One item at the meeting was the approval of a variance allowing the conversion of commercial units at the southeast corner of Maine Avenue and Mars Street into two-bedroom residential apartments. This decision was made in light of the persistent struggle by the property owners to find commercial tenants over the past eight years, coupled with the area’s declining demand for retail spaces. The mixed-use property, which already houses three residential units—two one-bedroom apartments and one studio—alongside a beauty salon, is situated in an R4 residential zone. This zone typically permits single-family residences, making the board’s approval a notable departure aimed at addressing current housing market needs.

The board’s discussion acknowledged the property’s historical context, with its mixed-use nature being established through variances granted in 1965, 1980, and 2021. The current proposal includes merging three lots associated with the building, a process previously approved in 2021 but not completed due to administrative oversights. During the meeting, the applicant’s attorney confirmed that the deed recording process had been initiated, emphasizing the intent to complete the lot consolidation regardless of its status in prior approvals.

Parking logistics were a critical aspect of the deliberations, as the property currently accommodates 18 shared parking spaces for both residential tenants and salon customers. Board members raised concerns about the impact of adding two more residential units on parking demand, estimating up to four additional vehicles. The applicant clarified that residential parking requirements are less than those for commercial units. Suggestions were made to designate specific parking spots for the salon, though the board ultimately favored shared parking access to avoid potential conflicts.

Another topic of interest was affordable housing. A participant inquired whether any units would be designated as affordable housing, citing the township’s lack of an inclusionary ordinance that would typically mandate such allocations. The applicant had not included affordable housing in the current proposal, and the board noted that it lacked the authority to impose such a requirement. This led to discussions about the need for proactive measures to meet future affordable housing obligations, though it was acknowledged that such considerations would need to be addressed separately.

The board also reviewed an application seeking minor site plan approval and a D4 F variance to combine multiple lots and adjust the residential floor area ratio. The proposed changes aimed to mitigate land use intensity compared to previous commercial uses, with a significant reduction in the floor area ratio from the maximum permitted. The board’s consensus was that the modifications would not negatively impact the neighborhood, with support expressed for the development as a beneficial addition to the community.

The board’s approval of the application was seen as a positive step toward addressing these needs, with board members recognizing the property’s long vacancy and the potential benefits of its redevelopment.