TOWNSHIP OF WALL

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING

HELD IN THE MUNICIPAL MEETING ROOM

APRIL 2, 2003

 

 

The Regular Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Clayton at 7:45 P.M.  Members present were Chairman Clayton, Vice Chairman DeSarno, Wilma Morrissey, Ralph Addonizio, James Gray, first alternate Bob Kerr, second alternate Wayne Palmer, Attorney Hirsch, Planning Coordinator Roberta Lang, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl, Engineer Bill Hoover, Planner Cheryl Bergailo, Joe Kociuba and Reporter Arnone.

 

SALUTE TO THE FLAG

 

Attorney Hirsch announced that all requirements under the Open Public Meetings Act had been complied with for this meeting and read the purposes of the Board of Adjustment.

 

 NEW APPLICATIONS

 

CASE #BA3-2003 – Date application complete:  February 21, 2003.

 

APPLICANT: JAMES & DIANA BARNES

 

PROPERTY: 2202 Shore Drive, Block 128, Lot 1, R 7.5 zone

 

RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk

 

Sworn by Reporter Arnone:                  Diana Barnes

 

Mrs. Barnes explained she wants to put an addition on her home.  The house is a two room house.  There is no storage space. 

 

Attorney Hirsch asked if the addition will be 15’ X 18’.  Mrs. Barnes said yes.

 

Attorney Hirsch asked if the house is one story.  Mrs. Barnes said yes.

 

Attorney Hirsch asked if the addition will bring the structure closer to Salem Avenue.  Mrs. Barnes said yes.

 

Attorney Hirsch said the addition will be between 11.5’ and 12’ from the property line.  The regulation is 25’.  He asked what the existing front yard setback is.  Mr. Hoover said it is 19.5’ from Shore Drive. 

 

Attorney Hirsch stated there are a number of existing nonconformities.  Lot coverage and building coverage are not met. 


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 2

 

Attorney Hirsch asked Mrs. Barnes what was on lot 20.  Mrs. Barnes explained the rear of the house next door.  Attorney Hirsch asked if that house was closer to Salem Avenue or the same.  Mrs. Barnes said it sets back about the same.

 

Mrs. Morrissey stated lot 2 appears to be more impacted than lot 20.  What is on lot 2 and would the addition block the natural light of the sun.  Mrs. Barnes said there is a house on that lot; the addition would not block the sun. 

 

Mrs. Morrissey asked if any landscaping was proposed.  Mrs. Barnes said the neighbor on the side where the addition will be is going to put up a 6’ fence.

 

Mr. Kerr asked if the deck was going to come down and if so are there any plans on building another one.  Mrs. Barnes said the deck will come down and there are no plans to build another.

 

Mrs. Morrissey asked if there would be a fence or shrubs on the Salem Avenue side.  Mrs. Barnes said she plans on planting on that side.  The stones are going to come out.

 

Chairman Clayton asked if there was anything showing what the addition is going to look like.  Mrs. Barnes said no.  Mrs. Barnes said they are going to re-side the whole house.

 

The application was open and closed to the public.

 

Attorney Hirsch asked if the setback is 11.5’ is it another 10’ to the road.  Mr. Hoover said another 6’ – 7’. 

 

Mrs. Morrissey moved to approve the application subject to a grading plan being submitted prior to a building permit being issued.  Mrs. DeSarno seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote.  (Mesdames Morrissey and DeSarno, Messrs. Palmer, Kerr, Gray, Rembiszewski, Addonizio and Clayton voted yes.

 

Chairman Clayton stepped down on the Wolf application. 

 

CASE #5-2003 – Date application complete: March 3, 2003

 

APPLICANT: CHARLES & MARY WOLF

 

PROPERTY: 2134 First Avenue, Block 826.01, Lot 4, R-20 zone

 

RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance

 

Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.

 

Sworn by Reporter Arnone:                  Charles Wolf

 

Mr. Wolf explained he is seeking approval to build a 16’ X 34’ addition.  It will extend the living area, give some room for storage and add a laundry room.  He said they are a little over on lot coverage. 


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 3

 

Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Wolf to address some of the concerns in Mr. Gerken’s review letter of March 31, 2003, page 2.  Attorney Hirsch said there may be a difference in coverage.  He asked if Mr. Hoffmann added the garage into his calculations.  Mr. Wolf stated he gave Mr. Hoffmann an updated survey.  Mr. Hoffman figured out the lot coverage.  Mr. Hoover said there is a question on coverage that is why we asked for an updated survey. 

