Zoning Board of Adjustment

MINUTES BOROUGH OF MADISON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Special Meeting, January 11, 2016 at 7:30 P.M., Hartley Dodge Memorial, 50 Kings Road, Madison, New Jersey. 1. CALL TO ORDER BY CHAIRPERSON 2. ANNOUNCEMENT OF NOTICE (STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE): A special meeting of the Borough of Madison Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Monday, January 11, 2016, at 7:30 pm in Room #140 of the Hartley Dodge Memorial Building, located at Kings Road, Madison, N.J. Joseph Santoro, Chairman opened the meeting and requested the reading of the public notice as follows: “Let the minutes reflect that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in the following manner: On December 30, 2015, a copy of the scheduling of this meeting was posted at the bulletin board at the main entrance of the Hartley Dodge Memorial Building, was sent to the Madison Eagle and the Daily Record and filed with the Borough Clerk, all in accordance with the “Open Public Meetings Act.” 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Joseph Santoro, Toni DeRosa, Timothy Blair, Helen Kaar, Melissa Elias, Roger Paetzell, Anne Lawless, and Mary Sue Salko Recused: Diane Driscoll Also Present: Gary Hall, Zoning Board attorney Frank Russo, P.E., Engineering Consultant Gary Hall began the swearing in of Anne Lawless, Alternate #2, and Mary Sue Salko, as Alternate #1 4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 5. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL: None 6. RESOLUTIONS FOR MEMORIALIZATION: None 7. NEW BUSINESS: CASE NO. Z 15-016 34 Walnut Street, LLC Block: 1601, Lot: 41 34 Walnut Street Applicant is seeking permission for Preliminary and Final Site Plan and Use Variance to construct 11 townhouse condominium units in two separate buildings in an R-4 (Single/Two Family Residential) Zone. Nino Coviello, attorney is representing the applicant this evening. He proceeded to describe the application. A court reporter was hired to record the proceedings. He continued describing the application and what the applicant is seeking and why. Five votes are required from the Board in order to approve a use variance as the zone permits only 1 and 2 family residences. A bulk variance ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 1 for a 3rd story is requested, where 2 ½ stories are permitted in the zone. Five witnesses are going to testify for this application. Mr. Richard Romano, owner, Nancy Dougherty, Architect, Andrew Clarke, Licensed NJ P.E., Joseph Steiger, Traffic Engineer, and Michael Tobia, Planner. B – 1 Memo dated 1/5/16 from Frank Russo, P.E. B – 2 Bowman Consulting, dated 8/19/15 Technical Review #1, B – 3 Bowman Consulting, dated 10/20/15 B – 4 Memo from Susan Blickstein, P.P. dated 10/20/15 B – 5 Historic Preservation Commission letter, dated 9/10/15 B – 6 Letter from Shade Tree Commission Board, dated 8/9/15 B – 7 Copy of Resolution, dated 10/21/02 A – 1 Set of 7 Sheets, dated 3/23/15, rev. 9/24/15 prepared by Andrew Clarke, P.E. A – 2 Architecturals, prepared by Studio 100, dated 9/10/15 A – 3 Stormwater Management/Operation Maintenance Plan, dated 9/24/15 A – 4 Traffic Impact Study, dated 9/24/15 Mr. Richard Romano, Owner was called up to testify and began by stating he has a life long history in Madison. He continued by explaining his role in several projects in Madison which included the restoration of the train station. Mr. Romano also stated that he was also the developer of the condominium units on Ridgedale and Cook Avenue, and resides in one of them on Ridgedale Avenue. He believes there is a need for the younger generation to be able to afford a home as well as senior housing in town. This is one of the reasons he purchased this tract of land. The Board had the opportunity now to question Mr. Romano. Mr. Romano was asked what the price range is for these units. He stated $450,000 for a unit. Mr. Hall questioned Mr. Romano regarding the project on Ridgedale and Cook Avenues, priced at $599,000 to $695,000 and the larger units were priced higher. He continued by stating he constructed larger homes in the past. He believes there is a need for this proposed project. There being no further testimony from Mr. Romano, the public was given the opportunity to question Mr. Romano. Dr. Deborah Hess, 31 Ridgedale Avenue, Block 16, Lot 33, explained her home is on the NJ Historic Register. She had questions regarding her rear yard and whether a parking lot is planned. Dennis Castanon, 29 Walnut Street, asked if Mr. Romano knew the zoning of the property when he purchased it. He was concerned with #38 Walnut Street, and what will the plan be for this property. Lisa Sapio, 69 Ridgedale Avenue, asked why Mr. Romano is proposing this application and assured him that there will be opposition. Mr. Romano replied to the question stating that this property was going to be taken from him through eminent domain and he did not want this to happen. The Borough made a deal with Mr. Romano to hold the property for three years. Larry Wickman, 30 Walnut Street, questioned the Traffic Study and when it was taken. That will be addressed when the Engineer testifies. Is this project going to be similar to what exists on the street? Mr. Romano stated no. ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 2 Carrie Amplo, 43 Ridgedale Avenue, wanted to know what the project is adding to the Historic value of Madison. Mr. Romano answered by explaining how the area was developed, when and why. He believes his project is adding to the continued growth of Madison. Catherine Thompson, 29 Walnut Street asked what the taxes would be on the units. The applicant did not know, but agreed to return with an estimate of property taxes at a later date. Mr. Ziegler, 181 Ridgedale Avenue is confused and wants to know if he is the owner or is it owned by an LLC. Larry Wickman, 30 Walnut Street, asked if all the townhouses are filled on the Ridgedale project. Mr. Romano stated all the townhouses are filled. He believes this is a very big proposal for a small piece of property. Dr. Deborah Hess, 31 Ridgedale Avenue, questioned the parking. Mr.Coviello, clarified for the Board that a homeowner association agreement will impose a limitation of two vehicles per unit. Dennis Castonan, 29 Walnut Street, questioned the adequacy of parking issues Nancy Dougherty, NJ Licensed Architect was sworn in and was accepted as a qualified professional. Mr. Coviello began by questioning Ms. Dougherty regarding the manner in which she prepared the plans for this application. She began by utilizing Exhibit A – 2 to describe the buildings that are being proposed. The units are all accessed by the parking lot side and a stairway takes you up to the first floor. The lower level houses a mechanical room and washer/dryer and a garage. The first level houses a kitchen and living room. On the second level, there are two bedrooms in the front, one bathroom with tub, sink and toilet. The exterior will be constructed of hardi plank. Ms. Dougherty will obtain the information regarding the size of the cars that were utilized in the plan. Mr. Santoro is also interested in storage for the proposed units and questioned the adequacy of storage space, as well as the adequacy of space within the garage for two vehicles. Mr. Romano answered several questions that were asked by Board members. The washer/dryer is on the lower level near the mechanical room. The porches are covered and a bike can be housed on the porch. The kitchen seems very skimpy as stated by Ms. Kaar. She was concerned by the size of the unit and whether occupants would want to stay in the unit. A – 5 Colored version of A – 4 Architectural Ms. Dougherty continued that when reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission, it was agreed that this design was in keeping with the area. A lot of attention was paid to the details of the design and constructed of quality products. The height of the building was met at 35 feet. There are variations in what the view is from the street. This was done upon the recommendation of the HPC. The back of the building is 91 feet and the front building is 70 feet. . Mr. Santoro questioned whether the rear façade of the building located to the rear should be staggered per ordinance. The Board reserved the option to make this a condition. A – 6 A – 5 Architectural, diagrammatically aerial view of the area ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 3 A – 7 Aerial photo showing intersection of Walnut and Ridgedale Section 32.1 R-5 Zone, for Townhouse Use was quoted by Gary Hall to the applicant and his attorney and the public. A – 8 Rendering without tree A – 9 Rendering with tree Both renderings show what the view would be from Walnut Street, that being the side of the building with an entrance and porch over the entrance and the garage doors. Fairly extensive landscaping is also shown. A – 9 is the same rendering, however, a tree has been added near the driveway to the garages. A 10 minute break was taken at 9:28 and the Board returned at 9:39. Ms. Dougherty began by discussing minor details that she had not discussed before the break and She read and excerpt from the letter of September 10th , 2015 by the Historic Preservation (HPC) in which they provided favorable feedback with respect to design. The public was given the opportunity to ask questions of the Architect as follows: Lisa Sapio, 69 Ridgedale Avenue asked what the HPC recommended for the design. Ms. Dougherty stated they recommended two structures, the rear building taking on the design of a barn and scaling the size of windows presented. Larry Wickman, 30 Walnut, asked how many windows are in the rear of the units. Ms. Dougherty stated there are 20 windows on the rear of the buildings. Jane Reynolds, 119 Greenwood Avenue, asked how many doors exist. Ms. Dougherty stated there are two doors for each unit. Jane Reynolds, 119 Greenwood Avenue questioned the issue of the property owners association for each unit. A question was posed if an owner were to be permitted to rent their unit? Carrie Amplo, 43 Ridgedale Avenue, questioned the low cost housing and how many units will there be in this project. Two units will comply with Borough ordinances