The most contentious item on the agenda involved an application from Wana Lopez seeking preliminary site plan approval and variances to construct a two-story building on Woodbridge Avenue. The proposed structure, intended to house a beauty salon on the ground floor and a two-bedroom apartment above, faced significant scrutiny from the board and local residents. The site, currently occupied by a dilapidated building used by a psychic, required several variances due to existing zoning violations and the intended residential use in a commercial zone.

Bernard Shire, representing the applicant, argued the project’s benefits, citing the property’s poor condition and the need for revitalization. Shire detailed the design, which included three on-site parking spaces and an agreement for additional parking at a nearby funeral home. He emphasized that the salon’s operations, limited to two stylists at a time, would not increase parking needs since the owners would reside upstairs.

The board’s questioning revealed concerns about the variances and parking adequacy. The property, measuring only 2,548 square feet against a minimum requirement of 7,500 square feet, had several non-conformities, including a lot width of 25 feet, front yard setback of 14.9 feet, and side yard setback of 2.47 feet. The proposed building coverage also exceeded the permissible limit, necessitating a D variance for the residential unit.

John Dupont, an engineer and planner, provided further insights into the existing conditions and visual aids illustrating the proposal’s context. Despite these efforts, board members remained apprehensive about the project’s impact on the neighborhood, particularly regarding parking and traffic congestion.

Public comments echoed these concerns. Charles Felix, a nearby resident, highlighted traffic issues caused by a local deli, fearing similar problems from the salon. Amanda Lee Kachak questioned the planned buffer between her property and the new building, expressing worries about visibility and parking congestion. Another resident raised drainage and safety issues, stressing the challenges of navigating busy streets with additional parked cars.

The board decided to carry forward the case to a later date for voting, with a transcript of the meeting to be provided for records. The applicant’s representative requested a full board’s presence for the vote.

In another notable decision, the board denied the application for Case C 17 2024 submitted by Arvin Patel, after reviewing the request and subsequent roll call.

The meeting also featured a presentation by Jay Rakin on behalf of Harts Mountain Industries, seeking additional facade signage for the iFly indoor skydiving facility at Edison Town Square. Justin Lair, iFly’s Northeast area manager, and Sam Bellamy, a professional planner, supported the application, emphasizing the need for clearer signage to attract customers.

Lair described the facility’s unique offerings and operational hours, noting the inadequacy of the current signage. Bellamy detailed the variance request for two new signs exceeding the length requirement for secondary facades but argued that the additional signage would improve visibility without detriment to the surrounding area. The board unanimously approved the signage request, considering it consistent with the commercial district’s character.