Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Fence Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves 6‑foot pool fence at 100 Fries Lane with survey and lighting conditions
Summary
The Cherry Hill Zoning Board granted a bulk variance allowing an as‑built 6‑foot aluminum pool fence at 100 Fries Lane, conditioned on a survey to resolve a possible Dublin Lane ROW encroachment and compliance with the Township lighting ordinance; the vote was 5‑0.
The Cherry Hill Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 4 unanimously approved a bulk (C) variance permitting an as‑built 6‑foot black aluminum fence enclosing an in‑ground pool at 100 Fries Lane, subject to conditions including a survey to determine whether any section encroaches into the Dublin Lane right‑of‑way and compliance with the Township lighting ordinance.
The variance request was presented by applicant Arthur Grass and his attorney Daniel Kelly. Zoning Officer Kathleen Gaeta testified that the permit originally issued in May 2024 contemplated a 4.5‑foot fence and that the township notified the applicant when it observed a 6‑foot fence had been installed. Township planner Jacob Richman told the board the permit language codifies applicable Uniform Construction Code pool‑fence requirements and that the board must find that the positive criteria outweigh the negative criteria to grant a C variance. Richman also noted a potential small encroachment into the Dublin Lane ROW and recommended a survey as a condition of approval.
Members described security and trespass deterrence as the primary reasons supporting the variance. Public commenter Martha Wright of 200 Munn Lane asked whether trees were removed to install the fence and raised concerns about apparent floodlighting on the residence. Grass said any removed vegetation were saplings, that he has planted up to 80 trees on the property, and that the lights had been installed by a previous owner; he agreed to comply with the zoning officer’s determination regarding lighting. Solicitor Allen Zeller summarized the conditions, and Grass agreed to the Community Development review letter’s requirements.
Following deliberation, Greg Bruno moved to approve the application; Mishael Azam seconded. The board recorded affirmative votes from Vice‑Chair Nacovin Norman, Jay Jones, Greg Bruno, Mishael Azam and Ken Williams, and the motion carried unanimously. The board required that, if a survey shows any part of the fence sits within the ROW, the applicant must relocate the fence without removing trees and must comply with the Township lighting ordinance as enforced by the zoning officer.
The applicant must submit the required survey and any relocation plan if the survey shows an encroachment; otherwise the fence may remain under the granted variance.
