BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MEETING MINUTES – MONDAY, APRIL 4, 2016 – 8:00 p.m.
Present: Mr. Nadelberg, Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. DeSarno, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr,
Mr. Morgan, Mr. Ping, Mr. Phil Morin, Board Attorney, and Margaret Koontz, Secretary
Absent: All present
Also present: Fred Heyer, Borough Planner, and Keith Lynch, Director of Planning and
Development
A. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Nadelberg called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m.
B. PUBLIC NOTICE
Chairman Nadelberg stated that this is a meeting of the Board of Adjustment of the
Borough of New Providence, County of Union, and State of New Jersey. Adequate
notice of this meeting was given in accordance with P.L. 1975, Chapter 231, in that a
notice was made in conformance with Section 13 of the Act. He also stated the protocol
for the meeting.
C. RESOLUTIONS
Christopher and Nicole Bisaccia
Application #2016-04
7 Pine Court, Block 113, Lot 5, R-1 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule III for permission to construct an
addition. The proposed building coverage is 4,170 square feet whereas 3,960 square
feet is the maximum allowed.
Mr. Ammitzboll moved this and Mr. Ping seconded same. Members voting in
favor: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr, Mr. Ping and Mr.
Nadelberg.
Donna Bucco
Application #2016-05
78 Woodcrest Drive, Block 251, Lot 2, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedules II and III for permission to construct
a deck. The proposed rear-yard setback to the deck is 40 feet whereas 45.5 feet is the
minimum required. The proposed building coverage is 2,637 square feet whereas 2,305
square feet is the maximum allowed.
Mr. Karr moved this and Ms. Jaynes seconded same. Members voting in favor:
Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr, Mr. Ping and Mr. Nadelberg.
New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless
Application #2016-01
121 Chanlon Road, Block 221, Lot 6, TBI-2, New Providence, NJ 07974
Conditional use and site plan approval to install a wireless communications facility on the
roof of 121 Chanlon Road. Height variance to allow the antenna enclosures to extend to
63’ and the equipment shelter to 65’ above grade, where 50 ‘ is permitted and a variance
to allow a zone setback of 130’ to the C-1 Special Commercial Zone where a 150’ zone
setback is required, together with any additional variances, waivers or other relief
required by the Board after its review of the application.
This resolution will be memorialized on April 18, 2016.
Members eligible to vote in favor: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. DeSarno , Mr. Grob, Ms.
Jaynes, Mr. Karr, Mr. Ping and Mr. Nadelberg
Erminio LaRosa
Application #2016-03
12 Primrose Drive, Block 131, Lot 6, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule II and III for permission to construct
an addition and proposed future garage. The proposed rear yard to the addition is 26.67
feet to the addition and 21.67 feet to the future garage whereas 40 feet is the minimum
required. The proposed side yard setback to the second floor addition is 8 feet whereas
16.8 feet is the minimum required. The proposed building coverage with the future
garage is 1,722 square feet whereas 1,658 square feet is the maximum allowed. The
property currently does not have a garage whereas a one car garage is required. In
accordance with a previously approved variance the existing deck is 16’ from the rear
property line. The property has an existing shed that is 1.2 feet from the rear property
line and 2.3 feet from the side property line.
The Board discussed adding a condition to the resolution for the alternate plan for trees
on the rear right side of the property between Messrs. La Rosa’s and Morgan’s
properties to be determined following consultation with the landscaper as discussed at
the hearing and a condition granting the Board jurisdiction over the landscaping following
final approval of the landscape plan.
Mr. Ammitzboll moved to approve the resolution with the amendments as noted.
Mr. Grob seconded the motion. Members voting in favor of the amended
resolution: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. DeSarno, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr and Mr. Grob.
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 4, 2016
Kline Boulevard Associates, LLC
Application #2016-06
38 Kline Boulevard, Block202, Lot 1, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule II for permission to construct an
addition. The proposed front-yard setback to the front stoop is 31 feet and 32 feet to the
addition along Kline Boulevard and 23.83 feet to the addition along Richland Drive
whereas 40 feet is the minimum required. The existing front-yard setback to the house
is 34.7 feet along Kline Boulevard and 22.6 feet along Richland Drive to the detached
garage.
John Tedesco, owner of the property, and Thomas Hofmann, his architect were sworn
in. Mr. Tedesco was represented by August Santore, attorney. Mr. Hofmann described
the property which is on the corner of Kline Boulevard and Richland Drive and is
occupied by a Cape Cod house with a detached garage. Mr. Tedesco proposes to
bump out the back of the house and add a second floor and attached garage. The frontyard setback to the stoop on Kline Boulevard will be 31’ and 32’ to the garage. The
current front-yard setback on Kline Boulevard is 34.7.’ The 2.5 story house will be 29’
high and the addition meets the setback requirement based on the height of the addition.
