Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montville board grants variances for Sabatino backyard pool, fence and shed
Summary
The Zoning Board approved 'C' variances for a proposed in‑ground pool, shed, reduced buffer and a 6‑foot privacy fence at 21 Gunthers View, citing the lot’s through‑lot configuration; approvals were conditioned on engineers’ and planners’ reports and required plan notes.
The Montville Township Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 3 approved variance relief to allow an in‑ground pool, a shed and a 6‑foot fence at 21 Gunthers View, the board record shows.
Applicant Susan Sabatino, sworn during the hearing, said she intends to install a pool for her four children and requested a privacy fence because coyotes have posed a safety risk on her property: "I have 4 kids and I want to put a swimming pool in. Privacy fence is important with children. We have a major issue with coyotes on my property. Could not let my kids out, it is not safe," she said.
Attorney Steven Schepis reviewed title issues tied to Alpine Road, an unimproved private roadway that makes the property effectively a through lot with two front yards. Engineer Erman Suljic, P.E., testified that the application requires 'C' variance relief for deficient setbacks between the proposed pool and Alpine Road, a deficient landscaped buffer, and a shed setback shortfall; the plan also requests a 6‑foot fence where 5 feet is permitted. Suljic described proposed drainage mitigation, including French drains around the pool patio and a drywell/infiltration system; he said there would be a small side retaining wall of about 10–15 feet and a soil‑movement permit was requested.
Schepis told the board the applicant will address outstanding items in the board planner’s report and add required notations about lighting, tree removal and any wall‑fence compliance: "Will address all remaining items in your report," he said. The board planner and engineer asked that infiltration tests and as‑built drainage information be added to the plans and that tree removal be noted; the applicant indicated a dead tree on the lot is less than 30 inches.
After testimony and no public comment, Board member Rebecca Gomilla moved to approve the application subject to the testimony and all required professional reports; Ibrahim Coklar seconded. Roll call votes were Yes from Gomilla, Larry Lomrantz, Coklar, Ryan Pisano and Jake Kovalcik, and the motion carried.
The approval is conditioned on incorporation of the professionals’ required plan notes, compliance with the soil movement permit, and any buffering or fence treatments the board’s ordinance requires for walls taller than 30 inches. The board set no additional modification to the approved setbacks beyond the variances recorded in the application.
