By a 3-2 vote, the Morristown council on Wednesday approved a new developer and some cosmetic changes for an 18-townhouse project proposed for the former Epstein’s parking lot between Maple and Macculloch Avenues.
The new developer, Pulte Homes, must pay $100,000 to the town’s affordable housing trust fund. And it must incorporate any “reasonable comments” made by the town’s Historic Preservation Commission.
Please click icon below for captions.
Council members Alison Deeb and Raline Smith-Reid voted against the project, contending it was ramrodded through. The council only received amended plans last Friday, and the planning board gave its final green light on Monday.
But the project actually received its major approvals in 2008 as part of the Epstein’s “rehabilitation” project that included construction of the 40 Park and Metropolitan luxury residences on the site of the former Epstein’s department store.
Recent plan alterations–which actually call for somewhat smaller townhouses and more green space–conform with those earlier approvals, planning board Attorney John Inglesino told the council.
Essentially, he said, all the council could decide was whether to approve some architectural tweaks and the new development company, which will take over the Maple Avenue project from the Roseland Property Company and Woodmont Companies, developers of 40 Park and the Metropolitan.
One reason for moving quickly, the board attorney explained, was Pulte’s willingness to start construction right away–as early as March, if necessary permits are obtained. The developer has 18 months to complete the project, the attorney said.
Responding to concerns raised at Monday’s planning board meeting, Pulte Homes tinkered with the design in an effort to make the proposed project look more Victorian and less Colonial, in keeping with the historic district in which it sits. Box bays, turrets, flying gables and chimneys are among the additions meant to break up a “monolithic” appearance of the townhomes, architect Bill Feinberg said during an hour-long presentation.
Alison Deeb objected to plans for some garages and driveways to empty onto a busy portion of Macculloch Avenue, near the intersection of Mt. Kemble Avenue. She also questioned the rush to approve the developer switch, when the Roseland/Woodmont team still owes $200,ooo to the town’s affordable trust fund. (A payment extension deadline expires this month.)
“This doesn’t pass the sniff test,” the councilwoman said.
In a letter to the planning board, Ken Miller, chairman of the four-person Historic Preservation Commission and a resident in the historic district, asserted that “front facing garages are not historically appropriate or pedestrian friendly, and would have a detrimental visual impact on this key entry into the Morristown Historic District.”
A resident, Janice Barrett, noted that Pulte never delivered on another 2008 project–walking away from plans to build 66 townhouses at Ann and Court streets after six 19th century structures were demolished. She asked if the town could ensure that doesn’t happen at Maple Avenue.
Not really, John Inglesino answered. All the town can do is require escrow funds from the Basking Ridge developer to secure the site if the project sputters, he said.
The 18 townhouses will be divided into four units. They will be three stories, with square footage ranging from about 1,800 square feet to around 2,400 square feet. Initially, asking prices were going to be in the $1 million range. But the sizes have been trimmed and prices are expected to be lower, though by how much is unclear.
Some residents criticized plans for vinyl siding, asserting it will look bad after a few years.
“My bottom line is we are not stuck with another ugly project in Morristown,” said Alice Cutler.
Ken Miller, the historic preservation chairman, said the proposed cosmetic changes don’t make the project look any more Victorian. He proposed a simpler look, more akin to quaint “workers housing” found on James and DeHart streets.
Town Planner Phil Abramson took exception to proposed lawns fronting Maple Avenue; he said they are out of character on a street where most properties abut the sidewalk.
As for the other “no” vote, Raline Smith-Reid said she was not given enough time to perform “due diligence.” The choice came down to reading the documentation over the weekend or sleeping at night, she said.
Councilwoman Rebecca Feldman acknowledged being taken aback upon receiving the plans on Friday. It was short notice and residents near the proposed development were not notified as they should have been, she said.
Yet after doing her due diligence, Rebecca said, she was confident that the new developer was reasonable and would be responsive to suggestions from the historic commission. The property faces the town’s most environmentally friendly building at 14 Maple Ave., she said, and that building should enjoy an equally impressive view.
“This town deserves a great project,” said the councilwoman.
“Would you want that in front of your house?” Alison asked.
“When it’s done, sure,” replied Rebecca, , who voted yes along with Michelle Harris-King and Kevin Gsell. Council President Anthony Cattano Jr. and Councilman James Smith were absent.
The vote followed 90 minutes of discussion, in open and closed sessions. And then the council entered into another closed session to discuss a 165-page proposed agreement with a Speedwell Avenue redeveloper.
READ LIVEBLOG BLOW-BY-BLOW OF MEETING
READ MAPLE AVENUE TOWNHOUSE PLANS
Great post on the Maple Avenue project from the Roseland Property Company and Woodmont Companies, developers of 40 Park and the Metropolitan.
The new developer, Pulte Homes, must pay $100,000 to the town’s affordable housing trust fund.
“‘“This doesn’t pass the sniff test,’ the councilwoman said.”
Could Ms. Deeb tell us more about the “sniff test?”
Again, if you are overwhelmed by the job, remember no one twisted your arm to run for election either.
“As for the other “no” vote, Raline Smith-Reid said she was not given enough time to perform “due diligence.” The choice came down to reading the documentation over the weekend or sleeping at night, she said.”
What is this about? It’s like going to work and telling your boss that you did not have enough time to do your work. Not very resposible behavior. No one twisted her arm to take this job.
Does this mean she voted “no” for something she never read. Wouldn’t an “abstain” vote be more apprpriate?
Only in Morristown is something proposed in 2008 and approved in 2011 ‘ramrodded’ through. It takes the town council way to long to approve ANYTHING. See the latest Speedwell Ave redevelopment, that thing was pushed back so many times it is ridiculous.