25:57The most notable discussion point revolved around the application for a property on Troy Drive, where the property owners sought to expand their kitchen and add a basement wine room, necessitating variances for building coverage and sideyard setbacks. The existing single-family home, situated in the R4 zone on a corner lot, faced zoning challenges due to its location and pre-existing non-conformities. The board heard from an engineering representative who detailed the property’s features, including its driveways and a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement. The proposed expansion sought to increase building coverage from 14.44% to 14.82% and address a sideyard setback variance, proposing a revised setback of 10.1 feet.

34:20An architect presented updated plans, emphasizing the design’s intention to unify the building’s exterior and maximize interior space without adding new windows where setbacks were concerned. The board scrutinized the necessity of the variances, particularly the sideyard setback, and examined potential impacts on neighboring properties. A professional planner further contextualized the application, citing the township’s master plan while highlighting the property’s zoning challenges related to its topography and historical development. Ultimately, the board approved the application, recognizing the practical difficulties posed by the property’s existing conditions and the minimal impact of the proposed changes on the neighborhood.

59:32The meeting also addressed another application on Pine Street, which involved a comprehensive renovation proposal for a single-family home. The applicants aimed to modernize the home by adding a second floor, featuring a new primary bedroom and bathroom, and replacing a shed with a garage. This project required seven C variances and one D variance, largely due to the lot’s undersized nature compared to zoning requirements. The board was tasked with evaluating whether the renovations would disrupt neighborhood aesthetics and zoning standards.

01:37:11Board members deliberated over the proposed changes, particularly the garage dimensions and the home’s overall size. Concerns were raised about potential overdevelopment and the house’s proportionality relative to neighboring properties. Despite these reservations, the board acknowledged the necessity of modernizing the home for contemporary living standards. The applicant’s representatives underscored the improvements’ alignment with master plan objectives.

02:05:46In a separate application concerning 2 Jefferson Avenue, the board reviewed proposals for structural adjustments to mitigate the property’s bulkiness and improve aesthetic alignment with the existing streetscape. Applicant David Rosen highlighted the property’s history of prior applications and emphasized the current proposal’s focus on aesthetic improvements and family needs, including a swimming pool addition. The board examined variances related to front yard setbacks, building heights, and steep slope disturbances. The discussion also involved stormwater management strategies, with assurances made to engage with neighbors to address runoff concerns.

02:55:27The meeting concluded with a proposal for a new cabana and associated landscaping at another property. The board examined the cabana’s design and compliance with zoning regulations, including height and setback variances. Concerns regarding stormwater management and tree removal were addressed, with the applicant agreeing to enhance tree screening and collaborate with neighbors to resolve potential drainage issues.