Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Heritage Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves barn addition and 22% lot-coverage variance after historic-area debate

Bernards Township Zoning Board of Adjustment · August 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Zoning Board approved a 16-foot front addition to a historic barn (to create a two-car garage and small studio), granting a lot-coverage variance up to 22% (including treating certain retaining walls as impervious) with conditions on materials, tree replacement and stormwater measures; public commenters urged a smaller, more historic-scaled solution.

The Bernards Township Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to approve an application to add a 16-foot front addition to a historic barn to accommodate a two-car garage and a small upstairs studio. The applicant said the addition will help preserve the barn by making it usable and described plans to match the barn's vertical-board siding and to retain visible historic elements. The board and staff discussed setbacks, whether the proposed work increases the structure's nonconformity, and the lot-coverage implications of existing and proposed features.

A central technical dispute at the hearing concerned whether the property's gravity or segmental retaining walls should count in the town's lot-coverage calculation. Staff and several engineers explained that segmental walls with a compacted base or constructed as continuous surfaces are often treated as impervious because they displace ground and direct runoff, while loose-built stone piles that admit flow may be treated differently. The applicant's engineer estimated the walls contributed roughly 1.2% of coverage; board members agreed to count the walls as impervious for this application and to proceed with a practical coverage threshold.

Because counting the walls raised the calculated coverage from the plan's 20.49% to a level near the requested relief, the parties agreed to frame the relief as a 22% lot-coverage variance that included a 1.2% allowance attributable to the retaining walls. The applicant also agreed to replace two Bradford pears and add screening between the barn and the adjacent St. Mark's Chapel; the Environmental Commission and township memoranda were cited in the list of conditions.

Members of the public, including John Booth, a trustee with the local historical society, urged restraint and suggested a smaller addition or a different roofline to preserve the barn's historic viewscape; the applicant said the design was chosen to preserve the barn's frontal appearance while making the building usable and structurally safer. After deliberation, a board member moved to deem the application complete and asked the board attorney to draft a resolution memorializing approval under the board's findings; the motion passed on roll call. The resolution will include the agreed conditions on color/materials, stormwater management, tree replacement, and plan clarifications.