ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEET
JUNE 19, 2002
The Regular
Meeting of the Wall Township Board of Adjustment was called to order by
Chairman Clayton at 7:43 P.M. Members
present were Chairman Clayton, Vice Chairman DeSarno, Wilma Morrissey, Anthony
Rembiszewski, second alternate Jim Gray, Attorney Hirsch, Planning Coordinator
Pam D’Andrea, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl, Engineer Gerken, Special
Planner Bergailo and Court Reporter Arnone.
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.
CASE #BA12-2002
– Date application
complete: March 26, 2002
APPLICANT: ROBERT
AND DONNA DAVIS
PROPERTY: 1505
Louise Court, Block 233, Lot 5, R-20 Zone
RELIEF
REQUESTED: Bulk variance
Attorney Hirsch
reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Robert Davis was
sworn.
Mr. Davis
explained he is proposing to construct a roofed, open front porch. It will come out 7’ from the house. It will be the length of the house. It will have three columns. It will be 16.64’ from the property
line. Mr. Gerken said it will be 19’
from the property line. Mr. Gerken said
half of the porch conforms.
Attorney Hirsch
asked what was on lot 7. Mr. Davis said
there is a house there. It fronts on
Belmar Boulevard. He said the rear of
that property abuts his property.
Attorney Hirsch
asked how far away is that house to the closest property line. Mr. Davis said around 50’.
Attorney Hirsch
asked what was on lot 9. Mr. Davis said
it is a double lot. He said there is a
pool and then a house. Attorney Hirsch
asked how far. Mr. Davis said about 30’.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked if the driveway was going to stay.
Mr. Davis said it will go around the porch. He said he will have grass between the porch and the driveway.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if the porch will be hidden by shrubs and would it fit in with the
neighborhood. Mr. Davis there will be
landscaping and it will fit in with the neighborhood.
June 19, 2002 Page
2
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if any of the neighbors objected.
Mr. Davis said no.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the siding will match the house.
Mr. Davis said yes.
Chairman Clayton
asked would you step up to the porch or would it be even with the grading. Mr. Davis said it would be basically even.
Mr. Gerken said
he had no concerns.
The application
was open to the public.
Jim Stigliano,
Sharpe Road, asked how long Mr. Davis lived there. Mr. Davis said 6 – 7 years.
Mr. Stigliano said the Davis’ have done many improvements to the
property. He said the addition will
increase the value of the house.
Mr. Edwards,
3214 Sharpe Road, said he is a neighbor.
He lives four blocks away. He
said they have made improvements to the property. He said this will be a benefit.
The application
was closed.
Mrs. Morrissey
moved to approve the application. Mr.
Rembiszewski seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call
vote. (Mrs. Morrissey, Messrs.
Rembiszewski, Gray, Mrs. DeSarno and Mr. Clayton voted yes.)
CASE #BA-13-2002 – Date application complete: April 4, 2002.
APPLICANT: MICHAEL TRANBERG
PROPERTY: 1740 “I” Street, Block 5, Lot 7, R-7.5 Zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Bulk variance
Attorney Hirsch
reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Michael Tranberg
was sworn.
Mr. Tranberg
explained he is proposing to construct a standard wrap around porch. He said there is an old sunroom there
now. He said he will knock that down
and leave the existing roof and then add to that.
Attorney Hirsch
asked, instead of a sunroom you will have a porch. Mr. Tranberg said yes. He
said he just wants to add the front. He
said it would come out 9’ in the front.
It will be 19’ wide.
Chairman Clayton
asked how far it will be from the ground.
Mr. Tranberg said about two steps.
Chairman Clayton
asked about the steps. Mr. Tranberg
said they will be on the side where the sidewalk is. He said he will remove the existing steps.
June 19, 2002 Page 3
Mrs. DeSarno
asked about the enclosed porch area.
Mr. Tranberg said it will be about 14’ long and 4’ – 5’ wide.
Chairman Clayton
stated the set back required is 25’ and you are proposing 14.6’. Mr. Tranberg said that is correct.
