Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waldwick board carries Wallace home application for soil testing and DEP review over pond‑edge concerns
Summary
The Waldwick Zoning Board paused a proposal by Matt and Nikki Wallace to replace a lakeside split‑level with a two‑story home after members and staff flagged missing engineering evidence, potential high water table near White(s) Pond and required DEP/permit‑by‑rule approvals. The board asked for soil borings and septic/perk tests before re‑opening the application.
Matt and Nikki Wallace asked the Waldwick Zoning Board to approve a knockdown and new two‑story house with a carport and covered patio at 41 White Pond Road, a lot that sits beside Whites Pond. The applicants, represented by architect Joseph Cesterero, said the design keeps a similar footprint to the existing split‑level while adding a basement and modest second‑floor living space.
The board’s technical reviewers and members focused the hearing on geotechnical and regulatory gaps. Mr. Singer told the board that the revised plans removed a height variance but that combined side‑yard and rear‑setback relief remained for the attached carport and roofed patio. Architect Joseph Cesterero said the plans show “the lot is certainly in character with the neighborhood,” and that the proposal keeps impervious coverage well under the municipal maximum.
Concerns centered on soils and flood‑related permitting. Joe, the building inspector, explained that a dashed line on the site plan relates to the NJ flood design elevation for Whites Pond and that the project will need review and approvals under the Department (DP/DEP) processes for structures close to the water. Board members and staff said they had not yet received soil borings or full seepage‑pit test data. As one board member put it, board staff had asked for a soil log and percolation tests to confirm the water table and the design for seepage pits; without that information, the board could not be certain a full basement or shallow septic system would function as designed.
The board’s engineer and planner indicated the applicants had submitted responses to earlier review comments but flagged that the key geotechnical questions remain outstanding. The board recommended the applicants perform soil borings and three test holes for the seepage pits (to the design depth plus two feet) and said those results should be available before a final decision. The board also noted that DEP/DP permit‑by‑registration requirements for streams and stormwater must be satisfied before construction permits can be issued.
After extensive questioning and discussion about the implications of a high water table and potential redesigns (removing or raising a basement, redesigning seepage pits), the board declined to vote and carried the matter to a later meeting to allow engineers to complete the required field testing and to provide any DP/DEP responses. The board recorded that an approval now could require later reapproval if DEP/DP or the geotechnical tests force substantive design changes.
Next steps: the Wallace applicants were told to arrange soil borings/perk tests and to bring their engineer and any DP/DEP correspondence to the next hearing. The board reiterated that any approval will remain subject to required permits and inspections and to the standard 45‑day period for challenges following resolution publication.
