Hopatcong board delays Georgi lakefront build amid dispute over Riggs Lane access

The Hopatcong Planning Board on Tuesday carried an application from Sandra Georgi to April 15 after neighbors and the Echo Cove Association asked the board to withhold action until deeded access rights along Riggs Lane are resolved.

Georgi asked the board for multiple variances to build a two‑bedroom, two‑story home with a walkout basement, a two‑car garage, and a larger boathouse and docks at 8 Oneida Avenue (Block 31603, Lots 1 and 8). Engineer testimony described a slender, 25,710.4‑square‑foot R‑1 lot with steep topography that slopes down to Lake Hopatcong; the application seeks lot‑depth, front‑yard and rear‑yard relief and significant steep‑slope disturbance relief.

Why it matters: nearby property owners and the Echo Cove Association said their historical deeded rights to a 35‑foot strip and beach that leads to Echo Cove — known locally as Riggs Lane — would be affected. Their attorney asked the board to condition approval on a recorded agreement, saying the owners have accessed the dock and beach area “for the last 60 or 70 years” and that a court order previously divided part of the lane. The board agreed to carry the application 30 days so the parties can attempt to negotiate.

Board and applicant testimony Engineer testimony summarized the site constraints that the applicant says justify C‑1 (hardship) relief: the lot measures about 66 feet across where 100 feet is required, front yard setbacks computed from the end of Oneida Avenue yield a tight building envelope, and slopes greater than 15 percent cover much of the disturbed area. The engineer reported proposed disturbance of about 10,578.8 square feet of slopes greater than 15 percent where the ordinance permits 2,500 square feet.

The applicant’s engineer said the plan replaces the existing boathouse and larger dock structures with a proposed 21‑by‑30‑foot boathouse intended to store a single pontoon boat. Proposed water‑lot coverage for the boathouse would rise from an existing 20.3 percent to about 28.3 percent; dock coverage would rise from 10 percent to about 17 percent. The design includes three dry wells to collect roof runoff, a retaining wall up to about 4 feet to terrace the garage entry, and site grading to direct surface runoff toward the lake. The engineer also said the septic design has been approved by the Sussex County commission referenced in the hearing record.

The architect described a small, cottage‑scaled two‑bedroom home (first floor ~840 sq ft, second floor ~744 sq ft), a walkout basement and attic/loft space not intended as habitable bedrooms. The boathouse includes a non‑habitable upper storage area with ceiling height the architect said would not meet egress requirements to be considered additional living space.

Neighbors’ objections and legal concerns Chris Colabella, speaking for Echo Cove Association and for several named property owners, told the board he represents six households plus the association and said deed language and a prior court order (entered by Judge DeAngelis, Chancery Division, the record says) establish rights tied to a 35‑foot strip between lots historically used to reach the dock and beach. Colabella asked the board to make any approval conditional on an agreement that protects those access rights or to withhold action until the parties finalize an agreement.

Multiple residents echoed those concerns. Caroline ("Corey") Liguori and Tom Hatton described long‑standing use of the lane and asked the board to require protections — including a recorded easement or licensing agreement and, in one public speaker’s suggestion, a construction bond to repair the lane if equipment damages it.

Applicant response and board decision Applicant counsel said he had offered a licensing agreement approach (described in the record as an annual license with renewal terms and additional‑insured status on insurance) and that the applicant is willing to continue negotiations. Counsel also said he preferred negotiations not be made a precondition of the board’s consideration because, in his view, that could leave the applicant indefinitely unable to proceed if a single property owner declined.

After discussion the board voted to carry the application to the April 15 meeting and asked the parties to work toward a written agreement in that period. The board made clear it expected the parties to attempt to resolve the access and insurance issues and said the application will be returned to the board on that date unless the parties agree otherwise.

Votes at a glance Motion: Carry (table) Georgi application for 30 days to April 15, 2025; mover/second: not specified in record. Outcome: Carried (unanimous on roll call) Vote (as recorded in the meeting): Sherrill — yes; Diamond — yes; Croft — yes; Councilman Kucovich — yes; Mazilewski — yes; Chairman Wright — yes; Snow — yes; Taylor — yes; Mayor Galati — yes.

What remains The application still requests all variances described in testimony: lot depth (proposed 66 ft vs required 100 ft); front yard setback (proposed 30 ft vs required 40 ft); rear yard setback (main house 16.1 ft, chimney at 13.73 ft vs required 20 ft); steep‑slope disturbance (proposed ~10,578.8 sq ft vs permitted 2,500 sq ft); boathouse and dock water‑lot coverage increases (boathouse to ~28.3%, docks to ~17%); and dock width/length variances (one proposed dock 6 ft wide where 5 ft max is in ordinance, total leg length ~98 ft where 50 ft is required). The board record shows the septic system was described as approved by the Sussex County commission noted in testimony.

Next steps: parties were directed to attempt an agreement and to return on April 15; if no agreement is reached, the board indicated it would proceed on the application record then.