Zoning Board of Adjustment

MINUTES BOROUGH OF MADISON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Regular Meeting, Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 7:30 P.M., Hartley Dodge Memorial, 50 Kings Road, Madison, New Jersey. _____________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER BY THE CHAIRPERSON 2. ANNOUNCEMENT OF NOTICE (STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE) A regular meeting of the Borough of Madison Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 7:30 pm in Room #140 of the Hartley Dodge Memorial Building, located at Kings Road, Madison, N.J. Joseph Santoro, Chairperson opened the meeting. 3. ROLL CALL: PRESENT : John Ciulla, Nancy Northrup, Daniel Cochran, Joseph Santoro, Ronald Poeter, Mike Lami, Diane Driscoll and Timothy Blair ALSO PRESENT: Gary Hall, Board attorney, Susan Blickstein, Planner and Frank Russo, Engineer The following minutes were distributed to all Board members prior to this meeting for their review. There were no additions or corrections. A voice vote of aye was heard from eligible voting Board members in approval of the minutes. 4. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING: Minutes of 12/08/2011 for adoption. The following Resolutions were distributed to all Board members prior to this meeting for their review. There were no additions or corrections to the Resolutions. A voice vote of aye was heard from all Board members in approval of the minutes as submitted. 5. RESOLUTIONS FOR MEMORIALIZATION: The following Resolutions were distributed to all Board members prior to this meeting for their review. There were no additions or corrections made to any of the Resolutions except Z11-033 change the name from “Jim” to “James”. A voice vote of aye was heard from all eligible voting Board members in approval of the Resolutions. CASE NO. Z 11-032 - Resolution granting variance application to Jim & Jodi Bartie, Block 4203, Lot 16, 42 Hillcrest Road to construct a Detached 2 Car Garage in an R-2 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage. CASE NO. Z11-033 - Resolution granting variance application to James Malcolm, Block: 3702, Lot 19, 24 Maple Avenue to construct a 1 Story Rear Addition, Stairs and Sidewalk in an R-3 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Maximum Principal Building Coverage and Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage. CASE NO. Z 11-034 - Resolution granting variance application to Dorothy Meaney, Block: 4502, Lot: 12, 3 Candlewood Drive to construct a Deck, Paver Patio and ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 1 Walkway in an R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage. CASE NO. Z 11-035 – Resolution granting variance application to Timothy & Corinne Blair, Block: 506, Lot: 27, 80 Ridgedale Avenue to construct a Brick Paver Patio, Sidewalk and Retaining Walls in an R-3 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Minimum Driveway/Patio Setback. CASE NO. Z 11-036 - Resolution granting variance application to Judith Tiernan, Block: 804, Lot: 4, 7 Leigh Drive to construct a covered front porch, Driveway Widening and Paver Patio in an R-3 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Minimum Front Yard Setback, Maximum Principal Building Coverage and Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - CASE NO. Z10-017 LVJJ Investments Block: 1302, Lots: 5 & 6 4 & 6 Elm Street Applicant is requesting permission for Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval with necessary variances (C) and (D) to construct a nine-unit townhouse development in the R5 (Multi Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Maximum Allowable Density, Minimum Front Yard Setback, Minimum Rear Yard Setback, Minimum Side Yard Setback, Maximum Building Coverage, Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage, and Maximum Building Height. This application was started at the November 10, 2011 meeting and carried without further notice. This application was carried at the December 8, 2011 meeting and carried with out further notice. Nino Coviello, attorney rep LVJJ began by reviewing the past meeting and what occurred. Rusty Schommer, Engineer had testified and finally the Architect, Tim Plessi reviewed the proposed application. Mr. Coviello stated this evening issues will be cleaned up with the Engineer, Rusty Schommer. Mr. Schommer began by reviewing the eight open issues which were depicted in Susan Blickstein’s memo. A – 19 Site Layout Exhibit – Zoning Data Table A – 20 Open Space and Landscape Area Exhibit – Legend Mr. Schommer firstly reviewed Exhibit A – 19 and Exhibit A – 20, showing the parking area describing it in detail. Each area was detailed in a color to show the differentiation. Mr. Russo questioned whether there was landscaping within the parking area. Mr. Schommer stated that there are no free-standing islands in the parking area. The area in green was dedicated for open space, 31% total. Exhibit A – 20 was now discussed. This exhibit depicted the actual building and where it will be located. Mr. Schommer pointed and reviewed the space between the buildings. Lighting was discussed next. Different fixtures were selected, it was lowered to an 8 foot pole from a 15 foot pole. The location of the poles were kept. Less than 1/10 of a foot candle to the property line ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 2 will now be proposed. All of the above will be included in the Revised Plan. All of the pole lights will be turned off at 10 pm each evening. A – 21 Lighting Plan Exhibit Mr. Schommer stated Mr. Russo requested that he check to see if an EIS is required. This document applies to development large enough to check water quality. A Revised Environmental Impact Analysis will be drawn up and submitted to the Engineering