MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE BOROUGH OF
Chair Jill Gotthelf called the meeting to order and read the Open Public Meeting Advertisement: Notice of this meeting was given to the Citizen and the Daily Record, posted with the Borough Clerk and on the Bulletin Board and was made available to all those requesting individual notice and paying the required fee.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Gotthelf, Richter, Bolo (arr.
Absent: Max Also Present: Attorney Lisa John
Council Liaison - none
REVIEW OF MINUTES: The minutes of the September 7 meeting were approved by voice vote.
MEMORIALIZING RESOLUTIONS:
ERIC BECHT Appl. #06-480
Jill Gotthelf made the motion to adopt the revised resolution of approval, seconded by Bob Sheasby and carried by 2 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
ANNA-LISA GALLO Appl. #06-491
David Kane made the motion to adopt the resolution of approval, seconded by Jim Moody and carried by 4 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
DOUGLAS WALLER Appl. #06-494
Jim Moody made the motion to adopt the resolution of approval, seconded by Chris Sullivan and carried by 5 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
ANDREW & VIVIEN GREENBERG Appl. #06-495
Bob Sheasby made the motion to adopt the resolution of denial, seconded by David Kane and carried by 2 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
MICHAEL & PATRICIA MCELDUFF Appl. #06-496
Jim Moody made the motion to adopt the resolution of approval, seconded by David Kane and carried by 5 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
BOB & MAUREEN WILSON Appl. #06-498
Chris Sullivan made the motion to adopt the resolution of approval, seconded by David Kane and carried by 5 - 0 roll call of eligible voters.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: All applicants were sworn in by Chairman
Gotthelf. The application order was
modified from the published agenda.
GARY & ANDREA MCLAUGHLIN 11 Van Duyne
Bl. 49, Lot 40.01 Appl. #06-500
ILC RAA zone
Gary and Andrea were sworn in by Chair Gotthelf. They would like to create a grassed area in their back yard. They are reducing existing coverage but will still be over the 20% limit in the RAA zone. They will reduce the amount of concrete around the pool area and the size of the retaining walls. The deck will be removed and replaced with pavers to reduce upkeep and eliminate splinters. Walls will be tiered so that no wall is over 3 feet. The existing fence around the pool is outside the property line but they plan to move it within the setbacks. Chris Richter asked whether the stone area is included in impervious coverage. McLaughlin said yes.
The McLaughlins testified that the A/C units are within the envelope. Portions of the pre-existing fence will be replaced but will still be nonconforming. Variances had not been granted for the pool and fence. The Board reminded them that to be in compliance, the fence would have to be inside the 25 foot setback line. They agreed to that limitation. Bob Sheasby asked whether they could reduce coverage even farther because it is so far beyond the 20% limit (28.3% requested). McLaughlin said that they prefer the pavers aesthetically and to reduce upkeep. Their primary purpose is to make the area safer for their children. David Kane pointed out that some of the walls are higher than 3 feet and must be reduced; that should be a condition of approval.
Board comments: Gotthelf – would like to see the ILC reduced but she appreciates the installation of the dry wells and could accept the request; she would also like the fence moved within the building envelope. Moody – the wall revision would be less hazardous. Rusak agreed with previous comments. Sheasby – not comfortable with the request; the pool and decking create a lot of coverage; he would prefer more reduction in coverage. Bolo – would like to reduce coverage, perhaps with a wood deck. Sullivan – the nonconformities were not created on your watch so I’d support the application. Richter – the deck is not an issue, I don’t like the stone walls encroaching within 5 feet of the property line. Some of the walls could be eliminated. The shed is 1 ˝’ off the property line. Andrea – the neighbors like the shed because it is covered with ivy. The fence should be brought to conformity. Gotthelf – we would prefer to see the revisions because we don’t know exactly how much can be reduced. Richter -would like a revised plan and have them come back with an exact number.
Chris Richter made the motion to accept the plan with these conditions: fence in conformance with setback requirements; all retaining walls should be within setbacks 130 square feet of coverage should be removed from the plan. That would bring the coverage to 8524 square feet reducing ILC to a maximum of 27.9%. The motion was seconded by Jim Moody and carried by 5-2 roll call vote (Bolo, Sheasby denied.)
