MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE BOROUGH OF MOUNTAIN LAKES
November 7, 2013
Chair Chris Richter called the meeting to order and announced: Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act by adoption of the annual notice on January 3, 2013. Said resolution was mailed to The Citizen and The Morris County Daily Record and by filing the same with the Borough Clerk on January 7, 2013 and was made available to all those requesting individual notice and paying the required fee.
Start: 7:45 pm
ROLL CALL:
Present: Albergo, Max, Dietz, Richter, Bolo and Rusak
Absent: McConnell
Also Present: Attorney Lisa John
REVIEW OF MINUTES: Mary Dietz made a motion to approve the minutes from the October 3rd meeting. William Albergo provided the second; the minutes were approved by voice vote by all members.
MEMORIALIZING RESOLUTIONS:
JAMES & TERRY CINNAMOND App. # 13-631
William Albergo made motion to adopt the resolution of approval; Mary Dietz seconded the motion. The resolution was passed by a vote of 3 to 0 with members Albergo, Max, and Dietz voting to approve.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: All Applicants and professionals were sworn in by Chair Chris Richter.
Application:
WILLIAM & KAREN ROOS 156 Pollard Road
Blk. 110, Lot 63 Appl. #13-634
Front Yard Setback R-A zone
Bill and Karen Roos, of 156 Pollard Road, were before the Board seeking relief from the required front yard setback to install a generator 23.6 ft off the road. Mr. Roos explained their 1929 Hapgood needs a generator because the stream on their property runs under their home. They have managed the stream during most storms, when it overflows they use sump pumps to keep the water out of the basement. A few years ago they made the basement into a recreation room and laundry room. During Irene they did not loose power and the sump pumps kept up but Sandy was a different story. They need to install the generator 25 ft off the stream and need to keep it away from steam to keep it dry. Water flows under the house through a culvert cutting the property in half. They have no alternative site and can’t run gas piping through the stream. They did not feel there would any impact to the neighbors plus the property is challenging.
Chris Richter said the need had been documented and understood the hardship of the property. Mary Dietz also understood the hardship but asked why the unit was so far from the house. Mr. Roos said the unit needed to be installed away from the windows but they would place it as close to the house as they could. Peter Bolo asked if the steam was visible inside the house, no it ran through a culvert under the house.
Mr. Richter asked if anyone from the public wished to comment on the application. Dave Shaw, of 25 Valley Rd, had no issue with generator. Barry Zawacki, of 19 Valley Road, lived across the street and would not see the unit from his house. Mary Dietz asked the generator be placed as close to the house as possible. Chris Richter confirmed the downward slope of the property would make the unit less visible from the street. Peter Bolo made a motion to accept the application as presented with the addition of landscaping to hide the unit and William Albergo provided the second. The Board approved the application 6 to 0 with Board members Albergo, Max, Dietz, Richter, Bolo and Rusak voting in favor.
JAMES & LAURA HIRSCHFELD 8 Laurel Hill Road
Blk. 60, Lot 17 Appl. #13-632
ILC, FAR, Front Setback, Height R-A zone
Larry Korinda a licensed Architect in the state of New Jersey as well as James and Laura Hirschfeld of 8 Laurel Hill Road would be presenting the application. Mr. Korinda said the applicant was seeking variances for FAR, ILC, height on both the street facing sides and the non-street facing side of the house and front setback on Lowell Road. The submitted site plan showed the fronts on Lowell and Laurel Hill in addition to the trapezoid shaped lot; both create a hardship. Exhibit A-1 was a photo board consisting of 4 photos showing the house from various angles. The existing driveway off Laurel Hill does not connect to the historic garage. The existing drive under garage will become a tandem garage to hold two cars. Exhibit A-2 was a 2nd photo board of 4 photos showing the second driveway on Lowell Road. William Albergo confirmed the applicant was looking for variances for 2 driveways and 3 garages if approved; this was correct. Exhibit A-3 was a colorized version of the submitted site plan showing the relocation and widening of the existing driveway on Lowell and the porch to be removed.
