ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Graham Petto. Mr. Petto read the notice of compliance with the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act and indicated that appropriate notice was forwarded to the officially designated newspaper of Montclair and posted in the Municipal Building. The schedule of meetings is also posted on the Township website.
ROLL CALL:
Mr. Petto called the roll. Present were Mr. Harrison, Mr. Fleischer, Mr. Moore, Mr. Church, Mr. McCullough, Mr. Simon, Ms. Harris, Mr. Caulfield, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Petto. Mr. Allen was excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
September 18, 2019
A motion to approve the minutes as amended was made and seconded. The minutes were approved unanimously with Mr. Fleischer and Mr. Moore abstaining.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution for App. 2648: 47 Mission Street. 47 Mission Street Trust. Bulk variance of required front and side yard setback and building coverage for additions to two-family dwelling in the R-2 Two Family Zone.
A motion was made to approve the resolution as amended by Mr. McCullough, seconded by Mr. Church. The resolution was approved unanimously with Mr. Fleischer and Mr. Moore abstaining.
Resolution for App. 2638: 73 South Fullerton Avenue. St. Luke’s Episcopal Church. Variance relief and site plan approval for installation of new entry door, pedestrian sidewalk and HVAC units in the R-1 One Family Zone.
A motion was made to approve the resolution as amended by Mr. Church, seconded by Mr. McCullough. The resolution was approved unanimously with Mr. Fleischer and Mr. Moore abstaining.
OLD BUSINESS – RESIDENTIAL
App. 2643: 10 Alexander Avenue. Bruce Bird. Bulk variance of the maximum permitted building width in the R-1 One Family Zone.
Mr. Petto announced that the applicant has requested that the application be carried to the November 13 meeting to allow for time to consider the Board’s comments. The Board agreed to carry the application and announced that the matter would be carried with no further notice.
OLD BUSINESS – NON-RESIDENTIAL
App. 2639: 360 Orange Road. DH Development, LLC. Use variance and site plan approval for construction of two new two-family dwellings on one lot in the R-1 One Family Zone.
Present for the application was David Owen, attorney for the applicant. Mr. Owen reviewed the previous testimony on the application for the Board. He noted that the applicant is seeking to construct two two-family dwellings on the lot with associated site improvements.
Mr. Owen reviewed the preceding testimony in the case. He noted the density of the existing development of the properties adjacent to the subject property, all of which are located in the same single-family zone district. Mr. Owen reviewed the history of development of these properties for the Board.
Mr. Owen reviewed the benefits of the site development and noted there is no impairment of the zone plan. He reviewed the options of rezoning the area or approving a variance, noting that variance relief allows for more control by the Board.
Final comments from the Board were then offered.
The Board discussed the application. Some members expressed support of the proposed number of units to be developed on the site and were generally supportive. Other members felt that the development of two principal structures on the site was not consistent with the requirements of the R-1 One-Family zone.
A motion was made by Mr. Church to approve the application as presented, except for the variance relief of the fence height.
The Board discussed conditions of any approval.
- The applicant is to eliminate parking space number 5 shown on the submitted site plan and replace the parking space with a landscaped area.
- One additional accessible parking space is to be provided on the site.
- The applicant is to comply with Township’s shade tree preservation ordinance.
- All newly planted on-site trees that may not survive within the first two years are to be replaced.
- A paved walkway between the two on-site buildings is to be provided and illuminated.
- The applicant is to comply with conditions 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 & 15 of the Board Engineer’s memo dated
- The variance sought by the applicant of the maximum permitted fence height to exceed 4.5 feet along the southern property line is denied.
- The applicant is to comply with Montclair Code 202-42.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Simon. The motion failed with Mr. Caulfield, Ms. Harris, Mr. Moore, Mr. McCullough and Mr. Harrison voting against and Mr. Simon and Mr. Church voting in favor.
A motion was made by Ms. Harris to approve the variance to allow four dwelling units on the property, subject to the conditions that had been discussed, and deny the variance to permit a second principal structure on the lot and deny the variance of the maximum permitted fence height along the southern property line.
The Board discussed the proposed motion and determined that it would also require the applicant to return to the Board for site plan approval.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Church. The motion was approved with Mr. Caulfield, Ms. Harris, Mr. Simon, Mr. Moore and Mr. Church voting in favor. Mr. McCullough and Mr. Harrison voted in opposition to the motion.
