A central topic of discussion was the proposed subdivision of a 15,000-square-foot corner lot on Web Avenue into two 7,500-square-foot lots. Concerns were raised about water management and potential impacts on neighboring properties. The plan involved regrading the land to improve drainage, proposing mechanisms like swales and a stormwater management system to collect runoff. However, doubts were expressed about the soil’s capacity to absorb water, particularly during heavy storms. The board emphasized the importance of ensuring no adverse effects on adjacent properties, with a member stressing the need for “Extreme Measures” to prevent downstream flooding. The absence of a soil moving permit and sufficient information on soil conditions halted an immediate vote on the application, with further scrutiny required before proceeding.

Simultaneously, the board deliberated on Evergreen Medical Group’s application for a freestanding illuminated sign on Kinderkamack Road. The proposed sign, intended to improve visibility for patients, required variance approval due to borough restrictions on such signage. Concerns were voiced about the sign’s orientation and illumination, with discussions surrounding the potential “sign pollution” it might cause. The applicant assured that the sign would be turned off after business hours, addressing board members’ concerns about nighttime brightness. Despite mixed opinions, the application was approved with conditions, including a six-month review of the LED lights.

Additionally, the meeting addressed procedural details for other applications. Quality Home Developers LLC sought approval for the subdivision at Web Avenue, with discussions touching on sidewalk installations and utility connections. Questions about the adequacy of the proposed drainage system persisted, with the board requiring more detailed assessments to ensure compliance with municipal standards.

The board also reviewed an application from residents on Bogur Road for a deck installation. With the property classified as undersized, the board considered a variance for building coverage, given that the proposed deck exceeded the allowed limit by 1.6%. The architect explained the necessity of the deck due to limited backyard space and emphasized that its construction would minimally impact the topography. The board unanimously approved the variance, acknowledging the hardship posed by the lot size and supporting the homeowners’ plans for outdoor improvements.