The application requires a variance for the front-yard setbacks. Part of the property is
located in Berkeley Heights. The rear-yard setback is compliant. A series of
photographs of the property were marked as follows:










Exhibit A-1: Photograph showing the sidewalk across the front of the house on
Kline Boulevard. The front of the house will maintain the existing lines and is set
back a little farther than the house next door to the left.
Exhibit A-2: Photograph of the front of the house
Exhibit A-3: Photograph of the front and right side of the house from Richland
Drive
Exhibit A-4: Photograph of the right side of the neighboring house on Kline
Boulevard to the left of the property in question.
Exhibit A-5: Photograph of the front and right side of the neighboring house on
Kline Boulevard located to the left of the property in question
Exhibit A-6: Photograph of the garage from Kline Boulevard
Exhibit A-7: Photograph of the right side of the house and the front and right side
of the garage
Exhibit A-8: Photograph of the right side of the house
Exhibit A-9: Photograph of the house across the street on the Richland Drive
corner, band
Exhibit A-10: Photograph of the house on Richland Drive one in from the corner
of Kline Boulevard and Richland Drive..
Mr. Tedesco has worked in New Providence and Berkeley Heights and is familiar with
the area. He did a survey of the area to determine the nature and character of the
neighborhood before designing the proposed addition. The proposed house is the same
general size and character as the houses shown in Exhibits A-9 and A-10.
Mr. Tedesco responded to questions from the Board. Mr. Tedesco owned the house 15
years ago, sold it and then bought it back. When he filed the application, he was the
contract purchaser but closed on the house prior to the hearing. He does not live in the
house. The distance from the existing garage to the rear property line is 25.2’ and then
another 10’ to 15’ to the first house on Richland Drive behind the property. Mr. Tedesco
believes the front-yard setback for that house is about 40.’ The driveway will stay the
same but will narrow toward Union Avenue at the curb cut. The two trees closest to the
corner of the new garage will have to be removed to construct the attached garage. Mr.
Grob suggested that it would be better to leave the curb line for the driveway the way it
is to protect the tree closest to Kline Boulevard. Mr. Tedesco is willing to put tree
protection around that tree. Mr. Karr noted that the neighbors behind will now see a flat
wall with the proposed addition which was previously broken up by the detached garage.
Mr. Grob believes there is enough vegetation in the back to break up the view and
provide screening. Mr. Tedesco testified that the neighbor behind wants him to remove
the large oak tree in the back of the property because he believes it is going to fall and
injure/kill his child. Mr. Tedesco is not sure if the tree is unhealthy but he is willing to
plant other trees if the tree is removed. The evergreen will be maintained. The steps off
the slider in the back lead to an 18’ x 18’ paver patio which does not impact the
impervious coverage requirement. The back of the house will have downward-facing
lighting and possibly a flood light. The house has central air conditioning but a new unit
will be added to the left side of the house within the setback facing the neighbor’s
driveway and garage which is 40’ away. Mr. Tedesco may install a generator which
would be located by the air conditioning compressors.
The Board had no further questions for the witness. The hearing was opened to
questions from the public.
There were no questions from the public.
No further witnesses appeared to testify and the hearing was opened to
comments from the public.
There were no comments from the public.
Discussion: Mr. Grob was inclined to approve the application with a condition to protect
the tree along the driveway. Mr. Ammitzboll believes that it is a good addition. It’s a little
close but does not encroach much and the neighborhood can accommodate the
encroachment. Mr. Karr stated that the house is the smallest in the neighborhood and
the addition is modest. Mr. Grob agreed that the addition is proportional to the
neighborhood.
Mr. Ping moved to approve the application with the condition that the first tree off of Kline
Boulevard off of the driveway will be protected during construction. Mr. Ammitzboll
seconded the motion. A resolution will be passed at the next meeting. Members voting
in favor: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. DeSarno, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr, Mr. Ping and Mr.
Nadelberg. Those opposed: None.
Page K. Woodbury and Elizabeth Woodbury
Application #2016-09
67 Holmes Oval, Block41, Lot 9, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule III for permission to construct a
garage addition. The proposed building coverage is 1839 square feet whereas 1500
square feet is the maximum allowed. The existing front-yard setback to the house is
39.8 feet and 36 feet to the portico.
Elizabeth Woodbury and Al Leonard, her architect, were sworn in. Mr. Leonard
presented his credentials as a licensed professional architect and was accepted as
such. Ms. Woodbury would like to use the rear 8’ 4” of the existing garage to build a
mudroom which requires extending the garage in the front so that it is still functional.