Chairman Clayton
asked how many feet will the porch be to the road. Mr. Tranberg said about 6’.
Mr. Gerken said it is about 10’.
It will be a total of 25’ from the road.
Chairman Clayton
asked if there were any other porches in the neighborhood that were that close
to the road. Mr. Tranberg said
yes.
Mr. Gray asked
about the demolition of the sunroom.
Mr. Tranberg explained he will remove the windows and the wall.
Mr. Gray asked
how far from the existing floor that is there now. Mr. Tranberg said about 9’.
He said realistically it will be about 7’. It will be uniform.
Chairman Clayton asked if Mr. Tranberg would accept the approval of
7’. Mr. Tranberg said yes.
Attorney Hirsch
asked if the porch would come out further than the structures on the right and
left. Mr. Tranberg said if it is 7’ it
will be even or further back than his neighbors.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if the tree in front would have to be removed. Mr. Tranberg said yes.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked about shrubs. Mr. Tranberg said
he wants to put in smaller trees and some hedges.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if the white fence is going to stay.
Mr. Tranberg said yes.
Mr. Gerken said
there is an underground tank. He said
if it is abandoned it should be removed.
Mr. Tranberg said the tank is idle.
He said he did not want to take the tank out incase he wanted to convert
back. He said he has a letter from the
State stating there is no problem with the tank. Chairman Clayton said if a tank is idle for more than a year it
has to be removed according to BOCA code.
The application
was open and closed to the public.
Mr. Rembiszewski
moved to approve the application. Mrs.
Morrissey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call
vote. (Mr. Rembiszewski, Mrs.
Morrissey, Mr. Gray, Mrs. DeSarno and Mr. Clayton voted yes.)
CASE #BA15-2002 – Date application complete: April 12,
2002.
APPLICANT:
JEFFREY AND HELEN SHIELDS AND MATTHEW AND HELEN PRINGLE
June 19, 2002 Page
4
PROPERTY: 340 West Hurley Pond Road, Block 771,
Lot 1 R-30 Zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Use variance.
Attorney Hirsch
reviewed the file and stated the Board had jurisdiction to proceed.
Jeffrey and
Helen Shields and Richard Tokarski, Architect were sworn.
Entered into
evidence:
A-1 Aerial view of property
A-2 Photo taken from the road showing both
houses
A-3 Photo taken from the driveway toward the
smaller house
A-4 Photo taken from the side of the house
that is facing the pond
A-5 Photo taken from the side showing the back
of the house
A-6 Photo taken of the house as seen from the
road showing the garage
Mrs. Shields
read a statement regarding the project.
She said they want to renovate her parent’s cottage. She said they would like to add a kitchen
and a spare bedroom. She said she
cannot see any negative impact on the neighborhood. She said there is sufficient buffering between the cottage and
the neighbors. The proposed addition
consists of 635 s.f.
Attorney Hirsch
explained when a variance is granted it runs with the land. He said if the Shields decided to sell, the
next owner will be able to do what they want.
The Board can limit the use of the cottage to family only.
Mrs. Shields
said this property is staying in the family.
Chairman Clayton
asked if they considered subdividing the property. Mr. Shields said it was brought up when he received the report
from the engineer. He said there is
also a mortgage on the property. He
said if it is subdivided he will have to apply for a new mortgage. He said all the utilities would have to be
changed.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked if the garage would have the same siding. Mr. Shields said they are going to reside the whole house.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked if they owned the entire pond.
Mr. Shields said yes. Mrs.
Shields said they only have one neighbor.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked about the sewer. Mrs. Shields
said it comes in through the main house and then travels to the cottage.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked Mrs. D’Andrea to clarify the remarks concerning the subdivision of this
lot. Mrs. D’Andrea said she would not
say they could not subdivide the lot.
Attorney Hirsch
asked the Shields what restrictions they were willing to accept. He asked if they would be willing to have a
restriction stating they would never be able to rent the cottage. Mrs.
