I am curious about zoning variances and how people feel about them

I have always believed that if you own a property and want to do something with it that is within the zoning rules you should be able to. I might not like what you build, but so be it. I also think that variances should be limited to rare situations, like if your lot has a little jog or something that makes a small adjustment necessary.

Now I am looking at a proposal for a new 22 unit apartment building with retail behind my house. They are seeking setback variances on all 4 sides of a rectangular lot and to reduce the required parking. My gut feeling is that they should conform to the existing zoning, which is not a new set of rules.

Do you think that I am out of line, and just being a NIMBY, or should the zoning rules as written be adhered to even if they dictate a smaller project?

I'm just curious, really. The project is in South Orange, but the question would apply anywhere, really.

I think zoning should have flexibility for the nuances and specificity of each project proposal.

I am familiar with that property off Valley St. On an 1870's map of So Orange, there is a farmhouse with several buildings there and it stretched over what is now several blocks. There is at least 1 house on Roland that is still there today that was part of the compound. I always wondered if there were some sort of history to that place. I guess not.

There will be a huge change to the backyards of the homes on Roland and Academy- with noise, garbage, lighting - not to mention the traffic on Valley will stay bad. I would suggest that the neighborhood take it seriously and voice your concerns to both the Zoning Board and the Developer and work with them. Sheena would be my first choice to get an understanding of the process. Good Luck!

i would fight the variance as it has great potential to negatively impact your property value and privacy !!! the set backs are there to ensure water run off, noise etc are at an adequate distance

you are not out of line at all !!!

We have more than enough apartments - hopefully the turn down of the variance may push the lot towards larger "homes" ie townhouses that have appropriate parking ratios etc...

Not at all nimby. I think zoning should be adhered to (except in cases like you mentioned, filmcarp)....or else why on earth take the time to have zoning laws in the first place? The town shouldn't grant a laundry list of variances just because a developer wants to develop as much as he/she can for the best return on an investment. Parking especially is (and will be more so with all the cumulative development) a huge problem. Notice that every single valley street development on the planning board in the past several months is requesting a parking variance.

When is the meeting? We and fellow nearby neighbors are trying to make a point to attend these meetings and speak out. We don't want a lack of involvement to be interpreted as the neighborhood being ok with what's going on. Yes, the valley stretch needs love, but development shouldn't happen at the expense of the rest of the neighborhood. I am not at all against development. Quite the opposite. I just think we shouldn't have to settle for bad/overcrowded development

Organize your neighbors and fight ! Be very public and very vocal. Reach out to members of the Planning board individually.

I think zoning should be flexible - but at it's core zoning is supposed to protect neighborhoods and homeowners. If this goes through it will seriously damage your quality of life and the value of your property.

In many cases development is good, but a developer should not be able to change zoning at will when the result is that he makes money at your and your neighbors expense.

I think the opinion on how you think of a zoning variance would depend on who the variance benefits. Like if someone wants to build a factory in my backyard and needs a variance for that - no go. If someone wants to build a family friendly craft beer garden in my backyard - please!

If this is just apartments, then it clearly benefits the developer only. If it's mixed-use with retail then it starts getting a little grayer. With all the development going up, it's certainly less clear that just having 'more' is desirable, so we definitely want to have the right kind of 'more'.

Now, we do plan on trying to build a patio or deck next spring. So while we're doing that I will change my tune and be in favor of any and all variances that we want!

How's does a building that's just apartments clearly "benefit the developer only"?

