Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Undersized Lot Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board clears new single‑family house on undersized 27‑ft lot at 232 South Pearl
Summary
After reducing the design and increasing setbacks, the board found the revised application for 232 South Pearl "substantially different" from a prior denial and approved a 1,498‑square‑foot single‑family home subject to conditions including Dalmire notice documentation, graded drainage details, unfinished basement/attic, and relocation of a neighbor stoop.
The Red Bank Zoning Board on Feb. 5 approved a redesign for 232 South Pearl, allowing construction of a new single‑family house on an undersized 27‑foot lot after the applicant reduced the home's size and increased setbacks following a prior denial.
Applicant Jacob Morales said he intends to move his mother to Red Bank and described the project as a family home. "I would love for my mom just to experience Redbank ... I'm excited to if everything goes well to bring her down here," Morales said.
Attorney Kevin Assadi and architect Edward O'Neal presented a substantially revised plan. O'Neal said the current proposal reduces the house to about 1,498 square feet (three bedrooms, two‑and‑a‑half baths), increases the northern setback from roughly 3.3 feet to about 5.1 feet, reduces building height slightly, and lowers lot coverage to approximately 28.7 percent. The team also removed on‑site parking from the plan; they said the board previously discouraged a curb cut and that on‑street parking and a nearby parking lot provide spaces.
Counsel reviewed the earlier denial (April 2025) and addressed the two threshold issues: whether the new submission is "substantially different" from the earlier application (rest judicata doctrine) and whether the applicant complied with Dalmire requirements for isolated undersized parcels by sending notice to adjacent property owners offering to purchase excess land. The applicant submitted evidence that Dalmire letters were sent to four neighbors; one nearby homeowner told counsel she no longer objected but did not offer land for sale.
Architect O'Neal noted the design preserves neighborhood character by pushing the house forward to align with nearby frontages, keeping a modest plan, and limiting the attic and basement to nonhabitable uses. He identified comparable small new single‑family construction in town to show the proposed size is within local precedent.
Board members debated whether plan changes were sufficient to overcome the prior denial. After discussion, the board voted that the application was substantially different and then approved the new single‑family dwelling with conditions: submittal of revised plans showing the attic/basement details, grading and drainage information, documentation of Dalmire notices, relocation of a neighboring stoop (to address an encroachment issue), screening of HVAC units, and a 24‑month time limit to obtain permits.
The board also required that the basement and attic remain unfinished and not be used as additional dwelling units unless the board is returned to for approval. With conditions accepted by the applicant, the motion to approve carried.
