Zoning Board Meeting

WALDWICK ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FORMAL SESSION May 27, 2026 The Formal Session of the Waldwick Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Wednesday, May 27, 2026 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. Hartmann present Mr. Myerjack present Also Present: Cliff Singer, Board Attorney Joyce Sinclair, Board Secretary Joe Mysliwiec, Zoning Officer Jim McGinnis, Board Engineer Paul Grygiel, Board Planner GREETINGS TO THE PUBLIC: No one appeared. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Mr. Wekarski for the approval of the Minutes of April 22, 2026. The Minutes were approved as submitted. RESOLUTIONS: ATKINSON 51 Longview Drive 26-L Block 163.08, Lot 5 Ed Sherman, Architect Rear Yard Addition, Deck RESOLUTION MOODY 3 Lakeview Drive 26-M Block 154, Lot 17 Second Story Addition RESOLUTION KELLEHER 11 Campbell Street 26-N Block 72.02, Lot 32 Bruce Whitaker, Esq. One Story Addition RESOLUTION 1 A motion to approve the above Resolutions was made by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Mr. Wekarski. A unanimous vote was taken. The Resolutions were approved. APPLICATIONS: 1 SMITH STREET KOC LLC 1 Smith Street 26-0 & SM-2 Block 131, Lot 20 Jennifer Berardo, Esq. Three-story, Two-family dwelling Use Variance & Soil Moving Permit NEW APPLICATION Jennifer Berrado, Esq. appeared before the Board. Ms. Berrado noted that the site is an oversized corner lot, formerly housed by the Knights of Columbus. The building has not been in use since COVID. The property is unique in that it also abuts in the rear to the Ho Ho Kus Brook, so there are environmental constraints. The Applicant proposes to demolish and construct a new two family building which will have a conforming front yard setback. They are seeking use for a two family home with three stories where 2.5 stories are permitted. The variance relief is due to the environmental constraints. Ms. Berrado pointed out that there are DEP requirements which prevent subdivision of property to permit two single family dwellings. With a two family dwelling we can meet all bulk requirements except for the three stories. The proposal is particularly suited for this property and will be an aesthetic improvement. It will also improve storm water management on the site and is compatible with other uses there today. There will be no detrimental effect on surrounding properties. Bruce Rigg, Land Surveyor and Engineer appeared before the Board. Photographs of the existing site conditions were marked as Exhibit A-1. Mr. Riggs described the photos of the property which is located at the corner of W. Prospect Street and Smith Street. The Site Plan dated March 26, 2026 was marked as Exhibit A-2. Mr. Rigg described a ditch which is a tributary to the Ho Ho Kus Brook. The site is in the flood zone. The ditch is dry except after a rainfall. Mr. Rigg noted that only one tree is proposed to be removed. All of the DEP requirements have been kept in mind with the proposal. A copy of the State Regulations was marked as A-3, which notes that if the lot is subdivided, only one home or a duplex can be built. He pointed out that the DEP requirements also impact the square footage of the dwelling. Mr. Riggs described the proposed layout. The basement is considered a story if a certain height. The basement can be used for storage and must meet grade at the back of the building. There is no change in the grades. The garages will come off Smith Street and the first floor is at elevation. Any habitable area is well above the flood hazard. A deed restriction would be placed to notify future owners that the basement is not habitable. 2 There will be new curbs and sidewalks on Smith Street and the utilities will come in from Smith Street. There will be zero increase in run off. There is a separate retention system on both sides of the building. There will be zero impact on surrounding properties. Mr. Rigg noted the soil movement and that they will be filling part of the existing basement. Stone is included in the calculations for the driveway and retention system. They will be taking out about 90 cu. yds. of excess soil and will ensure that any fill on site is clean soil and certified. Mr. Rigg has reviewed the reports from the Board Engineer, Jim McGinnis, and the Board Planner. Paul Grygiel and will comply with all comments in the reports. A tree permit for the one tree to be removed will be applied for. The design that is proposed is as a result of meeting DEP requirements. The proposal complies with all bulk requirements except the permitted stories. There will be landscaping around the building. A landscape plan has not been submitted. Mr. Walsh questioned the height of the building which is 34.7 feet. It meets the 35' height requirement. The variance is because of the basement which is considered a story. All utilities will be on a platform. Ms. Luppino questioned the use variance for the two family dwelling and whether the two driveways each have enough space for two cars. It was noted that the units are completely separate including utilities. Both dwellings have ample room for two cars in the garage and two in the driveway. Mr. Hartmann questioned whether there were any other deed recommendations and there are not. Mr. Hartmann questioned the retention systems and it was noted that you will not know they are there from the street. Mr. Centineo questioned whether the lot could be subdivided and two single family homes placed. It was noted that the site does not allow for that proposal. Mr. Wekarski questioned the height of the ceiling of the garage and it was noted that it is 9 ft. There is a pitch of 4’ of the floor of the garage to the rear of the building. The front door will be 3’ above grade. Dave Titus, 11 Smith Street, questioned whether consideration had been given to the surrounding homes which are ranches. Frank Petruccelli, 2 Smith Street, appeared before the Board. He questioned whether Mr. Rigg had visited the site during a torrential down pour to see the movement of water. Mr. Rigg noted that he has not been there during a heaving rain storm and has not seen pictures of the flooding or the water that collects in Mr. Petruccelli’s backyard. Mr. Rigg advised that the proposal provides for detention basins so that there is zero runoff from this site, which is what they are required to do. 3 Mr. Petruccelli questioned how much water comes into the building's basement now. Mr. Rigg described that the proposed design is for zero run off from this site. Ms. Berando explained that they took into account flooding when the storm water management was designed for this property. There will be zero impact to surrounding