 

Attorney Hirsch said there are various existing non-conforming variances.  The lot is undersized.  There are existing non-conformities for width, frontage, depth, front yard setback and side yard setback.  They are all deficient. 

 

Attorney Hirsch asked what is on lot 65.  Mr. Wolf said there is a house.  Attorney Hirsch asked how far is that house was from the property line.  Mr. Wolf said approximately 1.5’.  That house is a single story. 

 

Attorney Hirsch asked what is on lot 67.  Mr. Wolf said there is a house but there is a lot between that house and my house.  It is part of a vacated street.  It is 50’ wide.  My neighbor and myself each received 25’.  The neighbor’s house is approximately 100’ from the property line. 

 

Attorney Hirsch asked, in addition to the 25’, the width of that other lot is what.  Mr. Wolf said at least 50’.  Attorney Hirsch stated the survey does not reflect any of that.  He asked how far from your property is the house on lot 67.  Mr. Wolf said about 75’. 

 

Attorney Hirsch asked how far the house in the rear is from the property line.  Mr. Wolf said approximately 60’. 

 

Mr. Gray asked if the addition is going to have an attic.  Mr. Wolf said the roof line will stay the same. 

 

Mrs. Morrissey asked if Mr. Wolf is going to remove the deck and put in a new one.  Mr. Wolf said the deck will be removed and no new deck will be built.

 

Mrs. DeSarno asked if the Board should require the new survey.  Attorney Hirsch said he does not know how Mr. Hoffmann did the calculations.  If the Board approves the application they can make a condition that the application is approved if Mr. Hoffmann’s calculations include the garage.  They can also request a new survey be submitted.

 

The application was open and closed to the public.

 

Mr. Addonizio said he feels what is proposed is in character with other homes in the area.

 

Mr. Addonizio moved to approve the application subject to assuming that everything is in line.  Attorney Hirsch said it should be a condition that the applicant gets a survey showing the entire property and building coverage calculations. Also a condition that Mr. Hoffmann’s calculations include everything on the lot.  If the calculations are not correct the applicant must come back to the Board.  Mr. Gray seconded the motion which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote.  (Messrs. Addonizio, Gray, Mrs. Morrissey, Messrs. Rembiszewski, Palmer, Kerr and Mrs. DeSarno voted yes.)


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 4

 

Chairman Clayton returned to the meeting.

 

CARRIED APPLICATION

 

CASE #29-2002 – Date application complete: August 14, 2002.  Carried from November 5, 2002, December 18, 2002 and February 5, 2003.

 

APPLICANT: B.P. PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA INC.

 

PROPERTY: Route 71 and Eighteenth Avenue, Block 12, Lots 1, 2 & 3, HB-20 zone

 

RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk, Use & Site

 

Philip E. San Filippo, Esq. appeared for the applicant.

 

Attorney San Filippo recalled Paul Grygiel who testified at the February 19, 2003 meeting. 

 

Mr. Kerr asked Mr. Grygiel how he would categorize the store portion of the project.  Mr. Grygiel said the retail portion can be considered a small convenience store.  It will be smaller than others that you see.  It is a small scale retail convenience store.  Mr. Kerr said with an ATM machine and a lottery machine it is more of a full service store.

 

8:30 P.M. Mr. Palmer left the meeting

 

Mr. Addonizio said at previous meetings the convenience store was referred to as a food mart and at the last meeting it was referred to as a convenience store.  Mr. Grygiel said the terms are interchangeable. 

 

Mr. Addonizio said when talking about a convenience store, 7-11, Wa-Wa, etc you don’t see a sit down area.  Why is it necessary at this store?  Mr. Grygiel said at any new convenience store being built they have a sitting area.  The older stores do not have them.  They are too small.  He said he does not think it is such a unique aspect.  There are going to be just eight seats.

 

Mr. Rembiszewski said the Board is concerned that the sitting area becomes a haven for large groups.  He said if there is a seating area at this convenience store they may have the same situation that they have at Dunkin Donuts.  Mr. Grygiel said the applicant wants to make sure their business does not become a teenage hangout.  It is not in their best interest. 

