CITY OF BURLINGTON
LAND USE BOARD MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 24, 2013
The City of Burlington Land Use Board held their regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 in the City Hall Complex, 525 High Street, Burlington, New Jersey.
Members present: Chairwoman Claudine Conaway, Vice Chairman Samuel Richter, David Ballard, Victor Carnivale, Councilwoman Helen Hatala, Michael Johnson, Charles Johnston and Raymond Schobert (8). Absent: Officer Matthew Mercuri and David Tishler (2).
Also present: Board Solicitor M. Lou Garty, Planner Robert Perry of Remington & Vernick, Board Engineer Wendell Bibbs of Remington, Vernick & Arango and Board Secretary Diane Burns.
BOARD BUSINESS
Board was requested to discuss and act on a street vacation request from the City’s Governing Body. The property is a 5’ wide “L” shaped alley between Cunningham & McNeal Streets. Exact location reviewed. Chairwoman Conaway noted that in her experience with the Board this is the first application of this kind to be reviewed by the Board. Councilwoman Hatala explained it is before the Board because of the new master plan requirements and the new ordinances. Planner Perry stated the Board should only have concern if the vacation land locks any property. He noted it appears people have moved into this alley space already. He feels this request will not affect anything in a negative way. He feels the Governing Body is only interested in any objections. Dave Ballard noted the property is more like a swale then an alleyway. Councilwoman Hatala wondered if there could be prior action on this land. Engineer Bibbs entered the meeting. Public Comment: Samuella Cohen of 180 Riverbank stated the County has a book of lanes and alleyways. Public portion closed. There being no further discussion Board Member Ballard moved to report to the Governing Body that the Board has no objections to the vacation with the recommendation Land Use Board recommends that if the application is granted, such approval be conditioned upon the drawings, surveys or related plans being reviewed and approved by the City engineer so as to ensure that the new property line designations conform with applicable engineering standards, including the recommendation that the applicable County recording and land title records have been reviewed for any prior vacations, second from Mr. Schobert. Roll call vote. All in favor.
APPLICATIONS
Continuation:
Estate of Patricia R. Webb c/o Frank J. Volpe, Jr.
Application #664-13
307 Farner Avenue (Block 66, Lot 39)
6’ fencing project
Attorney Jeffrey Snow represented the application along with Applicant Frank J. Volpe, Jr. Board Solicitor Garty swore in Mr. Volpe of Riverside, NJ. Location of the 6’ fencing reviewed. Five photographs were available for review. Mr. Volpe explained the existing 3’ fencing along the rear will be removed; but, other existing fences will remain in place. When questioned, Mr. Volpe stated he is not aware of any other 6’ fences in the immediate neighborhood. Mr. Volpe explained the home has been for sale for many, many months and he hopes the proposed fence will help the situation as given the proximity to a neighboring property whose owner has two dogs. It was also mentioned the proposed fence would give privacy as the other property sits lower than his property. No public comment. Being no questions or comments Mr. Ballard moved for approval, second from Mr. Carnivale. Roll call vote. All in favor.
Doane Academy
Application #667-13
350 Riverbank (Block 3 & 5, Lots 1-2/5-6.01
Final site plan / variance for pre-existing conditional use for school – 2013 expansion
Attorney George Hulse represented the application along with the project’s professionals. Board Solicitor Garty swore in Project Engineer Gary Vecchio of Taylor Wiseman & Taylor and Architect John Martin. Attorney Hulse explained the Board approved the expansion in 2010; but, it was not built. The new addition will connect Odenheimer and Scarborough Halls and provide a new “river” face for the campus. The new building “Rowan Hall” will contain classroom(s), reception and lobby space. The primary difference is that the addition is set 82’ back from Riverbank creating a fore-court for the school and space for outdoor ceremonies. The new location for the similarly designed addition creates better connections between the
existing buildings and makes more sense in terms of the overall campus plan. The proposed addition would refer back to the original house on the campus, which burned down a number of years ago. The applicant received HPC approval for the redesign. Two exhibits, the 2010 version and the 2013 plan, were marked and made part of the record. Mr. Vecchio stated the existing variance for the Chapel is still needed. The height of the buildings was reviewed with the revised height of 45’ (instead of 42’) sought for a bulk variance. Professionals noted the Scarborough Building is actually higher than the other building. Waivers approved in 2010 briefly reviewed. The property consists of 12+ acres and this project will only disturb one (1) acre. The existing drive has been revised as well as the sidewalks because of the shift of the building, resulting in three (3) trees will be removed. Engineer Vecchio stated the school will comply with the review letter from the Board Engineer dated April 19, 2013.
