|
MONTVILLE TOWNSHIP
ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2, 2011
Montville Municipal Building, 195 Changebridge Road
8:00PM Regular Meeting
NOTE: No New Business to be conducted past 10:30 P.M.
Chairman Marinello welcomed
the applicants and residents to the hearing and requested that everyone either
turn off or silence their cell phones.
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
Stated for the record.
ROLL CALL:
Richard
Moore - Present
Thomas Buraszeski - Present
Donald
Kanoff – Present James Marinello - Present
Deane Driscoll - Present Keith Olsen (Alt #1) - Present
Kenneth
Shirkey – Present John
Petrozzino (Alt #2) - Present
Gerard
Hug - Present
Also Present: Joseph Burgis, Planner - present
Stanley Omland, Engineer - present
Bruce Ackerman, Esq. - present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Stated for the record
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Marinello opened the
hearing for public comment. Seeing no
one wanting to be heard, Chairman Marinello closed the public portion. He then reviewed procedure and expected timing.
The following application
requested to be carried to 12/7/11 hearing with notice preserved:
ZSPP/FD10-11 JCP&L – 9
Changebridge Rd. – B: 59.2, L: 2 – amended site
plan with variances for sound wall – carried with notice preserved to 11/2/11 –
Eligible: Driscoll, Shirkey, Kanoff, Hug[1],
Buraszeski, Olsen, Petrozzino, Marinello ACT BY: 1/24/12
Mr. Marinello – JCP&L
stated that they could get the materials in at the 10 day mark, but they chose
to move to December so our professionals would have time to review. Chairman commended JCP&L for being upfront about
their timing of delivery of reports.
ZSPP/FCD01-08
JLJ&J Marketing ( Kids R Kids ) - B:138,L:8
- 217 Changebridge Rd. - Preliminary/Final Site
Plan w/variances – request for extension to: 3/4/12
Alfred
Ferraro, owner - sworn
Requesting
an extension of time, we did not know it expired. Expect approval from the bank any day and
will be proceeding. No change in
application since time of approval. Mr.
Burgis – No changes to the zoning as it relates to this property. Mr. Ackerman – It is the Board’s decision if
they wish to grant an extension even though it is late.
Motion
to grant extension made by: Kanoff; Second by: Driscoll; Roll call: Yes – Driscoll, Buraszeski, Kanoff, Shirkey, Hug, Moore, Olsen, Petrozzino,
Marinello
OLD BUSINESS
ZSPP/FDC8-11 Romola Enterprises Site
Plan with variances//ZSOIL9-11 Romola Enterprises Soil Movement application – 347
Changebridge Rd. – B: 160.2, L: 27 –carried with
notice from 10/5/11 – Eligible: Moore[2],
Driscoll, Shirkey, Hug, Buraszeski, Kanoff, Olsen, Petrozzino, Marinello ACT
BY: 1/5/12
Present on behalf of the
applicant: Steven Schepis, Esq.; Mark Walker, PE, Joseph Romola, Applicant,
James Cutillo, AIA, Mia Petrou, PP
Mr. Schepis – Mr.
Walker is here to answer specific questions by the Board at the last
hearing. He has created a site plan
profile.
Mr. Marinello reviewed the
procedures of the Board for the public.
A3 – copy of plan submitted to the Board – site cross
section 10/19/11, highlighting line of sight and privacy fence
Mr. Walker – Reviewed A3 for
the Board. The road is elevated to the
site, there is a retaining wall by the lower parking area and on top of the
retaining wall is a 6’ board-on-board fence.
The sight line goes over the roof of the cars so they will not be seen
from the road. The sign is only 7 ½’
above the roadway as proposed, because the building is so low relative to the
street. In my letter of 10/11/11, I
answered the Board’s questions and attached back up information relating to
those questions.
A4 – construction detail of fencing
Mr. Walker reviewed the fence
details for the Board. The board-on-board
and chain link fences are both ‘6 high.
The board-on-board fence will be located from the access drive to the
south side of the property. The chain
link fence encompasses the lower gravel parking area. The dumpster is located next to the retaining
wall by the lower parking area. The
dumpster will not be seen from Changebridge
Road. The
lower area is proposed to be gravel, because gravel exists in this area and it
is to be a passive parking area, the public will not be driving in and out of
there. It also reduces the amount of
runoff coming off the property. Mr.
Burgis – They resolved my concerns from the last hearing. Mr. Omland – I have questions from Mr.
Romola, no more questions for Mr. Walker.
