Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MARCH 18, 2024 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:03p.m. 1 City Hall Plaza Rahway, NJ 07065 Adequate notice of this meeting, as required by the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act, also known as the Sunshine Law, has been provided by an Annual Notice sent to the City’s official newspaper The Home New Tribune on January 11th, 2024 and posted on the bulletin board of the Municipal Complex, posted on the City website, and filed with the Clerk of the City. ______________________________________________________________________________ FLAG SALUTE The Board will then salute the flag. ______________________________________________________________________________ ROLL CALL On a call of the roll, the following Board Members and Officials should be present: BOARD Ms. Joann Gemenden, Commissioner Mr. Adrian Zapotocky, Commissioner Mr. William Tomkiewicz, Commissioner Mr. Richard Zdan, Commissioner Mr. Timothy Antisz, Commissioner Ms. Robert Parson, 1st Alternate Commissioner Ms. Courtney Anderson-Harvey, 2nd Alternate Commissioner Mr. Roy L. Smith, 3rd Alternate Commissioner Ms. Vanessa Carrillo, 4th Alternate Commissioner Mr. James E. Pellettiere, Commissioner Vice Chairman Mr. William Hering, Commissioner Chairman Mr. Malcolm Thorpe, Esq, Board Attorney Mr. Peter Bondar, Board Engineer Mr. Kevin O’Brien, Board Planner Mr. Steven Decker, Board Secretary Absent from this meeting was Commissioner Pellettiere with an excused absence. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING March 18, 2024 PAGE TWO REGULAR MEETING: Chairman Hering opened the meeting with the salute to the flag and placing the Open Public Meeting Act Notice and reading of the agenda into the record. Board Engineering Peter Bondar and Board Planner Kevin O’Brien were sworn in. Fernando Zumba 618 Hamilton Street Application #4/23 Block 169 Lot 10 Applicant seeking Bulk “C” Variances Attorney Carmine Liotta introduced 618 Hamilton Street to the board. A Planning exhibit from Dougherty Planning was distributed to the board. Board Planner Kevin O’Brien asked if the paper copy was submitted previous to the meeting. Digital copies were submitted 10 days in advance, but paper copies were not submitted prior to the meeting. Attorney Thorpe asked if it is just a zoning map and photos of the neighboring properties. Commissioner Zdan stated the exhibit does not show rear yard setbacks on it. Commissioner Zapotocky asked what the purpose of handout was. Attorney Liotta believes this exhibit makes it easier for the board to get a visual of the property and neighborhood. Nestor Marulanda was sworn in to discuss the photos that were taken in the neighborhoods and the setback distances that were provided. Commissioner Zdan asked how the measurements were acquired. Mr. Marulanda used the city Sanborn maps to do the measurements. Board Engineer Bondar stated these are not property surveys so the measurements cannot be relied upon. Attorney Thorpe asked if Mr. Darden oversaw this project. Mr. Marulanda answered no. The meeting moved on without using this exhibit due to questions regarding accuracy. Mr. Robert Darden of PO Box 5666 Somerset, NJ was sworn in. Mr. Darden is a licensed architect in New Jersey since 2008. Mr. Darden informed the board of other boards he has appeared before and was accepted as an expert. It was explained that this application is for a single family, 2.5 story house at the corner of Fernote street and Hamilton Street. It will be a wood framed 3 bedroom 2 bathroom house. There is also a basement and attic space. The applicant is asking for setback variances. The front yard setback from Hamilton St. is proposed 14.3 ft. where 20 ft. are required and a proposed 19 ft. setback from Fernote Street where 20 ft. are required. They are also asking for a variance for rear yard set back on Fernote Street where 6 ft. are proposed and 25 ft. are required. The property will be reusing the existing curb cut on Fernote Street for the driveway. Mr. Darden discussed sheet A-1. The proposed cellar foundation wall will come 3 ft out of the ground and 5 ft will be dug into the ground. This is designated as a cellar. The 1st floor consists of a kitchen, living room, dining room and bathroom. Sheet A-2 is the second floor plan. The second floor will have 3 bedrooms, 1 full bath, and stairs to the attic area. Commissioner Zdan asked about the height of the attic walls being 5 ft. Mr. Darden explained that the roof slopes down to 5 ft. walls. Sheet A-3 showed the proposed elevations. Sheet A-4 showed colorized renderings of the elevations. The colors on the renderings are not the final colors of the house. The color of the new siding can be changed if the board