Irish Jacks/Violet Meadow Farm reviews and complaints

I’ve purchased 2 females from Shamrock Kennel and they’re the best dogs I’ve ever had. I believe early socializing has a lot to do with it. If you have a mean Jack, it’s the owner not the breeder.

Hear! Hear! Shamrock EJRT. Down to earth... Rowlettes are great people and breeders.

Blah Blah Blah...Fred and Kathy Rowlette - Shamrock Kennels - ABSOLUTELY THE BEST BREEDERS AROUND!

I'm posting this in order to warn other folks who may want to buy an Irish Jack from Violet Meadow Farms. I have two of these dogs from Susan purchased 9 and 10 years ago. Both are spayed females. The second dog had active Parvo virus which manifested itself on our drive home with the puppy from New Jersey to our home in Michigan. I managed to keep her alive with a syringe and some Pedia-Lite until we could get her to a vet. She did survive but the vet bill was $2300.00. Susan only refunded the price of the dog--$1700.

Though we took both dogs through puppy training and socialization, they have grown to be so "dog aggressive" that they can not both be out of their crates at the same time for fear of vicious fights between them. This appeared in their second year with us. Susan had no advice to give except to say we shouldn't have bought two females [though she did not advise this when I bought the second female].The behaviorist we consulted [another several hundred dollars] had advised us they can't be trained out of this, it is so severe and advised us to either put one of them down or continue our having to always have one in her crate. This behaviorist also suspects the dogs were in a puppy mill environment in Ireland where they were bred and this may have lead to the dog-aggression.

So, think twice before getting a dog of this breed especially from this importer!

Those of you who have had good experiences are just lucky. There is no doubt in my mind that this breeder is doing things that are less than honest. We were sold a JR that has been nothing short of a nightmare. Our dog has bitten almost everyone is the house so we have resorted to muzzling her because we can't bear to put her down. I recall when I purchased our JR I had to call over and over again to get the paperwork promised to me when we purchased our dog. We eventually received a binder of a dog which didn't look anything like ours and the shipping info was suspect. Addiotionally, I have a friend who also bought a JR from Violet Meadow and I believe the dog passed away within the first month. There is no doubt in my mind that Violet Meadow Farms is a sham! Stay away!

Sunset Dawn - Bingo! "Before certain people got involved." And now that good folks are NOW involved again, everything is great. I am definitely thinking about pup No. 4. I love my three that I have, and they are happy, healthy, and thriving - I could not ask for anything more.

I have to say that my 2 girls who are now 8 years old and came from Violet Meadow Farm as well as another 2 a year older are the healthiest dogs and happiest dogs and most social dogs! I do not know all of the details of what has ocurred but it would seem that at least 8 years ago things were very good at Violet Meadow. Does that seem to be before certain people got involved?

Dirt Dog - I am very curious - is there a reason why you would not sell an individual one of your puppies just because they had already purchased a pup from Susan? Even with a spay/neuter agreement? It just seems to me that you are taking a very "snobbish" and "uppity" position with your pups, as if to say, that if you ever dealt with Susan Sarao, then you cannot have one of my puppies. I am just really curious as to why you take that position.

Chris,

Well put. I too have offered information in an effort to help these families and educate them. In fact, I did have a couple of interested parties who already had a puppy from Susan and wanted to place deposits on a pup with me. I graciously and ever so tactfully, did not let this happen. My intentions (as clearly yours) are honorable and taking money from anyone here would cloud that.

Other breeders are too watching this topic very closely and it has been "the buzz" about how karma catches up and so on. However, none of the more established and intelligent ones (to date) have stepped in and hung their ### out there to help these families like Chris and I have. We stand more of a chance as having "targets put on our backs" than selling puppies stepping forward. Anyone in the dog world knows this much.

If Chris and I have to take a little heat for it, then so be it. It is time for people to wake up and think twice about who they get their next puppy from. I am SO TIRED of hearing people justify their ignorance by saying; "Well, at least I saved/rescued a puppy form a bad breeder. ...NO, in reality, YOU DIDN'T: You just help sentence its mother to a lifetime of misery. Take responsibility for the part you played in it, learn from it, and do not ever let this happen to you or a pups mother again. If everyone would get on the "same train", the bad breeders would not be able to make copious amounts of money, and they will be shut out.

Instead of looking at your pup with endearing eyes - Look at your pup and wonder where its mother is now... if that doesn't sober you up enough, you are a lost cause.

