Adequate notice of this meeting as required by the Open Public Meetings Act of 1975 has been provided. Annual notice published in the Home News and Tribune on December 4th, 2025 and has been posted in the main lobby of the municipal complex on December 4th, 2025.
Township of Edison zoning board of adjustment special meeting of January 27th, 2026 is now in session. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance to the flag. I will now do roll call. Mr. Carly >> here. >> Miss Knight here.
>> Mr. Rogoff >> here. >> Mr. AOT >> here. >> Mr. Johnny. >> Mr. Cerrito. >> Mr. Patel. >> Mr. Schneider >> here. >> Mr. Sadda here. >> Mr. Agorin
>> and Mr. Ka. >> Thank you. I will now call for a motion for chairperson. Thank you. And second, Mr. Patel. Beautiful. Okay. So, I will do roll call. Mr. Johnny,
>> Mr. Certo, to the motion. >> Mr. Patel, >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes. >> Mr. Sada. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Agorin. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Okay. All right. Thank you. Uh I look forward to another year working
together. And uh I will now entertain a motion for vice chairman of the board. Motion made by Mr. Schneider, second by Mr. Mr. Patel. Roll call, please. >> Yeah, Raj, we need another mic. >> Mr. Johnny,
>> Mr. Cerrito, >> Mr. Patel, >> yes. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes. Mr. Sadha >> and Chairman Kumba. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations, Vice Chairman. Thank
you. >> So, we will now uh entertain a motion naming Rachel Reggerio as secretary to the zoning board of adjustment. >> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Patel, second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. Mr. Johnny,
>> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sadha, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Gumba, >> yes on the motion. >> Thank you.
>> Congratulations. Uh we will now entertain a motion uh naming professional planner to the board. >> Yes, I'd like to make a motion for uh Naga. >> Second. planner Lindseay Knight, professional planner. >> Second
>> motion made by uh Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Johnny. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Johnny, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes on the motion. >> Uh Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman,
>> yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Ka, >> yes on the motion. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations >> so much. Um, on behalf of myself and Neglia, we really appreciate you guys appointing us and we look forward to this next year. >> Thank you. Welcome aboard. Uh, we will now entertain a motion naming a
professional planner to the board. >> Motion for a professional engineer. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Professional engineer. >> Yeah. I'd like to make a motion for um Mr. Carly and Delaware Ron Engineering. >> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Schneider, second by Mr. Johnny naming Delaware Rarit and
Engineering as our professional engineer to the board. Uh, roll call, please. >> Mr. Johnny, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sedaka, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Ka,
>> yes on the motion. Congratulations, Mr. Carly. >> Promise in 2026 to turn on the microphone. >> We're going to hold you to that. Nice. All right. Um, council.
>> Yes. My name is Mark Rogoff. Uh, I am appearing on behalf of the zoning board this evening. Uh, pending a more formal appointment of the attorney for the zoning board. Thank you. Welcome board. So, we have two announcements this evening.
