The meeting focused on the specifics of the proposed project and its potential impact on the property, particularly addressing the board’s questions and concerns about drainage and the number of accessory structures on the property. Mr. Rakowski sought a variance for lot coverage to build a pool house, which led to a detailed examination of the project’s implications for drainage and the potential impact of additional structures on the property.

In regards to the Chimney Rock Self-Storage project, the presentation by Mr. Winters highlighted the considerable changes in the revised plans, including the reconfiguration of the building and parking lot. This resulted in a more efficient use of space and a decrease in impervious coverage on the site. The stormwater management design had been modified to provide additional storage volume and enhanced stormwater controls that exceed the minimum requirements. The freestanding trash enclosure was eliminated, and the site lighting locations and fixture selections were revised.

The board also discussed the variances associated with the site plan, noting the elimination of several non-compliances and a reduction in the number of variances from 24 to 12. The remaining variances detailed include the use variance for self-storage, floor area ratio, landscape buffer conservation easement requirement, lot improvement coverage, setback for the front yard to Route 22, setback for the front yard to Donahue Road, setback for the rear yard, and others. A board member raised concerns about the proposed floor area coverage, prompting the engineer to explain that the proposed coverage was a reduction over the existing conditions, which is unusual in redevelopment projects.

The debate continued over the project’s stormwater management improvements, which included compliance with Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) stormwater standards and a 21% increase in stormwater storage on the site. The project team described a net decrease in impervious cover and detailed reductions in peak rates of runoff for various storm events, which would create more capacity in downstream systems and potentially benefit neighboring properties.

The board sought clarification on various technical details, including landscaping plans, the visual impact of the proposed building, and the calculation of lot improvement coverage. The engineer presented how the proposed changes would affect the visual perspective from nearby residences, emphasizing the use of strategic landscaping to mitigate visibility. The discussions also covered the provision of electric vehicle parking, gated vehicular access, and the challenges associated with meeting tree spacing requirements in the landscaping plan.

The public comments portion brought up issues such as the building’s height and the conservation easement requirement. A resident, Ashley Sheres, questioned why the building was proposed to be three stories instead of two. The engineer responded by stating that the building appears as a two-story structure from certain angles despite technically counting as three stories due to basement level exposure.