October 22 Zoning Board Meeting - Virtual

City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Thursday, October 22, 2020 Opening: The meeting of the City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairperson Diane Hutchinson at 6:06 PM virtually via Zoom and streamed live on Facebook. In compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice was provided. Roll Call: Mrs. Hutchinson, Chairperson Present Mr. Murray, Vice Chairperson Present Mr. Iurato Absent Mrs. Werner Present Ms. Hesel Present Mr. Van de Vaarst Present Mrs. Lukens Present Mrs. Nelson (Alt. 1) Present Mr. Walsh (Alt. 2) Present Also Present: Richard King, Board Solicitor Craig Hurless, PE, PP, CME, Board Engineer Karen Keenan, Board Assistant Resolution(s): Motion was made by Mr. Murray to adopt Resolution number 10-22-2020: 1, Sherman, 1525 New Jersey Avenue, seconded by Mrs. Nelson and carried 6-0. Those in favor: Mrs. Werner, Ms. Hesel, Mr. Van de Vaarst, Mrs. Nelson, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: Mrs. Lukens. Motion was made by Mrs. Werner to adopt Resolution number 10-22-2020: 2, Delowery, 1013 Cape May Avenue, seconded by Mrs. Nelson and carried 5-0. Those in favor: Mrs. Werner, Ms. Hesel, Mrs. Nelson, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: Mr. Van de Vaarst, Mrs. Lukens. Motion was made by Mrs. Lukens to adopt Resolution number 10-22-2020: 3, Atlantic City Electric Company, Venice Avenue, Bank Street, Elmira Street, seconded by Mr. Murray and carried 7-0. Those in favor: Mrs. Werner, Ms. Hesel, Mr. Van de Vaarst, Mrs. Lukens, Mrs. Nelson, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: None. Application(s): Ryan and Michelle Murray 819 Kearney Avenue Block 1072, Lot(s) 7.01 Vice Chairperson Murray noted for the record that he is not related to the applicants. ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes -- October 22, 2020 -- Page 1 Attorneys Anthony Monzo and Kate Monzo of Monzo Catanese Hillegass, PC appeared with Architect Joe Ross, and introduced applicants Michelle and Ryan Murray and Project Engineer John Kornick. Attorney Anthony Monzo described the application and the property as a five-unit guest house and referred the Board to photos seen in Exhibits A-1 through A-4 which show current conditions at the property. Mr. Monzo indicated that the applicants propose to convert the property to a single family home, make improvements and raise the structure to meet flood code requirements. Architect Joe Ross, Engineer John Kornick and Board Engineer Craig Hurless were sworn in by Board Solicitor Richard King for the record. Architect Joseph Ross of Joseph Ross, LLC, was accepted as an expert by the Board and explained that he was hired to do a substantial renovation as seen on the drawings A-1 through A-8. He went on to explain the base flood elevation, stating that Cape May requires two feet of free board, which must be made of flood resistant materials. Architect Ross said the plan is to raise the house 5’3” to meet FEMA requirements. As a result, six new risers plus the three that currently exist going into the building are necessary. He went on to say that the plan is to reduce the living space by 185 square feet to create a screened porch and raise the house 5’3” to meet FEMA requirements. Mr. Ross said the project received unanimous conceptual approval from the HPC. He said the U-shaped steps are necessary for symmetry and this home has a formal, imposing façade with high windows plus head trim. The portico was created as was considered the best solution after study of six different designs. He explained that the current setback is 14 feet, the proposed setback is 10 feet and the required setback is 20 feet. The Board was allotted time for questions of Mr. Ross. Engineer Hurless said that subsequent to his September 24, 2020 memorandum that Mr. Ross calculated the Floor Area Ratio to the nearest hundredth of a foot, and Mr. Ross testified that the calculations of total proposed living area to be 3,565 square feet making the Floor Area Ratio to be 0.352. Vice Chairperson Murray asked if the garage would be habitable, and Architect Ross said it is to be used as an outbuilding for the pool with an outdoor shower and not a habitable structure. Vice Chairperson and Chairperson Hutchinson asked if the pavers triggered a variance and Architect Ross said yes, the pavers for the side yard and the garage. Architect Ross said the pool is ten feet off of the deck as required, greater than ten feet off the garage as required and is conforming. Engineer Hurless said the pool part of the Zoning Ordinance includes the surrounding pool patio areas and the pool equipment. Professional Engineer and Professional Planner John Kornick, of K2 Consulting Engineers, Inc., was accepted as an expert by the Board and referred the Board to the colored rendering Sheet 1 of the submitted plans. He described the existing conditions and the drainage pattern to be in the rear which will be mirrored, the yard will be raised and an existing well will be removed. He stated that this major renovation requires the plan to meet the flood standards in Chapter 258, and the property is located in Frog Hollow a lower point in Cape May. Engineer Kornick depicted the pool design and garage and indicated that the project in total is a massive undertaking changing a commercial property to a residential property, which is a more passive use. ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes -- October 22, 2020 -- Page 2 Engineer Kornick then listed the hardship criteria which he felt the project met as the project preserves the historic integrity. He said regarding negative criteria, you have to balance and felt there was no substantial detriment to the public good and no substantial detriment to the Zone Plan. He added that near neighbors have the same conditions and the project is not out of character for the neighborhood. Regarding C-2 criteria, he said there is an existing nonconforming condition and three are three off-street parking spaces plus the applicant can apply for a permit to part in front of their driveway apron as a condition of approval. He added that there is on-street parking available. Engineer Kornick said the purposes of zoning apply as follows: (a) to ensure safety from flood and fire, (b) provide adequate light, air and open space, (e) promote appropriate population density, (j) promote conservation of historic sites and districts and (i) desirable environment. He felt there is no negative impact due to the existing vegetation, the addition of a fence and stormwater management mitigation plan. Engineer Kornick opined that the shower is better suited along the garage nearer to where the pool equipment will be stored. Board members were