The proposed residential development on Vander Road was a focal point of the meeting, with community input raising concerns about safety and traffic management. Residents Angela and Bob Straowski highlighted the precarious location of the lot on a bend in the road, pointing out speed limit transitions from 45 mph to 35 mph, which they argue contribute to dangerous conditions for pedestrians. They cited the lack of shoulders on the road and the high traffic volumes, which include large vehicles from a nearby industrial complex, as serious risks, particularly for children. In addition, the Straowskis raised skepticism about the proposed parking solutions, noting the challenges of accommodating visitors with a one-car garage and a limited driveway, given the neighborhood’s existing parking struggles.

The board also examined the implications of the proposed development’s rear setback, which at 12.25 feet fell short of the required 50 feet standard. Strict adherence to these regulations would render the lot unbuildable, hence the need for a variance. As the discussion unfolded, it became apparent that the proposed dwelling, designed with four bedrooms, would necessitate a right-of-way dedication to widen Vander Road, a move favored by the board over an easement. Concerns were raised about the lack of a clear policy regarding curbing requirements for similar developments. The board debated the necessity of curb installation alongside sidewalks, with arguments for curbing to prevent vehicles from encroaching on pedestrian areas.

In addition to safety and parking, environmental concerns were prominent. The proposed development included dry wells for stormwater runoff management, acknowledged as a positive aspect. However, questions about soil borings and the water table were addressed, confirming a depth greater than ten feet, which alleviated concerns about the septic system’s viability. The proposed design required variances for lot area and other setbacks, but was argued to improve the property’s alignment with the lot’s features.

Meanwhile, the board assessed the application by Express Auto Spa to modify an existing car wash and service station on Route 9. The proposal included improvements to site circulation, parking, and infrastructure, along with additional vacuum stall spaces. The debate centered on the location of a turbine to power the vacuum stations, which would require variance relief due to its visibility and potential noise impact. The applicant’s representative proposed situating the turbine within a front yard area, necessitating additional landscaping and screening to mitigate these concerns.

Operational aspects of the car wash drew attention, with discussions on the average time cars would spend in the facility and the potential for congestion in vacuum areas. Traffic management became a critical point, as board members expressed concerns about potential rear-end collisions on Route 9 due to backups. The applicant described design measures, such as two pull-through spaces, intended to mitigate such risks.

Noise levels from the new turbine and existing air dryers were another area of public concern, with residents seeking assurances that noise pollution would not disrupt their quality of life. The board discussed the potential for sound-attenuating enclosures and the relocation of the turbine to minimize impact on residential areas. A solid white vinyl fence, proposed around the turbine area, was suggested to help mitigate noise and visual impacts.

The board also addressed the need for variances related to the site’s nonconforming use and impervious coverage. The applicant argued that the proposed improvements, including enhanced site circulation and stormwater management, would justify the requested relief. The board ultimately approved the application, contingent on adjustments to the turbine’s placement, installation of a solid fence, and proper maintenance of sidewalks.