Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonconforming Lot Proposal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board asks Beamhurst Avenue applicant to revise plans over 3-foot side setbacks, drainage and fire-safety concerns
Summary
An applicant proposed replacing a small house on a 25-foot lot with a new three-bedroom home; the board pressed on side-yard reductions to 3 feet, increased coverage and drainage/fire-safety implications and asked the applicant to submit revised plans (one side increased to 5 feet) and drainage details.
Attorney Charles deWillem introduced architect Robert Larson and owner Giovanni Alba to present a proposal to replace an existing cottage with a three-bedroom single-family home on a nonconforming 25-foot lot in the R-7 zone.
Larson, a New Jersey-licensed architect and planner, described the proposal as a modest, 1,900-square-foot, three-bedroom house with a one-car garage. He said the project requires several variances because the existing lot lacks required area and width; the proposal calls for side yards of 3 feet where the ordinance requires 8 feet, principal-building coverage of roughly 39.5% (20% permitted) and total impervious coverage of about 53.5% (45% limit). "We're asking for 8.5% of relief," Larson said of the impervious-surface increase, and he argued the project would improve stormwater handling by tying leaders directly into the street storm sewer and would improve the streetscape compared with the current cottage.
Board members questioned elements of the proposal at length. The chair said, "I'm very concerned about the 3 foot on each side and the grading issues ... That's the safety — the fire situation." Members pressed whether the proposed side yards would allow safe maintenance and egress, whether windows shown on the plans complied with building-code restrictions for openings near property lines, and how the applicant would handle overground drainage without permission to work on neighboring land. Larson acknowledged that windows within 0–5 feet raise code issues, said some windows would be inset or removed to comply, and offered to revise plans to increase one side yard to 5 feet if that would allay board concerns.
The board also asked for clearer engineering on grading and drainage; one board member noted the plans in the packet appear to show a basement/garage configuration that was later changed, and asked the applicant to submit consistent, updated architectural and grading plans. Counsel and the architect agreed to submit revised drawings, including a plan that provides a 5-foot setback on one side and more detailed drainage information.
The board did not vote to grant the variances tonight and asked the applicant to return with revised plans addressing the side-yard setback, drainage solutions and any required window/egress changes so building-code compliance can be determined. The board indicated any future relief would be conditioned on memorialized findings and building-department review.
Direct quotes from the hearing include:
"We're asking for 8.5% of relief," said architect Robert Larson, describing the increase in impervious coverage.
"I'm very concerned about the 3 foot on each side and the grading issues ... That's the safety — the fire situation," the chair said, citing safety and maintenance concerns.
What happens next: the applicant agreed to submit revised architectural plans (including the option of a 5-foot setback on one side), updated grading/drainage details and clarifications on windows and egress. The board will consider the revised submission at a future meeting; no variance was approved for this application on May 27.
