Zoning Board Meeting

WALDWICK ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAL SESSION April 23, 2025 The Formal Session of the Waldwick Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Wednesday, April 23, 2025 at 8:00 p.m. and was called to order by Marty Nieman, Chairman, who made the announcement of adequate notice of all meetings. ROLL CALL: Mr. Nieman present Mr. Cericola present Mr. Walsh present Ms. Luppino present Mr. Wekarski present Mr. Centineo present Mr. Sanzo present Mr. Mitchell absent Mr. Myerjack present Also Present: Cliff Singer, Board Attorney Joe Mysliwiec, Zoning Officer Joyce Sinclair, Board Secretary GREETINGS TO THE PUBLIC: No one appeared. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Mr. Sanza and seconded by Mr. Cericola for the approval of the Minutes of March 26, 2025. The Minutes were approved as submitted. RESOLUTIONS: MILLER 71 W. Saddle River Road 25-C Block 73, Lot 2 Addition and Alteration RESOLUTION MILLER 71 W. Saddle River Road SM 25-1 Block 73, Lot 2 Soil Moving Permit RESOLUTION CABIBBO 35 Mackay Avenue 25-D Block 2, Lot 16 2nd Floor Addition over Garage RESOLUTION 1  ROSAZZA 27 Cambra Road 25-E Block 163, Lot 25 Rear Addition and 2nd Story over Garage RESOLUTION LYNCH 80 Moore Avenue 25E Block 7, Lot 59 6’ Fence RESOLUTION A motion was made and seconded for the approval of the Resolutions of the above Applications. A vote was taken. The Resolutions were approved. APPLICATIONS: PERROW 5 Emmet Place 25-K Block 44, Lot 23 Build front of the house Roof Overhang NEW APPLICATION Due to inadequate notice time, this Application has been postponed to the May 28th meeting. WILSON 38 Campbell Street 25-G Block 72.03, Lot 8 Ed Sherman, Architect Convert garage into living space Install Shed 2nd floor Addition NEW APPLICATION Ed Sherman, Architect, appeared before the Board. Jeff Wilson appeared before the Board. Mr. Sherman advised that the site is in a R-2 zone. It is an undersized lot and the hardship is the narrowness of the lot. The topography of the lot dictates the location of the shed placement. There is a zamor style home on the property and the Applicant would like to add a second floor addition over the existing footprint. The variances are existing conditions. A variance is needed for a covered structure over existing patio. The rear yard setback for a structure is 35'; to the structure it will be 19' with a 16’ x 9’ covered patio for protection from the sun. The existing shed is 6’ x 8’ and they would like to place an 8’ x 12’ shed in the same position. A variance for closeness to an accessory structure is required. The hardship is the back of the house has a wall that is retaining a hill in the back of the yard. The placement of the shed in the flat portion takes up the flat area. They would like to remove a rotted aluminum shed and replace it with a shed slightly larger in the same location. 2 A variance for no garage is needed. The previous owner had done interior work. The garage is 10’ x 12’ and not able to fit a car. It is used for storage and they would like to make it part of their livable space. There is a garage door that will be removed. There was no one in the audience to address this Application.. The Board was in favor of the Application noting the existing conditions. Mr. Centineo noted concern about parking in the future. A motion to approve the application was made by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Ms. Luppino. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. CORRADO 15 Campbell Street 25-H Block 72.02, Lot 34 Ed Sherman, Architect Convert garage into living space Patio Brian Corrado appeared before Board. Ed Sherman, Architect, appeared before the Board. He noted that it is a zamor style house. A car cannot be parked in the garage as it is too small. The Applicant would like to expand their kitchen into the garage. A 10’ x 10’ area of the garage will be used for storage. The Applicant had been before the Board previously for an addition on the right side, A concrete patio had been ripped up and pavers added. The new patio brings the lot coverage up to 40%.. Mr. Mysliwiec asked that this be addressed at this meeting as the owners had no clue and the contractor did not inform them about the coverage to put in a larger patio than what they had. The current coverage is 47.64 % . There was no one in the audience to address this Application. The Board was in favor of the Application and noted the existing patio of concrete was there which was banged up and the patio was done slightly larger. A motion for approval was made by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Ms. Luppino. