MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING BOROUGH OF ORADELL HELD IN THE TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 21, 2018 Chairman Michelman called the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Notice of this meeting was published in the official newspapers, prominently posted in the Borough Hall, and filed with the clerk in accordance with the requirements of the Open Public Meetings Act. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Michelman, Mrs. McGrinder, Mr. Beslow, Mrs. Cobb, Mr. Degheri Absent: Mr. McHale, Mr. Barrows Also Present: Mr. Regan, Esq. Mr. Atkinson, Board Engineer Mr. Depken, Zoning Administrator Correspondence Minutes of Planning Board Meeting held January 19, 2018.* NJ Planning Officials 2018 Winter-Spring Programs. Mr. Michelman explained the Zoning Board procedures. Mr. Depken and Mr. Atkinson were both sworn in by Mr. Regan. Applications CAL. #825-17 CHRISTIAN BROTHERS INSTITUTE NEW APPLICATION Block 501, Lot 1 1040 Oradell Ave. Carried to Monday, March 19 th meeting Mr. Michelman stated that they are not present because the application has been carried to the March 19 th meeting. He explained that if there is anyone here for this application, to please note that the hearing would not be this evening. CAL. #829-18 BRIAN & JOAN McCANN NEW APPLICATION Block 1307, Lot 25 325 Beechwood Road The homeowners, Brian and Joanne McCann were sworn in by Mr. Regan. Mr. Regan stated that the notice documents are in order and the board has jurisdiction to proceed. Mr. McCann explained that they had recently bought the property on Beechwood Road. He stated that they are requesting a C1 variance for a land hardship associated to adding onto the existing building. He explained that the building has a garage that was added on at some point and the garage is only 9.9 feet from the adjoining property where the allowable is 15 feet. He stated that they are looking to build above the garage. He explained that the new addition would be back 15 feet but
they still needed a variance due to the increase of the encroachment. He stated that they are also looking to increase the front of the house and in doing this it would increase the side yard setback due to the irregular nature of the lot. He explained that they are only adding 460 ft.² to the house so there is no FAR issue. He stated that the lot is a large size but due to the garage and the irregular shape, it triggers the need for variances. Mr. Michelman asked if anyone on the board had any questions. He asked if the board s professionals had any questions. Mr. Atkinson asked if there are any improvements being done to the existing footprint. Mr. McCann stated that there would be an extension to the front of the house, roughly 23 x 7 in size and there would be less than 30 ft.³ of soil moved. Mr. Atkinson asked if they were aware of the soil requirements if that number changes. Mr. McCann stated yes they are aware. Mr. Atkinson explained that they would have an increase of impervious coverage so they would need to mitigate that as well. Mr. Degheri stated that with the addition being over the existing garage, other towns do not require a variance and asked what the reason is for this in this Borough. Mr. Michelman explained that here, it is considered an extension of a pre-existing non-conformity and over the years it has been suggested that this should not require a variance but the Borough has never accepted that recommendation. Mr. Degheri stated that in his opinion, this situation is not an extension because they are not touching the first floor. Mr. Depken explained that the total side yard setback exceeds what it is permitted. Mr. Atkinson stated that the irregularity of the lot changes the total of the side yard setback. Mr. Regan explained that some municipalities do you have an ordinance that would eliminate this type of relief. Mr. Michelman stated that this type of ordinance has not been adopted here. Mr. Regan asked if the non-conforming side yard setback is on the easterly side. Mr. McCann stated yes. Mr. Michelman asked if the board had any further questions. Mr. Michelman opened the meeting to the public for questions, not seeing a show of hands, closed to the public. Mr. Michelman called for a motion from the board on either the affirmative or the negative. Mr. Beslow made a motion to approve, and Mrs. McGrinder seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: AYES: Degheri, Beslow, McGrinder, Cobb, Michelman CAL. #830-18 JANE & ANTHONY BATISTA NEW APPLICATION Block 410, Lot 19 295 Prospect Avenue The homeowners, Jane and Anthony Batista were sworn in by Mr. Regan. Mr. Michelman asked if the board had jurisdiction for this hearing and if the applicant brought the notices with them this evening. Mr. Regan stated that what is important is the proof of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Mr. Michelman explained that while the board attorney is reviewing these documents he would announce that Mrs. Cobb would not be sitting on this application since she is within the 200 ft radius. He stated that there is only four board members now present for this meeting. He explained that since this application has a D variance it would require five affirmative votes so the board cannot take a vote on this application this evening. He stated that 2
