The regular meeting of the Zoning Hearing Board of the Township of Lower Makefield was held in the Municipal Building on August 2, 2005.  Chairman Kirk called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.


Those present:


Zoning Hearing Board:              Barbara Kirk, Chairman

                                                Rudolph Mayrhofer, Vice Chairman

                                                David Malinowski, Secretary

                                                Paul Bamburak, Member

                                                Darwin Dobson, Member

                                                Greg Caiola, Alternate Member (left meeting in progress)


Others:                                     Robert Habgood, Code Enforcement Officer

                                                Jennifer McGrath, Township Solicitor

                                                James Majewski, Township Engineer

                                                Allen Toadvine, Zoning Hearing Board Solicitor

                                                Steve Santarsiero, Supervisor Liaison





Ms. Sheila Adamczyk and Mr. Jeff Renneisen from Anthony Sylvan Pools were present

and reminded that they were previously sworn in.


Ms. Kirk stated since the last Hearing of 7/19/05, two additional documents were

submitted – one being a drawing of Sylvan Pools revised 7/27/05 regarding a revised

pool deck.  This also included new impervious calculations dated 7/20/05.  This

document was marked as Exhibit A-4.    Also with this was a Zoning Permit Plan revised

7/27/05 which was marked as Exhibit A-5.  Ms. Kirk stated when this was previously

discussed the impervious surface calculations were confusing in that the prior Plan

indicated current impervious surface coverage of 24.5%, but the Township engineer

believed it was approximately 26.2%.  Therefore, the current calculations with the

proposed additions would have increased the impervious surface to 32.5%.  Since that

time, she understands they have done some re-calculating and re-modifying of the Plans. 


Mr. Renneisen stated they re-calculated the existing impervious surface to agree with the

engineer and also reduced the decking – the patio around the pool – from 768 square feet

on the first Plan to 413 square feet.  Subsequently, they added more seating area in the

pool by adding a sun shelf which is an oversized bench area that would help compensate

for the loss of the decking and does not count against the impervious surface.  The

impervious surface will therefore be 30.5%. 

August 2, 2005                                                  Zoning Hearing Board – page 2 of 5



Ms. Kirk stated it appears they also modified the Plan by taking out a concrete pad and

proposed concrete walkway and replaced it with concrete steps and stepping stones. 

Mr. Renneisen stated they did this on the previous plan and has been left the same on this

latest plan as well. 


Ms. Kirk stated it appears that the pool has been shifted slightly, but after discussion it

was noted that the pool has not shifted and what is being shown is a contour line. 


Mr. Toadvine stated the Applicant has indicated they agree with the Township engineer’s

calculations that the existing impervious surface ratio is 26.3%, and Mr. Renneisen



Ms. Kirk moved, Mr. Bamburak seconded and it was unanimously carried that the

request for an increase in impervious surface to 30.5% as shown on the revised Plan

marked as Exhibit A-4 be granted.


Mr. Caiola left the meeting at this time.





Ms. Ann Breth was present with Mr. Stephen Heinz, architect, who were sworn in.

Ms. Kirk marked as Exhibit A-1 the Application which was submitted.    Included with

that Application was a scale drawing for the property in question and this was marked as

Exhibit A-2. 


Ms. Breth stated she and her husband are requesting a Variance to permit a second stall

garage for their home.   They are also proposing an addition and they will need a

Variance for this as well on the left-hand side of the house.


Mr. Heinz stated this request is for impervious surface.  The existing impervious surface

exceeds the permitted limitation of 18%.  He stated he has come to understand that even

though that existing impervious surface could be swapped for new impervious surface

and made into building area rather than hard surface driveway, etc. since it is not shown

that way on the Plan that the Township has on record, that they would have to come

before the Board to increase it.  He stated since the allowance for the size of the garage

was minimal if they tried to stay within the swapped area, he has indicated an enlarged

garage area above the impervious surface that exists now so that they can have a

reasonable size garage with some storage area and extend the current three-season room

in the rear to make it a four-season room.  He stated they removed some of the existing

hard surface to the extent of 106 square feet and the additional square footage of building

would be 307 square feet so the net difference is an area of 200 square feet.


August 2, 2005                                                  Zoning Hearing Board – page 3 of 5



Ms. Kirk asked the current impervious surface coverage, and Mr. Heinz stated it is 19% 

so they are asking for an increase of 1% over what exists which is 1% over what was

shown on the original plot plan.  Mr. Mayrhofer stated it is actually closer to 2% since

they are requesting almost 21% impervious surface.  Mr. Heinz agreed they are asking for

20.97% so it is basically a 2% increase.


