Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears concerns after zoning board rejects proposed senior housing conversion on White Horse Pike
Summary
Council members discussed a local owner's plan to convert a four‑unit office building on the White Horse Pike into 12–16 one‑bedroom units for residents 55 and older; the zoning board denied the developer's use variance in a 4–3 vote, citing highway‑commercial zoning, safety and legal criteria for variances.
Council members on Sept. 5 reviewed a developer’s plan to convert a four‑unit office building on the White Horse Pike into senior one‑bedroom apartments and heard why the zoning board denied the application.
Councilwoman Kane (speaker 2) said the owner and his broker, Ravi Hussain, explored converting the building into roughly 12–16 one‑bedroom apartments restricted to residents 55 and older, with annual leases and tenant screening. Kane described the conversion as a way to improve a vacant office building and add “ratables” to the city.
The zoning board denied the application in a 4–3 vote. Greg Zayer, identified in the meeting as vice chair of the zoning board (speaker 5), told the council the property sits in a highway commercial zone and that use variances for residential occupancy in such zones must meet strict state criteria. Zayer and the city engineer (speaker 7) flagged two central concerns: public-safety risks for pedestrians along the White Horse Pike and the precedent set by rezoning commercial corridors to residential use. The board said those factors weighed against granting the variance.
The chair reminded council members that the zoning board’s decisions are independent and that the governing body cannot dictate the board’s approvals. Council members discussed options for the owner, including reapplying with a revised presentation, pursuing an appeal of the zoning board decision, or asking the planning board/master‑plan process to consider rezonings.
No formal action was taken by the council at the meeting; members suggested the owner attend future zoning or economic-development meetings if he chooses to pursue changes.
The discussion captured both the economic-development interest in renovating an underused building and the legal and safety limits the zoning board must apply when considering use variances.
