Board of Adjustment minutes 7-2-08 Print E-mail



Montville Municipal Building, 195 Changebridge Road

8:00PM Regular Meeting


Stated for the record.


Richard Moore – Present                                    Thomas Buraszeski – Present

Donald Kanoff – Present                                    James Marinello – Present

Deane Driscoll – Present                                    Carl DiPiazza (Alt #1) – Present

Maury Cartine– Present                                      Kenneth Shirkey (Alt #2) – Present

Gerard Hug – Absent

Also Present:        William Denzler, Planner

                                Hank Huelsebusch, Engineer

                                Bruce Ackerman, Esq.



Stated for the record

The following application was rescheduled with notice preserved to 9/3/08:

ZC18-08 Foss, Glenn – 9 Mulbrook Ln. – B: 21.01, L: 38 – impervious coverage of 20,310 s.f. vs 13,300 s.f. allowed for addition to single family home – Notice Acceptable – TENTATIVE


ZC12-08 Grossman - B: 139, L: 15 – 26 East Cheryl Rd. – variance for side yard of 17’ vs 20’ required; combined side yards of 45.3’ existing and proposed where 50.87’ required for addition to single family home - Notice Acceptable                                                                                                 ACT BY: 10/15/08

Present on behalf of the applicant: Steven Schepis, Esq.; Sharon Grossman, applicant; Stefanie  Pantala, AIA

Stefanie  Pantala, AIA - sworn

The lot is in the R-27A zone.  This lot has 22,282 s.f. where 27,000 s.f. required.  It is an irregularly shaped lot.  There is existing non-conforming lot depth and lot width. The variances requested are for side yard of 17’ where 20’ required and combined side yards of 45.3’ existing and proposed where 50.87’ required.    

Exhibit marked in:

                A1 – colorized version of site plan last revised 6/20/08

                A2 – photo array

                A3 – aerial photo of subject property

Ms. Pantala - The lot width toward the front of the lot is larger and makes the combined side yard requirement larger.  The house is built toward the narrower part of the property.  Propose to extend the family room back 12’ and extend the mudroom area.  Additions to be in rear of property cannot be seen from the front of the property.  This is a 1 story addition.  The addition will not be closer than existing sideline.  The addition meets all other zoning requirements. 

Ms. Grossman, applicant - sworn

Ms. Grossman - Reviewed photo array for the Board.  The property closest to the addition is woods.  Want to expand the den and laundry room.

Mr. Denzler – The only lot impacted would be lot 1 which is a large land locked lot.  They are going along existing non-conforming lot line.  Mr. Huelsebusch – If approved the application should be subject to removal of impervious surfaces shown on architectural plan.

Page 2


Open to public – none – closed

Dr. Kanoff – So you will no longer have a deck?  Ms. Grossman – Stated that was correct.  Mr. Schepis – The house has a side entrance garage and has enough room for turning a car.  Mr. Denzler and Mr. Huelsebusch agreed that the turnaround area would not be required.

Mr. Cartine – There should have been testimony that an attempt was made to purchase land from the land locked lot.

Motion to approve the application, unique shaped lot, existing non-conformity, subject to removal of impervious coverage made by: Dr. Kanoff; Second by: Mr. Driscoll; Roll call: Yes - Moore, Kanoff, Cartine, Driscoll, DiPiazza, Buraszeski, Marinello


ZSPP/FDC10-89-29-06 Hook Mountain Care Center – Hook Mountain Rd. - B: 159, L: 4 - preliminary/final site plan/use variance/bulk variances for construction of a 4 story, 75,538 s.f. Assisted living facility containing 120 nursing beds and 60- residential health care beds. Use variances required for height and use not permitted in zone.  Bulk relief requested for maximum building coverage, total lot impervious coverage, wall heights and signage, along with disturbance of steep slopes and off-street parking setbacks. Carried with notice from 7/5/07, 9/5/07,  11/29/07, 3/5/08, 5/7/08  – Eligible: Mr. Buraszeski, Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. DiPiazza, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello                                                                                                                            ACT BY: 7/3/08

