The meeting’s most discussion revolved around Justin Hulick’s request for a use variance for his historically rooted property. Hulick, whose family has resided in Cranbury for over 150 years, sought to make improvements to his 0.4-acre lot, smaller than the three-acre minimum required by current industrial zoning laws. Hulick’s property, described as a remnant lot, is uniquely situated between the turnpike and other residential areas, which complicated compliance with zoning regulations.

Hulick’s application required a D2 variance due to the non-conforming status of his property, which predated current zoning changes. The board’s planner clarified that the D2 variance did not necessitate proving the particular suitability of the use, only that the proposed modifications would not adversely impact the public good or zoning plan. Hulick presented his case by emphasizing his desire to enhance his family’s living conditions, despite challenges posed by nearby warehouses and the turnpike. He stressed that the improvements would address persistent litter and privacy issues, notably caused by truck drivers discarding debris.

A point of discussion was Hulick’s plan to install a fence to mitigate these issues. He argued that the fence would not only provide privacy but also serve as a barrier from ongoing debris problems. Hulick expressed frustration over the requirement for landscaping around the fence, deeming it impractical due to the current state of the area. He aimed for a balance between practicality and aesthetics in the fence design, given the environmental context.

The meeting also featured a debate over a resident’s request for a solid eight-foot fence along Heights down Cranberry Station Road. The resident argued that the increased height was necessary for privacy and noise reduction due to heavy truck traffic. While the eight-foot height is permissible, the request for a 100% solid structure conflicted with zoning regulations, which require fences in light industrial zones to be at least 50% solid. The resident justified the request by citing inadequate sound barriers from existing structures and the need to protect their family from noise and visual distractions.

Concerns about setting a precedent for eight-foot solid fences were raised, with board members recalling similar requests being denied in more developed neighborhoods. The resident countered by highlighting the uniqueness of their location, with fewer neighbors and distinct conditions compared to established areas. They argued that the fence would enhance their property’s value by providing much-needed privacy and noise suppression, appealing to potential buyers amid Cranbury’s high housing costs.

The board members engaged in discussions with Hulick and the resident, weighing the implications of their requests on community standards, property rights, and zoning regulations. Despite initial skepticism, the board approved Hulick’s application for variances and design waivers, acknowledging the unique hardships associated with his property and the reasonableness of his request.

The approval process concluded with a unanimous roll call vote, allowing Hulick to proceed with construction permits following the memorialization of the decision at the subsequent meeting. Hulick expressed gratitude and relief, noting the thoroughness of the approval process and his anticipation of moving forward with the property enhancements.