All about a Barn

I participated in the Zoning Board Hearing today to voice my opposition to the large number of variances related to the sub-division of the property next door. I was also happy to be joined by my neighbors. It was exciting to see that the issue energized everyone; some of whom never attended a meeting at Borough Hall.

Prior to the presentation, there was not universal agreement that the development would be good or bad per se. Even in my hand-out, I stuck to the facts and tried to remain neutral. We all agree that the lot is poorly maintained and requires improvement, but none of us were comfortable with the variances being requested.

Ironically, the legal representation and the series of witnesses cemented opposition to the plan. With each witness, the zoning board was discouraged that the proposed plan merited such accommodations. Again, these were the advocates and they failed to make a compelling case. The request for the zoning variances centered around a "barn".

Virginia Hampton, the property owner, will only permit the sub-division if the barn is retained on her lot. This forces the developer to use a lot that is smaller than our zoning requirements. Construction of a 3,167 sq ft house on this small lot dictated a variance on the minimum front yard setback. Effectively, every variance request was necessitated by the small lot size (almost 25% smaller than the required dimensions).

Each witness was forced to dance around and unconvincingly argue that the barn was important. Seemingly with purpose, they did not provide any pictures of the barn. The descriptions ranged from extremely dilapidated to structurally sound. The zoning board, familiar with the barn, asked if demolition or relocation had been investigated. Again, unwaveringly, they stated the barn forced the lot size and the setback.

I was vocal with regards to front yard setback. For all of us, this was a key issue. The witness stated that most properties in the neighborhood were not compliant. A low resolution aerial photograph was used to argue this point. It was not an appropriate exhibit and I brought this to the attention of the zoning board. I also asked the witness, while he was under oath, "What is my front yard setback?". This was a fair, but loaded question. I had him measure it on the survey drawing prior to the hearing. Oddly enough, my property, as with most properties in our neighborhood comply with the zoning requirements. As with all of the variances, the requested short front yard setback was the only practical way to approach the placement of such a large house on an undersized lot.

We were all encouraged that the zoning board was not "buying it" either. When the time came for comments, each of my neighbors voiced opposition to the variances. They were all very effective doing so. With our opposition, there was a common theme: This is too large of a house being placed on too small a sub-division.

Although the board did not render its decision this evening, the legal representation made statements that could be perceived as "defeat". Oddly, Virginia Hampton's legal representation made references to her mortality at her age of 87. Apparently, the barn could not be demolished as long as she was around.

As we walked out, one of my neighbors commented, "For the legal expenses that she is incurring, she could have renovated that barn".