Mr. Martin reviewed the architectural design and how it will work well with the school. The previously approved elevation along with the new elevation available for review. Engineer Bibbs stated the professionals satisfactorily answered the comments in the review letter. Mr. Bibbs asked for clarification of the building height as to where it was measured from. Professionals stated it was measured from the center line of the highest sloping roof. Mr. Bibbs asked if the trees will be replaced. Attorney Hulse recommended the tree issue be put on hold at this time until after construction takes place. He stated the school takes pride in their campus and would deal with location of the trees if they are needed after construction. Board members agreed to let the school deal with the tree issue after construction. Mr. Ballard stated the setback is a much better plan and agrees the school takes great pride in their school. No one appeared to speak during public comment. Mr. Ballard asked how long it will take to get through DEP review. Engineer Vecchio stated he hopes three (3) months. Solicitor Garty stated the HPC will review the final architectural plans as they become more detailed to gain final approval for certain materials and details. Applicant stated they are aware of that recommendation. Solicitor Garty summed the application; height variance to 45’, conditional use for the school; existing front yard setback not needed except for the existing Chapel; three (3) waivers: lighting, buffers and EIS; three (3) trees will be left to the applicant’s discretion after construction; ADA requirements; HPC review of final architectural plans. Being no further discussion Councilwoman Hatala moved to approve the application as submitted and discussed, second from David Ballard. Roll call vote. All in favor.
Donald J. McMenamin
Application #668-13
204 E. Union Street (Block 132, Lot 2)
Certification of Valid Nonconforming Use Status and/or Use Variance for four (4) existing apartment units
Applicant Donald McMenamin of 22 W. Union Street, Burlington, sworn in by Solicitor Garty. Mr. McMenamin stated he purchased the home in 1977 which consisted of four (4) apartment units. He stated his submitted documentation takes the property as a rental back 68 years. He stated there have been seven (7) owners since 1945 and he is the only one still alive. Solicitor Garty stated he needs to go back to 1964 and show consistent use of the property as a four unit property. Telephone records from 1950’s were produced by the Applicant were reviewed and showed only 2 telephone accounts at that time. Per evidence submitted, Mr. McMenamin commented not everyone in the 1950’s had phones. Mr. McMenamin stated the last owner had a steel fire escape installed in the 1960’s from the third floor to the ground level. Mr. McMenamin explained he himself has gone through seven (7) five (5) year State inspections for multi-family units and the previous owner went through one (1) state inspection so that goes back to the 1970’s. Mr. McMenamin referred to a notarized statement in the package from Merril Mirsky who remembers while growing up tenants coming and going from the building. Board Member Ballard questioned if Mr. Mirsky is available to appear to give testimony. Mr. McMenamin stated hopefully. Mr. McMenamin stated there are four (4) electrical services in the building. He stated he contacted PSE&G and they told him they only keep records locally for two (2) years. Mr. Ballard recommended the application be continued to give the applicant additional time to contact Mr. Mirsky. Solicitor Garty suggested the applicant contact Newark PSE&G who have cooperated with applicants in the past. Councilwoman Hatala stated she knows an elderly relative of a prior 1970’s owner who resides in Virginia. Mr. McMenamin stated he will gladly call Miss Hatala for that contact information. Solicitor Garty stated it is better for the Board if individuals appear in person before them. Mr. McMenamin asked for a continuation to the next month’s meeting date. Mr. Ballard moved to grant the continuation, second from Mr. Johnson. Roll call vote. Not Voting: Councilwoman Hatala (1). Mr. McMenamin thanked the members as he left the meeting.
The Chairwoman opened the matter to public comment on the application: Howard Rice of 209 E. Union Street stated he appeared to get more information on the application. John Martisofski of 218 E. Union Street stated he will return in May. Ed Wargo of 207 E. Union Street stated he is against apartments. Mr. Vasquez of 205 E. Union Street questioned what is acceptable proof and noted he is not aware of four (4) families in the building. He concluded his comments by noting parking is always a problem in this area and stated he will be more observant as he has lived in his home for 11 years. Phil Reeves of 214 E. Union Street gave a brief history of his home and his neighbor’s home being converted into single-family homes which helped stabilize the neighborhood. Vice Chairman Richter and Solicitor Garty reviewed the differences of the proofs required between a Certificate of Valid Nonconforming Use and a use variance. Chairwoman Conaway stated the May scheduled meeting date is May 22, 2013.
Solicitor Garty called for an executive session regarding possible litigation. Chairwoman Conaway called for a motion. Mr. Ballard motioned to go into an executive session, second from Mr. Johnson. All in favor. When the members came out of executive session, Chairwoman Conaway called the meeting to order.
Continuation:
Dolores Robb
Application #666-13
302 Jones Avenue (Block 150, Lot 2)
Application for a Certificate of Pre-Existing Use or, in the Alternative, a Use Variance to permit two (2) units
Chairwoman Conaway asked to hear a motion to adjourn this matter to the May 22 agenda. Mr. Ballard made the motion to continue the matter to the May agenda, second from Mr. Johnson. Roll call vote. All in favor.
BOARD BUSINESS
Councilwoman Hatala moved to accept the minutes of the March 2013 meeting as submitted, second from Mr. Carnivale. All in favor.
PENDING RESOLUTION(S)
1). Rhonda Brown – 185 Glenwood Avenue (Block 103, Lot 16.06) – granted a variance to construct a deck. Mr. Ballard moved for approval, second from Mr. Carnivale. Roll call vote. Not Voting: Johnson and Schobert (2). All in favor.
There being no further discussion the meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:36 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
DIANE BURNS, Secretary to the Boards