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. SPREEN 28 Kennedy Drive 25-! Block 162.02, Lot 9 Ed Sherman, Architect Covered front ramp Rear Addition/add-a-level NEW APPLICATION Mr. Sanzo recused himself from the application. Ed Sherman, Architect, appeared before the Board. Daniel Spreen appeared before the Board. Mr. Sherman noted the existing non conformities with an undersized lot with a width requirement of 100’ and existing is 60’. The front yard is required to be 50’ and 3 existing is 29.2’. The right side required is 10’ and existing is 6’ with total both 23.8’ where 35’ is required. The Applicant has an existing sun room in their ranch style home, and wish to remove the sun room from the back of the house and add an addition to the back to square it off. The existing front is an entrance way for their handicap daughter. They would like to pull that in closer to the house with a ramp into the front porch into the driveway. The second floor will have 4 bedrooms, laundry and 2 baths and a lift for their child to go to the basement and upper levels. The lot coverage existing is 45.64% and required is 40%. The proposal will increase it to 51.97% coverage. It is an undersized lot which brings the coverage up on the site. There is no change to the side yards and is exasperated as you go back, a technical exasperation, not a functional one. Mr. Myerjack questioned the porch/ramp and Mr. Sherman explained that half of the porch is the ramp. The existing ramp comes out from the house to the street, this will go to the driveway. Mr. Wekarksi questioned if there was a variance for the existing coverage and it was noted it was that way when they purchased the house. Mr. Wekarski questioned why the ramp is considered in setback and coverage as stairs would have been there. Mr. Sherman noted that it is treated as a deck coverage, there is nothing written on ramps. There was no one in the audience to address this Application. The Board felt the proposal was warranted and that is was a good application and good functional solution. The Board was in favor of the Application, noting the hardship of the undersized lot. A motion was made by Ms. Luppino and seconded by Mr. Walsh to approve the Application. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. VAN DYKE 31 Grove Street 25-J Block 16, Lot 24 Ed Sherman, Architect Demo existing detached garage Build new 19.6’ x 27’ garage NEW APPLICATION Cory Van Dyk appeared before the Board. Ed Sherman, Architect, appeared before the Board. Mr. Sherman noted that the existing garage is falling apart and needs to be demolished. The Applicant would like to replace it with a new 2 car garage. A slight height variance is needed. 4 The lot is undersized and the existing garage is set in the far back of the property. The existing setback is 4.0 to rear, 4.0 to side - required is 10' from an accessory strucgure, proposed is 4.5’. The existing house to the left has a shed on the property line. There are no sight issues from other properties. The applicant is looking to make the garage a little bigger than the existing garage and 19' high to get storage above, not livable space. The Applicant would like to fit two cars in the garage. Existing lot coverage is 46.64% and proposed is 52.94% with the larger garage and paved area. Regardless of what is built, a variance would be needed. The narrowness of the site is the hardship. The Applicant is trying to keep it in the back corner where all the other structures are. There will be pull down stairs to the attic storage space. The property has been family owned since 1996. There was no one in the audience to address this Application. The Board had no issues with this Application. The Board noted that it is an undersized lot and the improvement and size will be beneficial. It makes sense to put it where the old one is. A motion for approval was made by Mr. Walsh and seconded by Mr. Sanzo. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. NEW BUSINESS: -Extension of Resolution Dated May 22, 2024 for Suruj, 3 E. Prospect Street Brian Suruj appeared before the Board. The Board granted an extension of his Resolution dated May 22, 2024 for one year, to May 22, 2025. -Mr. Nieman reminded the Board to complete their financial disclosure statements on line if they have not done so already. OLD BUSINESS: None ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made for adjournment at 9:25pm by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Mr. Walsh. Joyce C. Sinclair Secretary 5