|
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OFDECEMBER 3, 2008
Montville Municipal Building, 195 Changebridge Road
8:00PM Regular Meeting
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
Stated for the record.
ROLL CALL:
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) – Entrance Noted
Gerard
Hug – Present
Also Present: William Denzler, Planner
Hank Huelsebusch, Engineer
Bruce Ackerman, Esq.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Stated for the record
OLD BUSINESS
ZSPP/FDC07-08 Lowes (Avila/Nemeth GI
Auto) – 85 Bloomfield Ave. – B: 167,
L: 28-32; B: 178, L: 3; B: 179, L: 1 – pre/final site plan/use variance/bulk
variances for construction of Lowe’s Home Improvement Center and mixed use
retail building – Carried w/notice from 11/5/08 – Eligible: Buraszeski, Kanoff,
Driscoll, Hug, Cartine, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
ACT
BY: 1/29/09
Present on behalf of the
applicant: James Kelly, Esq., Kevin
Boswell, PE, Kevin
Bolger, Lowe’s Representative
Mr. Kelly – We would like to
answer the questions from the last meeting first and then go into further
discussions on the proposed plan.
Kevin
Boswell, PE –
previously sworn
Mr. Boswell reviewed the
previous questions from the last hearing of the Board. The location of the HVAC systems will be
answered by Mr. Bolger. Mr. Petrillo did
not design the 2nd building but was hired to make it architecturally
compatible with the Lowe’s building.
Lowe’s will oversee the construction of the project. Do not anticipate any extensive delays due to
environmental cleanup. The site will be
constructed to the highest standards of the Township as well as Lowes. The building coverage is 12.7%. The customers will be able to enter the site
from Bloomfield Avenue
and will be directed out on Rt. 46.
Truck traffic will use a U-turn at the Bloomfield Avenue Home Depot
location and will exit onto Chapin
Road or Van
Winkle Road and are acceptable access points per
DOT. We have provided elevation views
for all 4 sides of both buildings and they are architecturally compatible with
the front of the buildings. The
buildings cannot be flipped due to the access from Rt. 46 which is a fixed
point. The building offers some
shielding effect to Maple Avenue. The second building can be occupied by one
or two tenants. HVAC units will not be
visible. The co-location of Home Depot
and Lowe’s happens in many areas, it is a common occurrence. Both function quite well. Big Box is not defined in the zoning
ordinance. Bed Bath and Beyond and Sports Authority would be
considered Big Box. The term that best
fits our proposal is a home improvement center.
The water and sewerage usage is 21% of a normal retailer. 3,549 gallons a day as opposed to 16,000+/-
for a normal retailer.
Page 2
12/3/08
Exhibit marked in:
A6 – DEP Letter 8-5-08 acceptable
design flow figures for Lowe’s Centers
Mr. Boswell – The DEP regulates
the flood plain, freshwater wetlands, discharge of an oil tank, sewer and water
extension and stormwater management and water quality. Currently there is 21 acres disturbed on
site, there is a restoration proposal for about 4 acres of the site, and the
remaining acreage is to be designated open space to be barred from future
development. There are 2 trailers
proposed for the site. Bloomfield Avenue
is an integral part for Montville
residents to access the site. There will
not be any light spillage onto neighboring properties. The minimum setback to any home is 400’. DOT will be involved with the Bloomfield Avenue
access. There will be garbage containers
assembled outside the store so customers can drop their garbage in the
containers. A single maintenance
contractor will be hired to take care of cleaning, snow plow operations,
etc.
Mr. Driscoll – Suppose trucks
use the U-turn by Wendy’s? Mr. Boswell –
They could but Lowe’s controls the trucking for Lowe’s and they have strict
rules on traffic patterns to be used.
Mr. Bolger, Lowe’s representative
– previously sworn
The HVAC units are on top of
the building and the parapets will block visibility of units.
Mr. Kelly – We requested 3 D
variances. We believe that we not longer
need the D variance for height over 35’.