*Not directing this to families of irish Jacks - I am simply being a bit dramatic to drive a point home and make us all think. Even if 2 years form now someone finds this topic, reads it and it helps them, I will be satisfied. Rescue from legitimate shelters or take the time to find an ethical breeder. Your puppy's mother deserves that much.

Katemartin,

To answer your questions, let me first offer some background about myself. I don't make any money whatsoever from importedjacks.com. Kathleen (the owner/breeder) is my cousin and I offered to help design her website for free, since I'm interested in web design and wanted to learn some things along the way.

I started helping her with her website this January, and as such, I had nothing to do with the website 8 years ago, and am not aware of any of this bribing that you're talking about. Your facts do strike me as odd, however, in that 8 years ago Kathleen would have been 15 years old, but whatever...

But even if most of what you said is true, it seems to me that your point is: my cousin went to Ireland and asked to get exclusive rights to a bad breeder and got turned down. I would say that turned out to be a good thing, based on what I've read on these boards about that breeder. Maybe because of that, or maybe because she just decided it was best, she breeds and cares for her puppies herself - she doesn't import them from some puppy mill in Ireland (they're of Irish descent, but they're not imported straight from Ireland).

There's nothing I "forgot" to include or am trying to hide in my above post. All I know is what I've seen since I started working on the importedjacks.com website, and that's just pure love and dedication from my cousin to the puppies she breeds and cares for.

As far as my statement "I think it's terrible that Susan Sarao engaged in the sorts of activities that are described in all of the above comments" -- is this some court room where I have to say "allegedly"? Is that the only way I can reference the fact that numerous people have complained on these boards about bad interactions with Susan and about receiving unhealthy puppies that Susan didn't seem to care about?

Lastly, I want to address this statement you made: "I think it might be better if you try not make money off of the suffering of others, for God's Sake, 'reach out to me for help!'" -- first of all, like I said, I stand to make zero dollars off of any puppy sales from people coming to importedjacks.com. I am not paid to make the website, I am not paid to advertise it, and I am not paid if the website makes more money in any way. Secondly, the offer to answer people's questions was clearly directed at people who have already bought a sick puppy from Susan. They already have a puppy - I was saying my cousin would help them answer their questions, not sell them a puppy. Just because the website I'm helping happens to also sell puppies, doesn't mean we can't offer a helping hand to other people that already handed their money over to a competitor. Do you not understand that sometimes people (even people who run a similar website) are just trying to be nice?

I understand why you'd be skeptical of someone who comes on a board and posts a link to their own site, but please don't point fingers at me and insinuate that I'm some sneaky money-grabber.

I will not mention the breeder on this thread who is speaking out against other breeders, as if she is so so very ethical with her JR kennel herself ! She is not ! Long long story ( COMPLAINT) here on her way of doing business. I had chosen after weeks and weeks of study on a IJR breeder. Chose her IRISH site, and proceeded to do business with her. After being told she would need a deposit on a puppy of my choosing. The pup's dam and sire litter was not born yet, but where on the way. What had happened was her very popular SIRE had become ILL, at the time she thought it may have been a genetic disorder and had to remove the stud from her breeding's. Only thing wrong was I had deposited 200.00 on one of HIS PUPPIES ! Now what ? Well I thought it best, since the whole reason for me choosing to purchase one of her pups was because he was such a GREAT DOG ! In the end, I requested my deposit BACK, , and she REFUSED to give it to me ! SO, I was out 200.00 from SO CALLED, ETHICAL IJR breeder ! She is the one who did NOT stand up to her end of the deal, not I ! But she felt right to keep some ones deposit ! NICE ! So buyers DO BEWARE .. there are MANY OTHER so called ethical breeders out there, who are not !

We got a beautiful Jack Russell from Susan Sarao and she has always been the sweetest most beautiful dog. However, from the day we brought her home she has been sickly. It started with the Giardia that we brought her home with. We then learned that she had a chronic digestive issue - 2 to 4 times a month did not ant to eat, loud gurgling noises in her stomach, wanted to eat grass, had to just lie down and "sleep it off" 24-36 hours. We tried everything diet and vet wise and nothing ever helped. When she was healthy she was the happiest dog, but 4-8 days a month she was sickly.
Then suddenly at 9, she was having trouble breathing and X-Ray showed fluid in her chest cavity caused by cancer that had traveled to the linings of her lungs. It was the end at only 9 years old and we were devastated and are still heartbroken.
Our only solace now is the realization that Susan is a puppy mill and we rescued our Jack Russell from a puppy mill and gave her 9 happy years.

i have Very cute, Pomeranian female and Male Adoption Email me at ( alexwillins@yahoo.com ) for more pics and info

I wish I had known this information back in 2004 when I purchased my "Irish Jack" from VMF. While my dealings with Susan back then were pleasant and any opinions I may have are based on what I have read here, this board has cast enough suspicion on VMF that I would never have purchased a dog from them.

