Zoning Board meeting 7/26

[admin]

I was not sure where to put this thread since we do not have a board for the Zoning board, so I put it here with town government.

I am going to refrain from opinion here because I do not know enough about this subject to comment. This was my first zoning board meeting and I am very unfamiliar with the ordinances and procedures that I witnesses last night. The purpose here is to let readers know what is going on as best as I can.

I had received an email that had been sent to many, many town residents and media, asking concerned Freehold Borough residents to attend the Zoning board meeting.

The following is what I witnessed.

Apparently there is a house on Main Street that is a rental. From what I saw the owner is seeking permission to allow for a professional home based business to operate there. He would have 500 square feet which would be allowed for the business purpose and the remainder would be for a one family tenant who operates the business. The applicant was not present, allegedly due to medical issues. His attorney and planner were there in his stead.

Well, there were many people in attendance, including Nick Petruncio from the APP and Claire from the NT. I would estimate that at least twenty people showed up, all against the proposal to allow for a business to operate there.

The people who showed up were average everyday people from what I could tell. They included Tom Parks from the Historical Preservation Commission and Wayne Mason, who left that commission under curious circumstances. I know both of those individuals are well respected. Also in attendance was a person by the last name of Higgins, I think from Higgins funeral home.

There were several neighbors from around the house in question who also attended. None of them had anything good to say about the landlord and his tenants. They spoke of too many people living there, with vans with PA plates coming and going. These people also spoke about the terrible condition of the house and property. They were all in agreement that the possible business would not be in the best interest of the community and have great concerns about the track record of the owner and his tenants.

This house is supposed to be a former mother/daughter, but is now a single rental. According to the testimony of the audience members who spoke, there does not appear to be compliance and is likely in violation. Hank Stryker stated that there has been no problem with that house.

The board did not come to a decision last night and will wait until the applicant can be present and answer some questions. This will likely be in September.

One interesting point that came out, and also appeared to raise concerns from those in attendance, it appears the the definition of professional is vague.

One unsettling statement that was made by a woman, who's name I forget, was that the landlord strongly suggested that the neighbors not get in the way of him receiving his variance or they will deal with plenty more of what they have to date. ( Those are not the exact words, but the general gist.)

[LS]

So the issue is whether to keep this house as a single family rental with shady tenants? or have it be a home based business within a house?

Sounds like the business owner is a better (at least, short-term) solution.

Am I missing something?

[admin]

LS,

Again, I have to refrain from my own opinion. I do not know enough to comment. I can only report what I saw. I also have not seen the house and even know if it would be appropriate for a business. The residents who showed up against the variance also had concerns about traffic such as delivery trucks and patrons to the business.

And again, there was a great deal of concern over the term "Professional" and how that could be interpreted with how our current ordinances are written.

The residents brought this up in context of the owner wanting to allow his son, who is still in college, to operate an engineering business. The residents wanted to know what would happen if that business did not open and another did.

Either way, the neighbors of this guy were not happy with him, his current actions, or his plans.

[admin]

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2007/0711/Front_Page/064.html

Questions left unanswered on application for variance
Residents complain about present situation at West Main St. home
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO
Staff Writer



FREEHOLD - Zoning Board of Adjustment members were more than a little perplexed as they listened to an attorney present an application during the board's June 26 meeting.

The application seeks a use variance to permit a home-based business to operate out of a single-family home at 109 W. Main Street. The applicants are Elio and Elaine DiCosmo, of Marlboro.

At the same time, residents who live near the home that is the subject of the application complained about the present situation at the property.

Attorney Salvatore Alfieri, of Matawan, and planner John Leoncavallo, of Sayreville, presented testimony on behalf of the applicant, but board members had questions they could not answer.

Board member Connie Murray said that in 30 years she had "never seen two professional gentlemen come here with so little information." After 90 minutes of testimony the board decided to continue to hear the application at a later date.

The hearing drew residents who live near 109 W. Main St. and who object to the applicant's request for a use variance.

Neither Elio or Elaine DiCosmo was present and Alfieri and Leoncavallo could not definitively say how many rental units are in the home or how many people are living in the home now. The could not articulate exactly what kind of home-based business the applicant is seeking to operate.

Leoncavallo said the home is across the street from the First Presbyterian Church. He said other homes in the area have been converted to home-based businesses. He noted there are administrative offices in the church and said there are other homes for sale in the area that could benefit from RPO zoning (residential, professional, office).

Zoning board Chairman Kevin Mulligan asked Leoncavallo why he was referencing other homes that had nothing to do with the application before the board.

The application, which was filed in January, initially sought a mixed use variance to accommodate office and residential uses. Leoncavallo said that after researching Freehold Borough's master plan he determined that initial request would be inconsistent with the master plan. He said he believed the request for a use variance to permit a home-based business would have a better chance of being approved.

