Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sayreville Zoning Board OKs variances for William Street single‑family home
Summary
The Sayreville Zoning Board approved variances for an application to build a single‑family house at 76 William Street after reviewing prior approvals, drainage changes and updated building dimensions. The approval was subject to state permits and memorialization at the next meeting.
The Sayreville Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to approve application 2505, granting variances to allow construction of a single‑family home at 76 William Street. The applicant, Michael Volomnick, whose family purchased the property in 2008, told the board he had regained capacity to pursue development after health problems and the COVID‑19 pandemic stalled earlier plans.
Board members and the applicant reviewed the property's history, including a prior remand to the board after Superior Court review and conditions from the earlier approval. Michael Volomnick said he had previously received approval for a house but did not build within the required period. “Now I'm ready,” Volomnick told the board.
The board heard that the new proposal differs from the earlier approval in several dimensional and coverage measures: the house is again four bedrooms (the prior approval had been revised to three bedrooms during the 2009 hearing), the building coverage increased from 22.4% to 24.5%, and impervious surface rose from 32% to 44.6% because of a longer driveway and a new rear deck. The proposed front setback from Davis/David Street was reduced from the earlier 10 feet to 9 feet; lot area and lot width remain nonconforming for the zone.
Board discussion also addressed flood and drainage issues that had been important in the prior review. Board counsel and witnesses said the borough has since installed a larger storm sewer system on William Street and added check valves, reducing the need for the drainage pipe that had been required under the earlier approval. The applicant acknowledged that state permits remain necessary: the board and counsel confirmed as a condition that the applicant must obtain any required New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection permits before construction.
After public comment was closed, a motion to approve carried on roll call. Seven members voted yes and one voted no. The board said it would memorialize the approval in a resolution at the next meeting and noted the DEP permit requirement would remain a condition of any final authorization.
Less‑critical details: the applicant said he may occupy the house himself but had not decided, and he brought a civil engineer, Mark Lehi, to answer technical questions. Board members asked about the change in first‑floor elevation (raised from 13 to 18 feet) and rechecked the list of required variances before voting.