I got Zero back in 2004. He did not have any health issues. Susan was very nice and I even brought him back to her so she could watch him a few weeks after I got him for a few days. No complaints.

But... At about 2 years, he snapped at me and drew blood. Having never owned a dog before, I believed I was partly at fault, and while he was punished to timeout, I didn't think must of it. He is and has always been a good dog in the sense that he doesn't chew things that aren't his toys and he listens to commands (verbal and hand) very well. Despite the typical "Jack" traits of barking a lot and being very nosey, many would say he was a good dog.

However he is a very timid and high strung dog. Sometimes he is so high strung that he that he shakes. While he can be a very loving and submissive dog, he bites. After his first episode at age 2, he snapped again about a year later. At the age of about 4 or so, he bit me again. At this point, while I was very frustrated, I also loved the little guy and contacted a trainer. We worked with him and he responded well. He is a smart guy. The problem is he can be moody and will snap (viciously) at a moments notice. And 5 seconds after biting or trying to bite, he will roll over onto his back (he knows he's done bad) and will try and be your best friend.

He is also very protective. My mother watched him for a few weeks and now if you try and approach her to hug her, Zero will go into his deep growl and kinda lunge at your feet. He will do the same if you lean over her on the couch or something and he is at her feet. And he will bite you if you get close enough.

Unfortunately at age 7, he suffered an ruptured herniated disc. By the time they did the surgery, he was paralyzed in his hind quarters and had lost the ability to urinate. They gave him a 50/50 chance of regaining his mobility. After about $12000 on surgery, vet visits, physical therapy and many hours of me working with him, he was almost back to normal. He moves a little funny, but is able to run around and go up and down stairs again. While it was a very trying time, it was wonderful to see him start kicking his legs in the pool again and start to recover.

However, I believe the whole traumatic experience made him much for frightful of situations. Shortly after the he started walking unassisted, he started to attack my wife when she would approach me. When I would grab him to keep him from doing so, he would bite me and once drew blood pretty badly. I was at the point where I was ready to give him up. I contacted my vet, who was also his physical therapist and she had a trainer come over. We worked with him a little bit, but I can't say that it helped.

We have learned how to avoid "biting" situations, but with a baby on the way, I am not very comfortable with him around the baby or any children for that matter. He can be a great little play guy and then all of a sudden... SNAP. He is also very food aggressive. I have been working with him to resolve this, but he will still bite you if you mess with him when he is eating or if he happens to get some food that doesn't belong to him and you try and take it from him. Funny thing is if we are walking and we spot some food in our path and I tell him to "leave it", he will leave it. But if I don't see it and he grabs it before I say to "leave it", it's his. Actually for a long time he would let me take it from him, but recently I tried and he bit my hand pretty viciously.

I have not had him for almost 9 years and I do love him, but I am just about at wits end with him. And with a baby coming, he is one strike away from doggy heaven. I'm just not sure what to do. Re-homing a biter is not really an easy thing to do. Putting him in another room does not work as he will howl and bark and bark until he has no voice. And that takes days. My vet has recommended getting him used to wearing a basket muzzle. He has no problem when I put a grooming muzzle on him, so I think he will take to it, but to have to wear it all the time just stinks for him.

He really is an adorable and great little guy (a lot of the time), but the biting is just dangerous.

So what does this all have to do with VMF. My vet believes his issues stem from neurological issues indicative of inbreeding and puppy mill practices. When she asked where I got him from I said "this great little farm in NJ". I recently did a Google search and surprisingly found this message board.

My take from what I read here is this. Where does VMF get their dogs from? Who is the breeder in Ireland? Why won't they disclose this? Why would a breeder sell puppies to a broker? They wouldn't. Only a puppy mill would. This is very saddening and disheartening. Unfortunately I was a 25 year old guy who just wanted a cute little Irish Jack at the time and didn't know enough to do my homework.

While I can only make an informed decision based on what I currently know, I would have to say that I believe that VMF is frauding many of their customers. Shame on you...

