Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing on 94 Nugent Drive addition put over to March 5 after neighbors raise drainage and sewer-easement concerns
Summary
A proposed two-story rear addition at 94 Nugent Drive was carried to March 5 so the applicant can provide further engineering information about drainage and potential impacts on a known sewer easement; neighbors described prior sinkholes and yard flooding during heavy rains.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment continued the application for a two-story rear addition at 94 Nugent Drive to its March 5 meeting after neighbors raised concerns about drainage, a sewer easement and past yard sinkholes.
Architect Francois Nicholas presented for applicants Rella and Jonathan Eisenbach, describing a 14-foot-7-inch slab-on-grade two-story addition to enlarge a rear master bedroom and kitchen, plus interior modifications. Nicholas said the lot is a triangular cul-de-sac parcel and the house already sits close to the rear yard limit; the addition would require relief from the 35-foot rear-yard requirement because the existing rear yard is already near or under that line.
Neighbors Roseanne Martorano (88 Newton Drive) and Kelly Walsh (87 Nugent Drive) described longstanding drainage problems in the neighborhood, including a historical sinkhole on Martorano’s property and previous sewage backups; Martorano asked that Clifton’s municipal engineers inspect the drainage and sewer easement. Chair and staff clarified application scope: the board will hear the applicant’s proposals for mitigation on the applicant’s property only. Board member and applicant discussion emphasized that the lot’s triangular shape and proximity to an industrial building behind the property contributed to the need for relief.
Given the neighbors’ testimony and requests for an engineering review of surface drainage and possible mitigation, the board agreed to carry the hearing to March 5 so the applicant can provide additional engineering information. Miss Bocato, zoning officer, confirmed the March 5 date and clarified the applicant will present property-specific engineering plans and not a townwide sewer study. Nicholas and the applicants offered to investigate seepage pits or other on-site mitigation and to coordinate with municipal staff; the board and neighbors were advised to exchange engineering contacts in advance of the continued hearing.
Why it matters: Public commenters said prior flooding and a known sewer easement raise the risk that expanding the house could worsen yard drainage and basement backups; the board paused action to let the applicant present engineered mitigation and allow neighbors to get municipal review if necessary.
Next steps: The board will reconvene this application at its March 5 meeting; applicants were encouraged to submit an engineer’s report addressing on-site drainage and any proposed seepage pits or other mitigation measures.