The Board announced that the applicant would return to the December 18, 2019 meeting of the Board for site plan approval.
App. 2644: 325 Claremont Avenue. Montclair Town Center, LLC. Amended site plan approval and variance relief for free-standing sign and plaque signs in the R-3 Garden Group Zone.
Mr. Harrison recused himself from the application and departed the meeting. Mr. Fleischer served as Chair for the application.
Present for the application was attorney for the applicant Alan Trembulak. Mr. Trembulak summarized the application to install a free-standing sign and plaque signs, one at the front door and one at the rear entry, at the property for the previously approved medical office use at the site.
Mr. Trembulak introduced Kevin Costello of Montclair Town Center, LLC. Mr. Costello introduced Exhibit A-1, a series of photos of signs like that proposed under the application. He noted that the proposed signs would be for tenants of the building.
Mr. Costello noted the comments provided by the Historic Preservation Commission on the application and stated that they would comply.
The Board asked about the material of the proposed signs. Mr. Costello reviewed the material for the plaque sign and the free-standing sign for the Board. The Board noted the size of the proposed plaque signs and asked if a smaller sign could be used on the front façade and whether this was an entrance. Mr. Costello stated that the entrance is at the rear only, and that the plaque sign directs pedestrians to enter at the rear. The Board questioned the utility of a sign at the front entry if there is no entry to the building at this location.
The Board asked how many tenants would be located within the building. Mr. Costello noted that four tenant spaces are available, and four sign areas are provided on the free-standing sign. The Board suggested removal of the proposed plaque sign and in lieu recommended the free-standing sign be increased slightly in size.
No questions nor comments from the public were offered.
Mr. Trembulak summarized the application for the Board.
The Board then discussed the application. The Board stated that, given the approved use, signage is needed for the building and noted that the residential zone district does not permit signage. Some members believed the front plaque sign could be reduced in size, while others felt the front plaque sign should be eliminated. The Board agreed that the rear plaque sign was necessary to direct entry from the rear entrance and parking area.
A motion was made by Ms. Harris to approve the rear plaque directory sign, seconded by Mr. Simon. The motion was approved unanimously.
A motion was made by Ms. Harris to approve the front plaque sign of four sq. ft. in size, seconded by Mr. McCullough. The motion failed with Mr. Church, Mr. Fleischer, Mr. Moore and Mr. Simon voting in opposition and Ms. Harris and Mr. Caulfield voting in favor.
A motion was made by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Church to approve the free-standing sign size of 6 feet by 4 feet 8 inches.
The Board discussed the proposed conditions of any approval.
- The freestanding sign area between the posts shall not exceed 6 feet in width and 4 feet 8 inches in height and shall include “Entry at Rear of Building” or similar language to be added at the bottom horizontal panel and the plan shall be revised accordingly.
- The building mounted plaque directory sign to be installed to the left of the rear entry door shall not exceed 36 inches in height and 24 inches in width and the plan shall be revised accordingly.
- The proposed building mounted plaque sign to be installed to the left of the front entry door shall be removed from the plan.
- The proposed building mounted plaque directory sign shall be installed into the mortar joints only on the Carriage House to protect the historic brick.
- The proposed building mounted plaque directory sign shall be set off the face of the building to allow air flow behind the sign and to protect the historic brick.
- The applicant shall be bound by all representations made including those on its behalf by its attorney and witnesses during the course of the public hearing.
- The applicant shall be responsible for all inspection fees required under Montclair Code Section 202-27 as well as escrow fees incurred in connection with review of this matter.
The motion was approved unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS - RESIDENTIAL
App. 2646: 11 Oxford Street. Mengjie Li. Bulk variance of number of stories for addition to two-family dwelling in the R-2 Two-Family Zone.
Mr. Harrison returned to the Board and served as Chair.
Present for the application was the applicants, Mengjie Li and Wentao Song and the architect for the applicant John Monchak.
Mr. Monchak reviewed the plans and the variance relief being sought in detail for the Board. He noted that the new addition would be located along the eastern façade of the dwelling and would project about 10 feet. He noted that the addition would create additional space for each of the existing dwelling units in the building.
Mr. Monchak introduced and reviewed Exhibit A-1, a diagram depicting the front yard setback of the adjacent dwellings on Oxford Street. He noted that the average front yard setback of the adjacent dwellings is about 15 feet 11 inches.