Case Z2 2020, Lamar Advertising of Penn LLC at 81 and 101 US Highway 1. uh has been carried to March 31st, 2026 with no renotice required. If you're here for this case, Z220, Lamar Advertising of Penn LLC, it will
not be heard this evening. It will be heard on March 31st, 2026 at 7 p.m. here in council chambers. Also, case Z27205, Vicos Chararma at 36 Rainford Road has
been carried to February 17th, 2026 uh with no renotice required. If you are here for this case, Z27, 2025. It will not be heard this evening. It will be heard on February 17th, 2026 with a meeting beginning here at 7 p.m. here in
council chambers. If you received a notice, you will not receive another notice. This will serve as your notice. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. This is a special meeting of the township of Edison zoning board of adjustment. The board is composed of Edison Township residents appointed by the municipal council who volunteer their time and
service to the board. The municipal land use law requires that members successfully complete a land use training course administered by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. This board also holds in-house training conducted by our board professionals. The zoning board abides by the provisions of the miscellaneous law in
addition to our board's bylaws. The zoning board is a quasi judicial land use board which differs from the township planning board. Under the municipal land use law, board members are required to be impartial and are not allowed to discuss any case prior to being considered at a hearing. All applicants will have the opportunity to present their case before the board
along with the opportunity for board members and board professionals to question the applicant and their witnesses. At the conclusion of the applicant's pres presentation of their case, case will open to the public. Residents within 200 ft of subject site will be heard followed by residents from outside of 200 ft. All residents will be
sworn in. They'll provide their name and address and they'll be given six minutes to comment on the application being considered without the opportunity for a rebuttal. Residents may ask questions of the applicant, the applicant's professionals, and board professionals. The board requests that these questions are asked prior to any commentary being
made on the application. Once commentary begins, the resident's timer will begin. The applicant will be allowed the opportunity for cross-examination of their witnesses. Under the law, the chair is allowed to stop any commentary which is repetitive or an attempt to filibuster the board. Further, the chair is allowed to stop any commentary that is irrelevant to the case or prohibited
from the board's consideration. Once public portion is closed, all public comments are ended unless new testimony is presented by the applicant. Following the closure of the public portion, the applicant will have the right of summation on their application. Following summation, the case will go to the board for a decision. This procedure has been followed by the board and
similar to procedures followed by boards of adjustments statewide. The miscellaneous law requires the board to engage in a balancing act. is not required to strictly apply to township ordinances, zoning plan, or master plan. As a board of adjustment, variances are granted when appropriately necessarily following all legal considerations. As
has been the case with prior boards, we will see where we're at if we we're still in session around 10:30 p.m. I ask that all applicants, professionals, and residents show respect to each other and be civil throughout all proceedings. I ask that you withhold applause, booing, or interrupting anyone while they are speaking. The chair will not tolerate
any outburst by applicants, professionals, or the public. Further, since most cases are being recorded by a court reporter, I ask the speakers do not speak over one another. Madam Secretary, first case on the agenda, please. >> Case number Z13 2025, Lake Home
Renovations LLC at 17 Gene Place. Applicant is seeking bulk variance to construct a new single family dwelling now existing. The following standards have not been met. Minimum front yard setback required is 25 ft. Proposed is 20.9 ft. And minimum sideyard setback
required is 10 feet. Proposed is 9.6 feet. Affected property is located in the RBB zone designated as block number 55603, lot number 12.01 on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order.
>> Can the applicant please approach? Sit the table, please. All right. Good evening, chairman. >> Good evening. >> Good evening, chairman, members of the board. My name is Punkage Mcnor of WY Lavender Macknor and I appear on behalf
of the applicant Lake Home Renovations LLC in connection with the property located at 17 Gan Place in Edison. Uh this matter is before the board this evening seeking bulk variances pursuant to NJSA 4050D-72 to legalize an existing single family
dwelling. Uh with me tonight is John Deont who will testify as both a New Jersey licensed professional planner uh and engineer. We also have Frank Derio, a member of the applicant present. Um though we may not uh we don't anticipate
offering testimony uh but he's here to answer any questions from the board. U procedural context. Uh, as your board may recall, this matter was previously listed and carried so that the board could hear testimony from a qualified engineer and planner addressing both the
technical and planning aspects of the relief requested. Uh, we are here tonight prepared to present that testimony. Um, as stated at the in the introduction by clarification, the applicant is seeking approval of the following bulk variances to legalize the existing
