|
MONTVILLE TOWNSHIP
ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT
SEPTEMBER 2, 2009
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 – Absent Carl DiPiazza (Alt #1) – Present
Maury
Cartine– Absent Kenneth
Shirkey (Alt #2) – Present
Gerard
Hug – Entrance noted
Also Present: William Denzler, Planner
Hank Huelsebusch,
Engineer
Bruce
Ackerman, Esq.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Stated for the record
NOTE Mr. Hug
enters
Mr. Marinello said a few words
about the passing of Fred Eckhardt. He
acknowledged Mr. Eckhardt’s substantial efforts and accomplishments in regard to
the planning of Montville
Township. He was a
credit to our community and a great loss.
OLD BUSINESS
**ZC15-09 Fariello, Ralph –13
Bromley Ct. – B: 124.7, L: 7 – front setback 48’
vs 50’ new entryway ACT
BY: 11/4/09
**RESCHEDULED TO 10/7/09 200’ NOTICE
REQUIRED/NEWSPAPER NOTICE CARRIED
**ZSPP/FCD25-06-05-09
Lake Valhalla Club – Vista Rd. – B: 11, L: 29 -
preliminary/final site
plan/Use
& Bulk relief and design waivers for lighting for volleyball area ACT BY: 11/12/09
**RESCHEDULED TO 11/4/09 NOTICE ACCEPTABLE
**ZC16-09 Van Duyne Properties –17 Van
Duyne Ct. – B: 82.12, L: 36 – rear setback 38’ where 75’ required (47.1’ existing); side yard
setback 18.4’ left side 21.2’ right side where 25.25’ required; building stories addition to single family
home – Notice Acceptable
ACT
BY 11/12/09
**CARRIED
WITH NOTICE TO 11/4//09
**ZC8-09 Kessler, Kyle – 144
Konner Ave. – B: 142, L: 18 – building coverage
3,619 sf (3,187 sf existing) where 2,745 s.f. allowed for deck – Notice Acceptable ACT BY: 10/20/09
** NEW NOTICE REQUIRED RESCHEDULED TO 10/7/09
OLD BUSINESS
ZC24-06-21-09 Lodi. Shahid (Kapitula) – Remand Hearing – compliance with RSIS requirements –
Notice Acceptable
Present on behalf of the
applicant: Frank Matarazzo, PE; (Transcription Company present); Lawrence
Calle, Esq
Mr. Calle – This application
was before this Board in 2008, the Board granted bulk variances and design
waivers. The application was appealed by
a neighbor. The court upheld the
decision and sent the applicant back for clarification on RSIS standards. Mr. Ackerman
- The remand was strictly sent back to see if the application meets the
RSIS standards and that is what we are limited to for discussion tonight.
Frank Matarazzo, PE
- sworn
A1 – colorized plan
Mr. Matarazzo – The property
is currently a vacant lot, the applicant would like to build a single family
home on the property. Propose an
underground drywell system. Used new rainfall
data as per RSIS standards and slightly modified the structure for the drywell
system. Slightly re-graded to the south
by the retaining walls which now meets the ordinance for height where
previously there was a variance required.
We meet the zero increase in runoff from the site.
Mr. Huelsebusch – The rainfall
increase was addressed in the previous resolution.
Open to public
Jeana Wirtenberg – 15 Old Ln – sworn
I want to make sure that this
is in full compliance with zero runoff.
Will the drywells be put in before the soil and trees are removed? Mr. Matarazzo – They will be put in early on
in construction. Will get permit from
Morris County Soil Conservation to comply with soil erosion measures. Ms. Wirtenberg – Can you calculate the
increase in runoff from offsite from above this property. Mr. Matarazzo – We meet zero runoff from
site. We propose a berm at the rear of
the property that will divert runoff down the side of the driveway. Ms. Wirtenberg – When will inspections
occur? Mr. Matarazzo – During excavation
and during construction a compliance report will be submitted to the Township. Ms. Wirtenberg – Can we be apprised of the
inspections so I can have an independent inspection done. Mr. Marinello – There will be a certification
in the file after it is inspected and you will not be noticed for that
certification. Ms. Wirtenberg – Silt
fences? Mr. Matarazzo – There is a soil
erosion control plan.
Dr. Kanoff – Are you
comfortable with this system? Mr.
Huelsebusch – Yes, and they still have to comply with the conditions of the
resolution which are more restrictive than most single family
applications. Mr. Hug – What prevents
water runoff from going onto the objector’s property. Mr. Huelsebusch – The construction in the
right of way will block the sheet runoff from the property during construction
and they would have to bond the improvements and submit an as-built showing
that they have re-graded the property properly.
Mr. Matarazzo - There will be a
slight increase in runoff during construction but there will be silt fencing
and the work in the right of way that will alleviate that issue.
Mr. DiPiazza – What is the
current condition of runoff over the last 6 months. Ms. Wirtenberg – It is bad right now. Mr. Hug – So it could improve by this
application. Ms. Wirtenberg – I hope so. Mr. DiPiazza – Will hay bales work to reduce
runoff. Mr. Matarazzo – No. Mr. Shirkey – They would redirect the water
to the catch basin. Mr. Matarazzo – We
could put hay bales on the south side of the property.