Present on behalf of the applicant: Jack Dusinberre, Esq.; Adam Remmick, PE; Nicholas Verderse, Traffic PE; Subramanya Baliga, PE; Neil Jiorle, Sr. Project manager, Environmental Engineer; Lou D’Agosto, Landscape Contractor for Snow Removal

Mr. Dusinberre – At the previous hearing it was requested that I bring back my witnesses to discuss questions left at that hearing.  Mr. Lou D’agosto will be here to discuss snow removal.  Mr. Verderse will discuss signage; Mr. Remmick will discuss trees and visibility;   Mr. Steck will also present planning testimony.

Louis D’Agosto, Landscape Contractor - sworn

Have done work for this applicant before at other sites.  I hope to be the snow removal contractor for this site.  Have reviewed exhibit A9.  I have 8 trucks, front loaders and bucket loaders.   I will push the snow up the driveway and a bucket loader will dump the snow in detention basin.  I will have to be there during the snow storm before the snow stops and stay on site to keep the roadway is clear.  I can bring equipment to the site before a snow storm if needed.  Mr. Shirkey – What size are the trees on the outside of the detention basin and what size are they supposed to grow to?  Mr. D’Agosto – About 30’.  Mr. Shirkey – How will you dump snow over the trees?  Mr. D’Agosto – Will dump in between trees, they are 30’ on center.

Open to public for this witness – none

Mr. Driscoll – Have you plowed this property before?  Mr. D’Agosto – When it was abandoned. 

Mr. Verderse, Traffic PE – previously sworn

Exhibit marked in:

                A-12 – site plan landscaping exhibit dated 7/2/08

Mr. Verderse – The applicant has added 10 additional parking spaces per board traffic engineer.  We have also added an advisory sign to give advanced notice to drivers.  It will be a 30’x24’ sign with white letters on green background that will say Hook Mtn. Care Center.  There is heavy brush along front of property so this is a supplemental sign to be located 500’ from the entrance of the driveway.  The second sign that is new to the application is an “enter” sign with a logo located in the right of way 4’ behind the curb line and is a two faced sign 18” high x 30” high.

Page 3


                A-13 – sign variance exhibit plan dated 7/2/08

Mr. Verderse – Plan shows sign details and location.  The other sign is 14’ from the curb line in the right of way but out of the sight line.  Variances would be required for these signs.  The “enter” sign will be internally lit, black letters on white base on 12” high base with a 6” sign on top.  Mr. Dusineberre – Ongoing discussions are proceeding with Bayer Laboratories to have a sign in their sight triangle easement, but approvals have not been received to date.  Mr. Verderse – The larger identification sign is to be ground lit. 

Adam Remmick, PE – previously sworn

                A14 – cross section prel/final site plan dated 7/2/08

Mr. Remmick – Cross section line indicated on the plan from the LaBlanc residence to the proposed building.  The plan also shows existing and proposed landscaping.  There are evergreens and fencing on the rear of the LaBlanc property.  There are 50-60’ high evergreens on our property and propose 6-8’ high evergreens by the parking area which will grow 2-3’ per year.  At the rear of the structure, only 2 ½ stories are visible toward the rear of the property even though it is a 4 story structure.  There is a gap in the vegetation due to the emergency access driveway.  The proposed building is well over 100’ from the property line and the Lablanc property is 75-100’ from their property line.  Due to topography the proposed building will be 10’ lower in elevation than the LaBlanc property.  If this was a residential property there would be no requirement for additional buffering. 

Michael Donnelly, AIA – previously sworn 

Using A12 Mr. Donnelly testified on noise from the proposed property.  The emergency generator is located in the rear court yard of the property.  The cooling tower is located at the end of the lower portion of the building.  The cooling tower has a super low fan with a sound pressure of about 70db.  Shouting or a noisy restaurant would be about 70db.  The building represents a sound wall shielding the direct path of the sound from the cooling tower.  The sound decreases with distance.    The emergency generator is about 74db which is slightly louder but shielded by the building in the courtyard.  I would be surprised if any resident could hear either one of these machines when running.  There is also a lot of vegetation between the machines and the houses.  I do not see any detriment as it relates to sound to the residences in the area.   The fire department wants the portico raised to 14’ and we will do so.  I will revise the plans accordingly. 