Leoncavallo said the conversion of the residence to a home-based business would offer less use and intensity with traffic and people than it does now.

When asked how many rental units the home presently has, neither Alfieri nor Leoncavallo could give an accurate number of tenants currently occupying the home.

Board members asked if the owners would live in the home with the home-based business if the application is approved. When Alfieri replied no, board members did not appear to be happy.

Mulligan asked why the owner wants to switch the home's use from purely rental to a business.

Alfieri said when the owner purchased the business at an auction he thought the use was commercial. The attorney said the owner was having problems with residents and believed it would be better to have a business owner living in the home rather than keeping the residence as a rental unit.

Board member William Barricelli asked how many people would be displaced if the application for the use variance is approved.

No definite answer was offered by the applicant's representatives.

Leoncavallo said the applicant's son


who is in college in an engineering program, planned to move in to the home and open a business, but he did not know when that would happen.

Board members looked to zoning officer Hank Stryker III when trying to ascertain how many rental units there are in the home.

Stryker said the residence is a single-family home.

During the public comment portion of the meeting, many residents offered comments on the application.

Lesley Stivale, of Yard Avenue, asked Leoncavallo, "If only 500 square feet is allowed for the business, what's the plan for the rest of the space in the house?" Stivale said she has seen many people coming and going at the house. She asked the zoning board to "reconsider [hearing] the application based on so many unknown factors and because it will not be owner-occupied."

Bobbie Brandao, of Oak Street, asked what would happen if the owner's son decided not to open a business and live in the home.

Mulligan explained that the use variance would go with the house.

Brandao expressed concern that any kind of business could come in at that point and was told that the zoning board could restrict that ahead of time. According to the home-based business ordinance, no medical, dental or real estate offices can be located in that area in a home-based business.

Nolan Higgins, of West Main Street, asked if there are existing visual issues at the home.

Leoncavallo said he had seen worn paint and some missing boards on the exterior of the residence as well as a piece of concrete missing from the property. There is also some type of open tank on the property which he could not identify.

Brian Quinn, of West Main Street, asked if the size of the house or the parking lot would be increased. He also asked how the owner was prepared to address the issue of noise.

Leoncavallo said a buffer, plantings and other methods to mitigate the impact of noise would be discussed.

Quinn got the board's attention when he said, "If you open this up to certain use will you consider a bail bondsman's business? Certain people will argue that they see themselves as professionals."

Zoning board attorney Vincent Halleran told Quinn that was a good question.

Diane Olszewski, of West Main Street, said the home is "going downhill and getting more rundown." She said it is not maintained properly and told the zoning board she sees people getting out of vans with Pennsylvania and North Carolina license plates at all hours.

"People are constantly moving in and out," Olszewski said.

Eileen Vanderbunte said she believes the home's owner is "running a boarding house and motel because there are so many people coming in and out, day and night. They line up along the house outside and smoke. I find this situation untenable."

The application is expected to be placed on the agenda of a future zoning board meeting.

[adefonzo]

admin said:

newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2007/0711/Front_Page/064.html

Questions left unanswered on application for variance
Residents complain about present situation at West Main St. home
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO
Staff Writer



FREEHOLD - Zoning Board of Adjustment members were more than a little perplexed as they listened to an attorney present an application during the board's June 26 meeting.

The application seeks a use variance to permit a home-based business to operate out of a single-family home at 109 W. Main Street. The applicants are Elio and Elaine DiCosmo, of Marlboro.

At the same time, residents who live near the home that is the subject of the application complained about the present situation at the property.

Attorney Salvatore Alfieri, of Matawan, and planner John Leoncavallo, of Sayreville, presented testimony on behalf of the applicant, but board members had questions they could not answer.

Board member Connie Murray said that in 30 years she had "never seen two professional gentlemen come here with so little information." After 90 minutes of testimony the board decided to continue to hear the application at a later date.

The hearing drew residents who live near 109 W. Main St. and who object to the applicant's request for a use variance.

Neither Elio or Elaine DiCosmo was present and Alfieri and Leoncavallo could not definitively say how many rental units are in the home or how many people are living in the home now. The could not articulate exactly what kind of home-based business the applicant is seeking to operate.

Leoncavallo said the home is across the street from the First Presbyterian Church. He said other homes in the area have been converted to home-based businesses. He noted there are administrative offices in the church and said there are other homes for sale in the area that could benefit from RPO zoning (residential, professional, office).

Zoning board Chairman Kevin Mulligan asked Leoncavallo why he was referencing other homes that had nothing to do with the application before the board.

The application, which was filed in January, initially sought a mixed use variance to accommodate office and residential uses. Leoncavallo said that after researching Freehold Borough's master plan he determined that initial request would be inconsistent with the master plan. He said he believed the request for a use variance to permit a home-based business would have a better chance of being approved.