The increase in building coverage is 1% which is minimal. The front of the addition for
the garage will still be set back from the house. With a mudroom, she will be able to
enter the house from the garage and can relocate the powder room which will allow her
to expand the kitchen. Ms. Woodbury spoke to the neighbors and no one objected.
A sheet with photos of the house; the house and neighboring house; building and site
data; front and side elevations: and, partial first-floor plan was marked as Exhibit A-1.
Mr. Leonard testified that the garage will be moved forward so that it will still be an 18’
garage. The garage is set back from the house and the shed roof will be the same angle
as the existing roof. The new garage will have the same look as the existing garage.
Mr. Leonard addressed the Board’s questions. The Woodburys will not be adding above
the garage. They will lose one window in the dining room when the garage is pulled
forward so there will be less light in the dining room but there was no good way to keep
the window and it doesn’t make sense to double the window in the front.
The Board had no further questions for the witness. The hearing was opened to
questions from the public.
There were no questions from the public.
No further witnesses appeared to testify and the hearing was opened to
comments from the public.
There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed.
Discussion: Mr. Karr stated that the proposed plan is a good alternative to abandoning
the garage and it’s a nice addition. Mr. Grob agreed that it was a creative solution. The
Board agreed that the addition looks good.
Mr. Grob moved to approve the application. Mr. Karr seconded the motion. A resolution
will be passed at the next meeting. Members voting in favor: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr.
DeSarno, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Karr, Mr. Ping and Mr. Nadelberg. Those opposed:
None.
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (“AT&T”) and
Application #2015-28
Sprint Spectrum Realty Company, L.P. (“Sprint”)
Application #2015-16
1778 Springfield Avenue, Block 191 Lot 1, C-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Joint applicants received temporary approval for a use variance, height variance, rear
yard setback variance, variance for setback from another zone and preliminary and final
site plan approval to construct a temporary 100’ ballast frame monopole with AT&T
antennas at the top of the pole and Sprint’s antennas below AT&T’s antennas.
Applicants placed related equipment at the base of the pole. Applicants have also
received extensions of this approval. Applicants now seek an additional twelve (12)
month extension until June 30, 2017.
Mr. Karr recused himself from the hearing.
Judith Fairweather of Pinilis Halpern LLP, attorney for the applicants recapped the
applicants’ prior applications to the Board for the initial temporary monopole, site plan
and amended site plan approval to relocate the equipment from the monopole to the
PSE&G towers and extensions of time on the monopole. Prior approval to relocate the
equipment included a request for an extension of time on the temporary monopole until
June 30, 2016. When requesting this extension, the applicants expected a spring
installation of the equipment on the PSE&G towers which PSE&G has delayed to the fall
for all wireless carriers. Ms. Fairweather is requesting a full-year extension in case there
is a problem and the installation in the fall doesn’t happen.
Ms. Fairweather responded to questions from the Board and Board attorney. There
have been no installations on the PSE&G towers for north and central New Jersey. New
Cingular Wireless (“AT&T”) and Sprint Spectrum have their approvals and their
equipment is ready for installation. The majority of the carriers should be ready for the
fall installation although some municipalities have not approved the carriers’
applications.
Christopher Cirrotti, Dewberry Engineering, handles the installation of the carriers and
confirmed that the explanation for the delay in installing the equipment on the PSE&G
tower was stated accurately.
The Board had no questions for Mr. Cirrotti. The temporary equipment will be removed
within the time frame specified in the previous resolutions. Ms. Fairweather does not
expect to be back before the Board unless it is for another New Cingular Wireless
(“AT&T”) site.
The Board had no further questions for the witness. The hearing was opened to
questions from the public.
There were no questions from the public.
No further witnesses appeared to testify and the hearing was opened to
comments from the public.
There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed.
Discussion: The Board previously approved multiple extensions and there was no
further discussion of the current request for an extension of time.
Mr. Grob moved to approve the request for an extension with the condition that there be
no further extensions of time past the one-year request ending June 30, 2017. Ms.
Jaynes seconded the motion. A resolution will be passed at the next meeting.
Members voting in favor: Mr. Ammitzboll, Mr. DeSarno, Mr. Grob, Ms. Jaynes, Mr. Ping
and Mr. Nadelberg. Those opposed: None.
F. REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 18, 2016
Lena Chen
Application #2016-02
87 Passaic Street, Block 53, Lot 1, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule II and III, to construct a new house.
The proposed lot area is 11, 867 sq. ft. whereas 15,000 sq. ft. is the minimum required.
