Berkeley Heights Board of Adjustment approves two residential variances with stormwater and landscaping conditions

The Berkeley Heights Board of Adjustment on July 24 approved two residential projects and adopted two previously noticed resolutions, moving both applicants toward construction while attaching conditions intended to limit runoff and neighborhood impacts.

The board unanimously approved amendments to the application for 265 Colani Drive after applicant Jason Konopolski reduced the patio scope. Konopolski said he removed a previously proposed fire pit and a stepping‑stone walkway and reduced the patio by roughly 14 linear feet on its east side and by 1 foot in depth, a change he said reduced impervious coverage by about 676 square feet and lowered the requested variance to roughly 5.2%. "I reviewed the plans with our architect and modified them to remove the previously included fire pit and stepping stone walkway," Konopolski said in presenting the revisions.

Board members raised technical questions about decks, permeability and trees; Konopolski said the project will remove about "five or six" trees but that a replacement planting plan appears on the site plan. The board approved the application 6–0 with conditions requiring downward‑directed exterior lighting, orderly onsite storage during construction, adherence to the submitted tree‑replacement plan and coordination with the township engineer on any stormwater management calculations. The board told Konopolski he will receive a memorializing resolution at the next meeting.

The board then heard application 250011, a devariance request to expand a pre‑existing nonconforming two‑family dwelling at 65 Park Avenue. Applicant Nelson (transcript: "Nelson area") said he lives at 65 Park Avenue and proposed a single‑floor first‑floor addition of about 400 square feet so his family could relocate to the first floor while renting the second floor. The chair and staff explained the application was treated as a D2 expansion of a pre‑existing nonconforming use and therefore requires a higher voting standard.

Board members pressed for clearer plans and asked for exact setback and dimension references on the submitted drawings. Mr. Ringwood asked the applicant to point out the proposed addition on the plan and requested clarification about several setback numbers that appeared inconsistent on the photocopied drawings; the applicant and staff explained some figures were existing vs. proposed and noted an error on one set of numbers. The applicant said an oversized dry well installed during a prior renovation may be considered by the township engineer when reviewing stormwater requirements. The board approved the devariance 6–0 with conditions that the addition match the exterior of the existing dwelling, use downward‑directed or shielded lighting, maintain an orderly site and work with the township engineer on stormwater calculations.

Earlier in the meeting the board adopted Resolution 25009 for the Hower residence at 236 Park Avenue and Resolution 25007 for the Hickman family at 94 Rutgers Avenue by roll call votes. The board also approved its June 26, 2025 meeting minutes.

Next steps: the board said both successful applicants will receive formal, memorializing resolutions next month (staff indicated a targeted late‑August meeting date) and that applicants should coordinate with township engineers and staff on any stormwater calculations before final issuance. The meeting adjourned after routine closing business.