MARCH 16, 2004



The regular meeting of the Lower Makefield Township Zoning Hearing Board was held on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 in the Lower Makefield Township Municipal Building.  Ms. Kirk called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.



                                                                                                DARWIN DOBSON

                                                                                                DAVID MALINOWSKI

                        `                                                                       JOHN HRICKO *


                                    OTHERS                                             ALLEN TOADVINE

                                                                                                PETE STAINTHORPE

                                                                                                DOUG MALONEY

                                                                                                SALLY DORNER

* ARRIVED AT 7:34 P.M.





This matter was continued from the last meeting.  At the last meeting there were issues concerning calculations as set forth on the plans which were marked as A-2.  Mr.  Feldman advised they do not have revised plans and wanted to review the numbers given by Sally Dorner.  At this point 27.78% impervious is what is being requested.  Mrs.  Dorner advised the plan states 27.6% which was the discrepancy and 27.78 is what is proposed.  Existing is now 25.4% per Mr. Feldman and Mrs. Dorner advised this is correct.  The area around the pool will remain 3' wide..


Mr. Maloney advised the township was in opposition to any variance over 27.6%.  However he believes 27.78% is close enough for the Board of Supervisors.  He discussed this with Mr. Stainthorpe who feels the same way.  It was noted this house was built in 1976.  Impervious surface limit allowed is 18%. 


Ms. Kirk asked about the drainage on the property.  Mrs. Feldman advised it slopes down hill.  There is no problem with the neighbors behind because the property in question is lower than that property.  No one has ever said anything.  Water clears away quickly.  It was noted 25' easement shown on the plans ends at their property.


Motion made by Mr. Dobson granting impervious to 27.78%.  Motion seconded by Ms.  Kirk and granted.




Mr. & Mrs. Spevak appeared before the Board.  Application submitted dated 2/10/04 was marked as Exhibit A-1.  Plan prepared by R.C. Mack, Jr. dated 1/19/04 was marked as exhibit A-2.   Mrs. pevak advised they are requesting approval to construct an addition of 520 sq.  ft. which would be used as a music practice room with a configuration which would be acoustical beneficial.  There will be an encroachment of 4' at the widest point and 1' at the narrowest point (10 sq.  ft.  of encroachment).  They would have had the option to put the addition out to the side but it would have been closer to the neighbors.  As proposed it would go out toward the farm field.


Ms. Dorner advised this is a 40' rear yard setback and encroachment on one side would be 4' 5 ˝".  Mr. Spevak advised that behind them is the farmland preservation which has a 25' buffer. 


There are no impervious surface issues.


Mr. Spevak advised the music room will be an actual part of the house.  Mr. Hricko asked about the offset on the west side.  Mr. Spevak advised there will be a door which would used in the winter. 

Mr. Maloney advised the township is not in opposition to the request. 


Ms. Kirk asked if they have spoken to the neighbors and Mrs. Spevak responded they spoke with three who have no objection.    This is a one story addition which is proposed.


Motion made by Mr. Malinowski approving variance as requested.  Motion seconded by Mr. Hricko and carried.





Mr. & Mrs. Vandemerkt appeared before the Board.  Application dated 2/18/04 was marked as Exhibit A-1.   Several drawings (consisting of 7 sheets  of which are 11 x 14 entitled proposed 1`6 x 16 screen room) were marked as Exhibit A-2.  Mrs. Vandemerkt advised they are requesting variance from the side yard setback from Dolington Road for a screen room.  This screen room will be attached to the home through the office which is used by the family.  This is not a home occupation.  The proposed addition is one story and will be screened with a roof.  Ms.  Kirk asked about the proposed deck and Mr.  Toadvine noted this also encroaches with the sunroom.  Ms.  Kirk noted the variance was advertised for the deck as well.  She asked about the size of encroachment by the corner of the porch.  Mrs. Vandemerkt advised this is about 7' at the furthest point. 


Mr. Toadvine noted Ms.  Dorner indicated this is a 100' setback with a 10' encroachment.  Mrs. Vandemerkt advised they accept her calculations.  This is a one story porch.  The railing on the deck will be decorative. There will also be a fiberglass roofing system installed which will be flat.  Mr.  Hricko asked how it will drain and Mr. Vandemerkt advised it will drain to the existing roof with down spouts.  There is enough pitch for the water.  It was also noted the deck will be synthetic wood and will have open slotting.


