Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals Meeting - October 15, 2025

The Zoning Board of Examiners and Appeals convened on October 15, 2025, with seven members present (two vacancies). The meeting addressed roll call, approval of minutes from September 11, 2025, disclosures and recusal motions regarding two members, consent agenda approval of two resolutions, a request to defer a decision on Case 2025-0104 (unfinished business), and a public hearing on Case 2025-0113 involving two variance requests for a property at 11461 Hill Drive. The board granted the deferral but denied both variances.

Consent Calendar

• Resolution 2025-010 and Resolution 2025-011 were approved unanimously without discussion.

Disclosures and Recusal Motions

• Vice Chair Dave Hale disclosed a conflict of interest in Case 2025-0113 (his firm represented the petitioner). A motion to direct him to participate was defeated (1-6-1), allowing his recusal.
• Board member Jonathan Lang disclosed that he had reviewed the September 11, 2025 meeting video and had client relationships with petitioners in two cases. For Case 2025-0104, a motion to direct him to participate passed (5-1-1); for Case 2025-0113, a similar motion failed (1-5-1), so he was recused from that case.
• Board member Andrew Ramadal disclosed that technical difficulties during the September 11 meeting prevented him from hearing public testimony in Case 2025-0104; he subsequently listened to the audio and is prepared to participate.

Unfinished Business: Case 2025-0104

• This appeal had been postponed from September 11 due to Mr. Ramadal's incomplete participation. The Municipal Attorney and the appellant jointly requested a stay of the vote and decision to a date uncertain, citing ongoing settlement discussions. The board voted unanimously (7-0) to grant the stay.

Public Comments & Testimony (Case 2025-0113)

• Susan Forbes (spelled S-U-S-A-N F-O-R-B-E-S), a Hillside resident since 1966, testified in opposition. She argued that the proposed large garage and driveway encroachment would harm the stream, set a bad precedent, and that current setbacks are appropriate. She supported the staff's recommendation for denial.

Discussion Items (Case 2025-0113)

• Variance 1: A request to allow a proposed 2,400-sq-ft detached garage to encroach into the required 25-foot south side setback. The petitioner argued the location was the only feasible spot due to topography, septic system, stream setback, and fire separation requirements. Staff found several standards unmet, particularly noting self-imposed hardship and that a smaller garage could comply. Board members debated alternative siting and whether the hardship was self-imposed. A motion by Brian Bennett to approve a 17.5-foot encroachment was made but not supported.
• Variance 2: A request to allow an existing gravel driveway to encroach 25 feet into the required 50-foot Craig Creek stream setback. The petitioner offered to accept a 16-foot encroachment per watershed management's suggestion. Staff raised concerns about environmental impacts and that a reduced encroachment would suffice. Board discussion echoed concerns about stream protection and necessity.
• Both variances were ultimately voted down after deliberation.

Key Outcomes

• Dave Hale recusal: The board voted 1-6-1 against directing him to participate; he was excused from Case 2025-0113.
• Jonathan Lang recusal: Directed to participate in Case 2025-0104 (5-1-1); recused from Case 2025-0113 (1-5-1).
• Stay of decision in Case 2025-0104: Approved unanimously (7-0) to a date uncertain.
• Variance 1 (garage setback): Denied (0-5).
• Variance 2 (driveway stream setback): Denied (1-4).
• Meeting adjourned without further business.