Bernards Township zoning board approves attorney change order, grants pool and setback variances with screening and environmental conditions

Bernards Township’s Zoning Board of Adjustment on July 8 approved a third change order for the board attorney and granted several variances for residential projects, including two pool-location variances and a two-setback variance for a house addition. The board directed its attorney to draft memorializing resolutions that include conditions from its planner, engineer and the Environmental Commission.

The board approved resolution 26-09, a third change order to the zoning board attorney professional services contract, by roll call. Members present voted unanimously to adopt the change order (vote recorded as unanimous among members present). The board then handled multiple applications on the agenda.

In the first substantive hearing, Gregory and Isora Brunner sought a pool-location variance for property at Block 4501, Lot 29 on Chapin Lane. Gregory Brunner described the plan as “just a standard swimming pool out the back of our home,” and said the roughly four-acre lot contains wetlands that constrain placement. Neighbor Timothy Jennings testified he had reviewed the drawings and said he had no objection to the pool itself but urged care to avoid damage to existing shrubs and trees and to clarify certain infrastructure shown on the plan. Jennings said, “I was just worried about having the impact of, all the shrubs dying…or maybe it’s even on my property at the end of the day because it’s so big.”

Board member David Sobieski summarized the proposal as the board’s familiar pool-location variance and noted the applicants agreed to comply with written comments in the board engineer’s and planner’s memos and the Environmental Commission’s May 18 recommendations. Sobieski said the applicants committed to a good-faith effort to move a subsurface basin to at least about 8 feet from the common property line and to follow stormwater best-management practices. The board voted to deem the application complete and directed the attorney to draft a resolution memorializing those conditions (vote recorded as unanimous among members present).

Peter and Tara Magliaro appeared next for a pool-location variance at 17 Birch Drive. Tara Magliaro said the proposed pool would sit behind the house but closer to a neighboring lot line than the ordinance’s preferred rear-of-dwelling placement; she noted several existing evergreen trees that already provide screening. The applicants submitted photos (marked as an exhibit) and agreed to update plans and follow memos from the planner and engineer. The board discussed pool-compliant fencing rules, easement issues for additional perimeter fencing, and impervious coverage: the application’s plan showed about 20% coverage while the ordinance standard is 18%; board professionals noted some grandfathering history but emphasized applicants must remain within the allowed limits or return for additional relief. The Magliaros agreed to supplemental tree screening along the Lot 15 boundary subject to the township planner’s review. The board voted to direct counsel to draft a resolution granting the relief with those stipulations (vote recorded as unanimous among members present).

Finally, Avni Gupta and Kartike Kachor requested two setback variances for an addition and interior reconfiguration at 4 Monroe Place to keep bedrooms on the first floor for their young children. Gupta described the intent to convert an existing living room into a bedroom and add a small mudroom and nursery. The board noted two variances: a principal front-yard setback proposed at about 48.7 feet where 50 feet is required and a rear-yard setback of about 47.9 feet where 50 feet is required. Board professionals reviewed lot-coverage and drainage matters and reiterated Environmental Commission cautions about best-management practices during grading and possible in-ground conditions. The applicants agreed to comply with the conditions in the board memos and the Environmental Commission’s guidance; the board voted to direct the attorney to draft a resolution memorializing the variances and stipulated conditions (vote recorded as unanimous among members present).

Votes at a glance: the attorney change order was approved by the members present (unanimous among those voting); the Brunner pool-location variance, Magliaro pool-location variance, and Gupta/Kachor setback variances were all advanced with the same pattern: the board deemed each application complete and directed drafting of resolutions that memorialize the approvals and conditions (votes recorded as unanimous among members present).

The board also announced continuances for other matters: the Allen application (Block 3302 Lot 106) was carried to the August 5 meeting, and three related South Findlay Avenue applications were carried to September 9 with limited additional notice to the fire company noted. The meeting adjourned after the listed business.

What’s next: the board attorney will prepare resolutions memorializing each approval and the stated conditions; those resolutions and any updated plans or drafts will appear on the board’s next agenda or in the record once prepared.