Mr. Shirkey – How will
employees access the dumpster? Mr. Walker – Mr. Romola will
answer that question. Mr. Shirkey – Is
there enough room for the garbage truck to access? Mr. Walker – Yes. Mr. Hug – What if the cars
can be seen after it is built. Mr.
Schepis – The Board can condition that additional screening will be required if
the cars area visible as approved by the Township Engineer. Mr. Buraszeski – Will the sidewalk be counted
toward impervious coverage? Mr. Omland –
Not within the right of way. Mr. Olsen –
Will the cars in the gravel parking area be seen from Route 80? Mr. Walker – No. Mr. Olsen – What about from the bridge over
Route 80? Mr. Walker – Did not do an
analysis from the bridge, but there is vegetation in that area. Mr. Olsen – Would like to have a condition
that if visible from the overpass that additional screening will be
required. Mr. Schepis – The applicant
would agree to that.
James Cutillo, AIA – sworn
A5 – large photo rendering of building
A6 – small photo rending of building.
Mr. Cutillo – Currently the
building is a one story building with a flat roof. Plan to gut the building inside and out and
refurbish the entire building. Plan a
parapet to hide roof top equipment. The
roof will be 26’ high from floor level.
Reviewed the applicant layout for the Board. The customer entrance would be on the side of
the building, but will leave the front entrance area to make it look like the
front of the building. Refinishing
building in stucco. The sign gives the
front of the building some character.
Also propose a freestanding sign.
A-7 black and white rendering of freestanding sign
A8 – color rendering of freestanding sign
Mr. Cutillo – The area of the
sign is 4’x4’ and then added area around it to match the character of the
building as requested by the DRC. Mr.
Burgis – How is the exhaust handled in paint area? Mr. Cutillo – The paint booth is a self-contained
system with a small exhaust vent on top of the building. The front office area will be air conditioned
and the rest of the building does not have to be air conditioned. Internally, there will be a lot of paddle
fans and exhaust fans. Mr. Burgis – The
new master plan wants consistency with new buildings. Mr. Cutillo – The proposed building is in
character with the existing buildings in the neighborhood. Mr. Omland – Will the landscape plan be
revised to indicate the plantings as shown on A6? Mr. Cutillo – The landscape plan does not
depict the area, additional plantings like the rendering will be done. Applicant will add year round planting as
opposed to seasonal to the landscape plan.
Joseph Romola, applicant –
sworn
Currently located at 62 Old Bloomfield Ave
for the past 32 years. Auto repair,
detailing, auto body repair and towing for customers only. The rent in my current building is
increasing; I thought this would be a good investment. We do not do enough bodywork to be required
to have a booth, but will be installing a booth as approved by EPA
requirements.
A9 – type of spray booth rendering
Mr. Romola – There is
ventilation equipment required and licensing required by the state. If a car is brought to the site, it is
stuffed with special absorbent towels to clean up any fluids. I will not allow leakage on my property; I do
not wish to pollute my property.
A10 – absorbent towel
Mr. Romola – Will agree to
put in additional screening if cars seen from Changebridge Road or Route 80
overpass. Garbage will be brought down
to the dumpster twice a day.
Mia Petrou, PP – sworn
A11 – photo array exhibit
Ms. Petrou reviewed the
properties in the area using the photo array for the Board. She indicated where the shared driveway was
located. Reviewed permitted uses in this
zone. This building could be developed
as a retail use from a zoning perspective.
The zone allows for outdoor storage.
Ms. Petrou – Use variance
required because auto body not a permitted use in this zone. I-2A Industrial Zone. Meets the intent and purpose of the master
plan. It would be unlikely due to the
slope of the property that retail would care to use this type of property,
since the building is not very visible from the road. The proposed use is compatible with some of
the other uses in the I-2A zone. There
is natural screening on the property as well as additional screening
proposed. No neighbors will be impacted
on the southerly or westerly side of the property. This is private redevelopment of a defunct
site. Parking variance, 144 required where
21 spaces are proposed. Signage
variances for height of wall sign at 18’ high and freestanding sign not
allowed. The signage height is required
for visibility from the road and public safety and identification of the
site. Signage is not obtrusive. No
substantial detriment to neighboring properties. Century 21 and florist have both freestanding
signage and wall signage.
A12 – photos of Petals of Pine Brook and Century 21
signage
Ms. Petrou – Freestanding
signs are commonly used to identify a use.
Open to public – None
Discussion ensued on height
of freestanding sign. Mr. Schepis – We
can reduce the sign to 8’ in height.