Mr. Maloney advised the township has no opposition. 


Mr. Hricko asked if the neighbors have been shown the plans and Mrs. Vandemerkt advised they have and all are supportive.


Motion made by Mr. Dobson approving application as requested.  Ms. Kirk amended motion to indicate it is a 90' setback.  Motion as amended seconded by Mr. Hricko and carried.





Chris Heulitt owner of the property appeared together with Jerry Kaye of Better Living.  Application dated 2/18/04 was marked as Exhibit A-1.  Attached to the application was a plan last dated 8/10/90 which was marked as Exhibit A-2.  Memorandum from code enforcement dated 3/9/04 which includes a two page Finding of Fact Hearing and Decision from prior appeal #90-720 was marked as Exhibit B-1.


Mr.  Heulitt advised they are requesting to install a three season patio on the back of their home on the existing deck which will encroach into the rear yard setback.  Mr. Kay stated this is going on area marked as “deck” on the plan.  This part of the deck will be covered with the proposed sunroom.  There is a 100' setback and there is presently a 40' set back existing.  Mr. Kay stated this would be to the furthest point to where the room would be and would be 52' to the present home.  Ms. Kirk noted the deck is existing and as measured from the furthest point there is only a 40' set back.  She asked if a variance was obtained for the wood deck to encroach.  Mr. Heulitt advised they did not. This has been there for 22 years.  Two years after they moved in they consulted with Mr. Beitl of the Township who had no problem with installation of the same. 


Mr Toadvine asked if there is something surrounding the decks and noted there appears to be structure on the plans.  Mr.  Heulitt advised there is nothing around the deck.  Mr.  Dobson noted the plan states something “brick”.  Mr.  Heulitt reviewed the plans with the Zoning Hearing Board.  Ms.  Kirk asked if there are pavers in the area in question and Mr.  Heulitt advised there are not.  It is just grass between the two decks. 


Mr.  Hricko noted there is a pool and deck encroaching.  Mr.  Toadvine stated decks are permitted to encroach 


The Board noted the applicant is also requesting an increase in impervious from 19.2% to 20.97%.  Ms. Kirk asked about the impervious surface calculations and if the site plan calculations are correct.  Ms. Dorner advised they are.  Ms.  Kirk noted this will add 1.75% which equals 20.97%. 


Ms.  Kirk also asked about the drainage and Mr.  Heulitt advised it is excellent.  The property is located on a rise between the canal and the river.  They do not have a sump pump. 


Ms. Kirk noted in 1990 there was concern from a neighbor about water running toward their property. Mr.  Heulitt advised the water did not leave the pool.  He noted the neighbor in question lives on Black Rock Road.  The side of their house is at the back of the neighbors.  They have an 80' setback on Black Rock.   Ms. Kirk asked about the complaints of this neighbor and Mr.  Heulitt advised that neighbor has a dirt driveway which is unpaved and always had a water problem.  When Mr.  Heulitt installed his pool this neighbor was given some dirt to help his situation.  This driveway still remains unpaved.  He did not speak with this neighbor regarding his plans and assumed notice was given to all surrounding properties.


Mr.  Maloney advised the township has no opposition to the application.


Motion made by Mr.  Malinowski granting variance as requested.  Motion seconded by Mr.  Dobson and carried.





Craig Lambard owner of the property appeared before the Board.  Application dated 2/19/04 was marked as Exhibit A-1.  Seven page s attached to the application including grading plan for Yardley Meadows last revised 9/1/83 was marked as Exhibit A-2.


Mr. Kirk asked if he is relying on the applicant to present the request in order to answer questions for the board as to why he is requesting variance for impervious.  Mr.  Lambard stated his contractor is not present and he would like to proceed in presenting his case.  He advised he is looking to construct a 16 x 15' sunroom on the back of the house.  This is a small cul de sac and there are two houses in this area with the same design.  His lot is in the middle of the oval.