Mr. Korinda continued they would be tearing down the existing side foyer and rebuilding on the same footprint to create an access connecting the basement garage to the kitchen on the 1st floor. The applicant was not eligible to apply under the Historic Preservation ordinance because they were tearing down and rebuilding in the front yard. During the construction of the addition they will re-grade the driveway 3 ½ ft lower than it is now. This will lower the garage doors making them less visible from the street. The applicant was willing to do additional planting or screening to block the view. Lowell is a narrow road that does not lend itself to on street parking. Currently the applicant cannot back out of the gravel driveway safely.
Chris Richter stated it was unusually to have 2 driveways, why not expand the garage on the west side. Larry Korinda said the applicant wanted to lower the deck and that would not allow for a second garage bay. Exhibit A-4 was sheet V-1 colorized showing the new stairs in basement. Exhibit A-5 was sheet V-2 colorized showing the 1st floor expanded kitchen. The current kitchen is 11’ x 15’ with 4 entrances into the room. Exhibit A-6 was sheet V-3 colorized, the 2nd floor plan changing the existing walk-in closet to a sitting area and adding a walk-in closets over an existing sunroom. Exhibit A-7 was a colorized version of V-4 the front elevation. Exhibit A-8 was a colorized version of V-5 the rear elevation. The building height on Lowell Road exceeds the allowed height. The existing FAR is 20.4% and they are requesting 22.3% if the Historic Preservation bulk incentives could be used they would be allowed 21% rather than 17%. The applicant could demolish the existing historic garage to reduce FAR. Chris Richter noticed there were no plans for the third floor. James Hirschfeld said there were three bedrooms and a bath on third floor. Arthur Max did not think referring to the Historic Preservation was relevant since it did not apply. Chris Richter thought it was valid to state to give perspective to the application. Pat Rusak provided exhibit B-1, a historic photo of the home. Peter Bolo thought the change to the home was deminimus on the Lowell Road side of the home and they should be allowed to use the Historic Preservation ordinance.
Mary Dietz asked the applicant to explain the new driveway access to the tandem garage. Larry Korinda explained one car would come in from one driveway off of Laurel Hill and one from the other driveway on Lowell Road. The extra driveway width on Lowell was for maneuvering the cars. James Hirschfeld said the Laurel Hill driveway gets snow bound because it is steep, the new driveway will be shorter, less steep and easier to plow because it will be heated. Chris Richter explained the Board was struggling with 2 driveways and 2 garages and giving an ILC variance for such a situation. Mr. Hirschfeld said cars do not fit in historic garage. On the other side of the house the new garage space connects with the existing drive under garage and we can make it bigger in length to hold two cars. The existing driveway is too tight to accommodate two cars. Chris Richter asked if they had asked the Engineer to re-grade the existing driveway to make it safe and provide better access; they had not.
Larry Korinda suggested another driveway option. Exhibit A-9 was a study to bring the ILC down. They narrowed the Lowell driveway to 18.5 ft, removed the historic garage and removed a front walkway bringing the ILC down to 24.9% rather than the 28% proposed. Mary Dietz questioned why they applicant was not addressing the primary drive. Larry Korinda asked if the Board would consider and an increased ILC to use the existing driveway. Mrs. Dietz said she could not without something to see. Peter Bolo confirmed the gravel driveway on Lowell gave access to the kitchen. James Hirschfeld said they wanted to improve the kitchen making it more usable and accessible, this created the garage situation. We would be willing to make the garage on the Lowell side a one car garage since we use that driveway to enter the house near the kitchen everyday. At one time the driveway was circular and connected to the existing free standing garage. Pat Rusak asked if there was a curb cut for the old circular drive; yes there was.