Mr. Burgis – How is this
within the intent and purpose of the master plan as it relates to retail? Ms. Petrou – It is not an appropriate site
for retail and will be a regeneration of an Industrial use. Mr. Omland – How many employees on this
property. Mr. Romola – I have 6
currently and I will have 10 at the proposed site. Mr. Omland – Is the parking sufficient for
repair cars as well as 10 employees?
Where do the cars queuing up for service park? Is 19 spaces enough? Mr. Romola – Number of employees is not
number of mechanics, we have office workers also. We pick up and deliver cars so when one is done we bring it back to the customer. We do detail on cars that we do body work
on. Waste oil stored in a tank. No outdoor storage of parts or tires on
site. Tires are picked up every
week. Mr. Omland – Do you intend to
irrigate the landscaping? Mr. Romola –
Yes. Mr. Omland – Will any of the trees
along the shared driveway be salvaged when you raise the road? Mr. Walker
– The pavement will not affect the trees but need to see if the grading
will. Will put in tree wells to attempt
to save the trees. Mr. Romola – Will
put in new trees instead.
Mr. Schepis – As it relates
to soil movement, Mr. Barile reviewed the plans and did a memo indicating that
he reviewed the site plan. No soil to be
brought to site without review by his office of the testing as required by
NJDEP. Mr. Schepis indicated that Mr.
Romola will comply.
Mr. Driscoll – How many cars
do you work on in a day? Mr. Romola –
Approximately 13 per day but it varies daily for the fleet companies. Mr. Buraszeski – Do you sell cars from the
site? Mr. Romola – No, unless I am
selling one of my own personal cars. Mr.
Schepis – The sign is subject to DRC approval and we will submit it to them for
final approvals. Mr. Ackerman – What
about noise? Mr. Romola – I have never
had a complaint about noise in 32 years and my neighbor is a residence. I do not think you will hear anything since
we are next to Route 80. Mr. Romola –
Will not have any cars parked overnight in the customer parking area unless a
customer drops one off in the middle of the night. Tow truck is a flat bed and will be parked in
the yard, which is locked at night.
Mr. Ackerman – The uses that
Ms. Petrou used for signage seem to be retail uses. Mr. Romola – The signage is very important,
people need to find me, I do retail business, if you need an oil change and I
have openings the car can have an oil change otherwise an appointment will have
to be made. Mr. Burgis – Do not see the
need for the freestanding sign based on the testimony provided. Mr. Marinello – Is the towing needed on the
sign since you do not do towing at night?
Mr. Romola – I was showing the full service of the site.
Mr. Burgis – Discussions held
at the planning board and subcommittee were that the industrial uses are fading
out in this zone. They have allowed for
restaurants and retail within this zone.
It is a significant aspect to the application that the parking is
blocked from view and the architectural design is aesthetically pleasing as
opposed to most auto repair facilities.
Mr. Marinello – If cars are being rinsed off for dust can the septic
system handle it? Mr. Walker – It is just rinse water poured on
cars that drains into the storm drains.
There is no issue with capacity or stabilization. No detergents will be used.
Mr. Hug – Complimented the
applicant on the design of the building.
There is no outdoor storage of tires?
Mr. Romola – Correct. Mr. Hug –
You agree to reduce the sign to 8’ tall?
Mr. Romola – Yes.
Mr. Shirkey – You don’t
really need that front sign because most of your business is local people. Mr. Romola – It is consistent with signs
along Changebridge Road
and it is important for identification.
Mr. Cutillo – The façade sign is parallel to the road so it is not seen
immediately as you pass. The
freestanding sign will have the number of the building up high so it is seen
from a distance. The applicant is
willing to reduce the size of the sign, but it is important to have the
sign. Mr. Shirkey – Can you do
pre-construction calculations as to if the parapet will screen the equipment on
the roof completely. Mr. Cutillo – Yes.
Mr. Burgis – The applicant is
requesting a D1 use variance, slope variance, sign variances, parking
variance. Mr. Burgis – The sign
lettering is 2 inches in height and will be very difficult to read. Also a front yard setback variance if
dedication given to the county will be required along with lot area.
Mr. Schepis – We have been looking
at this abandoned industrial building for the past 10 years. The applicant purchased the property in order
to upgrade the property and use it for a use that he already does in the town
currently. The site is suited for this
use. Screening will be maintained so
outdoor storage is not viewed. New
ordinance will allow for freestanding signs.
Closed to public
Discussion ensued on whether
or not the freestanding sign should be allowed.
Mr. Olsen – Because it is so relatively low to the street elevation, I
think a free standing sign is appropriate at that entrance. It would be easy to miss that site entirely
due to location to Route 80 overpass.
