Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subdivision at 106 Lane Avenue carried to Oct. 22 after neighbors raise parking, tree and sight-line concerns
Summary
The board continued a minor subdivision application for 106 Lane Ave. to Oct. 22 after engineer testimony and multiple residents raised concerns about parking capacity, a mature magnolia tree and sight lines at a busy intersection; the applicant will renotice and was asked to return with elevations and design clarifications.
The Red Bank Planning Board carried a minor subdivision application for 106 Lane Avenue to its Oct. 22 meeting after residents raised traffic-safety, tree-preservation and neighborhood-character concerns.
Applicant's attorney Kevin Buchanan presented the request to subdivide the existing 8,250-square-foot parcel to create a new single-family lot; the applicant's licensed engineer and planner, Joseph Kosuba, said the parcel is oversized for the RV zone and that the proposed new lot would be about 43.5 feet wide (creating one 4,749-sq.-ft. conforming lot and one smaller lot that requires lot-width relief). Kosuba described existing nonconforming setbacks (front yard setbacks as low as about 10–12 feet where 20 are required; a side-yard of about 2.37 feet) and argued the variances satisfy both the positive (C.2) and hardship (C.1) criteria because many surrounding lots are already narrow.
"It's an oversized lot in the RV zone. It's 8,250 square feet," Joseph Kosuba said while describing the aerial and tax-map exhibits and why the proposed subdivision would align with neighborhood density patterns.
Board members pressed the applicant on parking and the orientation of a front-entry garage. The engineer and board agreed that a minimum 18-foot front setback from the property line to the garage face must be stipulated so a parked car fits entirely on the lot; a committee member summarized the requirement: "The face of the garage door pretty much to the property line has to be 18 feet so that the parking space is totally contained within their lot." The board also discussed whether the existing detached garage could be relocated or rebuilt to reduce driveway/front-yard parking impacts.
Several neighbors asked the board to preserve a mature magnolia on the site and questioned whether a two-story home would be out of character. A resident who lives near the intersection of River and Layton described a near accident after the borough's new corner treatment and said a new, taller house could create sight-line hazards for pedestrians and buses accessing a nearby school.
The board did not vote on final subdivision approval. Instead members asked the applicant to return with building elevations and possible garage/parking configurations and agreed to carry the application to Oct. 22; the applicant offered to renotice. The board indicated several technical variances would be required for the subdivision (lot frontage/width and the preexisting garage-related setback variances) and that some variances are preexisting while others would be created by the subdivision.
Next steps: the applicant will renotice for the Oct. 22 hearing and is expected to provide elevations and more detailed plans addressing parking and the tree.