Retail is permitted in this zone provided that a hotel is associated
with the retail use. We termed it a Big
Box but maybe we should ask for a waiver that it is not associated with a hotel
then it would be a C variance.
Mr. Boswell – The D variance
is requested due to the lack of a hotel.
There is no definition for the term hotel in the ordinance except it
can’t be higher than 60’. When we went
through the rezoning request we never commented on any other use because we
always intended a Lowe’s. If there was a
hotel on the site it would be permitted except for the size of the Lowe’s
project.
A7 – display board showing hotel instead of 2nd
building dated 11-3-08
Mr. Boswell – We designed the
display to show the effects of traffic, water and sewer usage and quality of
life issues. We broke the Lowe’s
building down to 5 retail spaces and a 200 room 6 story hotel with a restaurant
associated with it. All of the
stormwater management issues are identical.
This plan meets the ordinance with the exception of a few C type
variances and the only D variance would be the distance to the Passaic River.
Went through all the trip generation, water and sewer details and
factors associated with times of traffic and we have determined that 37,000+/-
gallons of sewer would be used a day as opposed to the Lowe’s project which is
8,000+/- gallons a day. The weekday
traffic was 37% less with the Lowe’s project than the Hotel plan and about the
same on the weekends. During holidays
the traffic is reduced on a Lowe’s site.
The hotel project would be a 24/7 operation, the windows would be 60’
above grade and would not be shielded from Maple Avenue residents. The proposed use shuts down at 11PM. The Lowe’s project is less of an impact to
the residents than a hotel. A hotel site
would access Bloomfield Avenue
in 2 directions as opposed to the Lowe’s project.
A8 – proposed development concept A
Mr. Denzler – With the
conceptual hotel plan would you still need various variances for underground
parking, etc on site. Mr. Boswell – We
did not go into details but we did do another plan showing a parking deck. The
site is in the floodplain so underground parking is not viable so the only
other option is to go up. A 4 story
parking deck can be constructed along the Maple Avenue section of the
property.
Page 3
12/3/08
Mr. Huelsebusch – How many
spaces about would be constructed for hotel?
Mr. Boswell – 232 spaces required and the plan shows an excess of
that.
Mr. Boswell – We have spoken
with the County and we will upgrade the bridge on Bloomfield Avenue and they have agreed to
take care of it after that.
Mr. Driscoll – Have you
received DOT approval for the entrance on Rt. 46 yet? Mr. Boswell – No. We have met with the DOT on 3 separate
occasions. The section of Rt. 46 in this
area will be widened. It is currently 2
lanes wide and we will propose 3 lanes and a shoulder. It is the only practical place to put the
access. DOT has the plan at this time. Mr. Kelly - Any approval of this application
can be conditioned upon DOT and DEP and if they determine it doesn’t work than
we would have to come back before the Board.
Mr. Driscoll – How many trucks do you have control over as it relates to
access. Mr. Bolger – We control the
12-15 tractor trailers that visit the site a day. We do not control UPS trucks and small
delivery trucks.
Mr. Marinello – What happens
if the Big Box goes bankrupt and remains vacant for a while. A multi tenant building could keep the lights
on even if one user went bankrupt. Mr.
Hug – The only access to the site from Rt. 46 would be those coming from Rt.
46W all other traffic would have to go Bloomfield Avenue. Mr. Boswell – Unless they go to Clinton Avenue and
turn around. Mr. Hug – I would like the
traffic expert to have good testimony on how the Bloomfield Avenue access isn’t dangerous. Mr. Huelsebusch – I tried to turn right on
Rt. 46 from Chapin Road and it was a long wait, there is better sight distance
if you go down to the next road, Van Winkle, and exit from that road. Mr. Cartine – Will the Lowe’s be viable
without the 2nd building? Mr.
Boswell - Will answer at a later meeting.
Open to public
John Swauger – sworn
Are the lights turned off by
associates in the store or by a remote system?
