Resolution of the Joint Land Use Board of the Township of Riverside Concerning the Application of 430 Taylor, LLC for Variance and minor Site Plan Approval

Resolution of the Joint Land Use Board of the Township of Riverside Concerning the Application of 430 Taylor, LLC for Variance and minor Site Plan Approval RESOLUTION NO. 2026-#5 RESOLUTION OF THE JOINT LAND USE BOARD OF THE TOWNSHIP OF RIVERSIDE COCERNING THE APPLICATION OF 430 TAYLOR, LLC FOR VARIANCE AND MINOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL WHEREAS, 430 Taylor, LLC (the "Applicant") has applied to the Land Use Board of the Township of Riverside (the "Board") for Variance and Minor Site Plan Approval for property located at 430 Taylor Street, known as Block 3104, Lot 6, on the Official Tax Map of the Township of Riverside (the "Property"), for the purpose of converting the first floor space of a 3-story building into two (2) I-bedroom residential apartments; and WHEREAS, a variance pursuant to N.J.S.A 40:55D-70(d)(2) is required as the Applicant's proposed development of the Property is an expansion of the nonconforming multi-family use, a use not otherwise permitted in the Township's R-3 Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the Board previously denied the Applicant a (d)(2) expansion of a non-conforming use variance to convert the first-floor space into three (3) I-bedroom apartments; and WHEREAS, the Application was deemed Complete by the Board on August 11, 2025; and WHEREAS, public hearings to consider the Application were held by the Board on August 11, 2025 and December 8, 2025, after appropriate public and personal notice was provided to all property owners within 200 feet of the Property and published in the Official Newspaper of the Township, as required by the land development regulations of the Township of Riverside and the statutes of the State of New Jersey; and WHEREAS, the Applicant presented evidence to the Board concerning the Application through testimony, plans, and other evidence, including introducing the following Exhibits during the public hearings: A-1 - Photograph of rear of building; A-2 - West Elevation (rear of Property); and A-3 - Site Plan, last revised 09/10/25; and WHEREAS, the Board after carefully considering the evidence presented by the Applicant in support of the Application and after the meeting was opened to the public for their response and input, has made the following findings of fact: 1. The Applicant is the owner of the Property, located at 430 Taylor Street, approximately 14,000 square feet in area, located within the R-3 Zoning District of the Township. The Property is improved with a 3-story frame building; asphalt, concrete and stone surfaces; and a shed. The second and third floors of the existing building are each occupied by two (2) I-bedroom residential apartment units. The first floor is currently vacant, most recently occupied by a commercial use, a bar/tavern. 2. The Applicant is proposing to convert the first floor into two (2) additional I-bedroom apartment units, increasing the total apartments to six (6) units. The Applicant is proposing other site improvements for parking, lighting, landscaping and trash/recyclables. 3. The Applicant's submission to the Board included the following: a. Board Application for N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(d) Variance Relief and Minor Site Plan Approval, dated 03/12/25; b. Plan of Survey, prepared by Cleo E. McCall, PLS, dated 11/09/20 (1 sheet); c. Architectural Floor Plans, prepared by Zobel-Architects-Builders, Inc., dated 07/19/24 (1 sheet); d. Revised Architecturals, prepared by Zobel-Architects-Builders, Inc., dated 08/14/25 (2 sheets); e. Site Plan, prepared by William H. Nicholson, PE, William H. Nicholson Associates, P.A., dated 08/08/23, revised 09/10/25 (3 sheets); and e. Elevation Renderings, undated. 4. The taxes on the subject property are current or exempt. 5. The Applicant has paid and/or posted all required fees and agreed to keep the review escrow current. 6. Proper notice of the Application for Use Variance and Minor Site Plan Approval has been given, as based upon the property owner list issued by the Township's Tax Assessor. 7. The proposed development of the Property is an expansion of the nonconforming multi-family use, which is otherwise not permitted in the R-3 Zoning District. 8. The Applicant previously applied for and in May, 2024 was denied a d(2) expansion of a non-conforming use variance to convert the first-floor space into three (3) I-bedroom apartments. 9. The Applicant was represented at the August 11, 2025 and December 8, 2025 Public Hearings by Edward Vidal, Esquire. Jim Adams, the Applicant's Representative, William H. Nicholson, PE, the Applicant's Professional Engineer, and James A, Miller, PP, the Applicant's Professional Planner, appearing and each being duly sworn, with Mr. Nicholson and Mr. Miller qualified, and recognized as expert witnesses in support of the Application. 10. Mr. Adams provided the following sworn testimony during the Public Hearings: a. He is the Applicant's authorized representative and majority owner; b. The second and third floors are each occupied by two (2) I-bedroom apartments; the proposed development would convert the first floor into two (2) I-bedroom apartments, for a total of six (6) I-bedroom apartments; c. The prior application was for three (3) I -bedroom apartments for the first floor for a total of seven (7) apartment units; d. The first floor will match the second and third floors with the same color siding and trim and the same windows; e. He has been in communication with the Riverside Historical Society and is not aware of any issues with the intended appearance of the building; f. Other site improvements include the delineation of parking spaces with bumper blocks, new landscaping and a trash enclosure; g. Tenants will be responsible for delivering their own trash and recyclables to the trash enclosure for municipal pick-up; h. Thirteen (13) parking spaces will be provided, one