Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impervious Coverage Driveway Sheds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board asks zoning official to investigate sheds and impervious coverage after driveway expansion application
Summary
The board referred a driveway expansion matter for investigation after an as‑built survey showed impervious coverage approaching the local threshold; the board asked the zoning official to report back and flagged a second shed as a potential violation.
The Township of Washington Zoning Board asked the municipal zoning official to investigate whether work at a property that sought a driveway expansion has created an impervious‑coverage violation.
At the prior hearing the applicant for a driveway expansion was asked to provide an as‑built survey; that survey later showed impervious coverage at about 35.9 percent, just above the 35 percent threshold cited by board members. Board members noted the driveway may have been grandfathered, but the addition of a second shed could push total impervious coverage into noncompliance.
Why it matters: if the second shed or changes to the driveway cause a property to exceed the municipality's impervious surface limits under the recent ordinance update, the owner may need to appear before the board for a formal hearing and possible remedies.
Board members directed staff and board member Mister Yekimik to email the zoning official (Joe) and request a written determination about whether the sheds and driveway are grandfathered or in violation. The zoning official's written report is expected before the next meeting; the board set the matter to return, or to be forwarded for enforcement, depending on the official's findings.
No final determination was made by the board at the meeting; the next meeting will include the zoning official's report and any resulting hearing if required.