Ms. Kirk asked what was added to the property that increased the impervious surface

coverage.  Ms. Breth stated they just purchased the home in April and have not made any

changes.  The house was built 29 years ago.  Mr. Heinz stated looking at the existing plot

plan that was on record at the Township, it appears to him that they increased the

driveway area to provide another parking space at some point.


Ms. Kirk asked if they will expand the garage from a single-car garage to a two-car

garage, and Mr. Heinz stated they will and will also be adding another layer on the

second floor underneath a raised dormer type of roof.  He stated this will have no bearing

on the impervious surface.  Ms. Kirk asked if this additional part being added will be

used for storage, and Mr. Heinz stated it will be mostly for activity space.  Ms. Breth

stated this will be a bonus room.  Ms. Kirk asked if when they expand the garage area,

will they have a second level to the garage area; and Mr. Heinz stated there is planned

space above the garage under an additional raised peak of the roof and a dormer on the

back.  Ms. Kirk asked if this would be used for storage or will it be converted into living

area; and Ms. Breth stated it will hopefully be a bonus room at some point in the future

where they will put a pool table.  Ms. Kirk asked about the proposed enclosed sun room;

and it was noted it will be one story.


Mr. Mayrhofer asked if they have a head-on view of the Plan, and Mr. Heinz was able to

show this on his computer.


Mr. Toadvine stated they are also requesting a Variance from the front yard setback of

approximately ten inches, and Mr. Heinz agreed.  He noted there is a corner of the

proposed garage that extends beyond the setback by about ten inches into the front yard



Ms. McGrath asked the height of the new addition of the garage, and Mr. Heinz stated it

will be 24.5’. 


Mr. Heinz was asked about the visual being shown on his computer, and Mr. Heinz stated

the roof line is currently a 5/12 pitch, and they are raising it to a 10/12 pitch so it will be a

higher ridge line.  In the rear it will have a dormer that will come off in the back and

allow for more space on the second floor.  It will be accessible from an interior stair.  

The roof line will be completely across the entire house and there will be three dormers



August 2, 2005                                                  Zoning Hearing Board – page 4 of 5



that are extended in front.  The height is 24.5 feet.  Ms. Breth stated what
Mr. Heinz is describing will be the most extreme case that it would go across the entire

house as they have not yet finalized their discussions with the contractors.


Mr. Habgood stated when he reviewed the Application he also reviewed the approved

linen for Yardley Hunt to check the square footage, and the square footage of the

property is more than what is shown on the site plan so the increase is actually less than

what the Applicant is requesting.  He stated the square footage on the recorded linen is

19,582 square feet and they are showing 18,764 square feet.   He also calculated their

impervious surface calculations and the figures on the site plan are also incorrect.  He

stated the impervious surface he gets is 20.1%.   Mr. Bamburak asked if he checked the

height of the proposed new construction, and Mr. Habgood stated that no documents

were submitted for the elevation of the property.  He stated the maximum elevation

allowed for a single-family dwelling is 35’.  Mr. Mayrhofer stated Mr. Habgood has

indicated that as they propose to build on the Plan, the impervious surface will be 20.1%

instead of the 21%, and Ms. Breth agreed to accept those calculations.


Mr. Toadvine stated he feels they all agree that whatever the impervious surface is or is

going to be, the bottom line is that they are going to add an additional 201 square feet of

impervious coverage, and Mr. Heinz agreed.  Mr. Toadvine suggested that if the Board

approves this, they base the approval on the additional square footage of impervious to be

added as opposed to a percentage.  Mr. Heinz stated the exact amount of additional

square footage to be added is 201.37 square feet.


Mr. Mayrhofer moved, Mr. Malinowski seconded and it was unanimously carried to

approve an increase of 202 square feet of impervious surface and a front yard setback to

be 39’ 2”. 





Ms. Kirk announced that the Allegheny Valley School Appeals were scheduled for a

Special Hearing before the Board on August 9.  It was later determined that Mr. Toadvine

was not available on that date; and after much discussion, it was determined that

Allegheny Valley School will be heard on August 16, 2005 the next regularly-scheduled

meeting for the Board.  Mr. Habgood stated they did send out a notice to all the residents

who requested Party Status.  Ms. Kirk noted  Mr. Toadvine has also sent confirming

letters to all Counsel involved.  Ms. Kirk stated she will not be present that evening. 

It was noted that neither Mr. Malinowski nor   Mr. Mayrhofer will be present either. 

Ms. Kirk stated she did advise Mr. Schneider that she would not be present at the meeting

on the 16th , and he had no objection to her reviewing the notes of testimony or Minutes

of that meeting. 

August 2, 2005                                                  Zoning Hearing Board – page 5 of 5



Mr. Malinowski moved, Mr. Dobson seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 p.m.


                                                                        Respectfully Submitted,





                                                                        David Malinowski, Secretary