NEWTOWN TOWNSHIP

ZONING HEARING BOARD

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JULY 5, 2007

The Newtown Township Zoning Hearing Board met on Thursday, July 5, 2007 in the Newtown Township Building. In attendance and voting were: Victoria Bowe, Vice-Chairman; David Katz, Secretary; Gail Laughlin and John Lenihan, members. Also in attendance were: James J. Auchinleck, Jr., Esq., Solicitor; Michael Solomon, Zoning Officer and Donna D’Angelis, Stenographer.

Call to Order

Mrs. Bowe called the meeting to Order at 7:30 PM.

The Pledge of Allegiance

Approval of Minutes

Mrs. Laughlin moved to accept the minutes of June 7, 2007. Mr. Lenihan seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

The Agenda was reviewed:

  • Continued Application of James & Darla McLaughlin - 174 Durham Road
  • Continued Application of Paul & Bethany Deppi – 103 Upper Silver Lake Road
  • Application of Vyacheslav Mirson – 93 Richboro Road
  • Application of Craig and Dianna Henzel – 4 Madison Court
  • Application of James and Nancy Riesenberger – 59 Autumn Drive
  • Application of Ray T. and Catherine M. Pugh - Wrights Road, lot 43 Mardot Village
  • Application of Community Association Realty Inc. - Caufield Place at Lindenhurst Road
  • Continued Application of Third Federal Bank – 950 Newtown Yardley Road
  • Application of Friends Lane LLC – 104 Penns Trail
  • Continued Application of James & Darla McLaughlin - 174 Durham Road

Mr. Auchinleck informed the Board that the applicants have requested that this application be continued to the September meeting in order to attempt to address concerns of surrounding neighbors.

Mrs. Laughlin moved to continue the application of James and Darla McLaughlin to September 6, 2007. Mr. Katz seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Continued Application of Paul & Bethany Deppi

Mr. Auchinleck reminded the Board that this application had been read into the record at the June 7, 2007 meeting.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Paul Deppi was sworn in. Mr. Deppi said that he wanted to expand his kitchen and laundry room on a non-conforming lot at 104 Upper Silver Lake Road. This would increase the impervious surface on the property. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Deppi said that he has lived in his home for five years. He and his wife have one child. Work had begun on the concrete footings for the addition because he had some miscommunication with the Codes Department and did not realize that a variance and special exception would be needed. In response to Mr. Katz’s question, Mr. Deppi said that he would be willing to install a stormwater management system to retain additional run-off for the impervious surface above the permitted 12%.

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mr. Katz moved to grant a variance from Section 404(B) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a 256 square feet rear kitchen addition and a 60 square feet rear laundry room addition resulting in a 15.62% impervious surface ratio where 12% is allowed and a Special Exception under 1208(C)(2) to permit construction on a non conforming lot, subject to the condition that all run-off from impervious surface above 12% will be contained by a stormwater management system reviewed and approved by the Township engineer. Mrs. Laughlin seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Application of Vyacheslav Mirson

Mr. Katz read into the record the application of Vyacheslav Mirson, Vyacheslav Mirson owner requesting a variance from Section 404(C) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a 16 feet by 24 feet open wooden deck resulting in a rear yard set back of 26.39 feet where 40 feet is required. The subject property is 93 Richboro Road, Newtown, in the R1 Medium Density Residential Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-11-2.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone present wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Vyacheslav Mirson was sworn in. Mr. Mirson explained that his home is located on his lot in such a way the rear walls of the house are almost 40 feet from his property line. There is no room for any deck or patio without a variance. He is asking for relief to install a wooden deck with a rear setback of 26.39 feet. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Mirson said that there is open space and a walking trail behind his house. There is a stand of trees between his home and the next door neighbor.