structure. Front yard setback required a 25 feet uh provided in our plans is 20.9 feet. That's a deviation of 4.1 feet and side yard setback variance of one side required 10 ft and it's provided at 9.6
feet approximately 4 in. Uh all the relief sought is to legalize the existing single family home. uh no use variance is requested uh under the C2 uh requirements. There's three
requirements that need to be met. One is that the variances specific to a certain piece of property. The proposed variances uh advances the municipal planning and zoning plan. And three, u the benefit of granting the resolution
outweighs the detriment to the public. Um, and with that, I'd like to bring my first uh witness, your honor, or Mr. Chairman. >> Can you microphone? You want to stand? Raise your right hand. You swore on for
the testimony you're about to give the zoning board and this matters the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I hope you got it. >> I do. >> Mr. Dupont, you appeared before us previously, but it's a new year. Uh, so if you could please uh provide the board with the brief summary of your background qualifications. >> Absolutely. I am a licensed professional
engineer in the state of New Jersey. I have been so since the mid1 1990s, getting old. I am also a professional planner by examination in the state of New Jersey. I served as the Bur Carter red planning and zoning board engineer and planner for the past 28 years. I've been in front of your board as both
planner and engineer numerous times as well as other talents throughout the county. >> And your license are current and good standing. >> They are. >> We'll accept. You may proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I think before he testifies, the record should reflect that this matter was
originally heard on September 16, 2025. uh wherein the applicant testified there's a different lawyer. Are you with the same firm, sir? >> Yes. >> So, um if he decides she wants to write any further testimony, we'll we'll deal with
it. >> Okay. Understood. >> I think one of the reasons why it was carried was because you didn't have a professional planner. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, as you've heard, this is 17 Gan Place. It's block 556-C,
lots 12 and 13. It is in the RBB zone. So, a little history. The original project was to construct a fully conforming single family home. The applicants submitted the plans, grading, and plot plans to the township, received all permits, and began to build. The lot
does exceed the required lot area, lot depth. Um, so it's not it's not a small lot. actually exceeds the area. All other permits were received and the applicant started construction. It wasn't until the foundation was in and dwelling was framed and exterior
completed that it was noticed by the building department that the foundation was placed in the wrong location. The applicant made a mistake when staking out a foundation. He inadvertently measured the location of foundation from the edge of pavement
because there wasn't curb rather than the property line. By doing this, the foundation ended up 4.1 ft closer to the roadway than originally designed and allowed by your ordinance. The compounding mistake, he also had the
foundation shifted slightly closer to the sideyard. You heard the sideyard requirement is 10 ft. This is 9.6 feet. This mistake was not a result of an intent to ignore the zoning regulations, but rather a bonafide layout error. So
the end result doesn't matter front yard setback requirement 25 ft. The new existing now the new home is 20.9. Sideyard setback 10 ft required. We have 9.6 ft. We are seeking two bulk
variances tonight. I do have a couple exhibits and I'm going to walk over to that board and you can hand them out to the board. >> Yeah. >> So, I made a handouts for everybody you could see, but I have a larger one on the board over here.
>> What's on the board? >> There's three things on the board. There's a update. >> What is it? >> Excuse me. >> What is it? So, this is a building permit sheet one with the updated house location.
>> Is it part of the plan? >> It is part of this sub. Well, it's a modified. It's part of that handout. It's an exhibit. It's not part of the submission set. >> Okay. So, how many pages is it? >> I have three sheets up here. >> Okay. So, we'll mark if they're different issues, we'll mark that one as
A1. >> Okay. >> And can you describe it again for the record? >> I will. So this sheet is the building permit plan that was originally submitted to the board but now updated to show the
current location of the dwelling. So they modified it and showed the actual location. And I'm even going to shift quickly to I'll be back to this page. I just want to show you the second sheet. We'll mark it as A2. It's also in that packet
you're being handed out is the asbuilt survey. The asbel survey just shows and I highlighted in yellow on your copy the front yard setback being 20.9 existing and the sideyard setback being
9.6. >> What's the date of the survey? >> The date of the survey is 1227 2024. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'm sorry. That's A2. That's A2. Did you say there was a third?
>> There's a third. >> You want to mark it now? >> Yes. >> What is it? >> A3 is a Google map aerial of the neighborhood. We've taken a Google image. We've laid over the property lines and we laid over the setbacks. And
that'll be A3. >> We'll mark that. We'll mark that A3 then. >> Council, are you looking to put those in evidence? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay, we'll put those A1 through A3 in evidence. >> Very good. So, if you look at the first sheet, I just wanted to make sure the
board understood. You could see the location that 20.9 the house was simply shifted forward a little bit. And the sideyard setback 9.6. Just I want you to understand how close it is to the front yard.
