ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEET
HELD IN THE MUNICIPAL MEETING ROOM
APRIL 4, 2001
The Regular Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Noorigian at 7:40 P.M. Members present were Chairman Noorigian, Vice Chairman Michael Clayton, Mary DeSarno, Thomas Grasso, Ralph Addonizio, Dominick Cinelli, Anthony Rembiszewski, second alternate Wilma Morrissey, Attorney Thomas Hirsch, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl, Acting Planning Coordinator Pam D’Andrea, Engineer Gerken and Reporter Lofreddo.
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.
Chairman Noorigian announced Joseph Dubecki - PB#29-2000 has been withdrawn. Salvatore V. Soldano – PB#4-2001 has been rescheduled to April 11, 2001 at the applicants request. Luis & Roseanne Donuts, LLC – BA#3-2000 has been rescheduled to June 6, 2001 at the applicants request.
Mr. Grasso made a motion to send a letter to Luis & Roseanne Donuts notifying them that if they do not come to the June 6, 2001 meeting the Board will dismiss the application without prejudice. Mr. Cinelli seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Grasso, Cinelli, Addonizio, Rembiszewski, Clayton, Noorigian and Mrs. DeSarno voted yes.)
Attorney Hirsch stated the copy of the notice he received from the applicant, Luis & Roseanne Donuts, was so bad he could not read it.
Mr. Addonizio made reference to Township Attorney McLaughlin’s memo to the Board members regarding Martin Road Developers. Attorney McLaughlin stated the only action the Board can take is to send a transcript of the meeting to the prosecutor’s office for review. The doctor gave false testimony.
Mr. Addonizio made a motion to send the transcript to the Prosecutor’s office for his review. Mr. Grasso stated the Board has mixed opinions. He stated perjury occurred. He did not reside in town and he does not live within five miles of the site. He feels the Board should be unified and support Mr. Addonizio’s motion. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
April 4, 2001 Page 2
Mrs. Morrissey stated she does not agree with the motion.
Mr. Grasso stated the doctor admitted that he gave false testimony. He did come before this Board and lied. Mr. Addonizio stated he agrees with Mr. Grasso. Mr. Addonizio feels if one person is allowed to lie to the Board it can happen again. Mr. Grasso stated it is important for people to come before the Board and tell the truth. Mr. Grasso stated the Board should hand it over to the prosecutor’s office and let him decide.
Attorney Hirsch stated he was not at that meeting. The Board can sent it to the prosecutor’s office to see if it constitutes perjury. Attorney Hirsch stated he agrees with Attorney McLaughlin that the testimony did not impact the application. It had no zoning or planning merit. It does not effect the outcome of the application.
Mrs. DeSarno stated she was not at that meeting but she has an opinion. She feels sending it to the prosecutor’s office is too strong.
Mr. Addonizio said he asked the doctor where he lived in relationship to the application. He stated he lived five miles away. Toms River is more than five miles away.
Mr. Addonizio made a motion to send the transcript to the prosecutor’s office. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion. (Messrs. Grasso, Addonizio and Clayton voted yes, Messrs. Cinelli, Rembiszewski, Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey voted no.) There are three yeas and four nays. The motion is denied.
CASE BA#5-2001: Date application complete: March 8, 2001
APPLICANT: KIM AND KATHLEEN KAMARIS
PROPERTY: 805 Pine Road, Brielle, Block 4, Lots 3 and 24, R-7.5 Zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance requested to build one car attached garage and an opened and unscreened porch.
Attorney Hirsch reviewed the file and stated that the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Sworn by Reporter Lofreddo: Kim Kamaris
April 4, 2001 Page 3
Diana Anderson, Esq. represented Loretta Cramer, 1125 Pine Road, Brielle. Ms. Anderson explained this property is assessed in Brielle. The property boundaries are in Wall Township. She stated the applicant previously applied to Brielle and received variances for expansion of their home. Brielle does not have jurisdiction because it is in Wall Township. The hand drawn plans are not to scale. They do not show the improvements already granted by Brielle. Ms. Anderson stated the variances granted by Brielle should be void. Ms. Anderson stated variances were granted for addition of a second story and a pool. The variances were granted based on Brielle ordinances.
Attorney Hirsch stated Brielle does not have jurisdiction. If the Board hears this application it would only grant relief for what is presented to this Board. Attorney Hirsch said Wall Township is the appropriate jurisdiction because the property is in Wall Township. Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Kamaris what variances were granted in Brielle.
Mr. Kamaris stated a variance for the pool and the second floor. He stated no other variances were granted. All the improvements done did not need variances. Mr. Kamaris stated all he had to do was get building permits.
Ms. Anderson stated all the improvements done on the property were done by the Brielle ordinances. Attorney Hirsch said he is only concerned about the variances that would be issued by this Board. Ms. Anderson stated there were many variances needed.