June 19, 2002 Page
5
Shields said
yes. Attorney Hirsch asked if they
would be willing to accept, if the Board approved this application, put that as
a deed restriction. Mrs. Shields said
that is no problem.
Mrs. Shields
said the property will be kept in the family.
She said they agree that the deed state just family members.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked when they planned on starting construction. Mrs. Shields said right away.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the siding is going to match the existing dwelling. Mrs. Shields said the house they live in has
to be resided and then they would both be the same.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the property was 10.8 acres.
Mrs. Shields said yes. Chairman
Clayton asked if 9 acres was pond. Mrs.
Shields said yes.
Chairman Clayton
asked when the Shields purchased the property.
Mrs. Shields said in 1996.
Chairman Clayton
asked how long the previous owners owned the property and did they use the shop
as living quarters. Mrs. Shields said
she did not think they were renting out the cottage. She said it was not occupied in 1996.
Chairman Clayton
asked how many bedrooms were in the cottage.
Mrs. Shields said one. She said
they are proposing two.
Chairman Clayton
said the Shields are asking for an expansion of a non-conforming use. There are two residences on one piece of
property.
Chairman Clayton
asked how far the cottage from the main house is. Mrs. Shields said about 80’.
Chairman Clayton
asked how close the neighbors are. Mr.
Shields said approximately 250’.
Mr. Shields said
they are proposing to add a basement and a second story. Mrs. Shields said the garage will
remain. She said they will be removing
shrubs and trees.
Mr. Gerken said
they need to apply for the normal permits.
He said if they stay within the same footprint they do not need an LOI.
The application
was open to the public.
Jim Stigliano,
Sharpe Road, was sworn. Mr. Stigliano
said this seems like a good idea. He
said it will not be detrimental. He
said it sounds like the Echo Home Program.
Attorney Hirsch explained the program.
Mr. Stigliano
said this does have a benefit to the neighborhood.
Mrs. DeSarno moved
to approve the application subject to deed restriction stating it could only be
a family member living in the cottage.
Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was
June 19, 2002 Page
6
unanimously
approved by a roll call vote. (Mesdames
DeSarno and Morrissey, Messrs. Gray, Rembiszewski and Clayton voted yes.)
8:55 P.M. Mr.
Gray left the meeting.
The Board
recessed at 8:55 P.M.
The meeting
resumed at 9:15 P.M.
CARRIED APPLICATION
CASE #BA8-2000 – Date application complete: February 7,
2000. Carried from May 17, 2000, September
20, 2000, January 10, 2001, April 11, 2001, June 20, 2001, September 5, 2001,
October 3, 2001, December 12, 2001, February 20, 2002 and April 17, 2002.
APPLICANT: TOWER LODGE
PROPERTY: 1506 Gully Road, Block 239, Lot 8, R-30
Zone
RELIEF REQUESTED: Site Plan, Use Variance
Attorney
Primavera appeared for the applicant.
James W.
Higgins, Planner, was sworn.
Chairman Clayton
said at the last meeting the public had questions for the appraiser. Attorney Primavera said the appraiser will
be back at the next meeting.
Attorney
Primavera asked Mr. Higgins if he has reviewed the site plan. Mr. Higgins said yes.
Attorney
Primavera asked Mr. Higgins to give the Board his understanding of the
application.
Mr. Higgins said
this is a 60 bed nursing home. The
applicant is proposing to expand it to add another 60 beds. He said they are planning to bring the
building into much more habitable conditions for the residents. It will be ADA compliant.
Attorney
Primavera asked if Mr. Higgins inspected the building. Mr. Higgins said yes. He said from his review of the nursing home
the residents will benefit from this application. He said they are not adequate now. The site is in the R-30 zone.
Mr. Higgins said this is designated as an area for low-density
residential uses. Mr. Higgins listed a
number of uses permitted in the R-30 zone.
Mr. Higgins said nursing homes are permitted in several zones as
conditional uses.
Mr. Higgins
stated he did not think the expansion would have a negative impact on the
surrounding area. He also said that he
does not believe noise levels will increase if the expansion is approved.