Will the contractor to maintain the site be a local contractor or a
large company? Concerned with the
additional traffic on Old
Bloomfield Avenue.
Traffic is going to come from Rt. 80 and go through the residential
neighborhoods instead of Rt. 46 due to the amount of lights on Rt. 46.
Arthur Weber – previously
sworn
We believe that the soil and
water should be tested independently by someone who is hired by the town.
Carried with notice preserved
to the January 7, 2009 hearing.
NOTE: Mr. Shirkey enters
NEW BUSINESS
ZSPP/FCD01-08 JLJ&J Marketing (Kids
R Kids) – 217 Changebridge Rd. – B:
138, L: 8 – prel/final site plan/use variance and associated c variances for
construction of a child care center and medical office (separate buildings) on
the same lot. Notice Acceptable
ACT
BY: 12/25/08
Present on behalf of the
applicant: Josh Mann, Esq.; Mark Walker, PE
Mr. Mann- The property is
currently vacant. The lot is split zoned
R27D and R27A zones. Both uses are
permitted but 2 principal uses on one lot are not permitted. This proposal is a smart and efficient use of
this property. Child care uses are
considered inherently beneficial uses.
Kids R Kids is a chain.
Page 4
12/3/08
Mark Walker, PE –
sworn
Exhibit marked in
A1 – sheet 1 of 1 expanded area of
site dated 11/5/08 colorized
Mark Walker – The property is
8.78 acres. It is currently vacant. The house was removed but the well and septic
remain on the property. Mr. Walker reviewed
the neighboring properties for the board.
The property is 2,100’ deep and 240’ wide. The property abuts the Rockaway River
to the rear. It is in a split zone. There are environmental constraints on the
property. There is a flood hazard area. The proposal is over 250’ from the flood
hazard area. We have received an LOI
from the DEP. There is a sewer easement,
gas easement and JCP&L easement to the rear of the property.
Mr. Walker - We provided soil
testing to make sure there is no contamination on the site. There were levels of arsenic in the tests and
we have created a remediation plan that has been approved by the DEP. The excavation of the material has taken
place and is stockpiled on site. If
tests come back acceptable, the stockpiled soil will be taken to an
incineration site. There was a request
for another environmental firm to review the environmental concerns on the site
and since DEP has jurisdiction do not see why an outside firm would be
required. Arsenic is a substance that is
used for farming and it does not move from the soil. It was shown 18” deep and that would be removed
from the site. It does not migrate.
Mr. Walker - There are no
steep slopes on the property in the area of the proposal. 17,000 +/- s.f. child care building and 2,310
s.f. separate building for doctor’s office proposed on site. Propose to construct 86 of 100 proposed
parking spaces on site. Additional
spaces can be constructed if needed in the future. 16 spaces are required for the doctor’s
office and the remainder are required for the day care center. There is a variance required for no loading
spaces, the peak traffic time would be in the morning for the day care center
and their deliveries would be using small delivery vehicles as well as the
doctor’s office. No specific parking
spaces would be required for deliveries to the site.
Mr. Walker - The lighting
meets all of the lighting requirements.
The neighbor on lot 7 is about 50’ from the lighting fixtures. We propose 1 free standing sign. There is a stormwater detention basin
proposed. DEP has revised plans in their
possession. The detention basin will be
fenced in and the playground area will also be fenced in. Proposed a board on board fence from the rear
of the proposed child care facility to the last parking space along the
northern section of the property. The
location of the doctor’s office was to provide for a buffer from the
neighboring properties from the drop off/pick up site of the child care
center. We separated the facilities due
to safety issues. We cannot have people
from the doctor’s office having access to the day care facility. We cannot build residential lots to the rear
of the property due to environmental constraints; only one residential lot
would be able to be built near the detention basin.