Ms. Anderson stated there are other things on the property that are not conforming, such as, a shed and deck. Attorney Hirsch stated the zoning officer will have to go and see what variances are needed. He will have to make sure the other structures are not in violation.
Mr. Addonizio asked when the assessor’s agreement was made between Brielle and Wall Township. Ms. Anderson stated it was very old. Attorney Hirsch stated when the agreement was signed has no impact on this application.
Ms. Anderson stated the plans are not to scale. It does not show the prior improvements. They are not on the survey. The applicant wants to build a structure to within 3’ of Ms. Cramer’s property. Mr. Gerken said the deck is not on the survey. He said the pool was just drawn on it. He also stated there are some minor discrepancies. Mr. Kamaris said he would agree to getting a new survey and submitting it to the Board.
April 4, 2001 Page 4
Attorney Hirsch asked the Board if they had enough information to go on tonight or do they need additional information. Mr. Kamaris said he had additional drawings. Attorney Hirsch said documents should be filed 10 days prior to the hearing. Attorney Hirsch stated the Board has to decide if it wants to use the survey it has or do they want the applicant to provide a new survey and additional information.
Mr. Addonizio stated he needs more information. The Board should know where everything is. He stated the Board should have a new survey. Mrs. Morrissey agreed. Mr. Grasso stated the Board should have an accurate picture of what is there and what is being proposed.
Mr. Addonizio made a motion to carry the application. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion which was unanimously agreed upon. (Messrs. Addonizio, Grasso, Cinelli, Rembiszewski, Clayton, Noorigian and Mrs. DeSarno voted yes.)
Attorney Hirsch stated the applicant does not have to renotice.
Chairman Noorigian stated the application will be carried to June 02, 2001.
Mr. Grasso stated he has a letter from Mrs. D’Andrea stated Tower Lodge has rescheduled again for June 20th. They have rescheduled this application many times. Attorney Hirsch said they had a TRC a week ago. As a result of that meeting they decided to make some changes and that is why they rescheduled.
PROPERTY: Ramshorn Drive and Lakewood Road, Block 819, Lot 16, R-30 Zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance and use variances requested along with site plan approval in order to expand an existing nursing and personal care facility to include assisted living units.
April 4, 2001 Page 5
Chairman Noorigian and Mrs. Morrissey disqualified themselves and left the meeting. Vice Chairman Clayton chaired the meeting.
Sworn by Reporter Lofreddo: Henry Schweir
Mr. Schweir gave his credentials which were accepted by the Board. Mr. Schweir said he has been in real estate for 37 years.
Attorney Middleton asked Mr. Schweir if this project would have an impact on the neighborhood. M. Schweir said yes. Mr. Schweir stated he has handled a number of re-sales in the neighborhood. Mr. Schweir stated this project will have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Moved into evidence:
OM3 – aerial view taken October 1994
Mr. Schweir explained there is an incline going up the driveway. The wings of the building face Lakewood Road. The building is 34,500 s.f., 54,000 s.f. is proposed to be added. That is a total of 88,000 s.f. It will be a three story building.
Mr. Schweir said the traffic coming onto the property during change of shifts, delivery service, etc. will have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Trees will be taken down for additional parking spaces. Mr. Schweir said this project will impact all properties on Autumn Drive.
Attorney Middleton asked Mr. Schweir if he discussed with Mr. Montenegro the time of deliveries. Mr. Schweir said yes. Deliveries start at 5:30 A.M. Attorney Middleton asked if Mr. Schweir thought the problems would increase with the granting of this application. Mr. Schweir said yes. Attorney Hirsch stated this testimony is beyond the expertise as a real estate agent.
Mr. Schweir said the additional noise would have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Attorney Middleton asked if this project was in keeping with the neighborhood. Mr. Schweir said no. Mr. Schweir said the noise, the site, no privacy will have an impact.
Mr. Grasso asked Mr. Schweir how many homes he has been involved with in this area in the last few years. Mr. Schweir said two.
April 4, 2001 Page 6
Mr. Grasso asked if Mr. Schweir has seen any change in sales because of this application. Mr. Schweir said no, most of the concerns will be after the application is approved.
Mr. Addonizio asked about breaking the building up into four or five pieces. Mr. Schweir said it wouldn’t be so much of a cluster. It would not be so high. Breaking it up would have less of an impact.
Attorney Middleton asked Mr. Schweir if the properties in the neighborhood would loose there value. Mr. Schweir said definitely.
Attorney Middleton asked if Mr. Schweir was aware of any other building in Wall Township like this. Mr. Schweir said Sunrise.
Attorney Landis asked when were the surrounding homes in the area built. Mr. Schweir said in the 1980’s. Sunnyside was there before these homes were built.
Attorney Landis asked if Mr. Schweir felt that the neighborhood would feel the impact of the noise, change of shifts, traffic on a day to day basis. Mr. Schweir said yes. Attorney Landis stated Mr. Schweir has no expertise in noise or traffic. Mr. Schweir said he knows a little about it.
