Neighbors urge Borough to appeal variance for 516 North Church garage and ADU

Residents packed the Smart Growth Committee public-comment period to urge the Borough to appeal a Zoning Hearing Board decision that approved expanded building coverage for 516 North Church Street, a proposal to add a garage with an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).

Sarah Rogers, who lives at 516 Scott Alley and serves on the Sustainability Advisory Committee and the Barkley Grounds board, said the Zoning Hearing Board "did not seem to understand the full process" and that the proposal "will not go through the Planning Commission." Rogers asked the Borough to appeal the variance approval and handed committee members a copy of her remarks submitted to the March 31 hearing.

Other neighbors echoed her concerns. Chris Menon said the hearing focused narrowly on footprint and building coverage and excluded issues residents care about, including turning radius, water runoff and height. John Cottage, 532 North Church Street, said the alley is mostly single-story and the proposed two-story structure, up to about 24 feet, would be inconsistent with the alley's character and create light and noise impacts.

At the committee meeting, Borough code director Aaron Fluke confirmed the only relief before the Zoning Hearing Board was for total building coverage; ADUs in the NC1 and NC2 districts are allowed by right and would not normally go before the Zoning Hearing Board. Fluke explained the applicants hardship argument centers on lot-size brackets (under 12,000 sq ft; 12,000to 20,000 sq ft; over 20,000 sq ft) and that the applicant contends being slightly over the 12,000 threshold (about 12,100 sq ft) produces a disproportionately restrictive coverage limit. Fluke said he was not convinced the "100-square-foot" difference constituted hardship but that the Borough opposed the variance at the hearing.

Fluke told the committee the Zoning Hearing Board must issue a written decision within 45 days of the close of the hearing; once the board publishes that decision the Borough will receive it and staff will advise Council on the merits and likelihood of a successful appeal. He committed to provide the exhibits submitted to the hearing (site plans, footprint diagrams and photos) so committee members can evaluate the coverage math and sight-line impacts.

Residents repeatedly asked the committee and staff to measure practical impacts now (turning radius, trash pickup access, stormwater runoff) and to consider alternatives such as siting a garage on the Church Street driveway rather than the alley. The committee accepted staffs plan to gather the zoning exhibits and to place the matter on a future Smart Growth agenda when the Zoning Hearing Board issues its written decision.

The next procedural deadline is the Zoning Hearing Boards written decision; the Borough has 30 days after that to decide whether to file an appeal, staff said.