Office in the future. He then stated all sidewalks within and surrounding the project will be comprised of pavers. Both variances for impervious coverage were met and eliminated from the application. A three foot dedication along Elm Street will be complied to under the Ordinance. The front setback of the building will be reduced by 3 feet. Mr. Schommer stated he believes these changes will be a vast improvement to this site. There were no further questions from the Board. The public was also given the opportunity to question the witness. There being none, the next witness was called to testify. Timothy Klesse, Architect was now called and he stated he had five exhibits as follows: A – 22 NJ Transit Lines near Building A Mr. Klesse began by describing Exhibit A – 22 depicting the distances from the NJ Transit lines with respect to Building A. He stated a line of arborvitae will be installed on the property line. Ms. Northrup suggested deciduous trees so the deer will not feed on them. A – 23 Exhibit D – Photo looking SW from Park Avenue indicating face of the bldg. He reviewed the Exhibit. A – 24 Exhibit F – Height of Existing vs Height of Proposed Building Mr. Klesse reviewed the Exhibit depicting the dimensions of the height ridges of the buildings. There is a fence which was installed by the neighboring property owner between the property lines. A – 25 Exhibit G – Building Offsets Mr. Klesse began with Building B describing the size and depth of the building showing the deviations of size, giving a visual isolation separating the different units. Colors and architectural details are changing as you move along. Mr. Klesse continued to describe the location of all units and how they are staggered. A – 26 Photos of building in the area of 3-story building height Mr. Klesse had an exhibit with 6 photos of buildings. He reviewed each photo depicting the numerous floors. He stated that the look this application is addressing is similar to those surrounding the proposed buildings. ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 3 Mrs. DeRosa questioned the surrounding area homes relating to the proposed project. The sample materials will be at the next meeting. The Board was given the opportunity to question Mr. Klesse. Ms. Northrup asked for the height of the new structure. Susan Blickstein requested actual photos being superimposed on the site on Elm Street The public was now given the opportunity to question Mr. Klesse, there being none, the next witness was called to testify. Mr. Joseph Staigar, Traffic Engineer was sworn in and gave his credentials. The Board accepted him as a qualified witness based upon his credentials. Mr. Staigar began by stating he accessed the traffic counts on the site. He continued by describing the activity on Elm Street. He stated there is very limited traffic flow on the site. He took traffic counts on Elm and Park during peak hours. He stated the traffic is relatively heavy. 19 vehicles utilized the store during peak hours in the morning. Peak hours are 10% of the total activity. He then reviewed the total trips for the proposed site and compared them to what presently exists. He stated it is much less. Elm Street is also a designated bike route. With the new development, he believes a more orderly flow of traffic will occur. He stated the convenience store does generate a flow of delivery trucks. He also stated that moving vans will be able to maneuver the site. Frank Russo, Engineer will reach out to Captain Nunn, Fire Chief requesting fire emergency services on the site. There being no further testimony, the Board had no further questions. The public was given the opportunity to question this witness. There being none, Mr. Staigar will submit a summary of what was testified at this meeting. Mr. Coviello stated his applicaton will conclude for this evening and carried to February 9, 2012 meeting. The following application was heard before the LVJJ Investments application. CASE NO. Z 11-037 Steven & Maria Aloupis Block: 3404, Lot: 1 Applicants are requesting permission to construct a 2 Story Addition, 1 Story Addition (Garage), Paved Driveway, Realignment of Existing Gravel Driveway, and Rear Walkway in an R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Minimum Side Yard Setback (Left), Maximum Principal Building Coverage, Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage and Minimum Driveway Setback. This application was started at the December 8, 2011 meeting and carried without further notice. A – 9 Revised Site Plan, 2 sheets, Majewski Jones Architects, revised 12/27/11 A – 10 Two sheets, Majewski Jones, Elevations, Proposed House Addition, rev. 12/27/11 Mr. Aloupis began by describing the changes that were made. His last intent was to add a very small amount of living space and was not accepted. He stated that the plan was revised to reduce the impervious coverage. The driveway will be changed and a reduction in impervious coverage will occur. This reduction can be found in the plans that were just submitted. The circular driveway impervious coverage was reduced from ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 4 31 to 29.1% The garage size was reduced by 10 inches and included in the architectural plans. A – 11 Proposed Plot Plan, 10/19/11, Majewski Jones Architects A – 12 Updated Zoning Sheet Mr. Majewski stated he conferred with an Engineering firm regarding drainage. Mr. Majewski also stated the width of the garage was reduced by 10 inches eliminating the variance being requested. The walkway was restored in place of the driveway. There will be areas where cars can be parked at the entry driveway to the home and will allow cars to be removed off the roadway. At this point in time Mr. Aloupis reviewed his landscaping plan. Mr. Majewski stated the he and the applicant