Chairmen Richter asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. Behan Ziam was speaking for her dad who lives at 3 Lowell Road. The applicant will be taking down three trees her father sees from the living room, once removed he will see their raised deck from his front yard. The area will become a parking lot once their kids grow. Her father, Semih Ziam, added there would be too many driveways. Peter Bolo asked if the family had seen the second proposed plan; they had not. Pat Rusak said she was not concerned about the extra driveway she was more concerned with changing the grade of the existing driveway and preferred the 2nd alternative. Mr. Korinda told the Board the driveway could be a 12 ft wide single lane coming into the garage by the kitchen. This moves the driveway away from the Ziam property and the client would be willing to provide screening. Terry Cinnamond, 15 Lowell Road, said she did not consider the gravel area a driveway. The original Hapgood garage is not usable because it is not near the kitchen. I have a 2 car garage and so does Mr. Ziam. The kitchen is small and very tiny; every family wants an eating kitchen. Mr. Korinda noted the three evergreens have been topped because of the power lines and removing them will help visibility. Sina Ziam, of 16 Cobb Road/77 Boulevard, said he has a through lot with two front yards and he had no garage. He continued, it is not our duty or job as a community to make Hapgoods something they are not, they are special just the way they are. James Hirschfeld said they would be happy with a driveway one car width wide to provide access to the kitchen.
Peter Bolo asked why the applicant was increasing the space on the second floor. Larry Korinda said the Hirschfeld’s master bedroom bed was in the front of the house which was dark. By moving it to the rear of the house they will overlook the backyard, increase the light in the room and add a laundry. Dr. Bolo had no issues with kitchen but was struggling with the 2 driveways. Mr. Korinda said the new garage was depressed; the only thing you will see is the windows of the garage door from the road. Chris Richter asked if they considered make a two car garage on east side of the house and removing the drive on the other side, no they had not. Arthur Max said the Board really needed a site plan with the suggested changes. Exhibit A-10 was a site plan with a12 ft driveway reducing the ILC to 26.6%. A 4th option was a 12 ft drive and the removal of the historic garage. Peter Bolo commented, the house needs to be improved benefiting the neighborhood. Mary Dietz was concerned with the second floor mass she felt that needed to be minimized. William Albergo liked the garage and did not have a problem with two drives but he did like the idea of removing a variance. Pat Rusak felt the 12 ft drive to access the kitchen was needed and would like to keep the historic garage.
James Hirschfeld said they would do a 12 ft driveway remove the walkways and the existing garage stays. Mary Dietz felt they could leave the garage if it did not increase the existing non-conforming lot coverage of 26.3% but she was still concerned about the large walk-in closet so they should consider reducing the massing. James Hirschfeld said the area above the garage hurting them for FAR. Arthur Max agreed with Mrs. Dietz and was willing to grant them the 21% FAR as if they had applied under the Historic Preservation ordinance.
Chris Richter summarized the changes made to the application. The applicant will keep the historic garage in place. The area over the garage is 180 ft. so the Board agreed to grant an FAR of 21.83% for the property. The mass of the walk-in closet will be reduced to meet that FAR percentage. The Lowell Road driveway will be reduced to 12 ft wide with screening along street and the applicant must reduce coverage elsewhere on the lot to stay at the current non-conforming ILC of 26.3%. Mary Dietz added the applicant was to submit new house plans, site plan and page two of the application. William Albergo made a motion to approve the application with the changes listed above and Peter Bolo provided the second. The Board approved the application 6 to 0 with Board members Albergo, Max, Dietz, Richter, Bolo and Rusak voting in favor.
JAKE & MARY BETH DENOOYER 79 Lake Drive
Blk. 101, Lot 27 Appl. #13-633
ILC, FAR, Side/Combined Side Setback R-A zone
Lake Front Setback, Height/Stories, Front Wall
Richard Nelson a licensed Architect and Marc Walker a licensed Engineer in the state of New Jersey would present the application along with Jake and Mary Beth DeNooyer of 79 Lake Drive. Mr. DeNooyer explained they were new residents from Illinois. Their home has a 9 ft x 10 ft kitchen. They would like a more functional kitchen, a powder room and family room on 1st floor, on the second floor a master that has walk-in closet and view of the lake. Currently rain runs into the garage due to the grade of the property. He told the Board he requested his professionals provide him with a great floor plan, preserve the 1926 home and the addition look historically consistent.
