Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attached Garage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After debate over a zoning denial and height rules, board approves attached garage at 146 Baker Ave
Summary
The Board of Adjustment approved a plan to attach a two‑car garage at 146 Baker Avenue after hearing testimony about a zoning‑office denial and a change in the township height measurement; approval was conditioned on revised plans, stormwater checks and an 18‑ft curb cut at the street.
The Berkeley Heights Board of Adjustment on June 25 approved an application from Storybook Homes 2 LLC to attach a two‑car garage at 146 Baker Avenue, after hearing testimony about a prior zoning‑office denial and an ordinance change that altered how building height is measured.
Counsel James Weber told the board the garage attachment followed earlier approvals for the house and that the property is undersized; the application seeks variances tied to prior nonconforming conditions and a coverage variance. The application prompted a procedural dispute over whether the submission was a new application or an amendment of a previous approval and whether the zoning officer’s denial letter accurately reflected the as‑built condition.
Engineer and planner Christopher Nuser testified that the house is framed and permitted and therefore represents an legally existing nonconformity; he said the proposed attached garage addition would measure about 26.31 feet under the township’s current height calculation and therefore conform to the new 27‑foot limit. “At this point...the house is built. It has permits and it's under construction,” Nuser said, arguing the board should judge the addition’s compliance rather than treat the entire structure as a new violation.
Applicant representative Daniel M. Reichard told the board he spoke with zoning officer Tom Bako and said the denial stemmed from plan labeling confusion; Reichard said the officer agreed the house as built was covered by prior relief and that only the new addition needed review. The exchange clarified the administrative history but the board proceeded by treating the submission as a new application with prior approvals noted.
Builder Dan Riker described why the team changed the plans: the detached garage and long side driveway proved impractical in the field, making access and everyday use difficult, so the team proposed attaching a two‑car garage and reducing impervious coverage. “I didn't do my homework,” Riker said, describing how on‑site reality and construction logistics led the team to revise the design.
The board reviewed updated site exhibits and a bulk‑table showing revised setbacks, an updated impervious coverage of roughly 30.84 percent (reduced from prior submissions), and a proposed garage height that meets current ordinance calculations. The applicant agreed to submit three copies of amended plans with updated measurements, and to comply with any additional stormwater requirements triggered by the change in impervious area. The board also discussed an 18‑foot curb cut at the street (with a 20‑foot private driveway width) and restoration of Belgian block curbing where the old driveway is removed.
After a brief public‑comment period with no speakers, the board approved the application by roll call and noted conditions requiring amended filings and any required stormwater measures. The board instructed staff to consolidate and list all existing nonconforming conditions in the final resolution, which will be prepared for the next meeting on July 23.
