I would like to set the record straight with regard to the zoning variance discussion that has been before both the Haddonfield zoning board in June, the subject of meetings with the commissioners, and discussed in depth in letters to the editor and as complaints on Haddonfield Patch.
I have been an architect in town specializing in residential additions and new construction for more than 20 years. I work for homeowners, businesses, municipalities, developers and builders alike. I have been before the Haddonfield zoning board more than 250 times in my career and understand the law as it pertains to zoning regulations in Haddonfield.
I have found the zoning board of adjustment to be both fair and understanding of the laws as it pertains to applicants’ requirements to meet legal criteria for granting a variance. Their voting is almost routine, and they follow the standards set forth without favoritism to anyone, regardless of the applicants’ reasons for non-compliance. They will hear opposing opinions on any application from residents and neighbors, however they are bound by the law when voting to follow the regulations set forth in state standards.
In the case of a residence on Maple Avenue, it was at my urging that the homeowner apply for a variance for alterations to this property. Generally speaking, builders and developers avoid the Haddonfield zoning board “like the plague,” not because the board is in any way unfair, but because the process takes time, costs money, and often puts their projects in jeopardy from moving forward. It is usually easier to just meet the letter of the law and build to the maximum size permitted and simply conform, regardless of the visual outcome. This is not, however, always the best thing to do in a neighborhood as was the case, in my opinion, at the home on Maple Avenue.
Here was a tiny home on a deep corner property that did not meet minimum standards for lot width and a house that was situated non-conforming on the lot with regard to a front yard setback along Bryn Mawr Avenue.
The house sat on the market for quite some time before it was sold. It was purchased by the homeowner who could have simply demolished the house and built a 35’ tall, 2–1/2 story home more than 100’ long (because the lot was very deep) without resorting to requesting a variance from the zoning board. Instead, I suggested that a more fitting design would be to retain much of the original cottage, add a “cape” style addition that is 10’ lower than the permitted height, and retain a first floor bedroom suite that is lacking from many of the new houses in the area.
However, this design would require a variance from the zoning board to build over the portion of the house that did not meet the front yard setback along Bryn Mawr Avenue. Because the lot is narrower than permitted in the zone, and because it was a corner lot and the expansion did not extend the existing non-conformity, constructing a partial second floor over the existing house met the definitions set forth the zoning ordinance as a hardship, which is required for the zoning board to grant variances.
I was personally surprised at the neighbors’ concern over the size of the proposed home, even when we showed them the potential size of a “conforming” house and how much larger that home could be.
There was much discussion over flooding issues, however the proposed development met all of the coverage requirements permitted in the zone and no variance was requested for exceeding the borough’s strict coverage standards. The zoning board eventually approved the application to the dismay of many neighbors, who have since described the zoning board as a “rubber stamp” for this builder, and have gone on to file grievances with the commissioners as well.
After all of the discussion and disturbing media, it will be interesting to see if the homeowner proceeds with the house that was approved or if he decides to build a much larger home within the zoning regulations. It is my understanding that he has not decided which home to proceed with at this time.
I, for one, hope he will proceed with the house that was approved by the zoning board, and once the house is completed, I will request that members of the zoning board and three commissioners go and visit the finished product and determine for themselves if the zoning board was correct in approving this application, or if the neighbors’ fears of a McMansion on Maple Avenue were founded.
Thomas Wagner