Carried from September 7:
BOB & JENNIFER VOLOSIN 77 Cobb Road
Bl. 57, Lot 12 Appl. #06-497
Front, Bldg. Env., Soil Moving, ILC, FAR, height RA/RAA zone
Attorney Lee Levitt agreed he would not rely on previous testimony so that all Board members would be eligible to vote. Levitt clarified that they are accepting the interpretation from the previous meeting that the RAA zoning requirements would apply because part of the property is in that zone.
Architect Seth Leeb has
previously been accepted as an expert.
Leeb referred to drawing A1, a colored version of the application with
the open porches defined. Leeb described
the building envelope variance, required because the 85 x 50 envelope cannot
fit within the setbacks since the front yard exception dictates an 85.1 foot
setback. The previous house, destroyed
by fire, had a greater nonconformity. If
the house is set back 85.1 feet, there would be no rear yard because the property
slopes up toward Laurel Hill. The
requested front setback of 75’ is the same as the adjacent neighbor to the
left. Exhibit A2 was a photo board of 6
properties in the neighborhood. Leeb
acknowledged the error of 95’ on the plan.
The previous stairs were set back 64.4 feet, the house approximately
77.9’. Exhibit A3 was the
Leeb described his efforts to keep the house within the RA zone. The previous plan met the height requirements. This plan puts the garage under the house to keep the structure within the RA zone. We have reduced the footprint. Jill explained that we cannot assess the soil moving or building height request without a topo map. There is a lack of information to make an informed decision. Levitt pointed out that they are trying to reduce the intensity of the variances required because the house would be in the RA zone. With this plan we do not need the FAR or ILC variances required if RAA limits apply. Jill pointed out that now additional variances are required because of these changes. Richter – it doesn’t make sense to move the house over and then require additional variances. Gotthelf said the Board did not suggest you move the house, it suggested that you meet the requirements of the more restrictive zone. You need to submit more information to support the request. Levitt asked for a straw vote but the Board would not support that.
From the Public: Anthony DiMarco,
New Application:
JASON & GALE ALVAREZ 67 Briarcliff
Bl. 78, Lot 40 Appl. #06-499
FAR RA zone
Gale Alvarez was sworn in. Architect Joan Nix accompanied Alvarez and explained that she was not the architect who prepared the application and cannot verity the calculations. The Alvarez family has lived here since November 2005. They are no longer working with the architect who prepared the application. They are reducing the FAR to 20.86% by eliminating the addition on the second floor. Nix suggested that any approval be contingent on verified calculations by an architect or engineer.
Sheet T1 was reviewed. 3 photos on Exhibit A1 showed the stairs and paving proposed to be eliminated. They would like to remove the existing family room on the lake side and reconstruct it 3 feet wider because it is too narrow for a functional family room. The spiral stairway will also disappear. There are severe problems with rodents and leaks in the existing structure. The preexisting side setback nonconformity will remain but the spiral stair case will be removed. Nix speculated that the lakefront exception might not apply because thee is no neighbor on the east side. The extension will not be closer to the lake than the adjacent house.
Dr. Bolo asked whether the playhouse next to the lake could be removed. Alvarez said they would be happy to remove it because it is an eyesore. Nix is not sure whether the sidewalk or playhouse had been included in coverage. Nix said they would remove whatever coverage was necessary to get to 25%.
There was no public comment. Jill Gotthelf summarized, the application is for FAR of 20.86%. If the variances are granted, new calculations will have to be prepared by a licensed architect or engineer to verify FAR and ILC. The playhouse and slab will be removed. Jim Moody made the motion to approve with the conditions stated, seconded by Peter Bolo and granted by 7-0 roll call vote. Exhibits were retained by the applicant.
Carried to
November 2:
DAVID WINTERS
Bl. 100.02, Lot 86 Appl. #06-483
FAR, ILC, front & shoreline RA zone
Other Matters / Public Comment:
Fred Kantor,
He said that this Board has operated without rules as
required by State Law, so there is no chair or vice-chair. Kantor said he was arrested by a person
without any authority. We have had
illegal operations. The police held me
in another room and did not allow me to come back to the meeting. I came here with a wish to correct the
transgressions of this Board and was arrested.
The draft minutes were not available to the public. It was pointed out to Mr. Kantor that draft
minutes are not distributed but are available upon request. Attorney John informed Kantor that material
is available if the proper form is completed.
Kantor continued: should Mr. Richter choose not to apologize and not to resign, I will use the law to void every action of this Board since January 1.
The meeting
was adjourned at
Respectfully submitted,
Marge Jackson, Secretary