allotted time for questions of Engineer Kornick. Vice Chairperson Murray commented that in the summer on-street parking is substantially nonexistent. He asked if addition of the pool would not exacerbate the flooding, and Mr. Kornick said they are reducing the impervious coverage. Member Walsh asked about where the water will go due to the addition of the two-foot wall which could prevent some of the water to enter the property and therefore extend Frog Hollow flooding elsewhere. Mr. Kornick replied that there is flood storage before the wall and adequate flood storage on the property. Member Walsh asked if raising the property skew the flood maps and Engineer Kornick answered no because the property is in a coastal zone. Board Engineer Hurless said there is a difference between stormwater flooding versus actual flooding related to coastal storms. The displacement is negligible; the ocean is going to go where it is going to go. He added that elevating this property is not going to change the flood maps. Board Engineer Hurless then summarized his report dated September 24, 2020. He reviewed the variances required (page 3 of 6): building setback, parking, pool setback – rear and side and outdoor shower requirements. The General Review Comments 1-17 (pages 5 and 6 of 6), were reviewed and explained in detail, and were classified as conditions of approval including final Historic Preservation Commission approval. General Review Comment item 5 was amended to show 0.352 floor area ratio and classified as conditions of approval and item 14 was eliminated. Mr. Hurless stated that the Shade Tree Commission report dated October 6, 2020 approved with a condition that the pine tree in the niche to remain and be protected. Engineer Kornick said the tree was compromised when the house was recently raised, and there will be revegetation in this spot. Engineer Hurless said this condition of approval is to be struck from the conditions if the Board agrees. The Fire Department report dated October 6, 2020 shows approval of the project. Board members were allotted time for questions of Engineer Hurless. Member Lukens asked why the outdoor shower is not located by the home. Architect Ross said he is aware of the Zoning Ordinance, but there are flood vents required that limit the location of the outdoor shower. ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes -- October 22, 2020 -- Page 3 Vice Chairperson Murray asked about the pool equipment and Mr. Monzo said yes the applicant agrees to move the pool equipment to the garage. Discussion was opened to the public within 200 feet at 7:21 PM. All callers were sworn in for the record by Solicitor King. Jan Pask, 815 Kearney, said she is the owner of the Ogden Inn and President of the Cape May Historic Accommodations. She did not prefer the ornate design of the front stairs. She said there is not parking in the area four months of the year and she does not think going from a Bed and Breakfast commercial property to a residential property is such a good thing. She added that she felt that the City is losing their B&B identity having lost 23 of 50 of them over the last twenty years. Janice Bell, 816 Kearney, said she was denied use of pavers at her property. She shared her concerns that pool equipment should not be close to another’s property, pool noise can be an issue in this quiet residential neighborhood particularly if the property is rented, and the parking will be insufficient. She added that her home has experienced vibrations and jarring due to dropping of excavation materials into the dumpster and that the construction needs to be handled. Applicant Ryan Murray was sworn in for the record by Solicitor King. He asked about the use of a rental property versus a bed and breakfast and was told by Solicitor King that they are not the same. Phillip Green, 814 Kearney, asked whether piers are driven into the ground or will there be a brick foundation. Architect Ross replied that the city ordinance requires helical piers because of the property’s location in the historic district. He said the method of using helical screw piles is to avoid vibrations. Mr. Green added that parking is not an issue eight months during the year, but is an issue the other four months during the year. He felt if it is not a bed and breakfast, then it is not a problem. Discussion was opened to the public beyond 200 feet at 7:42 PM. Jan Pask, 815 Kearney, called again and gave a history of the successful bed and breakfast use and parking at the property. Discussion was closed to the public at 7:45 PM. Member Werner asked about the pool equipment and Mr. Monzo replied that the applicant has agreed that the pool equipment will be relocated to inside the garage. Member Van de Vaarst asked about the permit for the parking. Chairperson Hutchinson explained her experience with the parking permit across the apron of the driveway as a one-time application which will need clarification. Vice Chairperson Murray agreed with Chairperson Hutchinson that he has the obtained a permit that is not required to be renewed each year; it is a one-time fee that ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes -- October 22, 2020 -- Page 4 is approved while you own the property. He said it is not the same as a permit, to park on the street, which is renewed annually. Board Solicitor King explained the vote to the Board. Mr. Monzo was given an opportunity to make a closing statement, which he declined. Motion was made by Vice Chairperson Murray to approve, based on the C-1 and C-2 standards, the project with associated variances requested as outlined on page 3 of the Board Engineer’s memorandum by Craig R. Hurless, PE, PP, CME, dated September 24, 2020 subject to conditions of approval numbered 19 and 26 on page 2 of the memorandum and conditions of approval 1 through 11 plus number 12 that the pine tree will be removed and mitigated in a landscaping plan to the satisfaction of the Board Engineer, numbers 13, 15, 16, 17, plus added requirement # 18 to be that the applicant apply, obtain and maintain a parking permit to park across the driveway in order to occupy the premises, seconded by Mr. Van de Vaarst and carried 7-0. Those in favor: Mrs. Werner, Ms. Hesel, Mr. Van de Vaarst, Mrs. Lukens, Mrs. Nelson, Mr. Murray, Mrs. Hutchinson. Those opposed: None. Those abstaining: None. Board members made positive comments on the project and expressed their reasons for their votes. Motion made by Vice Chairperson Murray to adjourn the meeting at 7:53 PM with all in favor. Respectfully Submitted by Karen Keenan, Board Secretary ==================================================================== City of Cape May Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes -- October 22, 2020 -- Page 5