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mr. Lenihan moved to grant a variance from Section 404(C) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a 16 feet by 24 feet open wooden deck resulting in a rear yard set back of 26.39 feet where 40 feet is required. Mr. Katz seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Application of Craig and Dianna Henzel

Mr. Katz read into the record the application of Craig and Dianna Henzel, Craig and Dianna Henzel owners requesting a variance from Pheasant Point Final Plan to permit construction of a 24 feet by 45 feet patio resulting in a rear yard set back of 31.99 feet where 40 feet is required. The subject property is 4 Madison Court, Newtown, in the CM Conservation Management Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-49-20.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Craig and Dianna Henzel were sworn in. Mr. Henzel said that he would like to install a new patio in his yard. The existing deck and paving stones are to be removed. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Henzel indicated that his neighbors are supportive of his plan. The plan meets the guidelines of the Pheasant Point Homeowners Association; no approval is required. There has been no problem with run-off from the neighbor’s pool, and because of the slope of the property Mr. Henzel did not think that run-off would be a problem. In response to Mr. Auchinleck’s question, Mr. Henzel said that there is a 25-30 foot slope behind his home. This is common ground for his development. The house to the rear of his is about 150 feet away.

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mrs. Laughlin moved to grant a variance from Pheasant Point Final Plan to permit construction of a 24 feet by 45 feet patio resulting in a rear yard set back of 31.99 feet where 40 feet is required. Mr. Katz seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Application of James and Nancy Riesenberger

Mr. Katz read into the record the application of James and Nancy Riesenberger, James and Nancy Riesenberger owners requesting a variance from the Norwalk Final plan to permit construction of a 26 feet by 7.5 feet rear addition and a 22 feet by 30 feet side addition resulting in an 18.48% impervious surface ratio where 15% is allowed and a 22.75 feet side yard (56.05' aggregate) where 25 feet (60' aggregate) is required. The subject property is 69 Autumn Drive, in the OR Office Research Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-16-11-17.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

James Reisenberger was sworn in. Mr. Reisenberger said that he would like to add a sunroom and bathroom to the side of his house. About one half of the 30-foot long sunroom encroaches into the setback. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Reisenberger said that his neighbors have no objection to his plan. His rear neighbor is about 200 yards behind his home; there is some open space between the homes.

Mr. Katz asked if he would be amenable to installing a stormwater management system to control run-off for the additional impervious surface.

Mr. Auchinleck explained that an engineer would design a system to retain the run-off from the additional 3.48% impervious surface. The system would be reviewed by the Township engineer. Mr. Reisenberger agreed to this as a condition of approval

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mr. Katz moved to grant a variance from the Norwalk Final plan to permit construction of a 26 feet by 7.5 feet rear addition and a 22 feet by 30 feet side addition resulting in an 18.48% impervious surface ratio where 15% is allowed and a 22.75 feet side yard (56.05' aggregate) where 25 feet (60' aggregate) is required, subject to the condition that all run-off from impervious surface above 12% will be contained by a stormwater management system reviewed and approved by the Township engineer. Mrs. Laughlin seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

Application of Ray T. and Catherine M. Pugh

Mr. Katz read into the record the application of Ray T. and Catherine M. Pugh, Ray T. and Catherine M. Pugh owners requesting a variance from Section 401(B) & (C) and 1000(C)(2)(a) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a single family dwelling on a vacant lot resulting in an impervious surface ratio of 20% where 15% is allowed, a minimum distance between buildings of 59 feet where 100 feet is required, a .66 acre lot where 2.4 acres is required, and a Special Exception under Section 1208(C)(2) to permit construction on a non conforming lot. The subject property is Wrights road, lot 43 Mardot Village in the CM Conservation Management Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-8-2.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone present wished to be party to this application.

Mr. Auchinleck explained to those residents in attendance that if they wish to be a party to the application they would have the right to cross-examine the applicant and any of his witnesses, present evidence and witnesses, and make any statement concerning the application. Should they disagree with the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board, party status would give them the right to appeal the decision. Anyone present not wishing party status would be allowed to make statements for or against the application after the hearing and before a decision is rendered.