being an accessible space; the ADA space will be concrete; i. A portion of the parking area will be paved and a portion stoned; j. A planter has been added to minimize stone washing away; k. An inigation system is not proposed but the Applicant will contract for landscape maintenance; l. The building will not have an on-site property manager; m. Signage is not proposed for the site; n. All utility meters will be removed from the plywood and mounted directly onto the building's siding; o. The basement area will not be accessible to the building's tenants;the fire alarm panel is located in the basement but no other mechanicals; p. The leases for the first-floor units will include provisions that limit the number of occupants for each unit, subject the tenants to the building's and Property's rules and regulations, subject the tenants to proper trash and recyclable disposal and for general nuisance concerns; q. Similar language will be added as the existing leases renew, if permitted by law, and as tenants change; r. The Property will be subject to bi-weekly clean-up; the Applicant will comply with the Township's property maintenance ordinance; s. Once the first-floor renovations are completed the building will have a more pleasing aesthetic appearance. 11. Mr. Nicholson provided the following sworn testimony during the Public Hearings: a. He is the Applicant's Professional Engineer; b. The Applicant will comply with the comments contained in the review letter of the Board Engineer and Planner, identified as paragraphs 16 through 53; the tree referenced in paragraph 5 l will remain; c. With respect to submission requirements, relief is requested from paragraph 11 of the Review Letter; d. The concrete bumpers will delineate the non-ADA parking spaces; e. The number of on-site parking spaces complies with the RSIS requirements for the proposed use and is greater than the number of spaces required by the Township's Ordinance. 12. Mr. Miller provided the following sworn testimony during the Public Hearings: a. He is the Applicant's Professional Planner and prepared for his testimony by reviewing the Township Zoning Ordinance and visiting the site; b The Property is located at 430 Taylor Street, Block 3104, Lot 6, within the R-3 Residential Zoning District of the Township; c. The R-3 Zone permits single-family and two-family attached dwellings, as well as some public uses; d. The minimum lot area is 4,000 square feet with a minimum lot width of 40feet; e. The surrounding uses include, to the north, single family detached dwellings along Taylor Street in the R-2 Zone; to the east, four townhouses on the south side of Taylor St., and single family detached dwellings, also in the R-2 Zone; to the south, multi-family dwellings facing Kossuth Street in the same R-3 Zone; and to the west, a single family detached dwelling, which appears to be occupied by a contracting firm, and twin duplex dwellings, also zoned R-3; f.The existing use is a 3-story, mansard roofed structure containing four (4) apartments with a vacant first floor formerly occupied by a commercial use; g. The proposed use seeks to convert the first-floor commercial space into two (2) residential apartments; h. The relief required by the Applicant is a D-2 use variance to allow the ground floor apartments in a zone where multi-family structures are not permitted; i. The positive criteria, meaning the special reasons justifying the use variance, is the advancement of the purposes of the MLUL, including Purpose a, to encourage municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in this State in a manner that will promote the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare; Purpose g, to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial and industrial uses and open space, both public and private, according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens; and Purpose m, to encourage coordination of the various public and private procedures and activities shaping land development with the view of lessening the cost of such development and to the more efficient use of land; j. To justify the requested use variance, special reasons to support the granting of the variance must be demonstrated while also recognizing that the modification of a pre-existing nonconforming use is viewed with greater liberality, that legal nonconforming uses are established with the area becoming accommodated to the use's impact and that legally established pre-existing nonconforming uses have the right to continue and even grow, subject to appropriate conditions; k. Factors justifying the relief sought by the Applicant include that the modification of a pre-existing nonconforming use is justified if that modification allows the use to adapt to changing requirements for the use and does not result in a significant intensification or change in the character of the use; l. Courts have recognized the unfairness of not allowing minor changes to pre-existing non-confomung uses which would allow the use to adapt to changing circumstances; m. The Applicant's proposed expansion of the apartment use will allow a more efficient and appropriate use for the vacant first floor of an existing structure; n. The layout of the building with the first-floor business use reflected older development patterns where it was common for small neighborhood-oriented businesses, such as taverns, barber shops, and delicatessens, to locate within residential areas, uses that were sustainable as long as car ownership in the area was low and the business could rely on pedestrian traffic; o. Economic and lifestyle choices have made these pedestrian type uses obsolete as shopping pattems have changed, car ownership is universal, and shoppers no longer have to rely on local businesses, commercial uses need to be on main roads for visibility and access to attract customers; on-line shopping and the internet have also resulted in the contraction of the market for small retail and professional spaces; p. Freestanding neighborhood business spaces cannot