Mr. Denzler – The sound limits in a residential area is 50db and commercial property is 60db.  There is a commercial property adjacent to the property which is closer to these machines, how will you meet the sound requirements to this property?  Mr. Donnelly – I do not have an answer.  Mr. Denzler – Suggest that noise testing be done and they be required to meet all standards. 

Mr. Denzler – Will the evergreens grow and encroach onto emergency drive.  Mr. Remmick – It would have to be trimmed and maintained.  Mr. Denzler – The Township Design Review Committee had requirements and are maintained within this plan.  Mr. Denzler – Were the signs recommended by the board traffic engineer?  Mr. Verderse – Not all of them one was recommended by the board.  We will clear the sight line for a driver looking toward the north; we wanted to give a driver advanced notice with an advisory sign for safety purposes.  Mr. Denzler – The Board does not have jurisdiction for signs in a right of way.  Mr. Ackerman – Variances will be required for the signs.  Mr. Dusinberre – The signs are for safety purposes.  Mr. Huelsebusch – How high is the advisory sign?  Mr. Verderse – It would be mounted at 7’.  Mr. Huelsebusch – Suggest that the Traffic Safety Officer review the advisory sign.  Mr. Huelsebusch – Regarding Fire Prevention report as it relates to Windsor Drive access road.  Mr. Remmick – Emergency access to be paved on site and left as gravel off site, break away chain required, additional hydrants to be provided and additional no parking signs are requested have been added to the plan. 

Mr. Cartine – What would the decibel be at the residential property line.  Mr. Donnelly – I do not have readings, but when you get to the property line the decibels should drop to less than 56db, this is unobstructed decibels and this equipment is obstructed and the residences are further away than the property line.   Mr. Cartine – Is the generator an emergency generator?  Mr. Donnelly – Yes it will be running during emergencies but also will be exercised once a week for about an hour.  Mr. Marinello – If this was subdivided for residential how many houses could be put here.  Mr. Cartine – How much noise does an air conditioner cause?  Mr. Donnelly – About 50db. 

Page 4


Open to public for these witnesses

Mark Platszinsky – previously sworn

Does the cooling tower rise above the sound wall?  Mr. Donnelly – The cooling tower is 18’ high and the wall is 32’ high.  Mr. Platszinsky – The cooling tower is for air conditioning?  Mr. Donnelly – Yes and will run in the summer.   Mr. Platszinsky – Request sound data that the sound levels meet requirements. 

Richard LaBlanc – previously sworn

Which trees are to be removed?  Mr. Remmick – There will be tree removal within the area of disturbance.  There is no inventory taken at this time.  There are some mature trees to be removed.  The majority of the existing vegetation along that property will be maintained.  Mr. Marinello – It was testified to that the only gap in vegetation along your property line will be at the emergency access easement.  Mr. LaBlanc – Will the cooling tower and generator be running at the same time?  Mr. Donnelly – They will both run only for about 1 hour a week during a hot season for testing.

Gindu Patel - sworn

Are there windows in the kitchen?  Mr. Donnelly – No.  Mr. Patel - Concerned with smell from the kitchen.  Mr. Baliga – The odors will be collected and exhausted through the roof through a new technology.  Mr. Patel – The neighbors will like to bring their own experts when can this happen?  Mr. Marinello – Most likely in September.  Mr. Patel – There is no fencing proposed between this properly and my property how will you keep people coming on my property?  Mr. Dusinberre – That witness is not available this evening.  Mr. Patel – Is the emergency access easement important?  Mr. Remmick – The emergency services requested it remain, it is a pre-existing easement that will have a break away barrier which was requested by the emergency services. 

Mr. LaBlanc – The fire safety report indicates that there is no objection to a fence or gate. 