The proposed lot width at the right of way along Passaic Street is 58 feet whereas 70
feet is the minimum required. The proposed lot width at the setback along Passaic
Street is 70 feet whereas 110 feet is the minimum required. The proposed front yard
along Lincoln Lane is 14.25 feet and 29.4 feet along Passaic Street. The proposed rear
yard to the house is 19.75 feet whereas 40 feet is the minimum required. The proposed
building coverage is 2372 sq. ft. whereas 1937 sq. ft. is the maximum allowed. The
proposed driveway width is 20 feet whereas 16 feet is the maximum permitted. The
property is on the Borough historical register. The property has two existing sheds one
is 3 feet from the property line and the other is in the right of way along Lincoln Lane.
Also there is an existing 6’high fence along Lincoln Lane. CARRIED FROM 2/22/16
Revised plans have not been received yet. This application may be delayed for the
planner to review revised plans. It was the applicant’s responsibility to research access
to the proposed driveway from the private road.
Gene Gregory
Application #2016-08
41 Brook Road, Block 44, Lot 25, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule II for permission to construct an
addition. The proposed front-yard setback to the front porch is 32.77 feet and 39.6 feet
to the second-floor addition whereas 40 feet is the minimum required. The proposed
side-yard setback is 10 feet to the second-floor addition and 10.83 feet to the covered
front porch with a combined total of 20.83 feet whereas 14.4 feet with a combined total
of 26.7 is the minimum required. The existing side yard is 6.8 feet.
Kathy Dwyer
Application #2016-10
24 Hickson Drive, Block 134, Lot 25, R-2 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Chapter 310, Article IV, Section 310-10, Schedule III for permission to construct an
addition. The proposed building coverage is 1,721 square feet whereas 1,611 square
feet is the maximum permitted. The maximum improved lot coverage proposed is .41
whereas .40 is the maximum permitted. The existing driveway is 3 feet from the
property line. The existing detached garage is 3.25 feet from the rear property line and
2.6 feet from the side property line.
Robert and Erica Zecca
Appeal #2016-11
17 Fourth Street, Block 160, Lot 3, R-3 Zone, New Providence, NJ 07974
Appeal of permit denial of the Zoning Officer and Zoning Review Officer for noncompliance with Chapter 310, Article V, Section 310-19(D) and 310-20(D) for
permission to construct a new home. The proposed driveway is 22 feet wide whereas
16 feet is the maximum curb cut permitted. The proposed structure is inappropriate to
the neighborhood with respect to the elements of exterior design affecting the character
of the neighborhood, such as size, height, and materials used in construction.
Mr. Lynch received notice today that the applicant is withdrawing its appeal. The owners
are opting to fix up the two-family house instead. Mr. Lynch will share the plans with the
Board at some point. The proposed house, which would be one of the biggest houses in
New Providence, is double the size of the new house at 23 Fourth that the Board
approved a few years ago.
G. COMMUNICATION ITEMS
H. MISCELLANEOUS
Lantern Hill (New Providence-ERC)
Mr. Grob circulated photographs of the great lawn at Lantern Hill showing large areas
where the soil has been removed and asked why the soil was removed in this area when
it was not disturbed for construction. Maintenance of the park-like great lawn and the
grading were an integral part of the Board’s discussion and consideration in approving
the application. Mr. Lynch stated that the site is contaminated and the soil had to be
capped with a building or parking lot or clean fill had to be brought in. Mr. Grob stated
that the most important roots of the trees are in the top 12’” of soil and the disturbance is
going to kill the trees. In addition, the trees now have mechanical wounds from the
equipment used to remove the soil. The Board would like more information about why
soil testing was done in the great lawn area and the contaminants found in the soil. The
Board discussed whether the applicant should have been required to come back to the
Board prior to disturbing the great lawn. Mr. Morin is not sure if the applicant would be
required to do so as he was not sure whether Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) requirements trump land use law. The Board expressed great concern that
applicant did nothing to minimize the damage to the trees or take any measures to try
and save them. Mr. Lynch will get additional information about the type of contamination
and the reason for disturbing the soil in the great lawn.
755 Central Avenue – Wrist Shipping
Mr. Lynch will provide an update on the litigation at the next meeting.
Barth’s Market
Construction bids were due las week. Barth’s Market will stay open during construction.
Avenue Deli
Avenue Deli had issues with the contractor. The deli expects to re-open at the end of
next week.
Marion Avenue Deli
Marion Avenue Deli has a new owner and will be operated as it was previously.
Friendly’s Site
The property is in the floodway so the footprint can’t be expanded. The owner is trying
to make the numbers work for restaurant use. A second floor could be added.
I. MINUTES FROM 3/7/2016 and 3/21/2016
Mr. Ammitzboll moved and Ms. Jaynes seconded the motion to approve the minutes of
March 7, 2016, and March 21, 2016, as submitted
J. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.