compete with more viable locations with newer improvements and convenient parking; q. The Applicant's multi-family use is established and expanding it to include the commercial space on the first floor provides a viable alternative use for a vacant and obsolete space; r. The two additional apartments will eliminate a more intense nonconformity if the first-floor was occupied by a non-residential use will result in a more residential character consistent with the zoning and the area; s. A minor modification of a pre-existing nonconforming use is justified if that modification results in an overall improvement in the use or mitigates some of the uses impacts; t. Case law has found that the expansion of a pre-existing nonconforming use is justified if it results in improvements that offset the impact of the use; u. The improvements resulting from the Applicant's proposed development of the Property include the paving and refurbishing of the parking lot, upgrading the trash enclosure area and interior and exterior renovations to enhance the building; v. These improvements will make the site more attractive and the conversion of the business space into a residential space will make the site more compatible with a residential area, satisfying the criteria established by case law; w. The location remains appropriate for the expanded nonconforming use, despite its modification as the Property is located in a residential zone, and adjoins other pre-existing multifamily uses in an area that includes similar uses and structures; x. The Property complies with the bulk standards for the R-3 zone; y. Unlike many residential locations in the immediate area, this site has the capacity to provide sufficient off-street parking spaces for its tenants; RSIS requires 12.6 spaces for the 6 apartments, 13 off-street parking spaces are provided; z. The proposed apartments will not result in added on-street parking demand and will reduce the potential parking demand generated by eliminating the potential for a first-floor commercial use; aa. The proposed use will allow for the adaptive reuse of the site; bb. The commercial space is currently vacant; vacant and underutilized structures tend to have negative impacts on the surrounding uses and the neighborhood as a whole; cc. The adaptive reuse stemming from the apartment conversion would mitigate these potential detriments; dd. Relief requested will also advance the purposes of the MLUL by serving as an appropriate and efficient use of land, satisfying the positive criteria for a d(2) variance; ee. The Applicant also has to satisfy the negative criteria for the requested d(2) variance, that is, the use will not result in a substantial detriment to the public good and will not impair the intent of the zone plan and zoning ordinance; ff. The general welfare prong of the negative criteria is usually satisfied by showing that the proposed use will not adversely impact the immediate neighborhood; gg. The proposed expanded nonconforming use has no potential to adversely impact the surrounding area as the R-3 zone is a residential district, and a residential use will be more compatible within a residential district than the former business use; the conversion of a commercial space to 2 residential apartments will be more consistent with the neighborhood; the consolidated residential use will be compatible with the existing multi-family dwellings on adjoining lots and the use is established; two additional apartments will not create a significant change in their impact on the neighborhood.; hh. There is no potential detriment to the public welfare from adding two apartments to an otherwise residential area; ii. The granting of this d(2) variance will not impair the intent or purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance as the primary apartment use is established and has no discernible negative impact on the area; the variance will allow the balance of the building to be occupied in a similar manner, and it will eliminate the potential for its further use by a more impactful and inconsistent non-residential use; JJ. Replacing a nonconforming commercial space with a residential space lessens the overall level of nonconformity of the site; the residential space is more consistent with the character and purpose of a residential district; kk. The site has the capacity to accommodate the additional units and provide sufficient parking; actually, the off-street parking lot mitigates the site's most significant potential adverse impact; ll. The relief will also address two of the secondary purposes of the R-3 zone, to help maintain existing housing stock and the improvements associated with the variance will enhance the streetscape and accommodate compatible infill development; mm. Overall, the relief requested will lead to an appropriate use of the Property without any substantial detriment to the surrounding area; nn. These factors also reconcile the variance for an expansion of the multi-family use with the policies supported by the use restrictions of the R-3 zone; oo. The relief requested satisfies the negative criteria. 13. The Applicant was questioned by an interested member of the public as to when the Applicant purchased the Property in relation to the prior bar use and whether the Applicant has marketed the first floor for a commercial use. (The Applicant's representative testified that the bar that formerly occupied the first floor was already closed and that the first floor was not marketed for a commercial use since the Applicant's acquisition of the Property.) 14. The Board Engineer and Planner reviewed their November 4, 2025 Engineering and Planning Review Letter #2 and had no objection to the Application as the Applicant has addressed or will address their review comments; the Board Engineer further recommended that any damage to the site during construction be repaired/replaced. AND, WHEREAS, based upon the above factual findings, the Joint Land Use Board has come to the following conclusions: 1. Res judicata does not apply as the one unit reduction in the number of first floor units now proposed by the Applicant is a substantial change in the Application previously denied by the Board. 