Mr. Monchak introduced and reviewed Exhibit A-2, a rendering of the proposed dwelling and a series of photos of the existing dwelling at the subject property.
The Board asked about the comments provided by the Historic Preservation Commission and whether the plans presented reflect any response to those comments. Mr. Monchak replied no, noting that the plans have not been revised. The Board expressed concern regarding the design of the third floor with the mansard roof.
The Board asked if the rear stair would be removed. Mr. Monchak replied yes and noted that the stairway would be moved within the building.
Mr. Monchak introduced and reviewed Exhibit A-3, a photo of the rear garage which is undergoing renovation.
The Board discussed the application and noted no concerns with the front and side yard setback variances as they align with the existing dwelling. The Board asked the applicant to consider a different approach to the third-floor addition that responds to the comments of the Historic Preservation Commission and return to the Board.
The applicant agreed to continue the application to the November 13, 2019 meeting of the Board. It was announced that the application would be carried with no further notice.
App. 2647: 48 Label Street. John Florek. Bulk variance for front, side and rear yard setback for additions to single-family dwelling in the R-2 Two-Family Zone.
Mr. Petto announced that the applicant had not completed the required publication notice for the application and that notice would be published for the November 13, 2019 meeting. It was announced that the application would be carried to the November 13 meeting.
NEW BUSINESS – NON-RESIDENTIAL
App. 2641: 117 Valley Road. 117 Valley Road, LLC. Use variance and site plan for three townhomes in the R-2 Two Family Zone.
Present for the application was the attorney for the applicant, Steven Azzolini. Mr. Azzolini introduced the application to construct three townhomes on the property. He noted that the subject property, a former rooming house, was burned in a fire and has been deemed a loss. He stated that the applicant proposes to remove the existing structure and improve the site with the three new townhouses and a parking area.
Mr. Azzolini then introduced Montclair Fire Official John Thomas. Mr. Thomas read a statement regarding the fire at the dwelling. He noted that the fire at the subject property has been deemed arson, and there is an outstanding warrant for a person of interest in the fire.
Mr. Azzolini then introduced engineer for the applicant, Mr. Robert Weissman. Mr. Weissman introduced Exhibit A-1, an existing conditions site plan of the property. He reviewed the existing and proposed site plan in detail for the Board.
Mr. Weissman then introduced Exhibit A-2, a copy of the submitted lighting plan for the application dated July 11, 2019 as well as the landscape plan. He reviewed the plans in detail for the Board.
Mr. Weissman noted that the side yard setback of the existing building on the property is 5.5 feet and that the proposed townhouse development will have a side yard setback of 27 feet. He also noted that the proposed townhouses will have a building coverage of 23%, where 25% is the permitted maximum.
The Board asked if any of the proposed parking would be in the front yard. Mr. Weissman replied no, noting the proposed building location. The Board asked if the proposed building would be parallel to Valley Road, to which Mr. Weissman replied yes. The Board noted the proposed storage shed and its non-compliant setback as proposed. Mr. Weissman stated that the applicant would comply with the required setback. The Board asked for clarification of compliance of the required rear yard setback. Mr. Weissman reviewed the rear yard.
The Board asked about trash collection from the site. Mr. Weissman stated that residential collection would occur at the curbside, and residents would bring the cans to the curb. The Board expressed concerns about the proposed entry door and walkway from Walnut Street, which enters in to a garage of one of the townhouses.
Mr. Azzolini then introduced Perry Chevestick, architect for the applicant. During Mr. Chevestick’s review of the plans, the Board noted inconsistencies with the submitted plan sets, which appeared to be incorrectly copied. Mr. Chevestick stated that he would submit new copies for the next Board hearing.
The Board noted the comments from the Historic Preservation Commission and expressed concerns regarding the detailing and finishes of the northern and southern facades of the proposed townhouses.
The Board also noted that the applicant should explain the proposal for townhouses rather than a mulit-family dwelling.
Mr. Azzolini requested that the application be continued to the November 13 meeting of the Board and noted that corrected architectural plans would be submitted for November 13. The Board agreed and announced that the application would be carried with no further notice.
App. 2662: 27 Orange Road. 27 Orange Road, LLC. Appeal administrative decision of abandoned and deteriorated sign.
Mr. Petto announced that the applicant has requested to carry this matter to the December 18, 2019 meeting of the Board.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion to adjourn was offered by Mr. Church, seconded by Mr. Caulfield. The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 pm.