The central topic of the meeting revolved around the draft ordinance 25-20, which aims to regulate demolition activities within the township. The ordinance, previously approved by the board, had been sent to the mayor and council for additional comments, which necessitated further review. The discussions were sparked by concerns over the definition and extent of the ‘length of existing dwelling at first floor level,’ leading to debates over whether this measurement should include the sill plate, the top of the first floor, or a foot from the grade. Board members deliberated on whether structures like enclosed porches or three-season rooms should be included in the definition of a building, highlighting the need for precise language to avoid misunderstandings.

A critical point of discussion emerged around the ordinance’s focus on what constitutes a significant alteration to a dwelling. The proposed ordinance sought to establish a clearer guideline than previous regulations, which left too much room for interpretation. The 50% threshold was introduced as a critical benchmark for compliance. Concerns were raised that some contractors might circumvent regulations and perform changes without notifying the construction official. Despite skepticism from some members who doubted the ordinance’s deterrent effect on “bad actors,” it was acknowledged that the construction official had intervened in cases of non-compliance.

The ordinance’s language was further scrutinized, particularly the use of the term “demolition” and its distinction between partial and complete demolitions. A suggestion was made to include the term “full” before “demolition” in one section to ensure clarity. Additionally, the term “perimeter” was debated, as it could mislead interpretations regarding interior wall demolitions. Members sought to ensure that the ordinance would not misinterpret what was permissible, leading to a motion to amend the ordinance with the proposed changes, which was unanimously approved.

The meeting also briefly addressed an ordinance concerning the parking of boats, commercial vehicles, and RVs. The proposal had previously faced significant opposition from residents, particularly tradespeople and those living near the lake who stored boats on their properties. Due to the pushback, the ordinance was not pursued further.

Attendance at board meetings was another topic of concern. Questions arose about implementing a formal process to address low attendance rates among board members, as some had been frequently absent without resolution. While there was no formal procedure in place, it was noted that the mayor and another member had previously dealt with a similar issue when a board member resigned due to consistent absences.

Lastly, the board received an update on the progress of the master plan, with a focus on the affordable housing plan being developed by Joe Burgess and his team. The meeting concluded with no further comments or concerns from the board members.