The property, situated in a business office zone and spanning 3.12 acres, is neighbored by various establishments, including a self-storage facility, religious building, auto repair shop, and a mix of residential and commercial uses. At the crux of the discussion was the motel’s application for preliminary and final site plan approval with a d variance for a manager suite and two-family use. The applicant’s attorney underscored the need for the changes, which prompted a debate over the classification of the second floor of a building on the premises. The floor, equipped with multiple rooms and kitchen facilities, raised questions about whether it could be considered an apartment.

Witnesses, including a planner, the property owner, an engineering expert, and the township planner, were sworn in to provide their insights. The engineering expert, having previously testified in Newark and East Newark, discussed the proposed interior renovations and the need for additional parking spaces to accommodate the multifamily dwelling. The board requested detailed floor plans for the two-family units and sought clarity on whether the property should be classified as a single family dwelling, hotel, or motel.

The meeting’s discourse extended to the property’s septic system. Previously approved as a single family home, the property’s septic capacity was now under scrutiny due to its proposed multifamily use. The addition of a kitchen implicated an increase in capacity requirements, and the board requested precise calculations to ensure the septic system could handle the multifamily building.

Parking was another issue addressed. The property’s current parking setup fell short of the required spaces by 11, necessitating a variance. The board sought a comprehensive understanding of the parking requirement against the existing spaces, and the extent of deviation that would require a variance.

The board’s concerns also extended to fire safety codes, further highlighting the importance of accurately determining the property’s classification. The distinction between a residential dwelling and a hotel or motel bore implications for code compliance and necessitated a clear definition of the property’s use.

Further complicating the property’s zoning situation was the presence of a shipping container, which had previously been represented as temporary. The board discussed the possibility of seeking a variance to retain the container, while also considering the future use of an existing restaurant building on the site and its impact on parking and utilities.

The multifaceted nature of the motel property case underscored the zoning board’s role in balancing regulatory compliance with the evolving needs of the community. The discussions emphasized the need for additional testimony and information on hotel operations and comparisons with the township’s ordinance.

In addition to the motel property case, the meeting briefly touched upon other matters. A zoning case withdrawal was announced, and the board addressed a separate application for a generator placement variance, highlighting the urgency due to recurring power outages. The board requested further documentation for a review of the property’s modifications and history.

The meeting concluded with the scheduling of the next hearing and the extension of the board’s action deadline to July 31st, 2022. The continuation of the hearing to April 18th allowed for the necessary time to gather the requested information.