Leoncavallo said the conversion of the residence to a home-based business would offer less use and intensity with traffic and people than it does now.

When asked how many rental units the home presently has, neither Alfieri nor Leoncavallo could give an accurate number of tenants currently occupying the home.

Board members asked if the owners would live in the home with the home-based business if the application is approved. When Alfieri replied no, board members did not appear to be happy.

Mulligan asked why the owner wants to switch the home's use from purely rental to a business.

...................

couple of questions here...

If Leoncavallo doesn't know how many renters or rental units are currently in the home, how can he be sure that the home-based business will offer "less use and intensity with traffic and people than it does now"??

Isn't the idea of a "home based business" that the owner of the home is operating the business that is being run out of it? How is it then that the owner of the business will not be living in the house?

How is it that all of the residents of the Boro who live around that house seem to notice multiple people coming and going as if it's some sort of boarding house, but Hank Stryker (the town's zoning officer) doesn't seem to know of any violations in that house and claims it is a single family home?? Are the residents not reporting properly or is our code enforcer missing out on something?

Glad to see the Zoning Board put off making a decision on this application. As others have already said, there are too many unanswered questions.

[admin]

Andrew,

I can't say I have any of the answers you are looking for, but the article does not mention half of the people who came out against this variance. The owner of the property is providing a good lesson on the value of being a good neighbor.

One of the reasons why this will be brought up in another meeting is because the Zoning board has questions to ask the landowner that his reps could not answer, as you took note of.

And you are right about what Hank Stryker said vs. what the residents were reporting. Very big difference between the two. I would find it hard to believe, that with all of the residents who came out, that this could be the first time that HS has heard anything about this property.

[novillero]

Rumor has it this application has been withdrawn

[admin]

novillero said:

Rumor has it this application has been withdrawn

Does that mena we can put away our pitchforks and torches for the next zoning meeting?

[Libyan Sibyl]

Home-based business plan pulled from zoning board
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO Staff Writer


FREEHOLD - An application that had been in front of the Zoning Board of Adjustment seeking a use variance to permit a home-based business to operate out of a single-family home on West Main Street has been withdrawn.

The proposal, which was heard by the board on June 26, was withdrawn by attorney Salvatore Alfieri without prejudice on behalf of the applicant, E&E DiCosmo.

Alfieri advised the zoning board in a Sept. 25 letter that his client would be withdrawing the application. He did not provide a reason why the application was being pulled from the board's docket.

Alfieri did not return several telephone messages left at his Matawan office last week seeking comment as to why the application was pulled.

Testimony at the June 26 hearing had been provided by Alfieri and planner John Leoncavallo.

The hearing drew a group of residents who live near the home at 109 W. Main St. and were objecting to the applicant's request for a use variance.

Neither Elio nor Elaine DiCosmo, the applicants for the proposal, appeared at the hearing.

The application, filed in January, initially sought a mixed-use variance to accommodate office and residential uses in the residence.

Leoncavallo said that after researching Freehold Borough's master plan he determined that the initial request would be inconsistent with the master plan. He said he believed the request for a use variance to permit a home-based business would have a better chance of being approved.

He said the conversion of the residence to a home-based business would offer less use and intensity with traffic and people than it does now.

Alfieri said the owners did not intend to live in the home and wanted to switch the use from rental to business.

Board members were not happy with that fact as well as the fact that the applicant's representatives could not state how many people are presently living in the rental home.

Alfieri said when the owner bought the house he thought its use was commercial. He said the owner was having problems with the current residents and believed it would be better to have a business owner in the home rather than keeping the residence as rental units.

Leoncavallo said the owner's son, who is in college, planned to move into the home and open a business, although he was not certain when that would occur.

The plan was to use 500 square feet of the home for the business.

One resident who attended the hearing wanted to know what the rest of the home would be used for.

Other residents complained that the property is not being maintained and is getting rundown. One resident believed the residence is being used as a boarding home.



newstranscript.gmnews.com/news/2007/1010/Front_Page/024.html

[admin]

That is good news. The people who showed up against the landlord deserve credit.

[novillero]

the problem is the alleged continued existing use. The residents claimed that it is overcrowded and that the house's condition has gone down in the past few years.

An owner occupier (in this case the owner's son/home businessman/occupier) may have improved the appearance and condition of the home, which would have also taken care of the allegations of overcrowding and late night noise.

[admin]

novillero said:

the problem is the alleged continued existing use. The residents claimed that it is overcrowded and that the house's condition has gone down in the past few years.

An owner occupier (in this case the owner's son/home businessman/occupier) may have improved the appearance and condition of the home, which would have also taken care of the allegations of overcrowding and late night noise.

I would like to agree but considering this guy's track record, he has not given anyone hope that he would do the right thing. I recall the neighbors saying that he is a nasty one who made some threats.

If he stays a slumlord I would hope the town will have a better time dealing with him and possibly running him out of town.