The most debated topic of the meeting was the application from Emerald Jade LLC to convert a garage into a cabana on Wildwood Road. The property, located in the R5 zone, exceeded the maximum building coverage allowed, necessitating a variance. The existing and proposed coverage was at 31.23%, above the 25% permitted. The proposal included retaining the garage structure and repurposing it into a cabana, which added to the complexity given earlier approvals that expected the garage’s removal.

As the discussion unfolded, a zoning official had originally suggested that the garage could be retained as a cabana after pool approval was granted, leading to the current request for a variance due to the prior agreement to remove it. The applicant’s representative argued for the retention of the garage by proposing to remove part of the existing driveway as a trade-off for the additional building coverage. The structure was designed with two solid walls and two that could be opened in summer, with no plans for heating or air conditioning.

Further complicating the proposal was the issue of sidewalk width, where the proposed five-foot width required a variance, unlike a three-foot-wide sidewalk, which would not be considered a structure. The board’s deliberations also touched upon the number of bedrooms in the principal structure to determine parking requirements, leading to a proposed deed restriction of no more than five bedrooms to prevent future zoning issues.

The meeting took a brief recess to clarify inaccuracies in the drawings, particularly concerning the front porch, which was confirmed to be an existing feature, not a proposed addition as initially represented. The discussion also covered the removal of excess concrete around the garage to address building coverage, although this was not originally factored into impervious or building coverage calculations.

Stormwater management was an important element of the discussions, with recommendations to install a dry well in the front yard to mitigate runoff due to the increased impervious surface area. The board insisted on a revised zoning chart to ensure all calculations were accurate and to avoid further variances.

The proposal faced minimal public opposition, and after addressing public comments, the board moved forward with a positive resolution based on the conditions discussed, including the stormwater management requirements. The board’s approval was confirmed through a roll call vote.

Another discussion involved a proposal for a two-story dwelling on an undersized lot measuring approximately 60 feet wide and 250 feet deep. The applicant sought variances due to the lot’s non-conforming size, which posed challenges in adhering to the combined side yard setback requirements. The application initially included a cabana, which was removed to reduce the number of variances. The applicant emphasized the impracticality of developing the lot without variances and highlighted that the proposed development would not violate zoning purposes, aiming to maintain adequate air, light, and open space.

The board engaged in a analysis of the variances, focusing on the lot’s size and shape’s implications on the proposed development. Safety concerns were addressed by ensuring a compliant distance for pool equipment from property lines, with the only remaining variance needed for the pool patio’s setback.

The board also discussed landscaping improvements, recommending additional sidewalk connections and ensuring compliance with grading and drainage requirements. The application was ultimately approved with specified conditions.

The meeting also covered an application for expanding an existing driveway and pool patio on Park Avenue. The proposal required variances to legalize existing non-conformities and address safety concerns with street parking at a busy intersection. The applicant’s exploration of a conforming circular driveway was deemed impractical due to setback requirements and proximity to the intersection. The proposed driveway extension was presented as the safest option, and the board approved the application after confirming no further questions or opposition.