Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant asks to keep preexisting fence; zoning board asks for a new survey and carries case
Summary
An applicant seeking to retain a fence and install a backup generator at 318 Dawes Highway told the Pompton Lakes Zoning Board the fence predates a 2021 zoning change; the board asked for a new, scaled survey showing fence location and height and continued the application.
At the July 28 meeting of the Pompton Lakes Zoning Board of Adjustment, an applicant identified as Maria asked the board to grant relief for a fence around a pool and to allow a previously applied‑for generator installation, saying the fence was in place before a zoning change in 2021.
Maria testified that she lives in a flood zone and sought the generator to power a sump pump during outages. She said the fence has “been there since” the prior owner and submitted historic photos and a letter from a DEP contact included with her application. "So I'm just asking that since this was there before 2021 when the thing changed, that you guys allow me to keep the fence," Maria told the board.
Board members and staff reviewed the denial notice and agreed the permit denial in the record stemmed from the fence's location, height, and front/side yard setback issues, not from the generator permit itself. Members examined a submitted survey (dated 02/02/1992) and discussed a separate letter from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection referring to floodway clearance. Board members made clear that DEP clearance does not automatically resolve local zoning requirements.
Multiple members said the submitted survey copy was too small or unclear to confirm whether the current PVC fence sits on the same line shown in older documents and whether its height is the same. One committee member recommended the applicant "come back with a new survey showing exactly what's there so that if you do come to an approval..." The board concluded it lacked sufficient evidence to grant a variance on the existing record and asked the applicant to file a legible, scaled survey that shows the fence line and height.
Because the key documentary facts were unresolved, the board carried the application. Staff told the applicant that if she returns with the corrected survey and required measurements, the board could act on the submission that same night.
The board did not vote to grant or deny the variance at the meeting; instead the matter was continued pending the applicant’s supplemental materials.