if everything is in order the first option the applicant can choose is to wait to present their application till next month and the second option is that they can present their case tonight, the missing board members can watch the video tape to view this hearing and then the vote can be carried till next month. Mr. Regan explained that the notices are in order and the board has jurisdiction over the application. Mrs. Batista stated that she would like for her builder to come up and help her present her case. The builder s representatives, Tana Cruz and Thomas Trill were sworn in by Mr. Regan. Mr. Trill stated that he was hired by the owner to help design the addition for the home. He explained that he worked with the architect on the plans. Mr. Regan asked if the architect would be providing testimony. Mr. Trill stated no that he was not available. Mr. Regan explained he believed these are factual witnesses and they would offer no opinions. Mrs. Batista would like to thank the board members for allowing them to present their case even though there are not enough voting members. She stated that they are not able to work with the existing home for the needs of their family. She explained that they are not looking to build a luxury home and it would be just enough space for their family. She stated that the second floor does not have enough space and the layout of the home is very choppy. She explained that the existing home has four bedrooms but not all of them are on the same floor and this is not conducive to a family's needs. Mr. Michelman stated that they are requesting something for their own personal lifestyle which he indicated earlier was not acceptable. Mrs. Batista explained that this is not for her personal life style. Mr. Michelman stated that they are requesting this variance in keeping with current building standards that would enhance and benefit the property as a whole to the neighborhood but not specifically to them. Mrs. Batista stated yes. Mr. Regan explained that this needs to be pointed out specifically because this is a D4 FAR variance which requires five votes out of seven. He stated that there are certain items that the applicant must specify proof for a D variance and asked if the applicant had consulted with their architect or another expert. He explained that he felt that they would need expert testimony to justify the standards for the D variance since there are specifics that need to be met. Mrs. Batista stated that she felt that they are not requesting a large amount of space to build on the property. Mr. Michelman explained that they are not a court but they are required to act that way. He stated that unfortunately they have no leeway. He explained that even though it is a small amount over, they are still required to satisfy the same burden of proof. Mrs. Batista stated that her builder could give factual information. Mr. Trill explained that in working with the existing home it was difficult to contain the FAR. He stated that they would see on the plans that the dining room is larger than it needs to be but that this is part of the existing home. He explained that the proposed kitchen and the family room layout is consistent to a modern home. He stated that to get the bedroom upstairs for it to be a comfortable modern-day size house, the downstairs of the house needed to be this size. He explained the existing home causes them to go over the FAR. Mr. Michelman stated that this technical information is something that needs to be presented by their architect. He explained that the builder is also giving the board a lot of opinions which they cannot consider. He stated that this is their case and it is their decision on who to bring forward. He explained that they were given information by the board attorney and himself. He stated that the applicant has time to bring in additional information for next month s meeting. Mr. Trill explained that the board is not voting till next month anyway so apparently the applicant has time. Mr. Regan asked what the current total square footage of the home is. Mr. Trill stated that this should be on the plan. Mr. Degheri explained that on the plan the current square footage is 3
listed as NA and this figure should be filled in on the plans. Mr. Regan stated that this is why he had asked because it is not on the plans. Mr. Degheri explained that this is unfortunate that they do not have their professional here at this meeting. Mrs. Batista stated that the current total square footage is on the architect s plans. Mr. Degheri explained that on the engineer s schedule pertaining to the variance, you see the calculation differs to what is listed on the architect s schedule. He stated that their professionals need to be here to answer such questions as these. Mr. Michelman explained that the applicant has gone as far as they can this evening. He stated that the applicant would be back here next month. He explained that the board cannot tell the applicant who to bring to testify but they can only explain to them how they need to proceed. Mrs. Batista stated that she is confused as to what other questions there are from the board. Mr. Regan explained that he looked again at the plans and does not see the existing floor area calculation on the architect s plan. Mr. Degheri stated that in his opinion he does not see this calculation either. Mrs. Batista asked what other questions the board has. Mr. Michelman stated that he cannot think of any as of this moment right