June 19, 2002 Page
7
Mr. Higgins said
Tower Lodge purchased the certificate of need from another facility. He said Tower Lodge’s certificate of need is
still valid.
Mr. Higgins
stated the facility is being upgraded.
A new kitchen and a kosher kitchen will be added. There will be better living arrangements. There will be two beds per room instead of
four. A new day room will be
added. A new separate dining room and
recreation room will also be added.
There will be more administration space. It will be better handicapped accessible. He said the building would have to be
expanded to upgrade the building.
Mr. Higgins said
he does not think there are any negative effects from this application. The site is a nursing home. He said what is being proposed is not
extensive. He said it cannot be seen
from the street. He said the traffic,
noise, smell, odors will not have an impact on the neighbors. He said the employees will increase by 25%.
Mr. Higgins said
a variance will be needed for a 50’ buffer on the north side. He said they are keeping as much of the
existing vegetation as possible. He
said they will add vegetation if needed.
He said the closest residence is approximately 200’ from the
building. There will be no noise
added. The air conditioning will be on
the roof and it will be screened. He
said the trash compactor reduces the number of trash pick ups. He said trash will be picked up every 7 to
10 days. He said the generator will be
placed inside the building. He said the
applicant will install a deodorizing system.
He said smells come from fried foods.
He said they do not fry food at Tower Lodge.
Attorney
Primavera asked what type of conditions the Board might deem appropriate. Mr. Higgins said they will provide
additional plantings. There will be no
deliveries by tractor trailer. They
will move the generator inside. The air
conditioner will be on the roof and screened.
They will retain the circular driveway in the front of the
building. They will provide a fire
access around the building. The applicant
will comply with any other conditions.
Mr. Higgins said
there are substantial benefits. There
are no substantial negative impacts.
There will be some impact to the residents but they will not be
substantial. The Board can grant the
variance on that basis.
Mr. Higgins said
the applicant is providing a 75’ buffer on two sides. The east and south sides.
The north side has a 55’ buffer.
He said the 55’ buffer is more than adequate.
Mr. Higgins said
the permitted building coverage is 14% and the proposal is for 20.8%. He said impervious coverage is limited to
25% and 42% is being proposed. He said
there is more than 50% green area.
Attorney
Primavera said storm water run off will be underground instead of using a
detention basin. Mr. Higgins said that
is correct. It will be in the rear of
the building.
Mr. Higgins said
a 45’ loading space is required and 38.6’ is provided. Mr. Higgins said this is adequate because
there will be no tractor trailer deliveries.
June 19, 2002 Page
8
Mr. Higgins said
there is no inconsistency with the Master Plan or Municipal Land Use. Mr. Higgins said this application is
consistent with the Master Plan.
Mr. Higgins
addressed Mr. Maczuga’s letter of February 20, 2002. He said the only comment he has is if additional landscaping is
necessary it will be provided. He said
there is nothing he would not agree with.
Mrs. DeSarno
asked if the residents at Tower Lodge were predominately Jewish. Mr. Higgins said there is a need for a kosher
kitchen. Mrs. DeSarno asked if all
denominations were welcome at Tower Lodge.
Mr. Higgins said all faiths can come in.
Attorney Hirsch
said there is a moratorium on CON. Mr.
Higgins said that is correct. Attorney
Hirsch said this is not a new CON. Mr.
Higgins said the CON is still in existence.
Attorney Hirsch said this CON was done many years ago. Chairman Clayton asked if the CON was
regional. Mr. Higgins said yes.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the new beds would meet with Mount Laurel obligations. Mr. Higgins said nursing homes are not
eligible. He said if regulations were
changed Tower Lodge would contribute to the Mount Laurel obligations. Attorney Primavera said approximately 85% of
the beds are paid for by Medicaid.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if Tower Lodge had a waiting list.
Mr. Higgins said that would have to be answered by the operator.
