The proposed development by Overcomers ABA Services LLC, represented by Gary Goodman, intends to transform the existing structure into an office building and training center for ABA instructors. The project is designed to accommodate up to 22 parking spaces, with plans to convert part of a residential rear yard into additional parking. This proposal has sparked considerable community concern, particularly regarding the removal of mature trees and the state of property maintenance.

Residents voiced their dissatisfaction during the public comment section, with many focusing on the removal of trees without prior approval, which they claim has led to environmental and visual blight in the area. This issue was compounded by allegations that the property had fallen into disrepair since its acquisition by Stephanie Tyo, the applicant and property owner. Concerns were raised about broken windows, overgrown grass, and the potential for flooding due to the alteration of the landscape. One resident emphasized the broader implications of property neglect, describing the condition as “an embarrassing structure to the community.”

Further complicating the application were discussions around the adequacy of the proposed parking lot’s design. Safety concerns were paramount, with board members questioning the visibility and maneuverability for vehicles, particularly emergency services. The limited width of the driveway and the potential for cars to block sightlines emerged as issues, raising alarms about the feasibility of the current design. The applicant’s architect, Jing Zhou, acknowledged these concerns, but the absence of a review of the fire and safety requirements added to the community’s apprehension.

The zoning board’s attorney, Rob Pansul, highlighted the challenges posed by the situation, especially given that demolition had occurred prior to obtaining necessary approvals, further complicating the review process. As the discussion progressed, residents expressed anxiety over the potential impact of the proposed development on their quality of life, safety, and property values. Many articulated a sense of frustration over the lack of communication and transparency from the property owners regarding the changes happening on-site.

In addition to the Morris Avenue case, the meeting also addressed a variance request for a property on Springfield Avenue, where the Mendes family sought approval for an addition to their home. The family’s need for more space to accommodate their growing children led to discussions about the unique circumstances of their corner lot, which required a variance due to non-conforming setbacks. The board engaged with the family’s architect, evaluating the implications of the proposed expansion against the township’s zoning regulations and the neighborhood’s historic development patterns.

Despite the challenges presented by the Morris Avenue proposal, the board ultimately decided to accept the withdrawal of the application, acknowledging the complexities and community concerns surrounding the project. The resolution to withdraw was passed unanimously, with the understanding that any future proposals would need to address the issues raised comprehensively.