believe the application has been improved considerably. The public was given the opportunity to question this witness. There being none, Andrew Clarke, Professional Engineer and Land Surveyor, was sworn in and gave his credentials. He was accepted by the Board as a qualified witness. Mr. Clarke stated he toured the property and offered his input as to what is needed with regard to storm water and drainage. He stated the front of the home is relatively flat and some grading can be done to remove the ponding. In the rear of the home the grade pitches to where the shed was removed. Several roof leaders discharge to grade on the west side of the home. Several leaders discharge into a drywell. Along the east side of the home is a drywell and it will be abandoned, and a new drywell will be constructed along the driveway area. Mr. Aloupis’ landscaping will improve some of the ponding conditions. A French Drain has been installed leading into a pit along the side of the home. Mr. Clarke’s opinion is that any additional measures are not required to manage storm water. There being no further questions, the public was given the opportunity to question the witness as follows: Richard Feldman, 146 Loantaka Way, was concerned about the removal of the trees. He stated he has a ponding problem which was created by new construction. He is concerned with what will occur several years from now. Mr. Feldman suggested that the Borough should re-introduce a policy that clear cutting properties is monitored. Gary Hall stated that it is not up to the Zoning Board to do the monitoring. David Curran, 144 Loantaka Way, questioned the two pits that were placed in the rear yard. Will any of the driveway or roof water be directed to the pits. They will not be directed to the pits. Open drain in middle of the rear yard, what is the plan? There will be changes in the leaders with the new construction. Adrianne Curran, 144 Loantaka Way, was concerned with the area near the fence and her property, and whether there will be runoff. Omar Jaffrey, a neighbor commented on the fact that Mr. Aloupis is working hard to improve the site and supports him wholeheartedly. ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 5 There being no further questions from the public, Mr. Majewski gave his summation. The Board had no further questions or comments, the Board began their deliberation. The consensus of the Board was to approve the application as submitted. A motion to approve the application with the Water Management Plan provided to the Borough was made by R. Poeter and seconded by N. Northrup . A roll call vote was requested and recorded as follows: AYES: Mrs. DeRosa, Ms. Northrup, Mr. Poeter and Mr. Santoro 7. NEW BUSINESS CASE NO. Z 11-038 Tom & Paula Murcott Block: 4230, Lot: 2 334 Woodland Road Applicants are requesting permission to construct a 2nd Story Addition, In-Ground Pool, Wood Deck with Arbor, Paver Patio, Removal of Existing Driveway replaced with Paver Driveway and Fence in an R-1 (Single-Family Residential) Zone requiring relief from Maximum Impervious Lot Coverage. Tom Murcott and Nick Bensley, Architect were both sworn in and Mr. Bensley began by describing the details of the application. He described the variances that are being sought. The following exhibits were marked: A – 1 Two site plans A – 2 A colorized plan Exhibit A – 1 shows the existing Site Plan and it depicts the location of the driveway. The backyard consists of lawn and a playhouse which will be removed. There are mature evergreens between the neighboring properties which provide screening. An inground pool and terrace is proposed. The impervious coverage will be reduced by removing a portion of the driveway. In its place, all areas will have pavers installed. The downspouts in the rear will be directed to a seepage pit which is planned in the rear. Some of the asphalt will be removed from the rear. This will provide a better landscaped area for recreation in the rear. An addition was constructed a few years prior. There was an issue with the impervious coverage and it was never addressed. Improvements to the existing conditions will be made and the neighborhood will not be adversely impacted by this project. The property is extremely flat and when the renovations are completed, this will remove any of the ponding on site. A fence on the side of the property will be removed and replaced. The addition will not impact the building coverage. There were no further questions from the Board, the public was given the opportunity to question the applicant as follows: ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 6 Mary Beth Cooney, 336 Woodland Road, questioned the fencing. It is near her sideyard. She asked if the fencing can be of noise reduction type. Are there lights that will be installed. Mr. Murcott stated there will be lights around the pool with low wattage. He stated that he will confer with her regarding what type of fencing she would prefer. There being no further questions from the public, the Board began their deliberation. The consensus of the Board was to approve the application as submitted and the condition that the applicant and neighbor decide upon the type of fence that will be installed not exceeding six feet in height along thelot line opposite the area by the front of the building lines. A motion to approve the application was made by R. Poeter and seconded by M. Lami. A roll call vote was requested and recorded as follows: AYES: J. Ciulla, D. Cochran, T. DeRosa, N. Northrup, R. Poeter, J. Santoro and M. Lami 9. OTHER BUSINESS: No Other Business this evening. 10. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by a motion made by R. Poeter and seconded by M. Lami at 11:15 pm. Respectfully submitted, Lorraine Sola Recording Secretary ZBA Regular Mtg 1-14-12 7