in accordance to the May 2015 Ordinance.. Mr. Romano plans to retain two units; one for him and his wife and the other for his children. The next witness was Andrew Clarke, Engineer who has been qualified as a professional. Mr. Clarke utilized Exhibit A – 1. Mr. Russo asked Mr. Clarke if he agreed upon all the information in his memo. Mr. Clarke replied “yes”. He continued by describing the topography on the site. There is a drop off on the Civic Center side of the property. He continued by giving the footage differences due to the topography. There are some trees on site; however, they are located near the Civic Center property area. The Site Plan itself was described, ie: setback requirements and driveways. The westerly end of the site contains a small visitor parking area, with 4 spaces. Garbage and recycling area will also be ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 4 located in this area where it will be maintained. The applicant will design a gated trash and recycling structure that is consistent with the aesthetics and building materials of the townhomes. The rear of the property is 160 feet to the building and the parking area is 110 feet from the building. No other projects will be proposed in that area, and if so, further variance relief would be needed from the Board. The Walnut drive out is proposed for 16 feet. Mr. Russo questioned the first floor elevations of the proposed buildings. In the rear of the lot, some landscaping is being proposed after a cleanup of what presently exists. Mr. Romano added that the area in the rear was never maintained. His intention is to save the large tree that exists and the area will be maintained for individuals to be able to sit and enjoy. The applicant agreed to rehabilitate the rear of the lot to include removing all remnant imperious coverage, along with waste materials and refuse blighting the rear of the lot. Mr. Russo asked Mr. Clarke to respond to a specific item from his #2 memo regarding pedestrian circulation. Mr. Clarke continued to address this concern of pedestrian issue. He stated, in his opinion, the drive aisle would not cause any safety issues. Mr. Russo and Mr. Santoro suggested a safe area to walk for the pedestrians. Mr. Clarke stated that the applicant is not opposed to planning a safe area for pedestrians. Mr. Romano did interject and explain specific times for deliveries and mail delivery, so there would not be too much traffic and confusion at one given time. Mr. Clarke discussed Sheet 4, Drainage. All roof leaders from both buildings will be directed into drywells. Three driveway inlets will catch water and also bring it into the rear drywell. Mr. Clarke suggested the impervious concrete as an alternative to working with water management. Mr. Santoro and the Board agreed this would be a good way to manage the water on the site. A discussion took place as to the numbers that are involved in the impervious concrete product. Mr. Russo will render a determination of an appropriate offset of pervious coverage based on the final design. Mr. Santoro suggested the applicant prepare a redesign to include aesthetic treatment near the driveway apron as well as color of the concrete. The Lighting and Landscaping Plan is next and Mr. Clarke stated the lights are mounted on the building. The front building will have 4 and the rear building will have 5. A light will be in the guest parking area. The lighting is LED and has frosted glass. The lights will all be connected to a timer. Mr. Clarke stated that he does not believe the light from the owner’s windows will affect neighboring homes. There is no lighting in the rear of the building. The applicant agreed to consult with the Board’s engineering consultant on an appropriate lighting solution to include possible use of timers, down-lighting and safety considerations. The Landscaping Plan contains considerable landscaping between the buildings consisting of evergreens, shade trees, Maple tree, ground plantings and shrubs in the front of the buildings. There will be a series of cherry trees along the drive aisle. A small berm was suggested at the front of the guest parking area to provide additional screening from headlights. An irrigation system will be installed to maintain the plantings. Mr. Santoro requested additional buffering at the left front of the property to shield neighboring homes from headlights as exiting cars proceed towards Walnut Street. Mrs. DeRosa requested that additional buffering be placed in the rear of the property and the front of the guest parking area to provide additional screening from headlights ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 5 Catherine Thompson, 29 Walnut Street, concerned with children’s safety in the rear garage and driveway areas. The Board and applicant agreed to carry the application to the next regular meeting on January 14th solely for the purpose of scheduling further action on the application. 8. OLD BUSINESS: None 9. OTHER BUSINESS: None 10. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:18. Respectfully submitted, Lorraine Sola Recording Secretary ZBA Special Meeting 1-11-16 Page 6