The primary focus of the meeting was the proposal to modernize an existing billboard by increasing its height and converting it to a digital format. The applicant aimed to replace the current static structure with a taller, single-monopole sign featuring narrow view technology to minimize light spillage. Despite a reduction in the billboard’s square footage, the conversion would introduce digital capabilities, allowing for frequently changing messages. This aspect was a point of contention among board members and the public.

Concerns were raised about the billboard’s impact on the community, particularly its potential to distract drivers and its proximity to new residential developments. One board member questioned the safety of a digital billboard, especially given its location at a busy intersection described as “one of the most dangerous in Red Bank.” The absence of a traffic study accompanying the application further fueled skepticism about the project’s safety implications.

The debate extended to the legal nuances surrounding the proposal. There was disagreement about whether the application required a D1 or D2 variance, with discussions highlighting the complexities of zoning laws and the implications of altering a non-conforming structure. The applicant argued that the conversion did not constitute abandonment of use, given the sign’s long-standing presence. However, the board ultimately determined that a D1 variance was necessary, aligning with the town’s master plan, which discourages billboard proliferation.

The public comment segment featured strong opposition from several residents and community representatives. One speaker expressed frustration over the billboard’s impact on property development, citing its lease as a significant barrier. The potential for increased property values if the conversion were approved was seen as an impediment to redevelopment efforts, with claims that the billboard’s presence detracted from Red Bank’s entrance aesthetics.

The executive director of The Red Bank River Center also voiced opposition, arguing that billboards in historic downtown settings constitute blight. He emphasized that the majority of advertisements would benefit national and regional businesses rather than local establishments, raising concerns about setting a precedent for future applications.

The legality of the billboard’s conversion was further debated, with references to the New Jersey Administrative Code and local ordinances. Discussions centered on whether the proposed changes adhered to regulations governing non-conforming signs. A participant cited specific prohibitions against altering the characteristics of non-conforming signs, arguing that the project failed to meet these conditions.

Ultimately, the board’s decision to deny the application was unanimous, reflecting widespread concerns about the project’s alignment with Red Bank’s vision and the potential for negative community impacts. Despite the applicant’s assurances of reducing non-conforming signs and providing municipal messaging opportunities, the board prioritized community feedback and the preservation of local character.