Planning Board Re-Examines Master Plan

Pocket parks on Springfield Avenue? An above-grade crossing at the Maplewood Train Station? Hotels on Dunnell Road?

Maybe.

Nearing the end of a process that started last fall, the Maplewood Planning Board considered a re-examination report of the Town's Master Plan at its regular meeting on June 14.

The draft report contains some dynamic recommendations that accommodate developments like those stated above, plus broader policy statements like community objectives to "promote strong cultural activities" and "promote and support stable racial integration throughout the Township."

The State of New Jersey requires that municipalities re-examine their master plans every 10 years. Until recently, the law stated an re-examination every six years — hence the fact that Maplewood began re-examining its 2004 Master Plan in 2010.

The Township contracted with Phillips Preiss Grygiel LLC for $25,000 for the process. Starting with a call for public comments at the November 9, 2010 Planning Board meeting, Paul Grygiel had met with numerous stakeholders' groups including the Springfield Avenue Partnership and Maplewood Village Alliance, in addition to holding four meetings with the Planning Board's re-examination subcommittee (made up of Board members Tom Carlson, Jerry Ryan, Jim Nathenson and John Branigan).

The re-examination process also included extensive site visits throughout town. There was no special standalone public meeting held as part of the process; this is not required for a Master Plan re-examination, said Carlson, who is Chair of the Planning Board.

Grygiel — who happens to be a Maplewood resident — presented the draft re-examination document on Tuesday night. Grygiel took the Board and community members present through an overview of major points in the plan.

On the residential end, Grygiel said that language discouraging teardowns had been strengthened. Historic Preservation Committee Chair Ginny Kurshan noted that, even though teardowns and "McMansion"-building are not big problems in Maplewood at the moment, such language was very important to guard against a possible trend in future.

Another major residential discussion item was front setbacks for garages. Board members and members of the public debated whether language in the re-examination report was strong enough to sufficiently discourage garage doors on front facades of residences.

"Why not just disallow them?" asked Dave Helmkamp.

However, Mayor Vic DeLuca noted that some areas of town — particularly in the Hilton neighborhood — had different types of developments. "We do have other residential zones," said Carlson. "We need to put some fine tuning on this."

Grygiel then highlighted some recommendations related to commercial zones.

Some of the new "big ideas" in the report included a recommendation to modify highway business zoning on Springfield Avenue to allow for groundfloor residential development. Board member Nancy Adams said she was concerned that such construction could stop pedestrian flow between retail nodes on the Avenue. Grygiel countered that "currently you have some real dead zones," noting that there was a "lot of land between nodes and a lot of vacant property" and that, in these areas, there was "not a market for retail right now and probably not for a long time."

The report also suggests, "The provision of additional open space and space for special events could help futher improve the [Springfield Avenue] corridor."

Regarding Maplewood Village and Dunnell Road, the report stresses that the areas should be considered as one. Better connections between the two areas should be sought — including perhaps an above-grade crossing over the NJTransit tracks.

The report recommends that retail be limited on Dunnell Road so as not to compete with Village businesses. Rather, Dunnell Road developments — such as small-scale hotels and multi-use family structures — should serve as a customer base for Village businesses.

The report adds no major recommendations on parking, recognizing that there is currently a separate town parking study underway.

Planning Board members made numerous changes to the document themselves — mostly minor changes such as requests that COAH (Council on Affordable Housing) and other abbreviations be spelled out. Members of the public who attended (there were four) also made suggestions that were taken into account. For example, Dave Helmkamp raised concerns about language stating that "The Parkside zone should be expanded to include the property currently occupied by the Delta Service station."

Helmkamp felt that the 50-foot building height allowed by the zone was too bulky for the location and would impact the character of the area. DeLuca added that one reason that the property had not been included in the Parkside Zone previously was because of the nearby stream bed and the property's location in a flood plain.

Grygiel outlined other recommendations to encourage and control development on Valley north or Parker (the A&P area), at the Village post office site, and at the Maplewood Country Club (in the event "the country club seeks to sell or redevelop ... the site should be primarily preserved as open space..."). More details can be found in the attached document.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board tasked Grygiel with making changes to the document. It was expected that edits would be completed within 72 hours and the amended document would then be posted on the Township website for the community to view and comment upon.

Planning Board Chair Tom Carlson encouraged all Maplewood residents to review the document (the current version is attached here) and to attend the next Planning Board meeting on July 12, 2011, at 8 p.m. at the Maplewood Municipal Building to make comments.