Sally Levine and Paul Levine of 720 Linton Hill Road asked for party status. Attorney Ed Murphy represented the applicants. In response to Mr. Murphy’s question, Mr. Levine said that his property adjoins both lots owned by Mr. and Mrs. Pugh.

Ray Pugh, Sally Levine and Paul Levine were sworn in.

Mr. Murphy entered the following exhibits:

  • Exhibit A-1 a plan for Mardot Village dated April 4, 1955, with lots 42 and 43 highlighted,
  • Exhibit A-2 – Notes from the previously approved plan dated October 9, 1955,
  • Exhibit A-3 – Research showing the chain of title for lots 42 and 43
  • Exhibit A-4 – A photograph of the proposed house to be built on lot 43

Mr. Murphy noted that Exhibit A-2 shows that the property had originally been zoned as “AA”, and had met all residential requirements for that zoning designation. The Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 changed the property to CM Conservation Management. Under “AA” zoning, the minimum lot size had been 20,000 square feet. Lot 43 measures 28,984 square feet. The JMZO of 1983 made both lots non-conforming. Mr. Pugh would like to build a single family house on the vacant lot. Referring to the chain of title, a condition on lot 43 had been that a home could not be built on the lot unless public water and sewer were available. Mr. and Mrs. Pugh purchased the property aware of this condition. Public water and sewer is being installed to Mardot Village this summer. Mr. and Mrs. Pugh would now like to build a single family home, similar to that shown in Exhibit A-4, on lot 43. A variance is needed from Ordinance Section 1000(C)(2), which states that a structure shall be permitted to be constructed on any lot that was lawful when created provided such lot is not less than 80% of the minimum lot area in that district. This lot is a 0.66 acre lot, which is less that 80% of the 3 acre minimum of the CM Conservation Management Zoning District. Regarding impervious surface, in the CM district, on cluster lots of 20,000 square feet, 20% impervious surface is permitted. The applicant is seeking 20% impervious surface, although the plans submitted show 16.9% impervious. Additional impervious surface is being requested in anticipation of certain improvements. Stormwater management would comply for 20% impervious surface. The existing home on lot 42 is close to the common property line, which is the reason for the request for a variance for distance between buildings. At the time the house was constructed, in 1955, the required distance had been 20 feet.

Mr. Pugh agreed with Mr. Murphy’s summary. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Pugh said that he had spoken to his neighbors on lots 44, 63 and 65. None had objection to his plan. He was not able to reach some of his neighbors.

Mr. Levine said that he is concerned about water run-off and asked how much additional run-off he can expect on his property.

Mr. Auchinleck said that there is not an engineer in attendance to give a definitive answer to that question. The applicant is seeking an increase in impervious surface of five percentage points above what is permitted under the Ordinance. The entire amount is above what exists there today; however 15% impervious surface would be allowed.

Mr. Levine said that he is concerned about loss of privacy if the lot is sold to a young family. There is a line of trees between his and the adjoining lot, but he is not sure whether these trees belong to his or the adjoining lot. He would like them to be retained. He said that developing this lot would have a negative impact on the value of homes in the area.

Mr. Murphy noted that a building permit would only be issued if the stormwater management system would retain additional run-off. The applicants have no objection to providing a landscape buffering. The applicant intends to sell the lot to someone who would build on it, and would accept as a condition of approval that the house be similar to that depicted in Exhibit A-4. To Mr. Levine’s continued objection, Mr. Murphy noted that Mr. Pugh would live next to the new dwelling, and would be as interested as Mr. Levine in having a plan similar to Exhibit A-4. In response to Mr. Auchinleck’s question, Mr. Murphy said that the requirement that the lot not be developed until public water and sewer were available had been a condition of prior owners, not of the Township or the water company. A similar restriction exists on other lots throughout Mardot Village.

Jeff Bloom of 319 Springhouse Road was sworn in. Mr. Bloom pointed out his lot on Exhibit A-1. He agreed with Mr. Levine’s position, stating that a house would be “shoehorned” into a very small lot, and would impact property values. He has lived in his home for 8 years; his lot is 30,000 square feet.

