Town airs worries over subdivision

Proposed site on Lawrence Road

By: Lea Kahn
   A developer who wants to demolish the former Francis William hair salon on Lawrence Road and create two building lots on the property has agreed to return to the Planning Board next month with revised architectural drawings and site plans.
   Representatives of developer JRKD Development LLC spent more than two hours Monday night outlining a proposal to demolish the building at 690 Lawrence Road and build a pair of four-bedroom houses. The property is across the street from Notre Dame High School.
   But Planning Board members expressed concern about the architectural design of the two houses and the minimal side yard buffer between one of the houses and the adjacent Poulson & Van Hise Funeral Home.
   Engineer Julia Algeo, who represents the developer, told the Planning Board that her client is seeking a variance from the required 40-foot-wide landscaped buffer between one house and the adjacent funeral home. The applicant has proposed a 5-foot-wide landscaped buffer.
   The township’s Land Use Ordinance requires the 40-foot-wide landscaped buffer between a residential use and a non-residential use. The funeral home is a nonresidential use. The plan, however, shows a 5-foot-wide landscaped buffer between the driveway for the proposed house and the funeral home property line.
   Planner Elizabeth McKenzie, who represents the applicant, told the Planning Board the buffer is intended to protect the funeral home from the neighbors. The buffer would include a 6-foot fence, in addition to plants, she said, adding that the goal is to create a wall-like effect.
   When Mayor Gregory Puliti, who sits on the Planning Board, asked Ms. McKenzie what would be the effect if the new family held a noisy party while a funeral was in progress at the Poulson & Van Hise funeral home at the same time, she said that a 40-foot buffer would not make a difference in reducing the noise level.
   Philip Caton, the township’s planning consultant, said a landscaped buffer would screen the house from the headlights of cars visiting the funeral home. He suggested revising the plans to show one shared driveway between the houses to increase the landscaped buffer.
   But Ms. McKenzie said people prefer to have their own driveway. The pattern in most residential developments is to have a private driveway, she said, adding that her clients are concerned about the desirability of the two houses if the new homeowners would have to share a common driveway.
   Architect George Fett presented the architectural plans for the two houses. Under current specs, each house would be served by its own driveway, which would lead to a detached two-car garage. Each of the two-car garages would be 20 feet tall and would have storage space on the second floor.
   Mr. Fett said each house would have a living room, dining room, a kitchen and family room on the first floor, plus four bedrooms, a laundry room and three bathrooms on the second floor. One house would contain 2,916 square feet and the other would have 3,001 square feet.
   On the outside, one house would have a square, two-story bay window and the second house would have a semi-octagonal two-story bay window. Both houses would have a combination of clapboards and brick veneer siding, and metal porch roofs.
   Planning Board member Marcy Kleiner said she was disappointed that the design of the two houses closely resembled each other. All of the other houses on Lawrence Road look different from each other, she said.
   "They look very similar to me," Ms. Kleiner said. "I felt the board was hoping that the two houses that would be built would (look) distinctively different from each other."
   Mr. Fett, the architect, said he could specify that the colors of the siding and the roof are different, but because the two lots are narrow, "no matter how much you change (the houses), they will still look long and skinny."
   Ms. Kleiner said she appreciated Mr. Fett’s efforts to distinguish the design of the two houses, but she felt the houses are too similar in appearance. She said she "would feel differently if they looked like two different houses."
   Joseph C. Parell III, a co-owner of the Poulson & Van Hise funeral home, objected to the proposed two-lot subdivision and expressed a preference to retain the large, half-acre lot.
   Mr. Parell compared the two proposed houses to the houses in the Lawrenceville Greene subdivision off the Lawrenceville-Pennington Road, which are about the same size.
   "It’s like taking a Lawrenceville Greene house and turning it sideways on the (proposed) lots," he said. "It would make a lovely addition to the neighborhood (on Lawrence Road) with one house."
   Mr. Parell said the proposed lots are "tight," and there would not be much room for children to play. It is likely they would go next door to his business and play in the parking lot of his business, he said.
   "Aesthetically, I don’t see how it fits in with the character of the neighborhood," he said of the architecture. "(The applicants) are creating a problem themselves by buying the property and trying to squeeze two houses on it. I don’t think it’s a correct usage of the lot. I would encourage them to build one single-family house."
   Attorney Robert Ridolfi, who represents JRKD Development LLC, said his client would return to the Planning Board at its June 4 meeting with revised architectural plans and also with a revised plan that shows one driveway.