The meeting began with an extensive discussion about the property on Manhattan Avenue, which has been the subject of ongoing compliance challenges. Concerns have been raised about two accessory structures on the site, with a lack of response from the zoning officer since an alert was sent in October. The council debated the potential need for the applicant to return for board approval, particularly concerning a driveway initiated years prior. Questions about the jurisdiction of the zoning officer and the need for aggressive compliance measures, such as fines or certified mail, were raised. The council acknowledged that winter conditions would delay physical improvements but emphasized the importance of resolving these issues promptly.

The council also addressed the quality of work on the property, particularly the driveway’s curb construction, which may not meet code requirements. Members were surprised that the applicant had not been informed that approval was contingent upon addressing these concerns. As a result, the matter was tabled for the next meeting, with a directive to follow up on compliance and financial obligations related to escrow accounts.

In a related discussion, the council considered the application checklist’s effectiveness. It was noted that the existing checklist might not capture all necessary documentation, leading to incomplete submissions and confusion. The council agreed that no immediate changes would be made without a formal recommendation.

The council then reviewed the fee structures for variances, proposing an increase to $250 for residential variances and $1,000 for commercial applications, with a focus on aligning with neighboring towns. For commercial applications, an escrow deposit of $7,500 was suggested to cover the costs associated with processing applications. The council emphasized the need for fees to reflect services rendered while remaining accessible for residents.

Amid these discussions, the council expressed unanimous opposition to New Jersey Senate Bill S4736 and Assembly Bill A4471. These bills propose allowing four residential units on every lot statewide, which the council argued undermines local zoning authority and could lead to undesirable developments. The council resolved to formalize their opposition, highlighting the potential negative impact on the community.

The meeting also touched on procedural aspects, such as the need for clear communication between applicants and the board to ensure compliance with conditions set forth in approvals. The importance of reviewing resolutions thoroughly, particularly concerning stormwater management and impervious coverage, was reiterated.

In addition to these topics, the council reviewed updates on YouTube viewership of their meetings, noting the positive impact on transparency and accessibility. They also discussed the Apple Montessori’s Certificate of Occupancy and ongoing concerns about a missing chain that could affect emergency access.