Debra LaBlanc – previously sworn

What is the cross section of the emergency access road and what protection is there to my evergreens?  There is a 60’ tree to be removed that acts as a shield to my property.  Mr. Remmick – We took the cross section to show important structures from your property.  Ms. LaBlanc – How did you get the elevations without going on my property?  Mr. Remmick – I believe it was based on an aerial but I would have to double check but there are many ways to get elevations on a property without going on a property.  Ms. LaBlanc – How high is the light poles in the parking lot are it higher than the 6’ proposed trees?  Mr. Remmick – It meets the requirements for lighting in the Township of Montville.  Ms. LaBlanc – What is the lighting intensity at the property line.  Mr. Remmick – I estimate it at 0 foot candles.    Ms. LaBlanc – What is the combustion of the cooling tower?   Mr. Donnelly – I do not have an answer to that question this evening.  Mr. Marinello – The cooling tower will have to meet all health codes for this application.  Ms. LaBlanc – What are the emissions on the test runs of the generator?  Mr. Donnelly – I do not have that information this evening. 

Ms. LaBlanc – Table 1 in noise ordinance 8.36 was placed before the Planner.  Mr. Denzler – This ordinance is from the Montville general code and I will look into it further. 

Saeyd Hadri – previously sworn

I am concerned with the amount of additional variances and waivers being requested by this applicant. 

Jenna Eng – 23 Windsor Dr. - sworn

How many parking spaces proposed on site?  Mr. Verderse – 99 parking spaces are proposed.  Ms. Eng – How many employees?  Mr. Marinello – Will have to go back to testimony to look up.  Ms. Eng – Do not want extra parking on Windsor Dr.

Mr. Marinello – Will have Mr. Steck’s testimony in September and opposition’s experts at that time.

Carry with notice to 9/3/08 with an extension of time to act to: 9/4/08

Page 5




ZSPF11-96-14-08 Dunkin Donuts – 38 Rt. 46W – B: 176, L: 4.2 – request for change of condition of

resolution – extension of existing hours of 5am-midnight to 24 hours from March 1st to October 31st and request to sell soft serve ice cream      - Notice Acceptable                                            ACT BY: 7/17/08

Present on behalf of the applicant; Nita Panchal, applicant

Ms. Panchal, applicant – sworn

Mr. Marinello – We are familiar with the resolution and the site, what is the change you are requesting and what precipitated the need for the change?  Ms. Panchal – We are requesting to change a condition of the resolution.  We request an extension of the existing hours of 5am-midnight to 24 hours from March 1st to October 31st.  Dunkin Donuts is requiring the sale of soft serve ice cream so request to be allowed to sell soft serve ice cream.  Mr. Denzler – Does the applicant need to be represented by an attorney?  Mr. Ackerman – Yes, when you are a business entity you must be represented by an attorney. 

Carried with notice to 8/6/08 with extension of time to act to: 8/7/08


NOTE: Court Reporter in attendance for the following hearing:

ZSPP/FCD04-08 Optasite Towers - B: 1, L: 29 – 78 Boonton Ave – Preliminary/Final Site Plan w/variances – installation of a wireless communication facility – 145’ high monopole, 24 antenna (12 per user), 25’x100’ compound area containing up to 4 equipment buildings; Use variance; 2 principal buildings on 1 lot; height 145’ vs 30’ allowed; accessory structure setback 5’ vs 25’; accessory structure side yard 142’ vs 145’ allowed - Notice Acceptable                                                                  ACT BY: 10/9/08

Present on behalf of the applicant: Renu Shevade, Esq.; Anthony Suppa, PE; Mark Brodsky, RF Engineer AT&T; Glen Pierson, RF Engineer Verizon  

Ms. Shevade – The application if for a monopole on the Marotta property.  Bell Atlantic made application in 1999 which was denied.  It went to court and was remanded to the board in 2000 where it was subsequently approved.  The tower was never built.  Optasite surveyed other carriers and there is a significant interested by other carriers for this tower.