Mr. Walker – Reviewed permits
requested from DEP. We will not have
dusk to dawn lighting but we will have security lighting. The berm by lot 7 is 2’ high with 6-8’
spruces proposed. We will have very
dense buffering. There is limited
screening to the south, it is an industrial parking area. Propose to extend the sidewalk to the
north. Propose 2 streetscape light
fixtures to be placed near the entrances on the applicant’s property and the
applicant will be responsible for electricity for those fixtures. The
project will be served by public water and sewer. The building coverage is 5.7% where 20% is
allowed. The impervious coverage of 17%
where 50% allowed is proposed.
Mr. Denzler – Concerned with
landscaping adjacent to child care building, can a double row be placed in that
area? Mr. Walker – We can but it would squeeze the
trees together due to the wetlands buffer.
The residential houses are over 300’ away. It doesn’t make sense to add additional
trees. Mr. Denzler – Affordable housing
contribution? Scarce Resource Order
indicates that the township cannot construct any site that does not provide for
affordable housing. The township has
filed for extension for 3rd Round.
Would that have an impact on the project proposed? Mr. Marinello – Can you meet with the
applicant to
Page 5
12/3/008
iron that issue out? Mr. Denzler – Yes. Mr. Huelsebusch – Will there be blending of
the contaminated soil on site? Mr.
Walker – All contaminated soil will be removed.
Mr. Huelsebusch – Should require a no left hand turn lane. Mr. Marinello – Are you comfortable with the
review of the contamination on site by the health department and the DEP. Mr. Huelsebusch – Yes. Mr. Mann – The DEP requires a certification
that contamination is removed before any child care facility be constructed.
Open to public –
Gretchen Strauch - 9 Green
Meadows Rd. - sworn
In 2002 during the rezoning
we were told that it would only be a single building on the site. Now the applicant is proposing 2
buildings. Mr. Denzler – They are allowed
one building on the site, they are here requesting a variance to allow 2
buildings on the site.
Mr. Marinello – Need
testimony of the safety of a doctor’s office so close to the playground area of
a day care center. Mr. Buraszeski – Have
seen day care centers in office buildings in the past so don’t see the safety
issue as to having 2 separate buildings on one lot. Will there be light spillage off the
property? The previous applicant indicated 100’ area and the neighbor is 50’
away. Mr. Walker – No, we have the evergreen trees, the
board on board fence and a .3 foot candle.
Mr. Mann – We will look into the design of the building to see if it can
be integrated.
Carried with notice to
2/4/09with an extension of time to act to 2/5/09
MINUTES:
Minutes of November 5, 2008 -
Eligible: Hug, Moore, Kanoff, Cartine, Driscoll, Buraszeski, Moore, Shirkey,
Marinello
Motion to adopt made by: Mr.
Buraszeski, Second by: Mr. Driscoll, Roll call: Yes- Moore, Kanoff, Cartine,
Driscoll, Buraszeski, Moore, Marinello
INVOICES:
William
Denzler & Assoc. – Trust for: $343.75, $218.75, $93.75, $312.50, $156.25,
$62.50,
$218.75, $31.25, $156.25, $218.75, $156.25, $156.25
Pashman, Stein – Litigation for: $142.93; Trust for:
$125, $1,031.25, $375
Bricker & Assoc. – Trust for: $187.50, $875,
$3,750, $2,250, $437.50, $500, $1,062.50, $1,250
Motion to approve made by:
Dr. Kanoff, Second by: Mr. Moore, Roll call: Unanimous
RESOLUTIONS
ZC16-08 Calle, Juan – 36 Crescent Rd. – B: 148, L: 7 – front setback of
34.95’ existing and proposed where 45’ required for addition to single family
home – Approval Resolution – Eligible: Mr. Buraszeski, Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Driscoll, Mr.
Cartine, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. DiPiazza, Mr. Shirkey, Mr. Marinello
Mr. Buraszeski – On Page 2 November
3rd should be November 5th, page 6 November 3rd
should be changed to November 5th
Motion to adopt made by: Buraszeski;
Second by: Driscoll; Roll call: Yes –
Buraszeski,
Kanoff, Driscoll, Cartine, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
Page
6
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 an assisted living
facility containing 120 nursing beds and 60- residential health care beds -
Approval Resolution – Eligible: Mr. Buraszeski,
Dr. Kanoff, Mr. Driscoll, Mr. Cartine, Mr. Hug, Mr. Moore, Mr. DiPiazza, Mr.