Attorney Landis asked about the sale of homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Schweir stated 1214 Lakewood Road sold for $320,000 in February, 1999; 2504 Autumn Drive $530,000 in March 1999; 2516 Autum Drive $649,000 in November 2000 and 2508 Autumn Drive for $729,000 in August 2000.
Attorney Landis asked Mr. Schweir if, in his opinion, these homes were devaluated by this application. Attorney Middleton said these owners were not aware of the application.
Attorney Landis asked Mr. Schweir if there was a comparable building in a residential area which involved values of properties. Mr. Schweir said the only one is Sunrise. It is in a R-30 zone. All the others are in a permitted zone.
Attorney Landis asked if Sunrise was near a residential area. Mr. Schweir said there are condos across the street and there is a new development across the other street. Attorney Landis asked how close were they. Mr. Schweir said within 200’. Attorney Landis asked if there was any decrease in the value of those condos. Mr. Schweir said there have been no resales on the tract to the right. He stated he did not know about the condos.
April 4, 2001 Page 7
Attorney Landis asked how many homes on Autumn Drive will be effected. Mr. Schweir said about seven.
The Board recessed at 9:30 P.M.
The meeting resumed at 9:50 P.M.
Attorney Middleton asked Mr. Schweir for the impact of the value of the homes that would be effected by this application. Mr. Schweir said between 20% - 25%, maybe as high as 30%.
Mr. Montenegro asked if the Sunrise application was similar to Sunnyside. Mr. Schweir said yes.
Mr. Montenegro stated there would be 25 air conditioners added. There would be additional height. The additional windows will have a negative impact on the neighborhood. There will be an additional number of vehicles on site. The detention basin will also have a negative impact. Mr. Montenegro asked if all this was correct. Mr. Schweir said yes.
Mr. Montenegro asked if this application would have an effect on his property. Mr. Schweir said yes there would be a lot more noise, noise during change of shifts, exhaust fumes, estetic view and the lose of trees.
Mr. Montenegro asked what would happen to this building, if approved, when it ceased to be useful. Attorney Hirsch said this is not in Mr. Schweir’s expert field. Mr. Montenegro asked what would happen to this building when there is no longer a need for assisted living. Attorney Hirsch asked Mr. Schweir if he had any experience in this field. Mr. Schweir said yes in Asbury Park and Ocean Grove. Attorney Hirsch stated Mr. Schweir must stick with real estate.
Tom Ross, 2407 Ramshorn Drive, asked Mr. Schweir if he could define what is the surrounding neighborhood. He asked if Mr. Schweir would consider where he lived in the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Schweir said yes. Mr. Ross said there is an increase in traffic flow already. Mr. Schweir said he had a purchaser that refused to buy a house on Ramshorn because of the traffic.
Mr. Ross asked, if this application is approved the homes on Lakewood Road and surrounding neighborhood would have a decrease of up to 30% of sale value. He asked what percentage he would suffer as a homeowner. Mr. Schweir said between 10% - 15%.
April 4, 2001 Page 8
Dennis Malanga, 2520 Autumn Drive, asked what the approximate
value of 12 homes on Lakewood Road was. Mr. Schweir said the average is $412,936 in the past three years. River Road would have a higher value. Mr. Malanga asked about the value of homes on Autumn Drive. Mr. Schweir said in excess of $600,000 - $700,000.
Mr. Malanga asked if there was any value in the future homeowners might loose. Mr. Schweir said the appraisal value can go down. The biggest negative impact on the surrounding properties will be the addition of this building.
Mr. Rembiszewski asked if there is any impact on the area surrounding Sunrise. Mr. Schweir said he could not tell. Sunrise has not been open long enough. It is a little too early to give any answer.
Attorney Middleton stated he has one more witness. He said his planner and Mr. Gerken’s office have merged so there is a conflict. A new planner has been hired. He wants the new planner to read the transcripts of all the meetings.
Vice Chairman Clayton said Sunnyside will be carried to May 2, May 16 and July 18.
Mr. Landis waived the time limits.
Mrs. DeSarno asked when will the Board get the decision on Meridian. Attorney Hirsch said they have to have oral arguments. They are scheduled for the end of the month.
RESOLUTION TO BE
ADOPTED:
PATRICK THOMAS JOST – BA#46-2000
Block 762, Lot 16 Grasso/Addonizio
TODD KAZANOWSKY – BA#1-2001
Block 826, Lot 94 Grasso/Addonizio
BYRON AND MARY KOTZAS – BA#31-2000
Block 893, Lot 66 Addonizio/Rembiszewski
MINUTES TO BE APPROVED: Mr. Addonizio moved to approve the minutes of the Workshop and Regular Meetings of March 21, 2001. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
April 4, 2001 Page 9
There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded, and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 10:35 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Schinestuhl
Acting Recording Secretary