 

Mr. Grygiel said the West Belmar Gateway Project calls for similar uses.  The Township is trying to redevelop this site.  The sitting area is not counterproductive to the Township’s goals. 

 

Mr. Rembiszewski asked if this was a 24 hour a day business.  Attorney San Filippo said yes, there is nothing against a 24 hour a day service.  He said Attorney Hirsch asked if we would consider not being open 24 hours.  We said we would consider that.

 

Attorney Hirsch stated the applicant’s burden is to prove that the site is suitable for the proposed project.  They must also prove that the use will benefit the public.  Mr. Grygiel said the Master


April 4, 2003                                                                                                    Page 5

 

Plan designated this section for HB type use.  The Master Plan stated that the types of use are those similar to those found on Route 35.  The Master Plan does not break down the use into smaller groups. 

 

Attorney Hirsch stated the ordinance was changed about one year ago.  Mr. Grygiel said that ordinance addressed a certain type of convenience store, gas station. 

 

Mr. Grygiel said some of the impacts of this project are the same as other uses.   Attorney Hirsch said how can this Board grant a variance when the Governing Body says that this is not going to be permitted in this zone.  Mr. Grygiel said there are reasons to grant this variance.   

 

Attorney Hirsch stated the applicant must establish that the site is suitable for the proposed project.  Mr. Grygiel said economics is a valid concern.  The property is underdeveloped.  The gas station and convenience store provide services needed in this area.  The application would comply with highway access.  The convince store can help reduce trips to other stores. 

 

Bob Smith, Elm Street, said you mention food being served.  There is going to be a few high stools and ready made sandwiches.  Mr. Grygiel said the application is for a food mart that has eight seats.  There has been no change.  There are no booths. 

 

Mr. Smith said there are many gas stations within one-half mile of this site.  Why is this going to be so good for the area?  Mr. Grygiel said this project would spur the redevelopment in the area.

 

Muriel Melando, 915 Sixth Avenue, stated there are eight gas stations within the area.  There are four on Route 35 and four on Route 71.  She asked how you would expect to get in and keep the traffic going.  Mr. Grygiel said the same way any other gas station does. 

 

Mr. Smith said there is access to this gas station from 18th Avenue and Route 71.  Where is the third access?  Mr. Grygiel stated the property has frontage on three streets.  There will be access only on two of them, 18th Avenue and Route 71.

 

Attorney Hirsch asked Attorney San Filippo if he received the updated reports from the Board Engineer, Planner and Traffic.  Attorney San Filippo said he received them today.

 

Attorney Hirsch asked if he wanted to address the moving of the driveway on 18th Avenue to the west and the moving of the tanks.  Attorney San Filippo said Mr. Spalt will address those concerns.

 

Mr. Spalt, previously sworn, said he spoke with Mr. Verderese and we have agreed to move the tanks.  The driveway can be moved about 25’ up 18th Avenue.  There are no negatives to doing that.  The only impact would be that the driveway now aligns move with the property on the opposite side of 18th Avenue. 

 

Mr. Addonizio asked if the 1 s.f. logo on the pumps was included in the signage package.  Mr. Spalt said he did not think so.  The total signage is 140 s.f. plus 6 s.f. at the dispensers.  Mr. Addonizio asked what is the total allowed.  Mr. Spalt said 200 s.f. 


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 6

 

Mr. Gray asked about moving the underground storage tanks back.  Mr. Spalt said they will be closer to the pumps by 10’.  They will be approximately 20’ from the ROW.

 

Mr. Addonizio asked about garbage pickup.  Mr. Spalt said a private contractor will pick up garbage.  It will be picked up twice a week.

 

Mr. Addonizio asked about delivery trucks.  Mr. Spalt said step vans will deliver most of the products.  Maybe a larger truck would be scheduled for off hours.  All deliveries will be made through the front door. 

 

Mr. Addonizio asked if a gas truck would be able to get on the site with no problem.  Mr. Spalt said yes.

 

Dr. Knust, 1908 18th Avenue, asked what was considered off hours for deliveries.  Mr. Spalt said off peak hours, non-rush hours. 

 

Mr. Addonizio asked about gas deliveries.  Mr. Spalt said they delivery whenever necessary.  Mr. Addonizio asked if a delivery can be made at 3:00 A.M.  Mr. Spalt said yes.  Chairman Clayton stated the Township ordinance states the noise ordinance in effect is from midnight to 7:00 A.M. 

