By Peter Elacqua
Staff Writer
MARLBORO – The Planning Board has rejected a plan submitted by a doctor who sought municipal approval to convert an existing home into a medical office and to construct an addition to that home on Robertsville Road (Route 520), just west of Route 9 in Marlboro.
At their Aug. 3 meeting, board members heard testimony on an application submitted by Dr. Tusharkumar Mistry. The doctor, who is an internist, was represented by attorney Dante Alfieri.
The property at 8 Route 520 is opposite and west of the Stokes Lane intersection. According to testimony, the first phase of the project proposed converting an existing dwelling into a 1,392-square-foot medical building. A total of five parking spaces (including one space for individuals who have a handicap) were provided.
The second phase proposed constructing a 2,198-square-foot, one-story addition at the rear of the existing home. Testimony indicated the addition would include 14 parking spaces, for a total of 19 parking spaces.
Board member Andrew Pargament said he was concerned there would not be enough parking spaces after accounting for doctors, nurses, clerks and patients.
Board members asked if the 14 spaces that were planned with the addition could instead be provided during the first phase of the plan, when the home would be converted to a medical office.
Mistry said two more parking spaces could be provided during the first phase, for a total of seven spaces.
The board’s engineer, Laura Neumann, said there was a 4,575-square-foot gravel area on the property that could be used for additional parking if needed.
When the hearing was opened to the public, Kurt Lang, who lives near the property, said he was concerned the proposed development of the property by Mistry could produce water runoff and flooding in the area.
After public comment was closed, a motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval for the first phase of the application and to grant preliminary site plan approval for the second phase.
The motion was defeated 4-3 with Vice Chairman Michael Messinger and board members Andrew Pargament, Michael Slotopolsky and Robert Zuckerman voting no. Chairman Mark Barenburg and board members Neil Betoff and David Gagliano voted yes.
The board’s attorney, Michael Herbert, asked the board members who voted no to discuss their reasons for doing so.
Messinger said Lang’s comments regarding water leaving the property and the concerns Pargament expressed about the number of parking spaces led him to vote no on the motion.
“That is (Lang’s) reality and I did not feel comfortable approving this (application) knowing that,” he said.
Pargament stood by his statement about the number of parking spaces and said the applicant should provide more than seven spaces for the first phase of the project.
Zuckerman and Slotopolsky agreed with the reasons expressed by Messinger and Pargament for voting no on the motion to approve the plan.
Board members said the applicant may file a redesigned plan or a board member can ask the board to reconsider the decision at a future meeting.