Mrs.  Dorner advised she agrees with the calculations presented for the application.  Mr. Toadvine noted that 18% is permitted and 18.24 would cover the addition. 


Mr.  Lambard advised he spoke with his neighbors who are in favor of the proposal.  This will be a one story dwelling .  The roof will be glass with metal framing and will be pitched so that water will run off the roof into the gutter.


Mr.  Maloney advised the township has no opposition.


Motion made by Mr. Hricko granting variance as requested.  Motion seconded by Mr.  Dobson and carried. 





Mr. & Mrs.  Annechini appeared before the Board.  Mr.  Maloney advised the Township requests party status.  They are opposing request for 2.1% increase in impervious.  They would not be opposed to an additional 1%. 


Application dated 2/20 was marked as Exhibit A-1.  Four page hand drawings which were attached to the application were marked as Exhibit A-2.   Impervious surface calculations prepared by applicant’s contractor were marked as Exhibit A-3.


Mr. Annechini advised they are requesting installation of masonry patio.  Presently they have 18% impervious.  Mrs. Dorner advised her calculations show existing impervious to be 20.55% and with the patio will be 23%.    When she did her calculations she came up with 20.01% existing and proposed to be 22.57%.


This is a masonry (concrete) patio with Pennsylvania bluestone and small brick walk capped in bluestone.  This patio will be suitable for a table and chairs.  Mrs.  Annechini stated that because of the way house is situated on the lot you can see the back of the property from all corners.  The house is catty corner and sits far back off the road.  There are no neighbors behind them because there is a wooded area.    From both Makefield and Homestead Roads you can see their backyard.  Proposed patio is 30' x 12'. 


This house was built in 1952.  Mrs.  Kirk asked if there is any existing impervious which could be removed to bring the calculations down.  Mrs. Annechini advised that they have not done anything since the house was built.  There is a 4 x 4 brick patio off the back door which has been removed.  Ms.  Kirk asked if this was included in the calculations and Mr.  Annechini advised the calculations were done based on what can be seen.


John Graffi, Jr.  Contractor arrived on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Annechini.  Mr. Toadvine asked him when the property was built what was the impervious.  Mrs Dorner advised in 1952 there was no impervious calculation - it was building coverage.  Mr. Toadvine advised over the years it went from 28% to 18%.  Mr. Toadvine asked if the records indicate if there have been any additions and Mrs.  Dorner advised there have been none.  Mr. Annechini stated they are the second owners.  He grew up across the street and nothing has been done to this property. 


Ms. Kirk asked about the drainage and Mr. Annechini advised they have a dry basement.  There is a swale between the properties which drains back away to the property behind them.   This property slopes towards Homestead.  Water drains through the swale and goes toward  the wooded area.  This area will get water which stays in the swale which is a natural swale. 


Mr. Annechini advised they have talked to their neighbors (all except one) about the proposed addition and there are no problems.


Mr. Graffi advised he calculated the impervious surface.  Ms. Kirk advised that Mrs.  Dorner came up with less impervious.  Mr.Hricko noted proposed is a 438 sq.  ft patio.  Mr. Graffi stated he spoke with Mrs. Dorner.  He measured everything and the plans are to scale.    He feels difference may be walkway which is bluestone in sand.  Mrs. Dorner advised this is still impervious.


Mr. Toadvine noted that there has never been an addition to the property and they are over the impervious based on the change in zoning over the years. 


Mr. Maloney noted they propose 3' wide sidewalk to rear of the dwelling from the driveway to the patio.  There is also an existing patio of 160 sq.  ft. 


Regarding drainage, Mr. Graffi explained rain drains to the line at the end of the lot where there is a swale which goes down South Homestead. 


Motion made by Ms. Kirk approving variance for 438 sq.  ft patio to be constructed on the property.  Motion seconded by Mr.  Dobson and carried.





Ms.  Kirk advised they received notice from Ms Dorner that letters have been received requesting that the request of Pratico be reconsidered.  Mr. Toadvine will send correspondence explaining the zoning procedure.



There being no other business Motion made by Ms. Kirk to adjourn.  Motion seconded by Mr. Hricko and carried.


The meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m.


                                                                        Respectfully submitted,




                                                                        David Malinowski, Secretary