December 20, 2012

Mr. Novak stated that Mr. Bocchino is proposing to build a 30’ x 30° detached two-car garage that he designed. He said that one of the bays would be for his boat and boat trailer that is 28” long and the other bay would be for his pick-up truck that he uses for his business. Mr. Novak referred to the plans and stated that the existing house has a one car garage under it. He said that this garage is being utilized by his wife’s car. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Novak if the existing garage under the house will remain; Mr. Novak replied yes. Mr. Novak detailed the area on the plans where the proposed garage will be built. He said that four variances are being requested because the lot is a substandard corner lot that is under 10,000 sq. fect. Mr. Novak stated that the variance for the rear set back is because they are 6’ from the property line and 10° is required. He referred to the plans showing trees along this property line and stated that the neighbor will not be able to see the garage because of these trees. Mr. Buechler asked Mr, Novak if the side 5° is considered a second front yard; Mr. Novak stated that it is defined as the rear set-back. Mr. Buechler asked Mr, Novak if they would consider moving the garage 4’ forward toward the street, Mr. Novak said that they would be glad to do that. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Grygiel to take a look at that and comment. Mr. Novak said that the lot coverage is currently 22.1% and 30% is required. He said that with the garage the lot coverage will increase to 31.9%. He said that there is an open deck and if the deck is counted as a structure it puts the applicant over. Mr. Buechler asked if the patio is pervious or impervious; Mr. Novak said that it is made of brick and is impervious. Mr. Grygiel stated that there is a separate standard for a side front yard and it is 30% due to the zone that the house is in. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Grygiel, from a planning perspective, should the applicant move the garage forward 4’; Mr. Grygiel said that it already encroaches in the front and it would be better being a little further from the rear yard neighbor. Mr. Novak stated that he will leave that decision up to the Board. Mr. Steinhart asked Mr, Grygiel if the impervious coverage would decrease if they moved it closer to the street; Mr. Grygiel said yes. Mr. Buechler said that would be another reason for moving it

rd. Mr. Steinhart asked Mr, Grygiel if the impervious coverage would decrease if they moved it closer to the street; Mr. Grygiel said yes. Mr. Buechler said that would be another reason for moving it forward. Mr. Buechler stated that the photos shows gravel in the driveway and asked if they will be leaving the gravel there; Mr. Novak said no that the gravel will be removed and they will plant grass or put mulch there. He said that the applicant can answer that question. Michael Bocchino approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Boechino if he was going to plant grass where the gravel is or put mulch there; Mr. Bocchino said it was not gravel, but mulch, and he planned to leave it as mulch.