Rick Nelson continued the presentation; the applicant was looking for variances for FAR, ILC, shoreline setback, height and side/combined side setback. The basement is 6’ 11” but counts when calculating FAR because it sits out of the ground. Many the variances drop out under the Boroughs ordinances upon completion of the project. Exhibit A-1 was the site plan colorized. Under the Historic Preservation ordinance you must have a combined side setback of 50 ft to qualify and as built this home does not. Lisa John, the Attorney sitting in for Michael Sullivan, said the dwelling met the criteria to be considered for the special ordinance however they do not meet the combined side yard setback. Mr. Nelson continued they needed a shoreline setback variance for the short entry steps and the deck. For the deck they also needed the side setback variance. Currently a FAR variance is needed because the basement and the attic count in the calculation. Upon project completion they will conform because the areas will drop out once the second floor is added and the grading is changed. Exhibit A-2 was a photo board of the existing basement; they need a height variance because the basement sits out of the ground. They would like to widen the driveway for safer egress. Exhibit A-3 was a photo of the driveway and the pillars they need to take down. They would rebuild the pillars to match the old ones. Mr. Nelson said in the back of the home he tried to match the front but brought the view of the house from the lake down. They would be preserving three of the existing elevations and are matching as many of the house details as possible. The dormers will be cedar shakes.
Marc Walker proposed keeping the circular driveway because the intersection of Midvale and Lake are very busy especially in the summer. The exits are only 11 ft wide between the piers so they would like to increase the driveway width to 20 ft. Since the property is so narrow the only place to put the garage is to the back. The new deck creates the side setback request of 18 ft. Chris Richter commented decks are structures and are required not to be in the setbacks. Mr. Walker said the applicant needed combined side yard and lakefront variances. The lot coverage is currently 25.9% where 30% is allowed, they are proposing 35.5%. The ILC is a hardship because of the need for access to the rear garage and the circular drive for safety. The building height of 35.32 ft and 3 stories remains the same after construction. The have added a 2 ft retaining wall in front and 3 ft in the back to keep the height down. We are not adding more height but are adding additional perimeter to the house. The attic drops out and is no longer part of the building height at the lower section of the lot. This will take care of the drainage in front and their vehicles will be parked in the rear of the house. They will comply after the construction with height and FAR. A lot of houses in town have retaining walls around the basement to soften house. Jack DeNooyer added currently the back of the house is not that attractive adding the walls improves the look.
There was no one present from the public.
The chairmen asked the Board for comments on the application. Mary Dietz was concerned about the lot coverage and the garage was larger than a standard two car garage. Jake DeNooyer commented the kitchen, dinette and family room drove the size of the garage in addition to the brick walls that need to be built. We have kept the original window openings to the current home and will use them as doorways to connect the new to the old house. Arthur Max asked if they could reduce the mass in some way, they had doubled the size of the house. Peter Bolo thought the house awkward and felt it substantially improved. He especially liked that the addition was only visible from the lake but felt manipulated by the proposed grading. He felt the slate patio should go since there was a lot of coverage and he was concerned about the circular driveway. William Albergo said the view from street remaining the same and the addition in the back of the house was great. He agreed the driveway should be improved to make it safer. Pat Rusak liked the proposed additions but thought they could reduce the FAR. The ILC was high and there should be less driveway and patio. Chris Richter said there should be no encroachment into lake front exception and the ILC should be brought down. The garage in the back of the house made sense.
Due to the time the applicant agreed to carry the application to the next month. William Albergo made a motion to carry the application to our December 5th meeting and Arthur Max provided the second. The Board approved the motion by voice vote.
Other Matters / Public Comment:
No one from the public was present.
The Board passed a resolution recognizing Pia Abate service on the Board.
We are still in need of two alternates.
Arthur Max made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Mary Dietz provided the second. The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Cynthia Shaw, Secretary