Those in your town's government who need to make the final recommendations and decision regarding this proposal can only act based on what they know. If you say nothing, it is unlikely that your situation/concerns will be addressed. Prepare a factual, clearly expressed explanation of how the proposal will affect you and suggestions if any as to how the proposal may be refined to better protect your quality of life and that of any neighbors you have who are similarly situated. If possible, get your neighbors to prepare their own statements. Avoiding use of a cut and paste template will likely be more effective. If you have a neighborhood association, get them involved as well. If the BOT has a period during their public meetings in which members of the public may address the board, get a group of your neighbors together and present your concerns to the BOT at their next regularly scheduled meeting. Make it your business to find out when the variance request is being considered and make it a point to attend any such board meetings as well. Request the opportunity to speak at any such meeting so your concerns can be made part of the official record. There is no guarantee that decisions will be made to your liking but at least your situation and that of your neighbors will be taken into consideration.

I know how to fight it. I'm just trying to get a feel for how others interpret zoning. The meeting is on the 8th, and I'm trying to get together with my immediate neighbors Saturday evening. We have all of the information they filed with the town. I'm not opposed to using the property as zoned. That's their right. I'm only worried about the variances.

I and my neighbors are dealing with a somewhat similar situation behind our houses. You absolutely need to loudly make your feelings heard to the development. The developer will NOT be working in your best interests. Without a doubt, if you give them an inch they WILL take a mile.

If you do not have some degree of satisfaction after the first meeting I strongly recommend that you and your neighbors consider pooling your resources and consult a lawyer about your options. It is money well spent.

It seems to be a tactic for developers to come in asking for the moon in terms of density increasing variances knowing that the end result will be a compromise so they want to drive the range.

qrysdonnell said:
I think the opinion on how you think of a zoning variance would depend on who the variance benefits. Like if someone wants to build a factory in my backyard and needs a variance for that - no go. If someone wants to build a family friendly craft beer garden in my backyard - please!
If this is just apartments, then it clearly benefits the developer only. If it's mixed-use with retail then it starts getting a little grayer. With all the development going up, it's certainly less clear that just having 'more' is desirable, so we definitely want to have the right kind of 'more'.
Now, we do plan on trying to build a patio or deck next spring. So while we're doing that I will change my tune and be in favor of any and all variances that we want!

I was speaking about the 'variance', not the apartments existence. Very few people would walk past some apartments and say "you know, if these were a little more like a hulking mass I'd be really into it and the community would benefit". The benefit of making something more of a hulking mass is pretty much entirely in the developers corner.

The rules exist to keep a certain ratio of mass to open space. There may be some situations where desires of a community for additional services make adjusting that ratio desirable. For me, that would be my proposed Craft Beer Garden adjacent to my backyard. (There's no empty space, so someone's house is going to have to be emminently domained too!) As no one on MOL ever argues about everything, I assume the community would be in 100% agreement with that.

For what it's worth, I'm in general in favor of sensible development. 3rd and Valley looks like a good development to me. That proposal for the large apartment complex on the odd collection of spare lots on Irvington didn't quite seem right to me. I haven't really paid enough attention to this development yet.

First, how much variance from the current zoning is being sought? Are we talking about 6 inches or 6 feet on each side, etc.? Second, what Zoinks said.

My impresssion of Maplewood is that allowing variances for commercial properties is the norm, not the exception.

This is what I find so problematic

yahooyahoo said:
My impresssion of Maplewood is that allowing variances for commercial properties is the norm, not the exception.

If Maplewood won't grant a variance to let someone put up an aesthetically-pleasing fence on a property for safety of children or pets, I don't think it should grant a variance to a developer to erect something that will encroach on/infringe upon adjacent properties and their values. I realize the OP is in South Orange, but I'm not, so I can't speak to how strict SO is on observing codes/granting variances.

I would be very against the granting of the variance described by the OP as it will definitely affect the property values of the adjoining properties. Who wants to live next to an out-of-scale structure smooshed up against one's property line?

@qrysdonnell: Ah, a distinction with a difference. Thanks. And I do agree on that point. And with the beer.

yahooyahoo said:
My impresssion of Maplewood is that allowing variances for commercial properties is the norm, not the exception.

You say this as if it's a huge thing. Most of these are completely innocuous. Those that aren't are hardly rubber-stamped IMO.