Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves commercial redevelopment at 430 Montclair Avenue with conditions
Summary
The Pompton Lakes Zoning Board of Adjustment approved a variance and site-plan for a new 13,860-square-foot commercial building at 430 Montclair Avenue, requiring cross-access easements, parking-verification per tenant, and other conditions tied to prior environmental monitoring and engineering comments.
The Pompton Lakes Zoning Board of Adjustment on Tuesday approved a variance and site plan for redevelopment at 430 Montclair Avenue, allowing a new 13,860-square-foot commercial building on Lot 13.02 where commercial uses are not allowed in the R-5 zone.
The board’s approval continues prior findings that permitted commercial use on the former PSE&G site and imposes conditions that the applicant must meet before construction and as tenants occupy space. The board’s motion was approved by roll call with all members present voting yes.
Bruce Whitaker, attorney with the firm McDonough Whitaker, represented the applicant and reviewed the application history. Whitaker said the project mirrors an existing building on adjacent Lot 13.01 and would “complement the site” by replacing the obsolete PSE&G building currently on Lot 13.02.
Licensed engineer Tibor (last name shown in the record) of Cochrane Associates described the proposal: a 70-by-198-foot, steel‑frame, 13,860-square-foot building divided into six leasable bays; reconstruction of the parking lot to current ADA standards; and one electrical-vehicle charging stall within an ADA stall. He said 39 parking stalls are proposed where the ordinance requires 28. The engineer testified that existing drainage improvements remain in place, that roof leaders will discharge to a crushed‑stone trench at the rear, and that the site is within a groundwater monitoring/protection area with monitoring wells on and near the property.
Owner Larry Turco, principal of 430 Montclair Avenue LLC, told the board he expects the redevelopment to remove outdoor equipment now stored on the site and that his businesses will relocate off the property once the new building is erected. Turco said monitoring and remediation agreements with PSE&G remain in effect and that PSE&G is responsible for ongoing well monitoring and DEP reporting.
Board and consultant questions focused on monitoring wells, parking and tenant control, dumpster placement, fire access, lighting, and signage. Colliers Engineering’s review letter was referenced repeatedly; the applicant agreed to meet the conditions listed in that letter. The applicant confirmed the landscaping previously approved for Lot 13.01 would be carried forward and that the cross-access easement will be recorded so vehicles and waste haulers may straddle the property line to service shared dumpsters out of public view.
Because the parcel backs to a rail line and quarry, the board and the applicant relied on prior findings from a 2016 approval addressing suitability for nonresidential uses. The engineer noted building coverage would remain similar to existing conditions (proposed 40.43% where 20% is permitted by the ordinance), and that the proposed rear yard setback is two feet where 10 feet is required—matching the neighboring lot’s nonconforming condition.
The board conditioned approval on several items the applicant agreed to: execution of the cross-access easement between Lot 13.01 and Lot 13.02; compliance with Colliers Engineering comments and any additional required plan revisions; carrying forward the prior landscaping plan; placing a parking table on the site plans that lists parking requirements by potential permitted use; and a requirement that the owner obtain written confirmation from the zoning official for each new tenant that on-site parking remains sufficient for the proposed use. The applicant also agreed to notify private refuse haulers to schedule pickups no earlier than 7:00 a.m.
Public comment included Paul W. Tenney (472 Montclair Ave), who said the prior redevelopment had improved conditions near his house and expressed support for the project. Several neighbors raised concerns about dumpster pickup times, sign size, lighting levels, and the potential for automotive‑type tenants to generate on‑street parking. Board members addressed those concerns in the conditions above.
The board voted by roll call in favor of the motion to approve subject to the enumerated conditions. The board instructed staff to prepare a resolution reflecting the agreed conditions for adoption at a future meeting.