The puppy I purchased from Violet Meadow Farms in 2004 is an amazingly sweet, adorable, and loving dog. However, I've had a nagging suspicion since early on that something wasn't right with this place. When my puppy was going through "adolescence" I tried to contact Susan for suggestions on how to deal with her behavior (seeing as she had offered help in the future when I purchased the dog) I never got a response. My dog has nearly died--twice--in her 8 years due to bladder stones and has been sickly with digestive issues repeatedly. I wouldn't trade my dog for anything, but I feel sickened that I have supported such a business without realizing what was going on. Again, the temperament of my dog is exceptional and she gets nothing but compliments, but certainly is rather sickly.

To anyone supporting Susan:
-Face it, your puppy came from a Puppy Mill. You supported at least one, and Susan and other people willing to abuse an animal for profit make quite a bit of mony from that.
-When you purchased your puppies seems to be factoring into the health of your puppy.
-Which "line" (read: Puppy Mill) your puppies come from is also a factor.
-People who purchase their puppies from pet stores often have dogs that are healthy. Guess what - those puppies come from mills too.
-The "record" posted was in reference to official ZONING issues - buildings and grounds. NOT animal welfare or business issues. Not much proof sees to be asked of her in reference to the puppy end.
-When we were at Susan's there were AT LEAST 20 puppies on the property, not including her own dogs and dogs she was boarding.
-It does not appear from the record she was required to actually she PROOF of her claims about cost, how many puppies he imports, if she complies with requirements regarding federal CDC requirements: http://www.cdc.gov/animalimportation/dogs.html and http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2003-title42-vol1/xml/CFR-2003-title42-vol1-sec71-51.xml. Again it was about zoning.
-Again, she's slick, and that she slips through the cracks of bureaucracy is a testament to New Jersey's many governmental problems.

CAVEAT EMPTOR when dealing with Violet Meadow farms! Yes, she has many shining, happy testimonials. Aren't they lucky?

Granted, Keith's story is only one side. Due to my past dealings with Susan, I am inclined to believe him, and am shocked no one has reported her to the department of agriculture in New Jersey, she is still doing a thriving business. Kudos to Keith. I'm sure the previous web designers who seem to have gone on their way would also have tales to tell. Beware the puppy broker - be it Susan or anyone else! And DO NOT BRING YOUR CHILDREN WHEN CHECKING OUT PUPPIES! 8 years ago, in our eagerness to buy a "shorty" Jack Russell, we, much to our embarrassment, allowed ourselves to be charged $1200 for a dog with a genital defect, a severe overbite. Susan and her partner (a woman whose name escapes me), assured us she would grow out of it. Our puppy came to us with Giardia, which now is covered by the "puppy lemon law." Needless to say our vet was outraged, and saddened we allowed ourselves to fall prey the cuteness of a puppy, her calls to Susan went ignored, our requests to have treatment covered went ignored, and our dog still has the overbite. Our children fell in love with our now dog while spending the afternoon at Susan's, and knowing we were being overcharged, succumbed to our soft hearts. Our dog is a loved member of our family, but now as a grown dog, it is so easy to see she is NO WAY 100% Jack Russell. She definitely has some Rat Terrier, and a good deal of Dachshund.

Susan is slick, have no doubt. Her grounds seemed nice and clean, she allows you into "her home." I had nagging suspicions she was not all what she professed to be. When I asked where the puppies were actually housed, she evaded the question with vague references to "a barn." when I asked about the breeder in Ireland (at that time the website was different, and it seemed the same dog standing on a stone wall, was on the only farm Susan dealt with), again she was vague. When I checked our dog's "paperwork, " with worming and shot info, I was shocked to see she appeared to be inoculating the dogs. Knowing what I know now, due to better publicity and public education of puppy mills, AND THE BROKERS THAT DEAL WITH THEM, I would never allowed ourselves to have been taken in. It makes me sick to think despite our best intentions, we ended up supporting the puppy mill industry. At least I can rationalize we saved one.

Barry Sharp - it pleases me to see that you are in the majority, who do realize that most animals almost always suffer from some kind of treatable condition (Susan's puppies included, as it would be with any other breeder of any other kind of breed). It is a statistical norm - with ANY breed. To single Susan out as some kind of monster that has no regard whatsoever for her puppies and her customers is utter nonsense. People need to remember that when you purchase an animal, no matter what type, that there is ALWAYS the chance that the animal is going to need to be treated for at LEAST one condition throughout its lifetime. That is the chance we all take when we take these precious little babies into our lives. The same goes for human life. Folks need to get off of this stupid "finger-pointing" kick and GROW UP!

