During the meeting, the application submitted by Jack Bertini for a change of use on his property took center stage, prompting discussions and scrutiny from the board. Bertini and his team, which included an architect and a planner named Mr. Carden, provided testimony about the proposed changes, particularly focusing on the refurbishment of an existing porch. Despite Bertini’s assertion that the porch’s dimensions and location had not changed, some board members spotted inconsistencies between the survey map and the actual property conditions. Notably, the map failed to accurately reflect several features, such as a brick planter, air conditioning unit, wood fence, and a concrete walkway.

The board’s attention to detail highlighted their commitment to precision in the application process. The absence of accurate representations in the survey raised a red flag, prompting a board member to engage in an exchange about the veracity of the documentation. The deficiencies in the survey led the board to postpone action on Bertini’s application, demanding updated and accurate drawings before proceeding.

Another point of contention was the requirement for a handicapped parking spot. The board requested further professional criteria to ascertain whether an ADA-compliant space was warranted given the property’s intended use. In response to the board’s inquiries, the applicant described the basement’s use as an area for office space and personal tool storage, with no expectation of employees or customer visits.

The nature of the basement’s use also came under scrutiny, with one board member differentiating between informal and sanctioned use of the space. The concern was whether the informal use while Bertini resided on the property would carry over and potentially alter the property’s use in perpetuity. The board’s insistence on a detailed description of the basement’s intended use underscored the necessity for clarity and regulatory compliance, which, in turn, influenced their decision to hold further action on the application.

Furthermore, the meeting touched upon the property’s potential future occupancy, especially the basement’s suitability for commercial use. The board discussed the building’s structural aspects, including the absence of a second means of egress from the second floor, which raised safety concerns. A representative from the River Edge Ambulance Corps chimed in during the meeting, noting potential access challenges within the building, which the board took into consideration.

The meeting concluded with a decision to carry Bertini’s application to a future meeting once the necessary documentation and information were provided. As the board considered potential dates, they also acknowledged the need for additional notice to be given.

In addition to Bertini’s application, the meeting covered administrative announcements pertinent to conducting the remote session and the mechanisms for public engagement. The board also finalized the memorializations of two resolutions for site plan approvals granted to Leon and Jennifer Chen, and Yuman Kolov Corov.

Lastly, the Land Use Board provided an update on the zoning ordinance edits, which were being submitted to the council for review.