Mr. Huelsebusch – A diversion
berm would act as a better solution. The
board can require the applicant to have an engineer do certification weekly to
make sure soil erosion measures are done accurately.
William Scalzitti – 15 Old Ln – sworn
All we are interested in was
to not have a downside to construction.
If they put the curb and catch basins in first that would take care of
everything.
Mr. Calle – Summed up
testimony. Will comply with Township
ordinance requirements.
Closed to public.
Mr. Ackerman – Summarized discussion.
There was discussion of improvements in right-of-way to be done in first stage
as well as catch basin, retention system to be in place, hay bales to be
installed at the south side of property by silt fencing, engineering
certification and erosion measures to be in effect.
Motion to approve the
application based on testimony and conditions discussed made by: Mr. Hug; Second
by: Moore; Roll
call: Yes - Buraszeski,
Kanoff, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
NEW
BUSINESS
ZC13-09 Rycharski, Ronald – 21
Gathering Rd. – B: 145, L:16 – side setback 12.5’
(12.66’ existing) vs 15.56’ allowed for one story addition and deck – Notice Acceptable
ACT
BY: 11/4/09
Present on behalf of the
applicant: Francine & Ronald Rycharski, applicant
Ms. Rycharski - sworn
We would like a bigger
kitchen and a deck. The house exists in
the setback. We want the house to be
flush on the right side. The addition
would back up to the closest neighbor’s shed.
There are 3 houses on the street that have the same addition. We are not in a flood zone. We got a new survey to show the walkway and
sheds that are on the property.
Mr. Denzler – A variance is
required for side setback where 15.56’ is required; the setback is existing
non-conforming and the proposed setback will be 12.5’. Ms. Rycharski – If the addition indented in
it would look odd and not symmetrical.
Ronald Rycharski – sworn
If we move the addition over
3’ it would affect the current laundry room door.
Mr. Denzler – The rear of the
existing house is in line with other houses in the neighborhood. The Board should impose a condition that the
addition be restricted to 1 story in the back.
Mr. Huelsebusch – Will there be an increase in runoff. Ms. Rycharski – There is a slight increase in
runoff. Mr. Ackerman – You need to have
someone certify that there is no increase in runoff.
Open to public – none –
closed
Mr. Hug – This is only 1 ½”
from what exists. Mr. Marinello – But it
is exacerbating the existing non-conforming setback.
Motion to approve the
application with the condition that the addition remain 1 story made by: Kanoff;
Second by: Buraszeski; Roll call: Yes - Buraszeski, Kanoff, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, No – Marinello
MINUTES:
Minutes of August 5, 2009 -
Eligible: Buraszeski,
Kanoff, Hug, Moore,
DiPiazza, Shirkey, Cartine, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by:
Buraszeski; Second by: Moore;
Roll call: Yes – Buraszeski, Kanoff, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
INVOICES:
Burgis Assoc – Trust for:
$562.50
William Denzler & Assoc.
– Trust for: $406.25, $62.50, $250, $250, $218.75, $375, $250, $62.50, $250,
$312.50, $281.25
Bricker & Assoc. – Trust
for: $625, $375, $187.50, $156.25, $1,750.00, $375, $343.75, $375, $375,
$437.50, $500, $437.50, $625, $500, $500
Pashman Stein – O/E for:
$225; Trust for: $125
Motion to approve made by:
Kanoff, Second by: Buraszeski, Roll call: Unanimous
RESOLUTIONS
ZC10-09 Onello, Daina – 98 Changebridge Rd.
– B: 124, L:17.1 – impervious coverage garage addition – Approval Resolution –
Eligible: Buraszeski,
Kanoff, Hug, Moore,
DiPiazza, Shirkey, Cartine, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by: Buraszeski; Second by: Moore; Roll call: Yes – Buraszeski,
Kanoff, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey Marinello
Ptaszak - 21
Rockledge Rd. – B: 13, L: 22 – request for
extension of approvals to August 6, 2010 – Granted – Eligible: Buraszeski, Moore, Hug, Kanoff,
Cartine, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello
Motion to adopt made by: Buraszeski Second by: Moore; Roll call: Yes – Buraszeski, Hug, Moore, DiPiazza, Shirkey, Marinello; No -
Kanoff
CORRESPONDENCE
None
OTHER BUSINESS
ZC05-06 Lazo, Jose - B: 111, L: 12 - 32 Alpine Rd – request for extension of approvals to
August 1, 2010
Mr. Denzler - No change in
zone in that area.
Motion to grant made by: Hug; Second by: Moore; Roll call: Unanimous; DiPiazza
abstained
Goals and Objectives Comments
– On for Planning Board meeting of 9/24/09
Any comments contact the Land Use Office
Discussion ensued on amount of applications and possibility
of additional meetings. Mr. Denzler indicated
that this board is the only board in the area that is busy.
Mr. Hug said a
few words about Mr. Eckhardt, he was always for the best of the town.
There being no further business the Board unanimously
adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane Grogaard
Recording Secretary
Certified true copy of minutes adopted at Zoning Board
meeting of October 7, 2009.
_______________________________________
Linda M. White,
Sec.
|