Mr. Levine said that he understood that the development pre-dates the Ordinance, and he agrees that this lot should be grandfathered, but that it should not be granted additional relief.

In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Pugh said that there are about 50 homes in the development, and about two other vacant lots. His two lots, though purchased together, have always been two separate lots. He was aware of the CM zoning in 1997 when his home was purchased. He has not made any improvements except for the water and sewer connections on lot 43. Lot 43 is similar in size to lot 42; his home is about 3,000 square feet and a single story. The proposed house is two stories and about 3,750 square feet.

In response to questions from Mrs. Laughlin, Mr. Levine said that his house is about 100 feet from Linton Hill Road and about 150 feet from the Pugh house. Mr. Levine and Mr. Pugh reviewed the location of the other homes in the neighborhood.

Mr. Murphy entered as Exhibit A-5 an older survey of the Pugh lots. In response to Mr. Lenihan’s questions, Mr. Murphy said that he did not know the proposed distance between the new house and the neighbor on the other side. He noted that the setbacks on the Pugh home are existing non-conformities.

Mr. Pugh said that he mows the grass on lot 43, but does not have any storage on that lot. He does not use it at all. He confirmed Mr. Levine’s statement that construction equipment has been parked there during the sewer installation. In response to Mrs. Bowe’s questions he said that he intends to remain in his home and to sell lot 43. The proposed house is similar in size to the house on the other side, which is also a two story house, about 3600 square feet, with a two-car garage.

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

In closing, Mr. Murphy again noted that the Ordinance does address non-conforming lots and this proposal meets the criteria for a special exception. The home will be similar in size and style to others in the neighborhood. The lot has always been a separate lot; the chain of title shows this. Mr. Pugh has paid for the water and sewer laterals for this lot, but that is the only improvement.

Mr. Levine again stated that at the time of purchase, it had been his understanding that this was a vacant lot. He said that the request is for a non-conforming use.

Mr. Katz moved to grant a variance from Section 401(B) & (C) and 1000(C)(2)(a) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a single family dwelling on a vacant lot resulting in an impervious surface ratio of 20% where 15% is allowed, a minimum distance between buildings of 59 feet where 100 feet is required, a .66 acre lot where 2.4 acres is required, and a Special Exception under Section 1208(C)(2) to permit construction on a non conforming lot, subject to the conditions that all run-off from impervious surface above 15% will be contained by a stormwater management system reviewed and approved by the Township engineer, that any new dwelling have an elevation similar in appearance to that shown in Exhibit A-4, and that the existing line of trees and shrubs between tax map parcels 29-8-2 and 29-8-36-001 be maintained or enhanced to provide sufficient privacy. Mr. Lenihan seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

In response to Mr. Levine’s questions, Mr. Auchinleck said that Mr. Levine would have the right to appeal this decision within 30 days of its rendering. If Mr. Pugh sells his home, the conditions would be upheld by the Township Codes department as conditions of this variance.

Application of Community Association Realty Inc (CAU)

Mr. Katz read into the record the application of Community Association Realty Inc, Community Association Realty Inc owner requesting a variance from Section 501(B)(2) and 1002(I) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit reconfiguring of approved final plans for three proposed office buildings resulting in 120 feet lot width where 150 feet is required and no loading berths where one is required. The subject property is Cricklewood Green, Caufield Place at Lindenhurst Road, Newtown, in the OR Office Research Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-10-78.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Attorney Don Marshall represented the applicant.

