At a recent public hearing, Lakewood Township's Planning Board granted site plan approval to an application submitted by Birchas Chaim to construct a child care center on Vine Avenue and Mermaid Avenue, between the existing Birchas Chaim yeshiva building as Mesivta Nezer Hatorah.
The application originally sought approval for a building capacity of 572 children, a parking area of 97 off-street spaces, and a design waiver from paving Mermaid Avenue to Vermont Avenue.
Their original traffic study claimed that only 50 staff members will be on site at any one point. However, based on a review of the architectural plans, the Board Engineer indicated that the State Daycare Standards require 82 off-street parking spaces just for the employees. The Board Engineer recommended that the Board require additional off-street parking be required and require the extension of Mermaid Avenue to Vermont Avenue "to address the proposed turnover for drop-offs and pick-ups," noting that "there does not appear to be a future opportunity for this proposed street connection."
At the first lengthy public hearing, the Board tabled the application over insufficient parking concerns.
Subsequently, neighbors of the proposal retained Attorney Ed Liston to represent their opposition to the design waiver from extending Mermaid Avenue to Vermont Avenue.
After Mr. Liston threatened to take the developers to court over the matter, the developers wisely scaled back the site plan.
The revised plan shrunk the building size capacity to 498 children and enlarged the parking lot to 123 off-street parking spaces.
Moreover, the developers agreed to pave Mermaid Avenue to Vermont Avenue and put a hammerhead at the terminus.
The application originally sought a design waiver to be permitted to pave an ingress driveway on Vine Avenue with a width less than 20 feet. The Lakewood Fire District rejected the plans, saying that the property requires a minimum access road width of 20 feet which must be maintained consistently throughout, and that 25 feet must be the minimum inside turning radius for a fire apparatus access road.
Accordingly, the developers consented to the revisions required by the Fire District.
Per the Board Engineer's review of the revised site plan, the application sought variances for Maximum Building Height and Maximum Wall Signage Area, as well as design waivers from improving the Vermont Avenue frontage, providing street trees along the project frontages, and completion of the proposed improvements for the entire length of Mermaid Avenue into the intersection with Vermont Avenue.
At the public hearing, Engineer Brian Flannery agreed to "add whatever street trees fit," and to "whatever the Board Engineer wants regarding the extension of Mermaid to Vermont."
The developers did not eliminate the variances nor the remaining design waivers.
This issue is extremely pertinent because the Township sold this property with a specific deed restriction that any future development comply with all Township ordinances and standards; therefore the Board should have denied the variances and design waivers.
The developers of this application attempted to conceal this deed restriction by showing the Planning Board staff a deed restriction for a different property and assuring them "the deed restriction is actually on that other property," when in reality there are deed restrictions on both properties.
Neighbors of the project were the ones who first showed the deed restriction to the Board at the first public hearing. In response, Attorney Adam Pfeffer conceded only that there is a deed restriction, but, he claimed it only requires the "property must remain in perpetuity in a non-profit ownership and non-profit use or title to the property shall automatically revert back to the Township of Lakewood without the necessity of entry or re-entry." Mr. Pfeffer ignored the fact that the deed restriction also requires that any future development comply with all Township ordinances and standards.
Prior to the second public hearing, the deed restriction was formally reviewed by the Board Engineer Terry Vogt. Shockingly, Mr. Vogt also stated that the deed restriction, only requires the "property must remain in perpetuity in a non-profit ownership and non-profit use," but not that any future development comply with all Township ordinances and standards.
At the first public hearing, neighbors raised considerable exceptions to the Traffic Study prepared by McDonough & Rea Associates, Inc, which claims that most drops offs and pick ups will be 2-3 children per vehicle.
Importantly, the traffic study did not analyze the impact of traffic to the adjacent intersections of Oak Street and Vine Avenue or Chestnut Street and Vermont Avenue. Nor did it analyze traffic which would be generated by Menachem Gutfreund's proposed child care center further north on Vine Avenue.
Board member Eli Rennert went so far as to call the traffic study "a bunch of baloney." Attorney Adam Pfeffer responded "our traffic expert is an expert in his field."
The neighbors have 45 days to file an appeal from the Board's approval.
This massive site plan further highlights why, as previously reported here on FAA News, the Township Committee's cheerful vacation of Grand Avenue was an absolutely awful idea.
Once the northern portion of Vermont Avenue is paved, Grand Avenue could have provided an additional connection between Vine Avenue and Vermont Avenue, further easing congestion in this area.
Despite being asked this question by numerous neighbors, the Township Committee simply didn't see any reason to maintain this grid.
To join the FAA News WhatsApp Status, click here.
1 comment:
Mr Heineken thinks traffic and gridlock is good, his lackeys follow his inspiring leadership
Post a Comment