Antony Suppa, PE - sworn

Optasite is proposing a 140’ tree monopole against wooded buffer with 4 carriers inside the compound.  The proposed site is located at least 500’ away from the nearest residence.  A site like this is visited by each carrier about once every 4-6 weeks for maintenance.  The proposed compound is 25’x40’; there will be 2 - 12’ sliding gates; electric and telephone will be taken from existing pole on site; the generator uses natural gas; the site is alarmed 24/7.  The compound will be constructed to fit all 4 carriers.  The monopole will be camouflaged with tree branches.  There will be 10’ of separation between antennas; all antennas will be hidden by branches.  The cables run inside the monopole, there is no lighting on the tree monopole.  There will be private property signs on fencing which will be smaller than 1’.  We can eliminate the accessory structure side setback by moving the compound 3’; we will lose about 3 parking spaces but will still meet parking requirements.  We will have to file for Highlands Exemption.  There will be no impact on municipal services; this is an unmanned site with exception of maintenance visits.  The entire site is on existing impervious surface, there will be no impact on drainage. 

Mr. Suppa – Reviewed the Board Engineer’s report.  This is a large site so we surveyed the area to be disturbed which was sealed by the surveyor.  There is more parking than required for the site.  Propose to submit manufacturing details to the building department if approved, our branches will be brought down to match the top of the existing tree line.  Verizon Wireless is the only carrier with an emergency generator; all other carriers have battery backup.  Each carrier will have security card to access the property.  The Highland’s application will be sent next week.

Page 6


Mark Brodsky, RF Engineer for AT&T - sworn

AT&T is interested in this site due to a gap in service. 

                Exhibit A1 – Coverage plot

Mr. Brodsky – The exhibit was prepared by an AT&T RF Engineer.  It is a coverage plot to show existing sites on our network.  The green shows the coverage that exists for reliable service and the white shows gaps in coverage.  AT&T is trying to provide coverage by Rockaway Valley Road, Boonton Avenue and Taylortown Road.  There is at least a 2 mile gap on Boonton Avenue where there is no service. 

                Exhibit A2 – plan indicating if tower built what service would be

Mr. Brodsky – A2 shows proposed new coverage for AT&T if the site were constructed which considerably reduces gaps in service.  We completely solidify Boonton Avenue and Taylortown Road and there is a vast improvement to Rockaway Valley Road and Kingsland Road.  AT&T will be located at 138’ centerline.  Antenna’s on a cell site need to be above the tree line in the area because trees and leaves effect coverage service.  We will comply with all FCC emission standards.  This site is well suited for coverage. 

Mr. Marinello – We will allow the next expert to speak but the public will have the opportunity to speak at the next hearing.

Mr. Pierson, RF Engineer Verizon - sworn

                A3 – overlay plan dated 7/2/08

Mr. Pierson – Reviewed A3 for the Board.  He reviewed other sites in the area for the Board.  He reviewed the existing Verizon coverage in the proposed location area.  There is a gap in service on Boonton Ave for about 2.5 miles and all of Taylortown and Rockaway Valley Roads.  Pennbrook Court, Kingsland, Masar Road, as well as Pyramid Mountain Park are included in the gap in current service.  The proposed space on the monopole is 130’. Reviewed proposed service coverage if the site was built out.  We will comply with all FCC standards.  The site is well suited for this type of service.

Open to public for these 2 witnesses – none

Mr. Denzler – The site is in the Highlands area, has approval been received from DEP?  Mr. Denzler - Requested proofs of adequate parking on site. 

NOTE: Mr. DiPiazza left the meeting.

Mr. Huelsebusch – What is the actual separation of antenna?  Mr. Pierson – AT&T will be at 140’ and Verizon at 130’. 

Mr. Buraszeski – Is there a preferred back up system?  Mr. Ackerman – The board is historically interested in knowing that the co-locators can be successful with their coverage at the heights remaining on the tower.  Ms. Shevade – We may have another carrier before the next hearing.  Mr. Marinello – Request testimony on security for the overall site if cell tower built on this sensitive property.  Mr. Cartine – Would like health and safety testimony.