I have purchased 4 dogs from Susan and can't be anymore happier. Each dog did arrive with kennel cough, but I understand this is pretty customary for little dogs and the trauma they experience with their transition. All of the dogs are healthy and have a wonderful temperament. I have also purchased numerous horses from Ireland, New Zealand and England and have also experienced issues associated with their transition. Several of my children have had medical issues as have my parents, but I don't blame their mother or my grandparents. If you purchase an automobile, motorbike or television and have issues, these items generally have warranties. I love my dogs and wouldn't consider any amount of money or valued possessions for them. Judging from the complaints on this forum and having 4 of Susan's dogs, one would think that I should have experienced horrible consequences. Maybe I should head out and purchase a power ball ticket?

Lebanon Township Board of Adjustment May 13, 2009

Municipal Bldg 530 West Hill Road Glen Gardner, N.J.

The Regular Meeting of the Lebanon Township Board of Adjustment was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Chairman Bruce Terzuolo. Present were: Mr. Machauer, Mr. Kozlowski, Mr. MacQueen, Mr. Nagie, Mr. Abuchowski, 2nd Alternate Maurizio, Attorney Gallina, Planner Bolan and Engineer Risse. Excused: Mr. Perry and Mr. Eberle

Notice of this meeting was noticed in the “Annual Meeting Notice Schedule” adopted by this board on January 28, 2009, mailed to the Hunterdon Review, Hunterdon County Democrat, Express Times, Courier News, Star Ledger and posted on the bulletin board in the Municipal Building on May 6, 2009.

PRESENTATION OF MINUTES: April 22, 2009 Regular Meeting

Motion by Mr. Maurizio and seconded by Mr. Abuchowski to approve the minutes with corrections. Unanimously approved.

April 29, 2009 Regular Meeting

Motion by Mr. Nagie and seconded by Mr. MacQueen to approve the minutes with minor corrections. Unanimously approved.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Susan Sarao Block #10 Lot #21

301 Rocky Run Road Rocky Run Road R 1½

Glen Gardner, N.J. 08826

CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING D Variance for a commercial use in a

Residential zone

Attorney Al Rylak was present along with the applicant Susan Sarao. Attorney Rylak had their first witness sworn in to give testimony, Bernard Pridy an adjoining property owner on Rocky Run Road. Attorney Rylak asked Mr. Pridy if he has ever detected any odors or noise from the Sarao property. Mr. Pridy said no. Mr. Pridy stated that Ms. Sarao has made improvements to the property, cleaned it up inside and out. Mr. Pridy said he recommended approval and that Ms. Sarao is a good neighbor. At the conclusion of Mr. Pridy’s testimony, Chairman Terzuolo asked if the board had questions of the witness. Mr. Machauer asked questions. There were no questions from the Planner and Engineer. When opened to the public, there were no questions.

Attorney Rylak had Ms. Sarao back to give more testimony. It was noted that she was sworn in at the last meeting. Ms. Sarao brought with her one of her 11 week old puppies for the board to see. Attorney Rylak asked how many puppies are sold during the course of a year. Ms. Sarao said 15 puppies per month. Attorney Rylak asked about the vacant lot next door to Ms. Sarao and whether it is for sale and if so would Ms. Sarao need that lot to run her business. Ms. Sarao said she would not need the lot next door to run her business. At the conclusion of Ms. Sarao’s testimony, Chairman Terzuolo asked if the board had any questions. Mr. Kozlowski asked if the property next to the applicant was for sale. Ms. Sarao did not know but noted it was a wooded lot. Mr. Maurizio asked from the time the puppies arrive when do they leave the property. Ms. Sarao said about 12 weeks of age; they arrive from Ireland at the age of 10 weeks. Mr. Machauer asked if she has 15 puppies on the property per month or sold per month. Ms. Sarao said both, she sells 15 per month. Mr. Machauer stated that 180 puppies per year and Ms. Sarao answered yes. Mr. Machauer noted from testimony given that Ms. Sarao has 6 dogs of her own and asked if they are used for breeding. Ms. Sarao said they are her pets and they are used for breeding. Her own litter would be added to the total number of puppies on the property. Mr. Machauer asked about when she was living in Tewksbury Township. Ms. Sarao said she rented a place in Pottersville and she kept the puppies at another location off Route 512, The property was on the corner of Fox Hill Road. Ms. Sarao said she originally lived in Bergen County. Mr. Machauer asked if moving out of Tewksbury had anything to do with the business and zoning ordinances. Ms. Sarao said absolutely not. Ms. Sarao said when she moved into Lebanon Township July 2006 the puppies were still be housed in a barn in Tewksbury Township and eventually brought them home. Mr. Machauer asked if there were any requirements, anything that had to be taken care of in regards to raising and selling of these puppies. Ms. Sarao did not understand the question. Mr. Machauer said that the applicant is looking to get a variance to do something that is not permitted by our zoning ordinance. Ms. Sarao said that no one ever said anything to her. Mr. Machauer