has a suggested color and the applicant will accommodate. Attorney Liotta asked Mr. Darden about the original drawings with 2 dormers in the attic. Mr. Darden stated these have been eliminated. The change of the pitch of the roof and elimination of the dormers has decreased the useable attic space. Commissioner Zapotocky asked about sheet A-2 and why none of the bedrooms have closets. Mr. Darden stated that he believes it is an error in the drawing. It will change the size of the bedrooms when these closets are added, but Mr. Darden stated the bedrooms will be the legal required size and will have closets. Commissioner Zdan asked about the door leading to the attic. Is this located in the master bedroom? This is correct, the door and stairs leading to the attic will be in the master bedroom. Mr. Zdan asked if this is a standard design. Mr. Darden stated this could be used as storage space by the homeowners. Commissioner Zapotocky asked to refer to sheet A-1 and the drawing of the basement. Mr. Zapotocky believes the basement will have 5 or 6 windows. He stated there are two windows labeled 36x20, but on the drawing one looked much bigger than the other. Mr. Darden explained that the bigger area is actually two 36x20 windows right next to each other. The reason for this is to bring more light into the basement. Commissioner Parson asked why the gas meter is in the basement as opposed to outside the house. Mr. Darden stated that this can be changed and the gas meter will be moved to the outside of the house. Joseph Hogan of MAP Engineering 170 Kinnelon Rd. Kinnelon 07405 suite 36 was sworn in. Mr. Hogan is a licensed engineer at Map Engineering. He has previously testified before Kinnelon, Franklin Lakes and other boards. Mr. Hogan was accepted as an expert. Mr. Hogan explained that all roof leaders will be directed to 3 storm water chambers on the north side of the property. A soil test was done on the property to determine the appropriate stormwater management system. The system was designed to accommodate a 2 inch rain storm. The driveway will be composed of permeable pavers. This will minimize runoff from the driveway. The proposed building coverage of the lot would be 22.18% where 35% is permitted. Attorney Liotta asked about a proposed patio. Mr. Hogan stated this has been removed to be compatible with the architectural plans. Commissioner Zdan asked about the total impervious coverage for the lot. The impervious coverage will be 47.11% percent where maximum allowed is 60%. The pavers are considered fully pervious for the calculations. Commissioner Gemenden asked why they are proposing 14.3 ft from Hamilton. Planner O’Brien explained because this is a corner lot it has 2 front yards and 2 rear yards. Commissioner Gemenden asked if the house has been moved on the property since the last time it was presented. Mr. Hogan stated the house has been shifted. It has been shifted toward 2 ft towards Fernote Street, and now a 6ft. variance is being asked for. Commissioner Gemenden asked if there is the ability to move the house over 2 more feet to have an 8ft setback on the rear and 17ft front yard from Fernote Street. Mr. Darden was recalled to testify to the house placement. Mr. Liotta asked what could be built if the setbacks were adhered to. Mr. Darden stated the lot would be unbuildable based on the zoning set backs. Mr. Darden stated that it would be feasible to move the house toward Fernote Street, but it would add to the variance being asked sought for front yard setback. Commissioner Zdan asked if it is possible to build the house with an angular wall instead of a rectangle. Mr. Darden showed that the house is designed in this way to angle with Fernote Street. Commissioner Zdan asked why a front yard setback on Hamilton is being sought. Could the house be pushed back so the variance is not required for the front yard from Hamilton. The rear yard has a 41.2 ft setback. Mr. Darden answered they were trying to maintain the same setback as the pervious house had in the rear yard. They also wanted to maintain the driveway and parking area in the back. However, the proposed house could be moved back on the property further from Hamilton Street. Commissioner Zdan asked why such a large parking court is proposed for a single family home. Mr. Darden explained that this is to allow for cars to turn around in the driveway space so cars would not have to back out onto Fernote street. It is possible to adjust the parking area to make it smaller. Commissioner Parson asked if it is possible to make a 12 ft rear yard setback and have a smaller front yard setback off Fernote. They were trying to keep the front yard setback off Fernote Street to match other houses setback on the street. Commissioner Gemenden