Carried with notice to 10/1/08


Minutes of June 4, 2008 - Eligible: Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello

Motion to adopt made by: Dr. Kanoff, Second by: Mr. Driscoll, Roll call: Yes- Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello

Page 7




Pashman, Stein – Trust for: $93.75, $437.50, $187.50

Bricker & Assoc – Trust for: $250, $500, $1,125.00, $500, $675

William Denzler & Assoc. – O/E for: $125; Trust for: $62.50, $31.25, $125, $218.75, $62.50, $218.75, $312.50, $875

Motion to approve made by: Dr. Kanoff, Second by: Mr. Cartine, Roll call: Unanimous


ZC25-07 Schachman, David - B: 59.01, L: 8.03 – 35 Kanouse Ln. – maximum building coverage of 3,273 s.f. where 3,226 s.f. is allowed; maximum impervious coverage of 6,941 s.f. where 6,452 s.f. is allowed for pool patio/walkway – Approval Resolution – Eligible: Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello

Motion to adopt made by: Mr.Driscoll; Second by: Mr. Moore; Roll call:  Yes – Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Abstained - Mr. Marinello

ZC05-08 Armenti, Gary – 1 Sunrise Way – B: 130, L: 20 – construction of an addition on existing single family home; front yard setback of 39.3’ vs 50’ along Pine Brook Rd – Approval Resolution – Eligible: Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello

Motion to adopt made by: Mr. Driscoll; Second by: Mr. Moore ; Roll call:  Yes – Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Abstain - Mr. Marinello

ZC24-07 Kroll, John – 75 Passaic Valley Rd – B: 124.3, L: 13 – addition to single family residence variance for front setback of 30.1’ (existing and proposed) where 50’ required – Approval Resolution – Eligible: Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello

Motion to adopt made by: Mr. Driscoll; Second by: Mr. Cartine; Roll call:  Yes – Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, Abstain - Mr. Marinello

ZSPP/FDC33-06-02-08 Casha, Lawrence & Debra – 115 Horseneck Rd. – B: 139.03, L: 7.03 – amended preliminary and final site plan/use/bulk variances in order to occupy 1,367 s.f. of basement level of existing 2 story office building – FAR of 27.23% where 25% is allowed; off street parking of 80 spaces (existing & proposed) where 104 required – Approval Resolution  - Eligible: Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey, No - Mr. Marinello

The amendments previously sent to the Board.

Motion to adopt as amended made by: Mr. Driscoll; Second by: Dr. Kanoff; Roll call:  Yes – Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Moore, Mr. Shirkey


ZSPP/FCD02-06 Old Towne Properties – B: 40; L: 52, 53, 54, 55 – 630 & 632 Rt. 202; 3 & 5 Waughaw Rd. – TRANSFERRED TO PLANNING BOARD

The board secretary indicated that the Old Towne Properties application has been transferred to the Planning Board.

ZSPP/F27-05-31-06 DAB Associates – 43 Bellows Ln. – B: 41, L: 15 – extension of time request for Use variance From June 7, 2008 to March 5, 2009

Motion to grant extension made by: Mr. Moore; Second by: Dr. Kanoff; Roll call: Yes - Moore, Kanoff, Cartine, Driscoll, Buraszeski, Marinello

Page 8




Motion to go into closed session to discuss legal issues made by: Dr. Kanoff; Second by: Mr. Driscoll; Roll call: Unanimous

Upon return from closed session the Board mad a motion to retain Pashman Stein to defend the Board of Adjustment  on the Wertenberg suit made by: Dr. Kanoff; Second by: Mr. Driscoll; Roll call: Unanimous

There being no further business there was a motion to unanimously adjourn made by Mr. Driscoll, Seconded by: Mr. Cartine; Roll call – Unanimous

Respectfully submitted,

Jane Grogaard

Recording Secretary

Certified true copy of minutes adopted at Zoning Board meeting of August 6, 2008.


Linda M. White, Sec.


With explanation

Must certify to 5/7/08


Last Updated ( Thursday, 07 August 2008 )
< Prev   Next >
Joomla School Template by Joomlashack