So, as we go through testimony, I'm going to do both engineering testimony and then we're going to shift gears go to planning testimony. So, first engineering. So, from an engineering standpoint, nothing really changes on site. The
front yard was designed to flow somewhere to flow to the street and is currently maintained. The side will still have the drainage swell as designed on the eastern side of the property and as was built that won't impact it.
Um, and the rear yard of the property all drains to the back. So, no changes from that. If there's any impact on the engineering by this change was that the house was pulled closer to the street, the driveway was reduced, the impervious coverage was reduced and runoff was
probably reduced. Right? All right. So, we have less impervious than we less impervious than initially designed. So, if there's an impact, we probably made it a little better for storm water. Um, it needs to be mentioned that even with the house being pulled closer than
originally designed, the driveway still meets the depth. You still have 20 feet for for your driveway space. So, the cars are not hanging into the rightway. There's no overhang. The driveways still meet your ordinance. I think that's a very important u note.
There's also no impacts on sightelines. There's no sight line issues with this house being pulled forward a little bit. There's none. Now, we have received a site improvement review from your township engineer and we could comply with everything, but there are two comments I think we should
discuss in detail. Comment number three in that letter talks about the driveway width. So, as originally submitted, if you look at the we're still looking at A1, it has a twocar garage in front. It has a third
bay, a third garage to the side. So, it was providing three garages and and three driveways that was originally submitted. That was approved. That width of driveway width of 30 ft shown was originally approved. We'd like to keep that if we need relief as the
SIP review said called out this time. didn't call out initially, but if we like if we can, we like to keep that 30 foot because it provides six off streetet parking spaces. It's nice to have that third bay. If the board is concerned about the width of that driveway,
you direct us to we'll take out that side, that one driveway and bay. It could be done. I would think it's a better project with it. In comment five talks about the issue side of the property. The engineer mentioned that there should there's
water on the eastern side of the property draining to the adjacent property owners property directly. And that would be as you're looking at the plan the right side of the plan was actually a swale was designed initially on that side. It's built on that side and there were drains to the rear of the
property. And we know of know because we had the client asked the neighbors if there was any if he knew of any concerns of drains. We we've heard none. If there's anything there or any concerns further, we'll gladly work with the township engineer and satisfy him. All other comp um comments in that
letter we can comply with. So that's it from a engineering standpoint. It's pretty basic. >> Just so I can clarify, does the applicant agreeing to comply with all the terms and conditions contained in the professional engineers report generated by the township of medicine? >> We are.
>> Okay. Any other reports? I assume that whatever other reports were generated by the township, the applicant would agree to comply with. Is that right? >> There were no other reports, but certainly if there was a second report, we would we'd have to review it, but there's only one report generated at this moment. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, shifting gears and going to a planning testimony. So the cause of the variance, these variances resulted in a dwelling being placed in incorrect location. A construction error caused this
problem. While the mistake explains how the conditions occurred, my professional opinion is based on planning principles and land use impacts not on fault. The relevant question here under the MLUL is whether variances can be granted
without substantial detriment to the public good without substantial impairment to the zoning plan or zoning ordinance and whether or not the statutory criteria is satisfied. So when we're looking on the analysis, it's a C2 analysis. It's a flexible C2
in my opinion. We're going to balance the positive negative criteria. We're going to show you the benefits clearly outweigh any perceived detriment. So again, my professional opinion, the applicant application satisfies the C2 variance criteria, focuses on advancing
the purposes of the MLU. Granting the variance will allow the continued use of our property for a single family use. It will preserve an attractive dwelling that is consistent with scale, design, and character the surrounding homes. I don't know if you've seen this if you if you've seen
this uh block, if you driven down this property, it's a beautiful block. There are a lot of very nice homes on this block. This to scale and size magnitude fits perfectly in the block. Grand varants will also avoid any unnecessary waste and environmental
impacts associated with demolition and reconstruction. This house is almost complete. It'll promote sound land use planning by recognizing is this neighborhood development patterns because we do meet the neighborhood pattern. Now we have
the A3. It's going to be very hard to see on yours, but I'll show you here and we'll walk through it together. So, we wanted to somehow be able to provide evidence and show the board how this house will look in their neighborhood.