asked if the house was centered on the property, what would the setbacks be. Mr. Darden stated he would have to recalculate to come up with this, but it could be done. Alexander McClean was sworn in as a liscensed planner. Mr. McClean has testified Clifton, Toms River and Newark and was accepted as an expert. Mr. McClean stated that the lot is 5171 square feet. The zoning requirement for minimum lot size is 5000 square feet. Exhibit 1 was distributed which contained maps and aerial photos of the area. Board Planner O’Brien stated that everything submitted should have been provided 10 days prior to the meeting. Commissioner Zdan is concerned that Mr. McClean is not affiliated with the firm that created the documents and his name is not on the document. Commissioner Parson shared this concern. Mr. McClean proceeded with testimony without the exhibit. He explained that the proposed site is in the R2 medium density district. The applicant demolished the preexisting home and proposes to construct a 2.5 floor home. This use is permitted in the zone. The applicant is asking for variance for minimum lot depth and width. This is a highly irregularly shaped lot, and creates a hardship. The lot size decreases as it moves down Fernote Street. Mr. McClean believes the application would advance the Master Plan by ensuring new development on vacant and underutilized land, and fits with the neighborhood. Positive criteria A promotes public health safety and general welfare. This house fits most requirements for zone and all variances are based on the unique dimensions of the site. The proposed project would be built for a single family and meets criteria B for adequate light, air and open space as well as population density. The proposal is below the impervious and building coverage maximums, and it can beautify the frontages on both streets. This also meets criteria C a single family house meets the appropriate population density and is consistent with use of the property. Criteria E the proposed building will create a desirable visual environment. This is a corner lot, so this is an endcap property that has a tasteful design. And criteria M for an efficient use of land to construct a modern home and far from intersection. Mr. McClean believes the house can be constructed without detriment to the public good. He does not believe there is any negative impact and the variance can be granted without detriment. Board Planner O’Brien’s report was concerned about how it fits with the neighborhood. Mr. McClean explained that the application is proposing downward facing light, and many of the setbacks are consistent with other properties in the area. This is a highly irregular block. The width of the property goes from 69.4 ft to 34.07 which is a reduction of 38.38 ft reduction that creates a hardship. The neighboring properties do not have the same hardship as this lot. Mr. McClean believes the house meets the criteria for the variances to be granted. Commissioner Parson asked about the impervious coverage in the driveway area. 60% lot coverage is maximum is 44.21 is proposed. Commissioner Tomkiewicz asked about the size of the old structure compared to the new structure. How far from the property line on Hamilton street to existing structure was, and from Fernote Street. Board Planner O’Brien stated the original setback between the existing home and 610 Hamilton was 14.7 ft. since the home was 12.7 ft from the property line and now 6 ft is proposed. The existing was 13.3 ft from Fernote where 19 ft is now proposed. Commissioner Zdan wants to know how this is consistent with master plan. The impervious and building coverage are both being increased with the new building. Just because they are below the maximum coverage does not mean they are minimizing impervious and building coverage on the lot as the master plan states. Mr. McClean said the goal was to stay below the limits, and they have made an effort to mitigate stormwater runoff. Commissioner Zdan asked about the historic preservation element of the city master plan. The preservation element is Article 10. Mr. Zdan sited section 10.3 of master plan document which refers to the area which 618 Hamilton Street is located. “While many of the homes have undergone historically inappropriate renovations or alterations the district still retains some semblance of the integrity and coherence of a mid-nineteenth century city with respect to the scale, pattern and architectural detail of the vernacular housing.” Commissioner Zdan thinks this house is much larger than the existing house, and is inconsistent with the scale of a house in the neighborhood and what the master plan has stated. Commissioner Zdan believes a proposal of smaller scale could reduce the variances being