Lebanon Township Board of Adjustment

May 13, 2009

Page 2

asked Ms. Sarao when did she find out what you are doing requires a variance. Ms. Sarao said she was notified a year ago, that she received a call from the Zoning Officer regarding her kennel operation. Ms. Sarao said she had no idea that she was a kennel and all she has is a couple of pens with tiny little puppies in them and didn’t consider herself to be a kennel. Ms. Sarao said she found out by New Jersey State law if you breed or sell 6 or more dogs per year you are considered a kennel. Attorney Gallina asked how much they weigh at 10-12 weeks of age. Ms. Sarao said between 3-5 lbs. Planner Bolan asked about the state law that was referenced and asked if an age is specified in the law. Ms. Sarao did not know only that it pertained to 6 or more.

Chairman Terzuolo referred back to questions asked by Mr. Machauer. Prior to moving to Lebanon Township, the puppies were kept in Tewksbury Twp. and asked why the puppies were moved out of there and wanted to know if she was asked by the zoning officer to move them. Ms. Sarao said no. Ms. Sarao said she was renting barn space, Chairman Terzuolo interjected and said the people you were renting the barn space from, were they approached by the zoning officer and told that the puppies had to leave. Ms. Sarao said no, what was asked if they wanted to do something to keep the puppies there and it wasn’t cost effective for her so she brought the puppies to her home in Lebanon Township. Mr. Machauer asked if she deals very closely with US Customs and in Ireland regarding shots and all the requirements that are needed. Ms. Sarao answered yes. Ms. Sarao said she has also been involved with Hunterdon County Board of Health but not the whole time. Mr. Machauer said since this is so critical with the dogs and bringing them here from Ireland, caring for them and making sure you meet all the standards coming into this country and questioned how much Ms. Sarao has been involved with agencies in this country. Ms. Sarao said she exceeds any and all requirements as far as care is concerned and there isn’t any requirement for any vaccinations other then rabies. Mr. Machauer said if this variance is granted then approval from the County Board of Health is required. Attorney Gallina asked if Attorney Rylak was going to refer to the letter from the County Attorney Guy De Sapio dated April 9, 2009. Attorney Rylak said that Ms. Sarao needs a fire inspection and she has also had inspections by Mario Filippi, County Health Inspector and Jim Gallos from the Hunterdon County Board of Health. Ms. Sarao stated she has a conditional approval from the county pending approval from this board and having a fire inspection. Attorney Rylak said the county only inspects the facility. The following was marked into evidence: A9-Ltr from Hunterdon County Counsel De Sapio dated April 9, 2009 to Fire Official Gary Apgar.

Mr. Kozlowski asked how many puppies are sold each year. Ms. Sarao said 180. Mr. Kozlowski asked how much the puppies sell for. Ms. Sarao said $1, 500.00. Ms. Sarao said each puppy cost her $900.00. At this time, Attorney Rylak had James Chmielak sworn in to give testimony. Mr. Chmielak is a licensed Engineer and Planner. Before Engineer Chmielak made his presentation the following items were marked into evidence: A10-Survey prepared by Robert Ent dated August 7, 2008. A11-Summation of exhibits A-E, A12-Summation of site photos. Attorney Rylak asked Engineer Chmielak review for the board the project report that was prepared for this hearing. The property is approximately 1.9 acres located in a residential zone. The lots in the area range from 1 acre to 2.8 acres. Behind the property is an 88 acre parcel that is preserved. The building that houses her business is 780 square feet. There is a fenced corral area which is the exercise area. The puppies are housed in dog pens which are located within the building. There is some vegetated buffering along the property lines for visual impact to the property. In visiting the site Engineer Chmielak stated there is no noise element even when the dogs are outside. The puppies weigh an average of 5 lbs for a 10-12 week old puppy. Engineer Chmielak stated at the last meeting, there was testimony by the neighbor immediately east of the subject property who stated there was no noise element also the neighbor across the road from the Sarao property testified that he did not hear a noise element. There is a vacant lot consisting of 2.88 acres next to the Sarao property to the west.