Mr. Marshall said that this is an application for setback relief for one building in an already approved office park known as Cricklewood Green, on Lindenhurst Road. He entered the following exhibits:

  • Exhibit A-1 – The approved final plan for Cricklewood Green
  • Exhibit A-2 – an outline of the relief sought in the application
  • Exhibit A-3 – Elevation of the proposed building “A”

T. Halleck Hoeland, project manager for the office park, was sworn in.

Mr. Marshall reviewed the already approved plan for Cricklewood Green, an office park with five buildings, including a restored farmhouse. Three of the buildings, buildings A, B and C on exhibit A-1, have not yet been constructed. This plan has full final plan approval; infrastructure has been installed; all fees have been paid. The applicant wished to modify the layout of three proposed buildings, with a reduction of the proposed total building square footage by 5,524 square feet, and a reduction of parking spaces by 28 spaces. Building “A” will be redesigned and significantly reduced in size, but is now placed within the setback along Lindenhurst Road. Parking in the front yard has been eliminated, reducing the impervious surface. Some of the parking spaces have been relocated to the inside of the office park. The new design moves building “A” closer to Lindenhurst Road, encroaching into the 150 foot setback by 30 feet. The building had been approved as a three-story building, but has been reduced to only two stories. The applicant is also seeking relief from Section 1002(1), requiring loading berths, and is proposing a loading area, as the buildings are office buildings.

Mr. Hoeland agreed with Mr. Marshall’s statements. In response to Mr. Katz’s questions, Mr. Hoeland said that as designed, building “A” will be two stories high. It will not be possible to add another story to the building. The approved plan permits 150,000 square feet of office space, and this plan has 144,000 square feet, close to the approved limit.

Frederick Schmitt, registered architect, was sworn in. In response to Mr. Auchinleck’s questions, He reviewed the elevation depicted in Exhibit A-3, noting that the 110 foot long building partially encroaches into the setback. In response to Mrs. Laughlin’s question he said that the bridge between buildings “B” and “C” is an enclosed footbridge linking the two buildings, for pedestrian use. It would be above the ground, and would be installed if one tenant were to occupy both buildings and would require indoor access between the two buildings.

Mr. Solomon confirmed that the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission had reviewed this application and had no comment. Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mr. Lenihan moved to grant a variance from Section 501(B)(2) and 1002(I) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit reconfiguring of approved final plans for three proposed office buildings resulting in 120 feet lot width where 150 feet is required and no loading berths where one is required. Mrs. Laughlin seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Continued Application of Third Federal Savings Bank

Mr. Auchinleck reminded the Board that this application had been read into the record at the April 5, 2007 meeting.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Attorney Don Marshall represented the applicant. He said that, after meetings with the Board of Supervisors, the applicant is amending the application, and is seeking a variance for a 25 square foot sign, which is two square feet smaller that the existing sign. The request for an internally lighted sign is being withdrawn; the sign will be a wood carved, externally lighted sign. The Board of Supervisors has withdrawn its motion to seek party status to oppose this application. The applicant is seeking a height variance to permit a 7 foot height where only 5 feet is permitted and a variance from Section 1103(C)(4), which does not permit a sign within 1000 feet of the Route 332 Newtown Bypass. This will be a three sided sign; however the Bank would be entitled to two two-sided signs because it fronts on both Route 332 and Campus Drive.

Mr. Marshall entered the following exhibits:

  • Exhibit A-1 – the plot plan
  • Exhibit A-2 – the lease agreement
  • Exhibit A-3 – extension of the lease
  • Exhibit A-4 – use permit issued in 2000
  • Exhibit A-5 – photograph of sign of predecessor on property
  • Exhibit A-6 – the repainted original sign
  • Exhibit A-7 – photograph of location of sign in relation to the Bypass
  • Exhibit A-8 – rendering of new sign

Wayne Bishop, Vice-President of facilities for Third Federal was sworn in. Mr. Bishop confirmed that the existing sign is eight feet high, and 27 square feet in size. The height is necessary because of the four-foot berm along the bypass. The new sign will have three sides, making it visible to traffic in both directions on Route 332 and along Campus Drive. The change in signage is necessary as the Bank is changing its logo and branding.

