The “Mine Sweeper” property, a term used to refer to a former residential structure on the site, has been a point of interest due to its historical value and unique circumstances. The application submitted by WCA Preservation Holdings LLC proposed a two-lot subdivision to reconstruct the single-family home while preserving the existing mine sweeper. The discussion revealed that the property had previously consisted of several lots, and due to the dilapidation of a second house, it was consolidated into one tract by the tax assessor.

The applicant’s representative, Keith Davis, outlined the necessity of the variances, which were required to rebuild what was once lawfully existing before the second home’s demolition. Davis argued that the reconstruction would reestablish the property’s historical significance. The new home’s design, as presented by the applicant’s architect, aimed to incorporate architectural elements prevalent throughout Cape May.

The board and the applicant’s representatives engaged in a examination of the technical variances requested, with detailed testimonies from various experts, including licensed planners and engineers. Tiffany Morisy, a licensed planner, underscored the variances’ technical nature, advocating that the development would create a better zoning outcome and advance the purposes of zoning. Morisy emphasized the plan’s alignment with the zoning ordinance and master plan, noting that the property had been intended for residential use. She addressed the potential impact of the architectural design on the visual environment and the importance of maintaining appropriate population density.

Key points of debate during the meeting included the lot’s unique challenges, such as being partially underwater, which raised concerns about stormwater management and access for emergency vehicles. The board scrutinized the implications of the lot’s condition concerning stormwater management regulations and the practical difficulties in meeting street frontage and access requirements. A fire official provided insights into the safety aspects, assuring the board of adequate access for firefighting purposes and the proposed lot’s ability to support fire apparatus traffic.

Moreover, the board discussed the placement of the pool equipment and fencing for Stephen and Katherine Clemens’ application to renovate their swimming pool, touching upon the project’s compliance with the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and safety measures such as a retractable pool cover. Public comments were solicited, and the board motioned to grant variances subject to conditions discussed, including compliance with stormwater ordinances and landscaping plans.

Another topic was the variance for parking requirements for a property reconfiguration that necessitated technical variances for building setbacks, lot sizes, and parking. The board explored the challenges of interpreting the changes and the practicality of parking on the property, especially considering the location of a garage space accessed by crossing a boardwalk. The property owner’s representative conveyed the intention to use the garage for a low-speed vehicle and clarified that the property was not meant to become a rental but for personal use.