 

Mr. Addonizio said he believed midnight was too late for deliveries in this area.  Deliveries should be made during the day.  He suggested no deliveries after 9:00 P.M.  Attorney San Filippo said that is severe.  He said they would agree to the township ordinance hours.  No deliveries between 12 midnight and 7:00 A.M.  Mr. Addonizio said there are too many homes there to have a truck pulling in at 11:00 P.M. at night.  That is unreasonable.  Attorney San Filippo said he does not think 9:00 P.M. is reasonable.  Mr. Gray agreed with Mr. Addonizio and said there should be no deliveries after 9:00 P.M.  Attorney San Filippo said they could not agree to 9:00 P.M.

 

Attorney Hirsch said before the Board can set restrictions they have to allow the use first then you can address the restrictions.

 

Rich Ambrosio, 1102 Glenn Street, asked about the environmental issues on the property.  He asked if the applicant planned to incorporate soil removal.  Attorney San Filippo said soil has already been removed.  Soil remediation has been completed.  The contaminated soil has been removed and replaced with clean fill.  Attorney San Filippo also stated that BP will not purchase the site until the current owner receives a letter of no further action from DEP regarding the groundwater remediation.  Mr. Ambrosio stated there have been no samples of soil taken since 1999.  Attorney San Filippo stated the owner has provided a 2002 certificate asserting that remediation efforts are ongoing.

 

Mr. Mayer, 1001 Sixth Avenue, stated he will see this from his home.  He has lived at this address for 17 years.  He stated he has never seen any soil removed.  Attorney Hirsch said soil removal is not in the jurisdiction of this Board.  There is a DEP case file.  The DEP must be satisfied that the site has been completely remediated. 


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 7

 

Mr. Mayer asked about landscaping along Camp Meeting Street.  Mr. Spalt said he has provided extensive testimony on landscaping.  There will be evergreen, deciduous trees, numerous Norway Spruces, Douglas firs and others.

 

Mr. Mayer said the township wants a colonial look on Route 71.  Mr. Spalt said the building will have a brick façade.  Mr. Mayer asked what will it look like.  Mr. Spalt, using a photo that was put into evidence, showed Mr. Mayer a similar gas station.

 

William Everett, 1815 Camp Meeting Street, asked about the buffer along Camp Meeting Street.  He also asked Mr. Spalt to explain the berm.  Mr. Spalt said there will be a 2’ – 3’ berm along the rear of the building.  Mr. Everett asked how close to the street.  Mr. Spalt said 10’ – 12’ inside the property line.  Mr. Everett asked how wide.  Mr. Spalt said about 15’ – 20’.  Mr. Everett asked how high.  Mr. Spalt said approximately 3’. 

 

Mr. Everett asked about filters being installed to catch all types of debris.  Mr. Spalt said they will be installed and they are shown on the plans.

 

Mr. Addonizio asked if the applicant’s traffic expert was here tonight.  Attorney San Filippo said no, he concluded his testimony at the last meeting

 

The Board recessed at 9:30 P.M.

 

The meeting resumed at 9:45 P.M.

 

The application was open to the public.

 

Petronella Smith, 1725 Elm Street, was sworn.  Ms. Smith stated she has been to all the meetings but one.  She said she feels this is not part of the redevelopment plan for Route 71.  She said she does not like it in her neighborhood.  She said she would prefer something else there.  Ms. Smith also stated she has gone out of her way to see gas stations at night and they will light up a lot more than what the photo shows. 

 

Dr. Knust, 908 18th Avenue, was sworn.  Dr. Knust said this project will have a negative impact on the surrounding area and on the environment.  Esthetically it does not fit in the neighborhood.  She said she is concerned about safety because of the traffic.  It will be a danger to the children and people who walk to work and wait for buses.  The welfare of the community is not protected in any way. 

 

William Everett, 1815 Camp Meeting Street, was sworn.  Mr. Everett agreed with Dr. Knust.  A gas station is totally unnecessary.  It is larger than the other gas stations in the area.  It is surrounded by residential properties.  There are environmental concerns on the site.  There is also a clean-up project going on the site.  That was because of the former gas station. 

 

Muriel Melando, 915 Sixth Avenue, was sworn.  Ms. Melando said she will be looking at bright lights all night long.  The traffic will be coming down Camp Meeting Street even more.  She stated she does not care for another gas station on this site.