Engineer Chmielak noted the applicant is here for variances. If the board was in favor of the variance and there were any site issues that needed to be addressed, the applicant would address it at a future date. At this time, no improvements are proposed. Perspective puppy buyers come to the property by appointment only. Engineer Chmielak reviewed for the board the photos from Exhibit A12. Engineer Chmielak stated in identifying the variances, the applicant has more than 6 dogs that she sells on the property, she does qualify as a kennel and a kennel use is not permitted in the R1½ zone. Kennels are permitted as a C.U. in the RC & R5 zones. Engineer Chmielak reviewed for the board the standards for a Conditional Use. Engineer Chmielak said the scope of the variance relief the applicant is seeking a D1 Variance/Use Variance in the R1½ zone for her kennel use. Engineer Chmielak stated this is a limited kennel use; it is limited to a specific type of dog and size of dog. Engineer Chmielak referred to the special reasons for the

Lebanon Township Board of Adjustment

May 13, 2009

Page 3

variance, limited animal kennel use will contribute to the well being of the applicant to be able to continue her existing successful home business on a residential property and the general character

of the neighborhood would be maintained and would not be sufficiently altered. Engineer Chmielak noted he looked at the Master Plan and goals, in supporting the positive criteria and special reasons he felt that some of the policies and goals of the Master Plan would be furthered if the applicant were able to legally continue the operation on her property. Engineer Chmielak felt the nature of her business would further rule number one, to protect and maintain prevailing rural character sense of place in the Township which includes diverse neighborhoods& historical settings. This is not a typical farm use or agricultural use but it fits well with the Township. Engineer Chmielak stated there are suitable conditions for this type of business. The board will need to decide whether 2 acres is enough for this type of business. In terms of the negative criteria, the MLUL requires that a variance not be granted unless it is demonstrated there will no substantial detriment to the public good. Attorney Rylak had Engineer Chmielak review the distances from the applicant’s building to neighbor houses and property lines.

At the conclusion of Engineer Chmielak testimony, Chairman Terzuolo asked if the board had questions of this witness. Mr. Machauer referred to a picture from B2 which is not in the booklet given to the board members and asked if this picture has been marked into evidence. The answer was no. Engineer Chmielak stated that the picture from B2 was updated at the request of Engineer Risse and copies were sent to the Board Secretary for distribution. After a brief discussion, the following was marked into evidence: A13-B2 Aerial map dated 8/7/2008 and revised 12/26/2008 project #8033, A14-B3 Aerial map dated 12/26/2008 project #8033 which shows septic and well. Engineer Chmielak went over all the dimensions from the building to the outer radius and from the property lines to the abutting lots and residences. Mr. Machauer said these distances range from 222’ to 605’ and wanted to know what is the significance of the dimensions. Engineer Chmielak said the significance of the dimensions is to address the ordinance requirements for the kennel use. Engineer Chmielak referred to the ordinance 400:11.9c on kennels. Planner Bolan asked about the fenced area to the east. Ms. Sarao responded and said it is a vegetable garden.

At this time, Chairman Terzuolo opened the hearing to the public. Ed Wirasnik asked about the value to his property. Attorney Rylak informed Mr. Wirasnik that two adjoining property owners do not have problem with the applicant’s business. Mr. Wirasnik was asked if he plans to sell the adjoining lot to Ms. Sarao. Mr. Wirasnik answered no. Since no one else from the public had questions, Chairman Terzuolo announced the board will take a brief recess at 8:57 pm. When the board reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Attorney Rylak announced that he does not have any additional witnesses to give testimony. Chairman Terzuolo had Planner Bolan sworn in to give testimony. Planner Bolan referred to his report dated March 11, 2009. Planner Bolan referred to the special reasons as promoting the general welfare which is a reason often relied on by applicants seeking variance relief. The case law on this is that the benefit to the general welfare derives not from the use, but from the development of the site in the community that is particularly suited for the enterprise that is proposed. The negative criteria are without substantial detriment to the public good or substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Master Plan and zoning ordinance. The other issue that has been discussed is the animal kennel. In reading the definition of kennels, this is not an animal kennel as defined on page 400:5 (An establishment wherein or whereon the business of boarding, selling or breeding more than six dogs each over one year old is carried on). Planner Bolan said in looking at some of the criteria that is in the ordinance for animal kennels as a conditional use, it doesn’t look to be applicable. It should be considered in the context of the neighborhood as you do with any use variance. Planner Bolan said this is not a kennel; it is a retail use essentially.

