The most notable item of the meeting involved a variance request from Michael Dere and his wife, lifelong residents of Basking Ridge, seeking to expand their home to accommodate their growing family. The Dere family proposed adding an open porch and a one-story addition to their split-level home to enlarge the kitchen and dining areas. This expansion required a variance due to a side rear yard setback issue, as the proposed design placed the addition at 27.84 feet from the property line, falling short of the mandated 40-foot rear setback. The existing coverage was 10.15%, proposed to increase to 13.06%, below the allowable 20%.

The board discussed the project’s implications, with Dere highlighting the cramped conditions in their current home and the need for expansion due to their growing family. The project also involved modifying the garage and creating a mudroom with a dog shower. The board engaged with the applicants on the significance of the proposed changes, considering the property’s unique challenges due to its corner location and angled house placement. The discussion included the introduction of photographic evidence illustrating the structure’s placement and its relationship with neighboring properties, with Dere expressing willingness to enhance screening between properties to address privacy concerns. The board ultimately favored the variance request, noting the project’s alignment with municipal land use ordinances.

Another crucial discussion involved a property seeking a lot coverage variance, with the applicant using a 2016 survey as a baseline for their request. The board scrutinized the stormwater management plans, as the existing house was not incorporated into the stormwater system. The applicant proposed directing runoff from the addition to the front stormwater system, with suggestions for additional mitigation efforts like installing a detention pit. Concerns about setting a precedent for future owners were raised, leading to discussions on the potential removal of elements like a gravel walkway to reduce coverage. The board reached a consensus to allow a maximum lot coverage of 20.25%, down from 20.87%, with conditions preventing further modifications or exchanges of coverage.

The meeting also addressed an application for a property where unforeseen damage to an existing structure required revisiting previously granted approvals. The project involved replacing a deteriorating garage with a new two-car garage, while adhering to setback regulations. Public comments from neighbors highlighted concerns about stormwater management and privacy due to the increased structure size. The board confirmed that the project would not exceed allowable impervious coverage, emphasizing compliance with township ordinance and openness to planting trees for privacy.