02/24/2022 Zoning Board Meeting

City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Thursday, February 24, 2022 Opening: The meeting of the City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairperson Diane Hutchinson at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Auditorium. In compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice was provided. Roll Call: Mrs. Hutchinson, Chairperson Present Mr. Murray, Vice Chairperson Present Mrs. Werner Absent Ms. Hesel Present Mr. Ledwin Present Mrs. Notch Present Mr. Walsh Present Mrs. McDade (Alt. 1) Absent Sam Venuto (Alt. 2) Present Also Present: Richard King, Board Solicitor Craig Hurless, PE, PP, CME, Board Engineer Karen Keenan, Board Assistant There was intermittent difficulty with the Livestream of this meeting. Oath of Office: New member Sam Venuto took the Oath of Office. Mr. Venuto was welcomed to the Board by Chairperson Hutchinson and the members. Minutes: Motion was made by Mr. Murray to adopt the meeting minutes of January 27, 2022, seconded by Ms. Hesel and carried 5-0. Those in favor: Mr. Ledwin, Mrs. Notch, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: Ms. Hesel, Mr. Venuto. Applications: Gerald & Mary Anne Jones 20 Patterson Avenue, Block 1018, Lot(s) 1 & 2 This application which was continued from the December 16, 2021 meeting was presented to the Board by Attorney Ron Gelzunas. Attorney Gelzunas said the non-conforming use of this property was being eliminated with a single family home to be constructed on this corner lot with the applicant returning with a redesigned plan that eliminates the need for the floor-area ratio variance. Architect Christina Amey, Owners Gerald and Mary Anne Jones, and Board Engineer Craig ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes – February 24, 2022 - Page 1 Hurless were sworn in by Solicitor King. Architect Amey presented her credentials and was accepted as an expert by Chairperson Hutchinson. Architect Amey gave a brief overview of design changes since the December 21, 2021 presentation including moving the breezeway forward, decreased massing with the front portion changed to a screened porch and an additional variance needed for the pool equipment. Engineer Hurless commented that the pool equipment is offensive to neighbors, and the applicant agreed to move the equipment closer to the house. Architect Amey described a connector between the main building and the carriage house. The applicant agreed, as a condition of approval, that the carriage house is not separate living quarters which could be rented or inhabited separately but is a garage and bedroom that will be used as part of the single family residence. Architect Amey stated that the purposes of zoning are advanced due to the elimination of the non-conforming use and the project also promotes light, air and open space. Board members were allotted time for questions of Architect Amey and asked about placement of the mechanicals for the carriage house and main house with the answers being in the attic space above bathrooms and closets for the carriage house and in the lower portion above flood level for the first floor and in the attic for the second floor for the main house. Board Engineer Hurless then summarized his report dated February 15, 2022. He described his completeness review, summarized the variances requested and shared his general review comments 1-15 in detail. He said a stormwater plan, although not required, was submitted, and the stormwater plan is acceptable. He noted that the Shade Tree Commission approved the application, in their report dated October 28, 2021, with comments that two silver maples trees to remain and construction barriers to be placed to protect the trees and roots. He said an additional condition is the landscaping plan should be redrawn to match the plans, and the applicants agreed. Board members were allotted time for questions of Engineer Hurless. Discussion was opened to the public within 200 feet and beyond at 6:35 PM and closed with no public coming forward to comment. Member Walsh asked about approval by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Architect Amey replied that the HPC wanted a reduction in size. Solicitor King explained the vote to the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Murray to grant the variances 1-5 outlined in Board Engineer’s Memorandum dated February 15, 2022 and based on the chart on page three, subject to waiver # 27 and conditions 1-15 listed on pages four and five plus condition 16 that the landscaping plan to comply with the site plan, seconded by Ms. Hesel and carried 7-0. Those in favor: Ms. Hesel, Mr. Ledwin, Mrs. Notch, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Venuto, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: None. ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes – February 24, 2022 - Page 2 Connor & Alex McMahan 20 Second Avenue, Block 1012 Lot(s) 5 Attorney Ron Gelzunas introduced this application to make the duplex property into a single family residence. Architect Christina Amey and Owner Alex McMahan were sworn in by Solicitor King. Board Engineer Craig Hurless remained under oath. Architect Amey presented her credentials and was accepted as an expert by Chairperson Hutchinson. Architect Amey described the existing property and stated that the structure cannot be elevated any further and the existing garage will be improved and is shared with the neighbor. She said there is no negative impact on the zone plan and the project advances the purposes of zoning by providing a more desirable visual environment and eliminating a non-conforming use. Architect Amey added that the mechanicals must be elevated presenting a design challenge