The most significant topic of discussion was the application by Richard Shenik for variance approvals on his property. Shenik, represented by attorney Daniel Bor, sought two bulk C variances for a side yard setback and an increase in impervious coverage. The existing side yard setback was 5.9 feet, short of the required eight feet. Similarly, the property’s impervious coverage was set to increase to 28.9%, surpassing the 25% standard, necessitating a variance. Engineer Tyler Vandervalk explained that the variances were crucial due to structural changes, including wall height adjustments that triggered the need for the setback variance. To alleviate the impervious coverage issue, the applicant proposed removing a concrete pad and limiting driveway expansion.

The discussion took a complex turn with the involvement of the Lake Mohawk Country Club. A letter from the Club’s attorney suggested that any approval of the variance application should be contingent upon the Club’s consent. The board members debated the necessity of this condition, given that the Club’s requirements typically include a non-objection letter, which was reportedly missing. Some board members voiced confusion over the recent communication, highlighting a gap in information sharing. The applicant’s attorney claimed that the necessary approvals from the Club had been obtained, yet the board sought further clarification.

Public commentary featured a notable segment, with resident Ryan Shrek expressing concerns about a deteriorating retaining wall on his property, allegedly impacted by Shenik’s construction. Shrek requested repairs to prevent erosion and offered to compare surveys to establish property boundaries definitively. The applicant’s representative agreed to address the issue if construction was found to be the cause of the wall’s degradation. This public interaction underscored the importance of addressing neighboring property impacts during renovation projects.

The board also reviewed previous permits and construction status, noting that Shenik’s renovations had been ongoing since 2021. The need for variance relief arose from new construction on the second level. The board confirmed that no changes had been made to the plans since the last review by the Country Club.

In response to these discussions, the board moved to approve the variance application, incorporating conditions for repairing the retaining wall and adhering to stipulations outlined by the board attorney.