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 8

 

Richard Ambrosio, 1102 Glenn Street, was sworn.  Mr. Ambrosio said he would like to see remediation completed before granting an approval.  He would also like to see less hours of operation.

 

Robert Smith, Elm Street, was sworn.  Mr. Smith said cars wait two – three lights before they can get through the intersection now.  He said there will be a problem with cars turning on Ward and Camp Meeting Street to beat the light.  He is also concerned about the drainage on 18th Avenue and Route 71.  He said that water is going to run south toward Wreck Pond.  All the run-off from the gas station will go into the storm drain and then to Wreck Pond.  Mr. Spalt testified about the filtration system.  Attorney San Filippo said the storm water detention system is not going into the public system.

 

The application was closed to the public.

 

Attorney San Filippo, in his closing statement, thanked the Board and the public.  He said the applicant wants to be a good neighbor.  The former gas station will be eliminated.  The site is being remediated.  The applicant will be consolidating three lots.  3,800 s.f. will be dedicated for the widening of Route 71.  This project will be on a state highway.  Most of the standards of the HB zone have been met.  Out of 12 standards we meet 11.  There will be no access to Camp Meeting Street.  There is extensive landscaping proposed.  Sidewalks and curbing are also being proposed.  Street trees will be installed.  The site will be ADA compliant.  There will be off street parking.  The lighting will be controlled and shielded.  Improvements will be made on the state highway.  Camp Meeting Street will be treated as a rear yard.  The plans were revised to take into consideration what the Board wanted.  Everything was reduced.  Attorney San Filippo stated this site is well suited for this use.  What is there now is an eyesore.  That will be eliminated.  There will not be substantial detriment to the zoning.  There will not be substantial detriment to the surrounding properties.  The property is large enough for the proposed commercial building. 

 

Entered into evidence:

 

BOA-1              Review letter from Glenn Gerken, Schoor DePalma, dated November 2, 2002

BOA-2  Review letter from Glenn Gerken, Schoor DePalma, dated December 11, 2002

BOA-3  Planning review letter from Schoor DePalma dated October 30, 2002

BOA-4  Planning review letter from Schoor DePalma dated December 11, 2002

BOA-5  Traffic impact study dated December 11, 2002

BOA-6  Revised traffic impact review dated April 2, 2003 prepared by Nicholas Verderese,

              Schoor DePalma

 

Attorney Hirsch stated the use variance needs five yes votes.  The use will be voted on first.  If that is approved than the site plan will be voted on.  That needs a majority vote.

 

Attorney San Filippo asked for the eligibility of the members.  Attorney Hirsch stated all are eligible.  All have signed affidavits and read the transcripts. 

 

Mr. Addonizio moved to deny the application.  Mr. Addonizio stated there are five or six gas stations within one to two miles of this site.  He said he felt the traffic study was not as complete


April 2, 2003                                                                                                    Page 9

 

as it should have been.  It did not consider the summer months.  The applicant agreed to reduce the number of lights but he increased the wattage.  This is going to have a negative impact on the area.  This will be a 24 hour a day operation.  They already have too much traffic which has a negative impact on the neighbors.  It does not fit into the West Belmar Gateway project.  It is not a good site.  It is too big for that area. 

 

Mrs. DeSarno stated she is concerned about traffic.  She said she lives in that area and knows how bad traffic is.  There will be a negative affect on the neighbors because of the lighting.  It will have a negative impact on the surrounding properties.  It is not suited to this site.  It is not in keeping with the Master Plan.  I second the motion which was approved by a roll call vote.

 

Mr. Addonizio, Mrs. DeSarno voted yes.

 

 Mr. Kerr voted yes stating he does not believe the general welfare of the neighborhood will be enhanced by this application.

 

Mr. Gray voted yes stating he is concerned about traffic.  This will have a negative impact on the area.  The use is too intense.

 

Mrs. Morrissey voted yes stating this application failed to meet the Master Plan.  The applicant failed to show special reasons why it should be approved.  It is a detriment to the surrounding properties.

 

Mr. Rembiszewski voted no.

 

Mr. Clayton voted yes.  The application is denied.  There were six yeas to deny and one to approve.

 

There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded, and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 P.M. 

 

                                                                        Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                       

 

Betty Schinestuhl

                                                                        Recording Secretary