Recognizing the importance of leadership continuity, Chris Avalone was reaffirmed as chairman. John Scully was appointed as vice chair, and Marie Rodriguez-Oldan was selected to continue her role as board secretary. In legal matters, Jack Serpico was designated as the board attorney, with the Beekman attorney firm stepping in as the conflict attorney. For planning services, CCH was appointed as the board planner, and TNM was chosen as the conflict board planner. The board also made a temporary appointment for the board engineer and APV was appointed as the board recording services. The Coaster and Asbury Park Press were designated as the zoning board’s official newspapers. Furthermore, the board’s 2024 meeting schedule was established, setting the framework for the handling of zoning issues throughout the year.

Following organizational matters, the board approved minutes from prior meetings held on January 10th, July 11th, and December 12th, 2023. These approvals were necessary to maintain a record of the board’s decisions and discussions. Additionally, a resolution for a property on Grand Avenue was adopted, though details of this resolution were not elaborated upon in the summary provided.

The main event of the meeting was the application by Dennis WRL for variances at his property located on Bridge Street. The requested variances included an expansion of the patio, the relocation of pool equipment, installation of a gas line for a barbecue, and the allowance of a non-conforming fence. The board’s rigorous examination of the application underscored the complexities involved in balancing homeowners’ wishes with the adherence to zoning regulations.

A granular discussion ensued concerning the optimal placement of the AC condenser and other backyard equipment. The homeowner’s preference for a more aesthetically pleasing layout was juxtaposed with the potential impact on the neighboring property. Board members were thorough in their inquiry, probing the homeowner on the necessity of the relocation and suggesting alternatives that would meet zoning requirements. They delved into the technical specifics, such as the size of the equipment pads and the extent of the piping, and raised concerns about noise and functionality. This dialogue revealed a willingness on the part of the homeowner to adjust plans, including the potential repositioning of the condenser, to meet the board’s and neighbors’ concerns.

The board pressed the homeowner for more plans and professional input, especially regarding the condenser’s visual impact and dimensions. The board’s focus on objective justifications for granting variances was evident as they considered the implications of the additional pavers and fence on water drainage. The homeowner conceded to working with the board engineer to ensure compliance with zoning regulations.

The proposed patio expansion was scrutinized, particularly its encroachment into the side yard setback. The board grappled with the homeowner’s design choices that risked overbuilding and the potential fire hazard posed by the grill’s proximity to the fence. The board members were cautious about granting variances based on subjective preferences and emphasized the importance of adhering to objective zoning criteria. This debate culminated in the homeowner’s acknowledgment of the possibility of overbuilding and an openness to exploring alternative designs that would conform to zoning laws.

The homeowner agreed to extend the time for the board to act on the application, and the board agreed to carry the application to a later date, allowing for further review and refinement of the plans.