properties. The proposed design is an improvement to the site and is better than what is existing today. The drainage calculations were noted and submitted as part of application. All storm water from the front of the building will be kept on site. Any storm water from their property does not go across Smith Street, it goes to the ditch on the property. Mr. McGinnis noted that perc tests still have to be made on the site. Mr. Wekarski questioned whether the basement shows if it has been flooded in the past. Mr. Rigg noted that when he was in the basement he did not see anything out of the ordinary to make him wonder if it had been flooded. Lorenzeo Franchina, Architect, Rochelle Park, appeared before the Board. He has visited the site and reviewed the requirements. The proposed design fits into the environmental constraints and the surrounding area. The architectural plan, consisting of six sheets of elevations, was marked as A-4. Mr. Franchina described the design with a two car garage, storage and stairs from the first level to the second level. The roof plan and elevations were noted. They meet the height requirement. Ms. Berando noted that the Applicant could build a two story structure the same height without a variance. The building will be set back 30 ft. from the curb so there would be no concern of being able to look into other windows. Mr. Franchini described the rendering which was marked as -A-5 noting the overall aesthetic timeless upscale design. All roof lines are designed for proper shedding of water. Mr. Walsh questioned the number of multi dwelling units in the area. Mr. Franchini noted there are some on Wanamaker and Zazzetti Street. The two family fits in with the area, but not the immediate surrounding area. Mr. Walsh questioned buffering to the site and it was noted that this will be provided. Mr. Centineo questioned whether other configurations were looked into for the site. It was indicated yes, but felt this was the best placement of the structure. Mr. Centineo questioned if there is an opportunity to use the property differently. Mr. Franchini indicated that this is the design with the least amount of disturbance. Mr. Cericola noted that this does not fit into anything that is in the area. Mr. Wekarski noted the design fits the county, but it does not fit the neighborhood. A two family home would be more fitting. 4 Mr. Grygiel, Board Planner, noted that the rendering does not show the flood vents and how would they look. It was noted that the flood grates would be 6" to the grade. They will be at grade level. Frank Petricelli, 2 Smith Street, appeared before the Board. He questioned from his front window how much of his back yard can be seen from the windows of the proposed home. Mr. Franchini was not aware of what can be seen from there to his property. Dave Titus, 11 Smith Street, questioned how much bigger the footprint of the proposed home is to the original. Mr. Franchini noted that are close in size. Mr. Titus questioned if consideration was given to putting the garages on the first floor to the side. It was noted that this was considered, but having the driveway not off of W. Prospect took up less green area and looked better aesthetically. Mr. Titus expressed concern with the height of the building and how large it is in comparison to the neighboring homes. Mr. Titus noted that the existing homes around it are smaller and this would block sunlight from the other homeowners. Mr. Franchini noted that there will be more light and air and will give it an upgraded look. The proposal is only 3 feet higher than what is there. A five minute recess was taken. The hearing resumed and the Applicant’s attorney requested an adjournment to the next meeting which will be on June 24. Extensions of time were granted by the Applicant. TARABOCCHIA 129 Longview Drive 26-Q Block 163.16, Lot 11 Bruce Whitaker, Esq. Addition NEW APPLICATION Bruce Whitaker, Esq., appeared before the Board. He noted the site to be in an R-1 zone with a non-conforming lot in width and irregular in shape. There is a skewed property line. The Applicants propose to update their home and add a two car garage and convert a full entry way with a covered area for exit and entering. A side yard setback variance is needed for combined setback and a small front setback. The proposal is in character with the neighborhood and the Ordinance promotes garages. A safe exit and entrance into a front door is appropriate. The landing area exists now. William Brown, Architect, Wyckoff, appeared before the Board. He noted Site Plan SP-1. The roof going over the landing that exists already creates the variance. They are making the current one-car garage into a two-car garage. From the street scape it will be an upgrade. They are below maximum building height. Mr. Brown described the Plan which was marked as A-1. He noted that the proposal fits in with the character of the neighborhood and there are even larger homes than this and many have large additions. There is 30 - 35 ' between the next home. 5 Mr. Walsh noted he is in favor of the Application noting the irregular shape lot. The Board noted that Longview Drive has this type of aesthetics and it makes sense to align it to this. The Board felt it fits in with the neighborhood and is a good application. A motion for approval was made by Mr. Sanzo and seconded by Mr. Walsh. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. CALLARI 23 Cambra Road 26-P Block 163, Lot 23 Rear Deck and Sun Room NEW APPLICATION Mr. Sanzo recused himself from this application as he lives within 200’. Joseph Callari appeared before the Board. He noted his request for a variance to construct a sun room and deck. The property has limited rear yard depth which makes it difficult to comply with the rear yard setback. There is no way to have a modest addition and meet the setbacks. The proposal is to the rear of the home. Mr. Mysliwiec noted that the existing side yard setback is non-conforming. If the deck is reduced to 23’ x 12’ it will eliminate the percentage of square footage and could count as a legally non-conforming deck. This would also reduce the lot coverage to 38%. The only variance that would be needed then would be for the existing non-conformity. It was noted that the deck has to be less than 275 sq. ft. The Applicant was in agreement to reduce by one sq. ft. The Board was in favor of the Application. A motion for approval was made by Mr. Walsh and seconded by Mr. Wekarski. A unanimous vote was taken. The Application was approved. NEW BUSINESS: None OLD BUSINESS: None ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made for adjournment at 10:35 pm by Mr. Walsh and seconded by Mr. Sanzo. Joyce C. Sinclair Secretary 6