Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pool Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pool and deck plan at 18 Prospect draws safety questions; board approves with fencing and permit caveats
Summary
Jason Deckert’s plan to expand a deck and install a 12x24 above‑ground pool at 18 Prospect drew questions about a 4.1‑ft deck setback, pool‑deck elevation and required fencing; the board approved the variances and directed code compliance for pool barriers at permitting.
Jason Deckert told the Waldwick Zoning Board he wants to extend the rear deck at 18 Prospect to create a family‑friendly area that will adjoin an above‑ground pool. Deckert said the pool is a 12x24 above‑ground model and that he intends the deck and pool apron to be flush so family use is more convenient.
The project required three C1 variances because the lot is undersized and the proposed deck would sit about 4.1 feet from a side property line, closer than the ordinance normally permits. The applicant’s engineer (Neglia Group) told the board the plan would leave roughly 13.9 feet between the deck and the east side and about 16.8 feet to the rear for the pool; the engineer also said the design includes removing an unused concrete driveway extension and planting grass to mitigate the increase in impervious coverage.
Board members pressed the applicant on pool‑safety measures. The engineer said the finished pool height would be about 48 inches and that the deck would be flush with the pool apron on one side; the board emphasized that a code‑compliant barrier (48‑inch fence or an approved ladder configuration and self‑latching gate) must be demonstrated at the building‑permit stage. The board’s procedural review also covered notice to neighbors; counsel and the board confirmed that neighbors were renotified after an initial notice discrepancy and found notice effective for purposes of the hearing.
After testimony and technical questions, the board approved the variances. The board and the applicant noted two practical points: (1) applicants may begin to apply for building permits but proceeding before the 45‑day post‑publication objection period carries legal risk; and (2) the building department will require code‑compliant fencing, gate hardware and ladder/barrier details when reviewing the permit application.
The approval was procedural and conditional: it addresses the zoning variances only; code compliance (including fencing and pool barriers) will be verified by the building department before final permit sign‑off.
