Officials OK several variances.
By Marianne Hooker
At its April 13 meeting, the Pennington Planning Board approved a variance in the maximum impervious surface coverage ratio for a residential property on East Delaware Avenue. The variance will allow the applicants to add on to an existing deck.
The board also granted front and side yard setback variances for a residential property on South Main Street. The applicant was seeking permission to demolish a small outbuilding, add on to the rear of the house, and add a second story to an existing detached garage. This application was approved only in part; further testimony on the building plans will be presented at next month’s meeting.
Deck on East Delaware Peter McDonough, who lives at 136 E. Delaware at the corner of Fitzcharles in the R-100 zone, was requesting a variance in the impervious surface coverage ratio. Under terms of the zoning ordinance, no more than 25 percent of the lot can be covered with buildings or driveways in this zone. The applicant was proposing an impervious surface coverage ratio of 27.4 percent.
Mr. McDonough said previous owners had built an addition to the house consisting of a family room, deck, and garage. The addition took away part of the driveway, which meant there was no longer room on the lot for vehicles to turn around. To correct this situation, Mr. McDonough reconfigured the driveway so vehicles can enter from Fitzcharles. A part of the original driveway was removed when they built the new access.
Mr. McDonough said that when the addition was put on, the previous owners did not extend the deck all the way around it. Doors were put in that were intended to lead out to a deck; however, at present they have nothing to connect to. To remedy this situation, he was proposing to extend the deck. With the change in the driveway and the proposed deck, the amount of impervious surface coverage on the lot would exceed the maximum permitted by the zoning ordinance. Mr. McDonough said he may someday want to convert a part of the deck to a screened porch.
No members of the public made any comments on the application. Cindy Coppola, the borough’s planning consultant, raised a few points concerning landscaping. Mr. McDonough agreed to have a one-way sign installed on the new driveway, as requested by the borough engineer. The board voted 5 to 2 to approve the variance in the surface coverage ratio, with Jeanne Donlon and James Reilly casting dissenting votes.
Additions and renovations on South Main Mark O’Dea, of 124 S. Main St. (house is a former school building that dates back to around 1820), was proposing to restore and expand the building and install architecturally correct windows. The proposed addition in back of the building would have an exterior of cedar clapboard, and the other three sides of the building would have the same stucco surface that is there at present.
The main building on this property predates the present zoning ordinance by over 100 years. It is located in the R-80 zone, but it is nonconforming with regard to the front and side yard setbacks. Mr. O’Dea was requesting variances to continue the nonconformity in the two side setbacks and extend the non-conformity in front. He also asked for a height variance and a roof slope ratio variance for the second story he was proposing to build above the existing detached garage.
Mr. O’Dea outlined plans for renovating and expanding the buildings. The main house has two additions that were built on in back, and there is also a small rear outbuilding with a wall connecting it to the house. The applicant was proposing to remove the additions and the outbuilding in back of the house. In their place, he would build a new and more compact two-story addition consisting of a family room downstairs and a master suite above. Mr. O’Dea said this would result in a smaller amount of lot coverage and a more balanced house. It would also lessen the non-conformity along the north side.
The proposed addition would follow the existing foundation on the north side, which is very close to the property line. From the north, it would look similar to what is there now, except that it would include a fireplace and chimney, and it would not extend so far back. Besides the addition to the rear, Mr. O’Dea was proposing to add a small covered porch with columns at the front of the building. The porch would be about 6 feet deep.
Mr. O’Dea said he was planning to add a second story to the existing detached garage, which is located to the left of the house. A covered walkway or portico would connect the house to the garage. The second story of the garage is intended to serve as an office, since the area that is now being used as an office is due to be demolished. Access to the second story would be provided by an interior stairway. The garage with the proposed second story would be 23.25 feet high, which exceeds the 20-foot limit imposed by the zoning ordinance.
Ms. Coppola said she had some concerns about the plans for adding a second story to the garage. She noted that the garage is only 1.9 feet from the property line on the south, and the adjacent dwelling comes right to the property line. This being the case, she thought that building a second story might reduce the light and air to the neighboring property. She also thought the proposed south-facing windows on the second story might lessen the privacy in the neighbor’s back yard.
As usual in the case of a second-story addition to a garage, Ms. Coppola said the board should guard against the possibility of the area’s being converted to living space at some future point.
During the public comment period, the board heard from Stuart Carothers, who is the applicant’s neighbor immediately to the north. He said the proposed design appears to be a good solution to Mr. O’Dea’s needs, and he would be glad to see the old outbuilding removed. However, he had some concerns about adding a second story to the garage. He was worried about what effects this would have on the neighbor to the south.
Mr. Carothers said that in general, he supports the zoning ordinance, which is designed to protect neighborhoods from unexpected problems. He would favor exploring strategies whereby the applicant could accomplish his goals without creating any further nonconformity with the zoning ordinance.
Robert Chandler (an architect and architectural historian who has been involved in many restorations), who lives across the street from Mr. O’Dea at 123 S. Main, suggested that the windows in the second story of the garage be made higher, so that someone standing in the room would not be able to see out. This would give greater privacy to the neighbor to the south.
Mr. Chandler also had some comments on the roof that was proposed for the second story of the garage. Someone commented earlier that the proposed gambrel roof would not be in keeping with the style of the main building. Mr. Chandler noted that Hopewell Borough still has many of its original barns, and they do not always match the design of the accompanying houses. In his view, the proposed roof would be more or less consistent with the character of the community.
Following the public comment period, several board members said they had difficulty envisioning what the applicant was proposing to do. They suggested that he submit an elevation of the front of the building, showing how it would relate to the neighboring properties. Without this information, they did not feel comfortable voting on the full application.
At Ms. Donlon’s suggestion, Mr. O’Dea agreed to bifurcate his application, and ask the bard to approve the variances that are applicable to the main building only. He will present additional documentation next month on the proposed changes to the garage and the covered walkway. The board then voted unanimously to approve the variances for the main structure. This will allow the applicant to begin work on the front porch and the two-story addition to the rear.
Other business The board passed a resolution of memorialization to formalize its approval last month of an application by the Mary-Lawrence Corporation, otherwise known as the Pennington Quality Market.
The board also discussed a request by Glenn and Carol Waldron of 231 S. Main St. Several months ago the Waldrons were granted permission to demolish their house and put up a new one. They were now proposing to build a house of a slightly different model, which would conform a little more closely to the setback requirements. The board determined that the change in plans could be handled administratively by Zoning Officer John Flemming.

