say matter boils
down to zoning issue
Legal battle brews over use
of car dealership, junkyard
Spotswood officials
say matter boils
down to zoning issue
By vincent todaro
Staff Writer
SPOTSWOOD — A longtime local business owner claims that borough officials are cracking down on his business because they want his land.
Borough officials dispute the claims made by Fernando Giancola, owner of Giancola Auto Wreckers at 192 Manalapan Road, who said recent measures taken by Spotswood have resulted in his losing thousands of dollars in business and prompted him to take legal action in the matter.
Giancola operates a junkyard and a used car sales lot, and also runs a towing service and auto repair shop on the site.
A dispute regarding permissible uses on his property began shortly after the borough sent a letter in March 2002 to the state Division of Motor Vehicles, informing the DMV that Giancola’s property was not zoned to allow the sale of used cars. The letter pointed out that Giancola’s branch license to sell used cars, issued by the DMV, was up for renewal on March 31, 2002. The letter also asked that the borough be notified if Giancola requested a renewal of that license.
That same month, the DMV refused Giancola’s request to renew his branch license, stating that he could not sell used cars from the location.
However, the action had consequences for Giancola beyond losing the ability to sell used cars, as he said he also could not operate his junkyard. Without the license, he said, he could not make purchases at auctions or sell items from his junkyard.
"Without the used car license, he could not sell or buy junk cars," said Giancola’s attorney, Christopher Rafano. "Someone needed a [branch] license to be able to accept the [car] titles."
Borough Attorney Gary Schwartz said the borough never meant to stop Giancola from operating the junkyard.
"The state only issues one license, be it for junk or operable used cars," Schwartz said.
Giancola responded with legal action against Spotswood in 2002. He said the lawsuit asked for the license back and that he be allowed to sell used cars and trucks and perform repairs on them.
The borough countered that the area, part of a residential zone, cannot be used for motor vehicle sales or to perform repairs — though borough representatives acknowledged the junkyard use was "grandfathered in" on the property.
The two sides continue to disagree on whether the sale of used vehicles and the performance of repairs is permissible.
"My client is running a business that has existed for many, many years," Rafano said. "It’s a pre-existing, nonconforming use."
Rafano said that the borough has previously acknowledged and allowed the same uses it now complains about. He provided a copy of a certificate of municipal approval, dated April 2001, that states Giancola was operating both a junkyard and a used motor vehicle dealership.
State Superior Court Judge Amy Chambers ruled that the "status quo" be preserved until a final ruling is made. That meant Giancola could have his branch license and could thus run the junkyard and sell used vehicles and perform repairs, albeit on a limited basis.
Chambers, however, upheld the borough’s decision against allowing Giancola to store trucks on the property, something Giancola said he is still fighting.
Despite the ruling, he said he did not get the branch license back until July 2002, and claims he lost about $2,000 each business day he was closed.
He said he is also upset with the repair and truck restrictions.
"We can’t store or sell any trucks, or have them on the property," he said. "Spotswood told us not to do it. The judge reinstated our license, but said we couldn’t have trucks."
Giancola said he is selling used cars again, as well as running the towing service and junkyard.
He also said the borough has made him take down signs regarding auto repair service and salvaging. The only reason trucks can go on the property is to drop off cars they towed.
The junkyard portion of the business is located on four acres behind his building, he said. The used car business functions in the front of the building on nearly one acre.
"It’s not a zoning thing like they’re saying, it’s about acquiring our property," Giancola claimed.
Giancola, who owns the business with his brother, Perry, also owns an Oldsmobile dealership on Main Street and several other businesses in Spotswood and East Brunswick.
In addition to getting permission to sell used cars and trucks and perform repairs, Giancola also wants to recoup money he says he lost as a result of being closed when his branch license was not renewed.
He argues that the borough’s real aim is to pressure him into selling them his property cheap — something borough officials say is untrue.
"The town wants the junkyard license and the four acres behind the railroad tracks [which run through the property]," Giancola said. "That would leave me with the building and three quarters of an acre in front of it, plus the motor vehicle license to sell trucks and cars, towing and the repair business."
He said he told the borough he will sell the junkyard license and four acres for $1.5 million, but that he has gotten no response.
"We told them we want $1.5 million for the junkyard license, which is worth gold, plus the four acres," he said.
"There’s a lot of property back there, and they’re up to something," he said.
Mayor Barry Zagnit denied Giancola’s claim that the borough is using zoning issues as a way to force Giancola to sell any of his property.
"We don’t want his land," he said, adding that Spotswood would not have the funds to buy the land if it was wanted.
"This boils down to a challenge of our zoning," Zagnit said. "It’s a fundamental question of what a community can do to control what goes in that community. This is not about the Giancolas; it’s a challenge about zoning. It wouldn’t matter if it was Giancola or not."
Council President Judith Ruffo echoed that sentiment and added that Giancola did not go through the proper channels when the problems began. She said the business owner should have gone to the borough’s Zoning Board and asked for a use variance.
When asked why his client did not do that, Rafano said it did not have to because the business is a pre-existing use.
The borough is appealing the judge’s decision, Schwartz said.
Schwartz said the borough has already spent more than $20,000 in legal fees on the case.

