Verona zoning board continues contentious plan for 257 Pompton Avenue after residents press traffic, parking and drainage concerns

The Verona Zoning Board of Adjustment continued deliberations on a proposal to convert 257 Pompton Avenue into an eight‑unit residential building after residents and board members raised unresolved questions about traffic, parking, stormwater and site operations.

Board members heard more than three hours of testimony on June 11 from engineer and planner James Michael Held, who described the applicant’s plan for an eight‑unit, two‑story building with 14–16 parking spaces and two designated affordable units. Held said the design includes a 15‑foot landscape buffer, dusk‑to‑dawn shielded lighting and a detention basin with infiltration to meet stormwater requirements. He also said the project had soil erosion approval from the county soil‑erosion district and that applicants had coordinated with the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) on ingress and egress from Pompton Avenue.

“The spaces as depicted were required to be accessible from Pompton Avenue,” Held testified, adding that a prior plan had been modified after DOT requirements removed several curb‑cut parking spaces. He told the board the revised plan still provides the parking and safety features the DOT required and that two affordable units represent 25% of the proposed apartments.

Opposition from neighbors was widespread. Dozens of residents questioned whether the site’s new residential program — eight one‑bedroom units on a compact parcel — would create more queuing and unsafe turning movements on Pompton Avenue and push overnight parking onto adjacent Vincent Place. Anna Fusaro, a nearby resident, asked for specifics about refuse handling and said the scale of the project “doesn’t fit in this little tiny lot.” Another resident, Anthony Gardner, urged the board to require an independent traffic study before the board acted.

“Putting eight single‑bedroom units in that tiny space is going to cause major issues,” Gardner said, citing recurring flooding and ice problems on Vincent Place and the narrow geometry of neighborhood streets.

Board members expressed similar concerns. Several asked for clearer property‑management commitments (refuse collection, package and delivery handling, and snow removal) and for concrete evidence showing that emergency vehicles could access the site safely. Commissioners also noted conflicting interpretations about whether the redevelopment should be treated as a minor or major development for stormwater rules and whether off‑site disturbance should be included in the calculation.

The applicant told the board that two of the apartments will be affordable units and argued that the project meets both the “positive” criteria (affordable housing and master‑plan goals) and the required “negative” criteria (no substantial detriment to the public good) under the Municipal Land Use Law. “I think it’s a good project,” the applicant said, adding he would work with town environmental staff on plantings and code compliance.

After deliberation, the applicant asked for time to meet neighbors and attempt to amend the proposal. The board voted to continue the application to its next regular meeting on July 9, 2026, so the applicant can negotiate possible changes with residents. The board recorded a roll‑call in favor of the continuance.

Next steps: The applicant may return with an amended plan or withdraw the proposal; if revised testimony is introduced the board will reopen the hearing and accept public comment at the July meeting.