requested. Mr. McClean stated this proposed house does move from the historic part of the master plan, but they are trying to create a more modern home with more space. Commissioner Parson asked why the Planner is not associated with Dougherty Planning and Development LLC . Mr. McClean stated he was present with Mr. Dougherty when the site was visited. Mr. Darden was recalled to testify. Attorney Liotta asked about this house being 3000 sq. ft. as opposed to previous at 2069 sq. ft. Mr. Darden believes the difficulty in shrinking the house to that size would be bedroom size. The owner wants to provide as much bedroom space as possible. They wanted a spacious kitchen, living room, and dining room. They are trying to build a larger more modern house that matches the characteristics of the neighborhood. They are providing a front porch, and also using siding to try to match the area. The previous home would have smaller spaces for hallways, stair sizes and doors. Modern day codes for emergency egress have larger doors, stairs etc. Commissioner Zdan is still concerned with the size of the structure. The proposed is still very large for this lot size. Attorney Liotta asked if the proposed house and size of the rooms is consistent with modern day standards. Mr. Darden believes this is and the design fits the owners needs. Mr. Darden addressed the Planner’s letter item 6 about the attic size. The 7.9 ft shown on the plan is the distance from the wall, not the height. Sheet A3 the front elevation shows the 5 ft dimension of the sidewall. This is the height in the attic. The Planner’s letter also asked about x shape in air space in the attic area and if these were additional walls. There will not be walls in the area, the x was just used to designate air space. A2 shows a highlighted area in the attic with a solid line. The sidewalls that enclose it are at 5ft. The ceiling rises from the 5ft up to the 8 ft at the center of the attic space. Board Planner O’Brien stated that some attic area is 6ft. tall. Mr. Darden said he can’t calculate the exact the size of the attic with 6 ft. tall ceilings at this point. Commissioner Gemenden asked the square footage of the house. The total is 3,122 square feet. Commissioner Gemenden asked how much bigger this house is than other homes in the area. Mr. Darden stated he has not done an analysis of this area. Board Engineer Bondar asked about the driveway and curbcut. Would they replace the driveway apron? Yes they would replace it in time. Mr. Bondar asked about the proposed fencing. Either a picket or corral type fence, it would not be a chain-link fence. It would be a low fence on the front yard. It is currently a chain link fence, but they are replacing it. Mr. Bondar asked how many parking spaces are required, and how many proposed. Mr. Darden stated he believes a minimum of 2 spaces would be required. There are 2 proposed. Mr. Bondar believes that more than 2 spaces are in the driveway. Mr. Darden stated if they shift the house, this would change the amount of cars in the driveway. Engineer Bondar asked for a maintenance plan of the drywell and permeable pavers. The applicant will comply. The board professionals stated their reports have been addressed. The meeting was opened to the public. Thomas Moulton, son of neighbor from 610 Hamilton was sworn in. Mr. Moulton stated that commercial vehicles have been parked on the site and are registered to 618 Hamilton Street. Fernando Zumba, the owner of the property was sworn in. Mr. Zumba stated that he is a contractor. Mr. Zumba said he will not use the house for a business. Mr. Moulton believes the hardship was created because the previous building at the site was knocked down. Mr. Moulton is concerned about the house going over the footprint Attorney Liotta asked about the parking of the vehicles at the site, and if Mr. Moulton has ever called the police about this. Mr. Moulton stated that he has not. Planner O’Brien asked if the vehicles are commercially plated. The vehicles are commercially plated. Joseph Moulton, of 610 Hamilton was sworn in. He is concerned about how close the building is to his property. He is concerned about fire safety with how close the structures are. If the house was built where the previous one was located on the property it would negate this concern. Public Portion was closed. Commissoner Zdan asked in regards to the commercial vehicles, where Mr. Zumba will park his commercial vehicles if he can not park them at this property. Eric Zumba was sworn in. He is the applicant’s son. Mr. Zumba stated that he will look for a spot that he can park the commercial trucks. He would look for a place to pay to park. Commissioner Zdan explained that commercial materials can not be stored on an R2 site. Mr. Zumba