now. Mr. Regan explained that on a D4 FAR variance there has to be a demonstration that the site can accommodate an overage in square footage. He stated that there has to be some testimony to the D standard. He explained that he felt the architect or engineer would be able to testify to the standard. Mr. Michelman asked if the applicant understood this. Mrs. Batista stated no. Mr. Michelman explained that he would recommend them to look at the Borough s website, click on OPTV section and watch this Zoning Board meeting carefully. He stated that the applicant needs to demonstrate that what they are proposing can fit on the property, does not overpower it and does not do damage to the neighboring properties. He explained that this would all need to come from an expert s testimony. He stated that the two individuals that the applicant has here cannot present that. Mrs. Batista explained that she believes they are well under all the other constraints within the ordinance. She stated that she does not know if that is what the board means and if that is what they are looking for. She asked if this is what the board is pertaining too. Mr. Regan stated that the board cannot advise the applicant on how to proceed or how to present their application. He explained that they would need to talk to their architect or engineer and they would be able to guide them. He stated that they could also consult legal advice from a land-use attorney. He explained that a D4 variance needs to meet the statutory criteria. Mr. Michelman stated that the applicant can re-watch this meeting to go over this information. He explained that their architect and engineer can watch this hearing to review what was said by the board. Ms. Cruz asked to confirm if they need to prove that the FAR they are proposing is not in violation of what. Mr. Michelman stated that they need to prove why the board should be granting the variance. Mr. Trill explained that he understands what the board is looking for and they could discuss this to be prepared for the next meeting. Mr. Michelman asked if there is anything further that they would like to add at this time. Mrs. Batista stated no. Mr. Depken explained that applicant has a letter which they needed to sign in regards to their soil moving were they are stating that the project would be under the 100 cubic yd.³ and the board engineer has to comment to that. Mr. Atkinson stated that they would need to revisit this with their engineer. He explained that when going through the calculations that were shown on the engineer s plans that were submitted in the packet there is an error in the soil calculations based on the Borough s ordinance. He stated that they had subtracted out the fill from the total volume and in actually the calculus of the total volume is to add everything together. He explained that their engineer needs to recheck his soil numbers because as of now they are potentially needing board approval for soil moving. Mr. Depken stated that the soil moving approval can be done at the Zoning Board in conjunction with 4
their variance but the applicant would need to submit the soil moving application. Mr. Atkinson explained that they need to have their engineer redo his calculations because based on the numbers submitted they are at 101 for soil moving which is over the amount. Mr. Michelman stated that based on all this, the hearing would be carried to the next Zoning Board meeting held on March 19 th at 7:30 PM. Mr. Degheri explained that with respect to Bergen Catholic, how would this applicant fall on the agenda for that meeting. Mrs. Batista stated that she was speaking with the Borough Administrator today and they would be heard first on next month's agenda. Mr. Michelman explained yes that they would be heard first because their application is already in process and cases in process go first also since the board s attorney has recused himself from the Bergen Catholic application anything requiring the board s attorney's attention would be held first. Resolutions CAL. #828-18 537 ELLEN, LLC RESOLUTION Block 501, Lot 1 537 Kinderkamack Rd. Mr. Michelman asked if any of the board members had any corrections or comments on the resolution. He called for a motion from the board to approve the resolution. Mrs. McGrinder made a motion to approve, and Mr. Beslow seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: AYES: Degheri, Beslow, McGrinder, Michelman Old Business None New Business Mr. Michelman stated that the planning officials programs has been set for any members that need to obtain certification. Mr. Depken stated that if anyone is interested to please let them know. He asked if the attorney knew if they would schedule another land-use symposium. Mr. Regan stated that he does not know since the last one was held back in 2016. Mr. Michelman explained that if they could let the new members know the information for the certification. He stated that next month they would have two members of the Planning Board join the Zoning Board for the Bergen Catholic application. He asked if any residents had any feelings about upcoming applications to please not discuss this with the board members. He stated that any information could only be discussed at a formal meeting. Mr. Michelman opened the meeting to the public for any matters, not seeing a show of hands, closed the meeting to the public. The meeting was adjourned at 9 p.m. 5
Secretary 6