Mr. Driscoll saw it as a safety issue due to location of property. Mr. Hug – No objection from neighbors.
Motion to approve the
application subject to additional screening post construction will be added if
needed to ensure no visibility of rear storage area, limiting washing of
vehicles to no use of soap, water only,
irrigation system for planting needs a rain gauge, no outdoor storage of
tires, pre-construction calculations of parapet to meet its intent and purpose,
additional planting on landscape plan, reduction of sign to 8’ high by 5’ wide,
wall mounted sign to be consistent and proportionate as shown in exhibit A5
subject to our professionals’ review, car washing and detailing only for cars
repaired, free standing sign to match the building design, subject to all
agency and professional reports, no parking of vehicles in customer parking
overnight unless a customer drops it off at night, no towing over night, no
metal or parts storage outside, approval of soil movement application as well
conditioned upon Mr. Barile’s requirements, dedication of right of way will
cause front setback variance and lot area, cap the well, number of employees to
be no more than 12, lighting for signage subject to DRC, well to be capped,
made by: Hug; Second by: Driscoll; Roll call: Yes - Moore, Driscoll, Shirkey,
Hug, Buraszeski, Kanoff, No - Marinello
NEW BUSINESS
None
MINUTES
Minutes October 5, 2011
Eligible: Driscoll, Shirkey, Kanoff, Hug, Buraszeski, Olsen, Marinello
Page
6 move Mr. Hug returns to prior to his comment.
Motion
to approve made by Buraszeski, seconded by Driscoll; Roll call: Yes – Driscoll, Shirkey, Kanoff, Hug, Buraszeski, Olsen,
Marinello
INVOICES
Johnson, Murphy – Trust for:
$270
Joseph Burgis – Trust for:
$1,957.50, $101.25, $202.50, $101.25, $405, $236.25
Omland Engineering – Trust
for: $573.75, $270, $123.75
Motion to approve made by Hug, seconded by
Driscoll; Roll call: Unanimous
RESOLUTIONS
ZC8-10 –Grassi – B: 94, L: 13
– 7 Hillcrest Rd. – request for extension of
approvals to
10/6/12
– Granted – Eligible: Driscoll, Buraszeski, Kanoff, Shirkey, Hug, Olsen,
Petrozzino, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by:
Buraszeski; Second by: Driscoll; Roll call: Yes – Driscoll, Buraszeski, Kanoff,
Shirkey, Hug, Olsen, Marinello
ZDC28-08 Holiday at Montville – 29 Vreeland Ave.–
B: 52.03, L: 19 – variance - request for extension of approvals to 10/7/12 –
Granted – Eligible: Driscoll, Kanoff, Shirkey, Hug, Olsen, Petrozzino,
Buraszeski, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by:
Driscoll; Second by: Shirkey; Roll call: Yes – Driscoll, Kanoff, Shirkey, Hug,
Olsen, Buraszeski, Marinello
CORRESPONDENCE
ZSPP/FDC10-89-29-06 Hook Mountain
Care Center – Hook
Mountain Rd. - B: 159, L: 4 - request for extension to: 12/3/12
The master plan reaffirms the
residential zone for that property. Mr.
Marinello – That is an affirmative that they want residential there. Mr. Ackerman – You gave it a variance for the
same zone that is there today. Mr.
Burgis – The Planning Board did not want to rezone it to a different use
because your variance approval was reasonable, they did not want to spot
zone.
The
Board requested attendance of the applicant at the next hearing for information
on where this application status is.
OTHER BUSINESS
Planning
Board Liaison Update – Planning Board had their first public discussion of the
draft-zoning ordinance. Mr. Burgis discussed
the updates to the zoning ordinance.
2012 Tentative Budget for
Board of Adjustment – If questions, discuss with Land Use Office
2012 Tentative Board of
Adjustment Meeting Date Schedule – If questions, discuss with Land Use Office
Discussion
re: reappointments: Moore, Petrozzino – If you wish to be reappointed, please
send a letter to the Township Clerk
The
professionals were released.
Mr.
Marinello – Why are there no high school students here? Mr. Driscoll – Is meeting with principal
tomorrow and will discuss this issue with him.
Motion
to go into closed session to discuss personnel issues.
Upon return from closed session and there being no further business, the Board
adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane Grogaard, Recording Secretary
Certified true copy of minutes adopted at Zoning Board
meeting of December 7 2011.
_______________________________________
Meghan Hunscher,
Sec.
[1]
Certified to missed section of 10/5/11 hearing
[2]
Certified to 10/5/11 hearing
|