2. This application relates to a specific piece of property and the purposes of the zoning laws of the State of New Jersey and of the Zoning Ordinance of the Township of Riverside would be advanced by the deviation from the zoning ordinance requirement for permitted uses in the R-3 Zoning District, as specified herein and as requested by the Applicant for the expansion of the nonconforming multi-family use. 3. The benefits of the deviation from the zoning ordinance requirement specified herein would substantially outweigh any detriment to the public good, as variance approval would promote the safety, health and general welfare of the community. 4. Relief as requested by the Applicant can be granted without a substantial detriment to the public good and would not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning code of the Township of Riverside. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Joint Land Use Board of the Township of Riverside, on the 8th day of December, 2025 that this Board hereby grants to the Applicant (i) a variance pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D- 70(d)(2) to expand the nonconfonning use located on the Property and (ii) Minor Site Plan Approval for the conversion of the first floor of the existing building into two (2) I-bedroom apartments, as proposed by the Applicant, in accordance with the Plans, Testimony and Exhibits submitted by the Applicant, with Variance and Site Plan Approvals subject to the following conditions: a. Subject to the Applicant obtaining all other approvals that may be required for the development, including, but not limited to Burlington County Planning Board and Burlington County Soil Conservation District approvals. b. Proof that the Applicant has applied for the necessary approval(s) from all other agencies having jurisdiction over the Applicant's use of the Property shall be filed with the Township's Land Use Coordinator. c. The fulfillment of all conditions precedent shall forthwith be reported in writing to the Township, which may cause such reports to be verified in an appropriate manner. Only upon the fulfillment of the conditions shall the Site Plan be signed and building permits, certificates of occupancy or zoning permits be issued. d. Subject to the sworn testimony and representations of the Applicant's witnesses and representatives made on the record at the August 1, 2025 and December 8, 2025 Public Hearings, whether recorded in this Resolution or fonnally imposed as a condition of Approval. e. Subject to the submission of revised plans complying with the comments of the Board Professionals and with this Resolution, as required. f. Subject to the Applicant posting all required inspection fees and performance and maintenance guarantees, required by the Municipal Land Use Law of the State of New Jersey for construction of the development, as approved. g. Subject to the Applicant's escrow account for the review of its Application being current. Failure of the escrow account to remain current may result in the non-issuance of permits. h. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to waive or modify the requirement that the Applicant obtain from all other agencies having jurisdiction in this matter, any and all approvals required by law and this approval is specifically conditioned upon the Applicant obtaining those approvals. i. Subject to the Applicant applying for and receiving all permits that are required prior to the commencement of construction. This Approval does not guarantee the issuance of any zoning pennit, construction permit or certificate of occupancy as the Applicant is required to comply with all other applicable codes, ordinances, rules, regulations and statutes for the issuance of such permits or occupancy certificate. j. Subject to the review comments of the Board Engineer and Board Planner as contained in the November 4, 2025 Engineering and Planning Review Letter #2 of Environmental Resolutions, Inc., by Rakesh R. Darji, PE, CME, PP and Brett L. Harris, AICP, PP, except as may be modified herein. k. Subject to the Applicant complying with the Affordable Housing Development Fee requirements of the applicable Township Ordinances or State law, rule or regulation. l. Subject to the Applicant coordinating with the Board Engineer and Board Planner the finalization of the site plan, including, but not limited to landscaping, lighting and the resurfacing/restoration of the parking area. The Applicant is advised that if the site plan is not finalized to the satisfaction of the Board Engineer and Planner, further action from the Joint Land Use Board will be required. m. Subject to all site improvements, including sidewalk and curbing, damaged during construction being repaired/replaced as determined by the Board Engineer, n. Subject to any signage for the site not shown on the approved site plan complying with the Township's Sign Ordinance, otherwise, a variance from the Board will be required. o. Subject to parking spaces being assigned to the apartment units. p. Subject to rain gutters and downspouts being added to the building for stormwater control. q. Subject to a night light test being coordinated with the Board Engineer to determine if the site lighting is adequate for the use of the Property. Additional lighting may be required. ROLL CALL VOTE 1l10se in Favor: 5 Those Opposed: 2 Those Abstaining: 0 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this foregoing Resolution is a true memorializing resolution, as adopted by the Joint Land Use Board of the Township of Riverside in accordance with its decision at its regular meeting on December 8, 2025. JOINT LAND USE BOARD OF THE TOWNSHIP OF RIVERSIDE By: /s/ John Kane, Chairman Attest: /s/ Meghan Jack, Secretary Dated: 1 /12/2025 Date of Action: December 8, 2025 Date of Mcmorialization: January 12, 2026 February 23 2026 LSOM0462904 $294.50