Shirkey, Mr. Marinello
Mr. Ackerman – I have
numerous comments on the resolution. I
will list them all and you can accept some or all of the changes.
Applicant’s comments: page 2
instead of 2 signs there were 4 signs this is confirmed to be true but 2 of
signs are in the sight easement that has to be dealt with by the Township
Committee. 118,091 to 119,059 on page
8. Applicant reconstructing retaining
wall not building retaining wall. Page 13 prefers to fire resistant building
instead of fire proof. On paragraph 17
line 5 applicant wants to change obtain to seek sight triangle easement and Mr.
Denzler wants it to remain obtain. Same
paragraph 18”x30” should be 18” high x 36” wide. 30’ should be changed to 30”.
Mr. Denzler’s comments –
securing signage in right of way must be obtained by Township Committee. Mr. Huelsebusch comments - requiring weekly
reports on soil erosion measures.
Ms. White comments –
applicant to meet all blasting requirements.
Mr. Marinello – If we put in blasting what about noise, what if we leave
something else out that is not specific, must comply with all ordinances, not
to be amended. Maybe covering too much that is not under our jurisdiction. Specify that emergency generator be tested
only during daytime hours, ok to be amended.
Require a copy of the contract with the noise expert after in full
operation to be reviewed by board engineer, ok to be amended. Removal of medical waste on site be reviewed
by board of health, not required by board this condition. The resolution to be recorded as deed
restriction, ok to be amended. COAH
requirements, ok to be amended. Security
lighting only lighting to be on after 11PM, not to be amended. Mr. Hugs comments – 911 first response
instead of 911 emergency, to be amended.
Submission of contract for snow removal with a plan to be reviewed annually.
Motion to adopt as amended made
by: Driscoll; Second by: Moore;
Roll call: Yes – Buraszeski, Kanoff, Driscoll, Cartine,
Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
ZSPP/FCD18-98-10-07 St.
Pius Church - B: 82, L: 10.01 - 24 Changebridge Rd.
– request for extension of approvals to July 5, 2009 – Granted – Eligible: Buraszeski, Kanoff,
Driscoll, Hug, Cartine, Moore,
DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by:
Driscoll; Second by: Buraszeski; Roll
call: Yes – Buraszeski, Kanoff, Driscoll, Hug,
Cartine, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
ZAC38-06 Lynch - B: 100.1, L: 9 – 36 Two Bridges Rd. – request for
extension of approvals to
January 3, 2010 – Granted – Eligible: Buraszeski, Kanoff,
Driscoll, Hug, Cartine, Moore,
DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
Mr. Buraszeski - 1st
page 3rd paragraph should be 2010.
Motion to adopt as amended made
by: Buraszeski; Second by: Mr. Moore; Roll call: Yes – Buraszeski, Kanoff, Driscoll, Hug,
Cartine, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
Page 7
12/3/08
CORRESPONDENCE
OTHER BUSINESS
Discussion re: Draft 2008
Annual Report
Any comments get to Land Use
office before January meeting.
Motion to retain Pashman
Stein, Bruce Ackerman, Esq. to defend the Board in the Ptaszek matter made by:
Mr. Hug, Second by: Mr. Buraszeski; Roll Call: Unanimous.
Mr. Marinello – Suggest a
night out the 2nd Wednesday of the month of January for members,
professionals and spouses. The
professionals, Linda and Jane and significant others would be guests of the Board. Check your calendars and respond back.
Motion to go into closed
session to discuss personnel issues made by: Hug; Second by: Driscoll; Roll
call: unanimous
Upon return from closed
session and 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 January 7, 2008.
_______________________________________
Linda M. White, Sec.
|
