Metuchen planning board approves subdivision at 14 Ohio Ave with variances and conditions

The Borough of Metuchen Planning Board on the evening approved a minor subdivision and related variances for property known as 14 Ohio Avenue (Block 176, Lots 11 and 12.02), allowing the existing parcel to be redivided and two single-family homes to be built.

The decision came after testimony from the applicant’s team and extended review by the board’s professionals. Justine Del Vecchio, attorney for Project Properties LLC, introduced the application and said it would “reestablish the two tax lots ... and construct a single-family dwelling on each lot.” Architect Nikhilesh Korde and engineer–planner Christopher Nusser gave detailed plans and technical testimony in support.

Board professionals and neighbors raised questions about lot geometry, prevailing front-yard setbacks, porch projections and the visual scale of the proposed homes. Nusser told the board the combined parcel is about 22,000 square feet and that the application would create two substantially more conventional lots (roughly 10,000–12,000 square feet each). He said the applicant seeks limited variances for lot depth, front-yard setbacks, porch projection and the façade width/massing standard while proposing architectural offsets, two-tone siding and porches to reduce perceived bulk.

Neighbor Tom Motyka, owner of 20 Ohio Ave and a 30-year resident, warned the board the larger, two-story Ohio-facing house would “dwarf the ranches” on the short street and urged caution. The applicant and the board planner disputed that the design would be out of character, with Nusser saying the proposed footprints and massing fall within the zone’s allowable coverage and that architectural treatments would break up the façade.

The approval was conditional. The principal conditions recorded on the motion and accepted by the applicant were: submission of a revised grading/drainage and utility plan; provision of meets-and-bounds for the sewer easement; submission of the Johnson Soils geotechnical report and any required permeability testing as part of resolution compliance; compliance with foundation planting standards; working with the Shade Tree Commission on required street and front-yard trees or making a payment-in-lieu if trees cannot be accommodated; and resubmitting plan sheets that reflect a squared lot line (the board directed the applicant to reconfigure the rear lot line so lots measure approximately 100 feet in depth).

On a remaining frontage question, the board’s planner recommended the Oakland-facing house be shifted back about five feet to reduce its visual impact on Oakland Avenue, which faces public recreational amenities. The applicant agreed to make that change if the board required it. The board also discussed reducing the small front-yard variance on the Ohio-facing house by moving that house back roughly 1.1 feet (the testimony on the record shows a 1.1-foot figure; an 11.1-foot figure is also mentioned later in the transcript and appears inconsistent — the applicant will finalize exact distances in the revised plans submitted for resolution compliance).

On the record the board then moved to approve the application with the conditions summarized above. The roll-call recorded 'yes' votes from Miss Cone, Mister Delia, Miss Koskowski, Mister Lifton and Mister Erickson; the chair declared the motion carried. The record shows the applicant agreed to work with staff and the Shade Tree Commission and to submit the requested technical documents for resolution compliance before permits are issued.

What happens next: the applicant must provide the revised plans and documentation the board required (soils report, grading/drainage/utility plans, meets-and-bounds for the easement, and tree-hazard evidence or a payment-in-lieu). Those items will be reviewed by the board’s offices as part of resolution compliance and building/permit reviews. The meeting adjourned after ministerial approvals of minutes.