The primary discussion revolved around the application from Greg and Shannon Rich, who plan to renovate their property on Washington Street, a historically significant site within the R2 zoning district. The Riches aim to convert the current duplex dwelling, a non-conforming use in the single-family residential zone, into a single-family home. This transformation requires several variances due to the property’s pre-existing conditions, such as lot area, width, and frontage, as well as issues with the second-floor area ratio and setbacks.

During the presentation, the Riches, alongside their architect and project engineer, outlined plans to modernize the home while preserving its historical character. Proposed changes include architectural enhancements that align with the property’s contributing designation in the park district. A new foyer, designed to increase the floor area ratio from 45.2% to 47.5%, stands as a focal point of the renovation, necessitating a variance. The introduction of a stormwater management system was also highlighted as a improvement to mitigate the impacts of non-conforming lot coverage.

The board discussed the project’s compliance with zoning regulations and its historical context, emphasizing the need to maintain the property’s aesthetic and historical value. The Historic Preservation Commission had already provided conceptual approval.

Attention then turned to the Cape May Paddle Club and Marina, which presented applications involving proposed changes that could affect site plan requirements. The Paddle Club’s application centered on transitioning from a “bring your own” alcohol policy to direct service, raising questions about potential impacts on neighborhood dynamics and parking requirements. The board examined whether the change in alcohol service constituted a change in use, which would necessitate site plan approval. The club representatives argued that their operations, including a licensed bar at the pool area, had not changed in nature, maintaining that the adjustments were operational enhancements rather than use alterations.

Additionally, the Paddle Club sought approval for a roof structure over an existing landing, intended to provide weather protection without altering the building’s footprint or affecting site circulation. The board scrutinized whether this modification required site plan review, given its potential effects on drainage and landscaping. Despite the applicant’s assertions that the roof would not impact the property’s existing conditions, the board and its engineer concluded that the addition warranted a review due to possible site considerations.

The zoning officer’s decisions on both the alcohol service and the roof structure applications were affirmed by the board, requiring site plan approval for the proposed changes.