At the conclusion of Planner Bolan’s testimony, the board asked questions of the Planner. Mr. Nagie asked if the board grants this variance does it go with the land or can it be denied at a later date. Planner Bolan responded saying the board has the right to put conditions with a use variance on any approval and the conditions should be well specified. Planner Bolan said that variances run with the land. Mr. Abuchowski asked since this is not a kennel what other ordinances come into play. Since this is a business what ordinances apply? Attorney Gallina noted this is a retail operation located in a residential zone which needs a variance. Mr. Maurizio asked if the variance is granted can it include that the scope of the business does not change. Attorney Gallina stated that when a variance is granted, if the scope/expansion occurs then the applicant would have to come back to the board for further relief. Mr. MacQueen said he doesn’t understand how the board can grant a variance for a retail business of selling dogs. Mr. MacQueen did not feel the issue of noise regarding the dogs was addressed enough especially if

Lebanon Township Board of Adjustment

May 13, 2009

Page 4

the vacant lot next to the applicant has a house built on it. Mr. MacQueen noted that the State refers to 6 dogs and they override us. The board discussed this issue at length. Chairman

Terzuolo asked if the applicant had questions. The response was no. When opened to the public for questions, there were none. At this time, Engineer Risse was sworn in to give testimony. Engineer Risse said this is a planning issue and he agrees with Planner Bolan on ordinance regarding kennels. Engineer Risse referred to additional screening and sound proofing of the building. At the conclusion of Engineer Risse’s testimony, Mr. Kozlowski question dealt with noise. Engineer Risse said the ordinance states that the board should look at site plan elements to ensure there is no off site nuisance elements from a kennel operation. Being no other questions from the board nor questions from the applicant or public, Chairman Terzuolo asked if there were any interested parties that would like to give testimony. Mr. Ed Wirasnik of Rocky Run Road was sworn in. Mr. Wirasnik informed the board that he has been a resident of Rocky Run Road for 47 years. He expressed concern for the value of his home and the vacant lot next to the applicant with this type of business operation. He informed the board that he does hear dogs barking. At the conclusion of Mr. Wirasnik’s testimony, the board asked a few questions. Attorney Rylak asked about the barking dogs. Attorney Rylak asked to have a rebuttal witness. Mr. Pridy who gave testimony earlier, said he does not have a problem with the dogs.

Chairman Terzuolo asked Attorney Rylak to give his summation. At the conclusion of the summation, Chairman Terzuolo announced that the evidence taking portion of the hearing is now closed. Because of the late hour, Chairman Terzuolo polled the board to see if they would prefer to do their deliberations on another night. The board discussed continuing to another night for their deliberations. The board agreed to have a continuance. Attorney Rylak did not have a problem with the board’s decision. Chairman Terzuolo asked Ms. Glashoff for a date. Ms. Glashoff offered June 10th. Attorney Rylak informed the board that he could not be present, but he will send his partner Attorney Gianos to cover. Attorney Gallina announced to the public, this application will be carried to the June 10th meeting date without further notice.

PRESENTATION OF BILLS:

a. John Gallina, Esq. $546.25 – Phone Conferences with Board Chair

Phone conf. w/Bd Sec./Atty Bernstein,

Zoning Officer re: Atty Gruenberg letter

$172.50 - Escrow (Michael Edwards)

$ 86.25 – Escrow (Patrick Allen)

b. Court Stenographer $200.00 – Attend Meeting 5/13/2009

c. Dues NJAPZA-2009 $ 45.00 - Gail Glashoff

Total: $1, 050.00

Ms. Glashoff informed the board she had two additional bills for approval from Bayer/Risse Engrs. The escrow bill for Patrick Allen, $298.75 and the other for the board $418.25, totaling $717.00 with a grand total of $1, 767.00. Motion by Mr. MacQueen and seconded by Mr. Abuchowski to approve the bills as amended. Unanimously approved.

CORRESPONDENCE:

a. Zoning Law 5/1/2009

b. Law Bulletin 5/2009

Ms. Glashoff announced on June 2nd the Planning Board they will have a presentation by the Highlands Council. Ms. Glashoff asked who would be interested in attending from the board. It was decided to place a notice in the paper in the event there is a quorum.

Being no further business to come before the board, nor comments from the public, motion by Mr. Kozlowski and seconded by Mr. MacQueen to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 p.m. Unanimously approved.

______________________________________

CHAIRMAN BRUCE TERZUOLO

__________________________________________

GAIL W. GLASHOFF, BOARD SECRETARY