and the increase in floor area ratio presents no detriment as it increases parking by one space, coverage and drainage are improved and there is sufficient light, air and open space. She added that the Historic Preservation Commission has granted conceptual approval to the project. Board members were allotted time for questions of Architect Amey and asked for clarification on parking. Architect Amey replied that the parking is in the same footprint with driver strips. Board Engineer Hurless then summarized his report dated February 7, 2022. He described his completeness review, the zoning requirements, summarized the variances requested and shared his general review comments 1-12 in detail. He said the floor area ratio variance requested requires five affirmative votes to carry. Engineer Hurless shared that the Shade Tree Commission October 29, 2021 report includes a recommendation that the cedar at the front be pruned and remain at the location. He said the Board can ask the applicant to provide additional landscaping if the cedar is eliminated. Attorney Gelzunas said parking is critical in this location and a two for one tree replacement or street tree could be arranged with applicant’s agreement to work with the Shade Tree Commission. Engineer Hurless said the species is to be duplicated when replacing two for one. Board members were allotted time for questions of Engineer Hurless. Discussion was opened to the public within 200 feet at 7:24 PM. Scott Maslow, 18 Second Avenue, was sworn in by Solicitor King and spoke in support of the application. He spoke as the next door neighbor and heartily approves the change of the structure from a duplex to single family home. Discussion was opened to the public beyond 200 feet at 7:30 PM Discussion was closed to the public at 7:30 PM. Solicitor King explained the vote to the Board. Motion was made by Mr. Walsh to grant the variances 1-9 outlined in Board Engineer’s Memorandum dated February 7, 2022 with waivers 27 and 28 on page two and conditions ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes – February 24, 2022 - Page 3 1-12 with the applicant to keep the second parking spot and reach a mitigation acceptable to the Shade Tree Commission and the Board Engineer, seconded by Mr. Ledwin and carried 7-0. Those in favor: Ms. Hesel, Mr. Ledwin, Mrs. Notch, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Venuto, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: None. Board members gave reasons for their votes and complimented the applicant on the design. A short break was taken at 7:43 PM. The meeting resumed at 7:50 PM. Renee Quinn 38 Jackson Street, Block 1034, Lot(s) 2 Solicitor King began the discussion on this application by explaining that the appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is very different from other Zoning Board applications and no new evidence is to be presented. He referred to Section 525-37 of the Zoning Ordinance – Appeal from Administrative Officer of the HPC action on the application. He said the determination by the HPC is entitled to due deference, and the Zoning Board is to review the decision to determine if it is arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or contrary to law. Attorney Anthony Monzo represented Owner Renee Quinn and gave a history of the property. He asked whether there is any legal basis to require the second HPC hearing and when can an applicant rely on an HPC decision. He felt that the HPC should have known that a house built in the 1880s would have had a wood roof. Solicitor King read the transcript of the May 20, 2019 hearing from page 30 to line 11 of page 31 and also read from the HPC Design Standards that indicate when one discovers historic materials that were previously hidden, the applicant must return to the HPC for approval regarding the materials. HPC Solicitor Robert Fineberg represented the HPC with Historic Preservation Commissioner Corbin Cogswell present. Solicitor Fineberg explained the HPC is comprised of members with knowledge of history, architecture, architectural history, and knowledge and interest in historic preservation. He said it is an applicant’s duty to know the materials of their property and further stated that a Commissioner had commented that wood shingles could be present and, if revealed, the applicant would need to return to the HPC who would then require wood shingles to be installed. Solicitor Fineberg said the HPC decision is only to be overturned if the decision was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or contrary to law. He said the HPC had a basis for their decision, and their decision was not contrary to law. There was a brief discussion on whether to deliberate in closed session, and Solicitor King checked Municipal Land Use Law and said the sunshine law prohibits the Zoning Board from going into closed session in this instance. ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes – February 24, 2022 - Page 4 Solicitor King explained the vote to the Board as was the decision of the HPC arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or contrary to law. Motion was made by Mrs. Notch to reverse the second HPC decision and affirm the first HPC decision, seconded by Mr. Murray and carried 7-0. Those in favor: Ms. Hesel, Mr. Ledwin, Mrs. Notch, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Venuto, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: None. Board members felt that the HPC decision to be unreasonable and contrary to law. Motion made by Mr. Murray to adjourn the meeting at 10:01 PM with all in favor. Respectfully Submitted by Karen Keenan, Board Secretary ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes – February 24, 2022 - Page 5