Jim Stigliano,
Sharpe Road, asked what percentage of Tower Lodge’s residents is Jewish. Mr. Higgins said he did not know. He said that a majority of the residents are
Jewish. Mr. Stigliano asked what would
prevent Tower Lodge from becoming an all Jewish facility. Mr. Higgins, again, said he did not
know. He said fair housing laws may
apply. Mr. Stigliano asked what the
balance between Jewish and non-Jewish residents should be. Attorney Primavera objected to this line of
questioning. He said he did not know
where this line of questioning was going.
Attorney Hirsch agreed. Mr.
Stigliano said he had a feeling there is an ulterior motive.
Mr. Stigliano
asked if the upgrades were contingent on the 60 new beds. Mr. Higgins said there is a CON for the 60 beds. He said in order to provide the upgrades
additional funding would be needed.
Mr. Stigliano
asked how many residents were bedridden and wheelchair bound. He asked how many residents would use a
gymnasium. Mr. Higgins stated that the
plans include a physical therapy and recreation room.
Mr. Stigliano
said this looks like it is being pushed toward a rehabilitation center. He asked how many residents will use
physical therapy. Mr. Higgins said
anybody that is wheelchair bound or bedridden need physical therapy.
Richard Edwards,
3214 Sharpe Road, asked about the nursing home as a residential use. Mr. Higgins said people reside there and it
is their home. Mr. Edwards asked if
this could be
June 19, 2002 Page
9
compared to a
hotel that turns a profit. Mr. Higgins
said no. He said Tower Lodge is not
like a hotel. Mr. Edwards asked if it
was a business for profit. Mr. Higgins
said he did not know.
Mr. Edwards
asked if they would agree not to provide physical therapy on an outpatient
basis. Mr. Higgins said the applicant
will agree to that.
Joseph
Lesniewski, 2307 Ruta Blvd., asked if Mr. Higgins was familiar with testimony
stating that residents stay at nursing homes for a limited time, between 90 and
100 days, depending on insurance. Mrs.
Higgins said yes.
Mr. Lesniewski
asked how far the homes from the rear of the building are. Mr. Higgins said about 400’ to 500’ from the
existing site.
Mr. Lesniewski
asked Mr. Higgin’s opinion as to the effect when the nursing home goes from 60
beds to 120 beds. Mr. Higgins said he
does not think it would have any substantial impact.
Mr. Lesniewski
asked if there were restrictions would they go from owner to owner. Mr. Higgins said yes, the approval and
restrictions go with the land.
Mr. Edwards
asked if the applicant would allow the neighbors to visit the site. Attorney Primavera suggested the neighbors
contact the manager to make arrangements for a visit.
Chairman Clayton
asked if the 90 – 100 day stay change the facility regarding zoning. Ms. Bergailo said no, it is a non-conforming
use.
Ms. Bergailo
asked for testimony regarding one story vs. two stories. Mr. Higgins said the rear tapers down. He said it is within the regulations of the
R-30 zone. He said it reduces the
visual impact.
Mrs. Morrissey
asked if Mr. Higgins would agree that less beds and larger rooms would be more
beneficial for living comfort. Mr.
Higgins said it would increase the cost per bed.
Attorney Hirsch
stated this application will be carried to August 7, 2002.
Chairman Clayton
said some residents brought up concerns regarding noise. Attorney Primavera said he spoke with the
route coordinator and told him to please come after 8:30 A.M. He said he has not received any further
complaints. Attorney Primavera said if
they put in a compactor trash would be picked up on demand. Attorney Primavera said he would complete
his presentation at the next meeting.
He said all experts will be here except Mr. Higgins.
Chairman Clayton
asked for a waiver of time limits.
Attorney Primavera waived time limits and ordered the transcripts.
MINUTES TO BE ADOPTED: Chairman Clayton moved to approve the minutes of the study
sessions and regular minutes of June 5, 2002.
Mrs. Morrissey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
June 19, 2002 Page
10
RESOLUTIONS TO BE MEMORIALIZED:
JOHN AND RENEE
BRINK – BA#11-2002
Block 299, Lot 14 Rembiszewski/Morrissey
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