Mr. Marshall entered the following exhibits:

  • Exhibit A-9 – three pages of photographs of signs visible from the Newtown Bypass
  • Exhibit A-10 – photographs of other three-faced signs, all along Newtown Yardley Road
  • Exhibit A-11 – photograph of Commerce Bank three-sided sign
  • Exhibit A-12 – Minutes of Board of Supervisors dated June 23, 1999, approving Commerce Bank final plan, listing sign variances granted
  • Exhibit A-13 – Minutes of Zoning Hearing Board dated September 7, 2000, granting First County Bank sign variances
  • Exhibit A-14 – Minutes of Zoning Hearing Board dated March 1, 2001, granting Brandywine Realty Trust sign variances
  • Exhibit A-15 – Minutes of Zoning Hearing Board dated October 4, 2001, granting Commerce Bank sign variances
  • Exhibit A-16 – Minutes of Zoning Hearing Board dated October 6, 2005, granting PNC Realty Services sign variances.

In response to Mr. Katz’s questions, Mr. Marshall said that the Bank is changing its branding; this sign will be the same as all other signs at other branches. Each side of the sign measures 25 square feet.

Mr. Solomon had no comment.

Mrs. Bowe moved to grant variances from Section 1103(c)(4), 1106(F)(4)(b), and 1106(F)(5)(a) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit replacement of an existing non-conforming 30 square feet sign with a new freestanding 25 square feet sign 7 feet high, where no signs are allowed to face the bypass, the maximum size permitted is 12 square feet, and the maximum height is 5 feet, subject to the conditions that the sign be externally lighted and is wood carved. Mr. Lenihan seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Application of Friends Lane LLC

Mr. Katz read into the record the a pplication of Friends Lane LLC, owner requesting a variance from Section 702(B) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a self storage facility resulting in a 76% impervious surface ratio where 65% is permitted. The subject property is 104 Penns Trail Lot 51, Newtown Business Commons, Newtown, in the LI Light Industrial Zoning District, being further known as Tax Map Parcel #29-10-94.

Attorney Joseph Pizzo represented the applicant.

Mrs. Bowe asked if anyone wished to be party to this application. There was no response.

Richard Shorr and Walter Bronson were sworn in.

Mr. Auchinleck provided Mr. Pizzo a copy of the memorandum from Mr. Solomon to the recording secretary, summarizing the application. Mr. Pizzo agreed that this is an accurate summary.

Mr. Pizzo entered as Exhibit A-1, the plan for a self-storage facility. The facility will have a 36,180 square foot, two-story building and a 27,000 square foot two story building, with associated parking and a stormwater management area, in the LI zoning district. The Board of Supervisors has reviewed and expressed support for the sketch plan. The facility will be climate controlled , and located on what is currently a 3.25 acre vacant lot. Stormwater facilities will handle all run-off for the entire project, improving current conditions. The basin will also capture some off-site run-off. The property has a 100 foot utility easement along the property line, measuring ¾ acre, or 20% of the total area. The Ordinance does allow for placement of a structure in the easement. The area of the easement is deducted from the base site area when calculating impervious surface.

Mr. Bronson agreed with Mr. Pizzo’s statements. In response to Mr. Auchinleck’s question, Mr. Bronson said that the gross impervious surface is 60%, which is under what is permitted in the LI district. Parking is included in the plan; however eight parking spaces will be held in reserve.

In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Bronson said that the total area of the variances is 13,140 square feet. The stormwater management will handle the entire site, including the parking held in green. All hardwood trees are to remain. Pine trees might be removed and replaced. There is to be only one entrance. The exterior of the buildings are to be either stucco or brick faced, with dormers along the roofs; there will not be a wall of metal doors.

In response to Mr. Katz’s question, Mr. Auchinleck said that the Board could impose a condition that the variance is granted only for the self-storage facility use.

Mr. Katz moved to grant a variance from Section 702(B) of the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance of 1983 to permit construction of a self storage facility resulting in a 76% impervious surface ratio where 65% is permitted, subject to the condition that the variances is granted solely for a self-storage facility use. Mr. Lenihan seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

Mr. Lenihan moved to adjourn at 10:45 PM. Mr. Katz seconded and the motion passed 4-0.

 

Respectfully Submitted:

 

Mary Donaldson, Recording Secretary