stated that the supplies stored at the site are for the house he intends to build on the property. Commissioner Tomkiewicz asked why the existing structure was demolished. Mr. Zumba stated the basement foundation was loose and leaking and they were concerned about the structure. Commissioner Parson asked if the owner would be ok with the house being shifted to a different area on the lot. Mr. Zumba said he does not care as long as he can build a house. Attorney Liotta stated they started with a lot that has many restrictions. As a summation Attorney Liotta said that this is another 3 bedroom house, and that in 2024 houses have larger rooms than in the 1800s and early 1900s. Attorney Liotta stated that neighboring houses have setbacks as small as 2 to 3 ft. from the property line. He believes this house will fit with the area. Board Planner O’Brien reminded the board of the burden of proof. C1 variance based on a hardship, such as size shape of lot, topographical hardships of the lot. A C2 is a flexible variance that states benefits outweighs detriments and fits area better than current. Mr. O’Brien stated the applicant has used both for their testimony. Commissioner Gemenden asked if the original home was non conforming. Mr. O’Brien answered yes it was. Commissioner Zdan made a motion to deny the application based on insufficient justification for variances requested, and believes the negatives outweigh the positives. Does not comply with some of master plan. Commissioner Zapotocky seconded the motion. Commissioner Gemenden commented that based on the existing home being non conforming, building a smaller home will not negate the need for a C variance. Commissioner Gemenden does not have an issue with the size of the home except for attic space. Commissioner Parson asked if there is a way to reconfigure where the building will sit on the property. Chairman Hering stated a motion and second has already been made. Board Planner O’Brien explained that if the application is denied and the applicant comes back with another application it must be substantially different from the original application. The applicant could also ask to go back and change the plans. Attorney Thrope asked if the applicant is open to going back and possibly reconfigure the location or size of the house for the application. Attorney Liotta stated that the applicant had already moved the house and wants to do what is needed to build the house. Commissioner Zdan withdrew his motion to deny to application. Commissioner Zapotocky withdrew his second. Attorney Thorpe asked when the applicant may be ready to present before the board again with a new plan. Chairman Hering reminded the applicant that all documents need to be presented 10 days prior to the meeting or it will not be considered. Board Engineer Peter Bondar and Planner Kevin O’Brien stated they would confer with the applicant regarding any questions they may have. A motion was made to continue the application carried with notice to the June 17th board meeting. All printed and digital plans need to be submitted by Friday June 7th. Chairman Hering thanked the public for coming out to the meeting. The meeting was opened to the public for comment. Public meeting closed. Motion: Commissioner Zdan Second: Commissioner Zapotocky Yes: Commissioners Zdan, Gemenden, Tomkiewicz, Zapotocky, Antisz, Parson, Smith, Anderson-Harvey, Carrillo, and Chairman Hering No: none Abstain: none Absent: Commissioner Pellettiere Commissioner Gemenden reiterated some of the issues the board would like to see addressed: having the house more centrally located with more space from the neighbor, replacing the apron and chain link fence, and the parking changed to be more conforming with the rest of the neighborhood. MINUTES: Any necessary changes to the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting minutes of February 26, 2024 shall be made and approved by action of the Commissioners. Motion: Commissioner Zdan Second: Commissioner Antisz Yes: Commissioners Zdan, Gemenden, Antisz, Parson, Smith, Carillo and Chairman Hering No: none Abstain: Commissioner Tomkiewicz, Zapotocky, and Anderson-Harvey Absent: Commissioner Pellettiere Minutes Approved A resolution honoring Commissioner Heim for his service to the Zoning Board was read for the board. The board members also receive a copy of this resolution. An update of the Planning Board was given. A motion was made to adjourn the meeting: Motion: Commissioner Parson Second: Commissioner Smith Yes: Commissioners Zdan, Gemenden, Tomkiewicz, Zapotocky, Antisz, Parson, Smith, Anderson-Harvey, Carrillo, and Chairman Hering No: none Abstain: none Absent: Commissioner Pellettiere ADJOURN: There being no further business; the meeting was adjourned at 9:40pm.