So, we didn't survey it. We used a Google map image. We placed a tax map, the tax u map over the top of that. We tied our property into it and showed the existing home in the current location. And that's the hatched one
right in the middle in black hatching. And then we checked, again, we didn't survey it, so it's estimated, but I want you to see just the perception. We looked at all the homes within 250 ft. See if any of them match our setbacks.
27 gene place is less than 25 ft for our front yard setback. 23 gene place is less than 25 ft. 18 gene place is less than 25 ft and three hills hillsdale road is less than 25 ft.
>> You know the dimensions? >> I do know the dimensions. The the yes the actual dimensions how far? >> Well, if you say if you tell the board it's less than 25 ft. What does that mean? >> Well, I have I again I didn't give specific. I didn't survey it, but they're less than 25 ft. put the 25 foot
set back on there and the house is forward to that. I didn't survey. It's an estimate based on Google images. I just wanted to kind of give you a schematic. I walked the neighborhood today. Can't I couldn't even tell which was the house was when we were walking it. The
house the the proposed house or the the new house as you walk down the street is in perfect line with the block. There's a slight abandoning gene in place. This home is perfectly in line with the contour of that of that street and those homes. Yes, there are a house or two a
little smaller, a little older that may be a little smaller and a little back further. Most of the houses are right up on that and they're all fitting that one car driveway. So, it looks does not look out of character. The reason no one saw, in my opinion,
that no one saw or noticed the foundation was in the wrong location until the building was built is because it looks like it perfectly matches. It doesn't look out of place at all. You drive by tonight or tomorrow in the daylight, it's going to look like it matches the neighborhood. That's why no one noticed it.
As far as the sideyard setback goes, 9.6 six feet instead of instead of 10 on our eastern side. Our adjoining property right next to us has 9.2 feet. >> The adjacent property is closer than we are to our neighbor. You're not even
going to see that difference. You're not going to be able to perceive that difference. So, the deviations in my opinion from the front and side yard requirements are minimal and technical in nature. and the home remains, this is the most critical part, very consistent with the
neighborhood and adjacent properties. Granting these variances will promote several purposes of the mul. Purpose A, to encourage municipal action to guide appropriate use and development of all lands in the state in a manner to promote public health, safety, general
welfare. We have a single family home in a single family zone. We are consistent with the neighborhood with respect to both front and center setbacks. Granting the variances voids the need to partially demolish the structure or alter structure that's already
construction constructed which could compromise the building safety, create construction hazards, prolong disturbance to the neighborhood. Allowing the dwelling to proceed as constructed promotes a safer and more orderly construction of the home.
Purpose C to provide light air and open space. The front yard setback is consistent with the neighbors property. We're not constricting the the light air open space. Um the reduced setback does not material materially impact light air open space. When viewed as your
perception as your neighborhood, you're not going to even perceive the difference. Purpose E to promote the establishment of appropriate population population densities to contribute to the well-being of neighborhoods. We're again proposing one single family dwelling on
an oversized lot meeting the character of the neighborhood. Purpose I to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement. Again, beautiful new home. I don't know if you've seen it very well. fits beautifully in the
neighborhood. Purpose M to encourage the coordination of public and private development, allowing the project to proceed, avoids prolonged construction activity, repeated inspections, additional disruption to municipal services and neighborhood properties, supporting
orderly development consistent with local planning objectives far as the and I and we'll go one more thing. I'll really quickly show you 27 gene place just to give you an idea.
Our house is right there in the middle. 27 gene place is right there. One, two, three doors down. 23 is two doors down. 8 Gan is across the street, two doors down. And then the corner in Hillsdale
is right across the street from our property. Just to give you an idea of the area, as far as negative criteria, I see no substantial detriment to the public good. The asbelt location of the dwelling does not negatively impact the light air open space. Does not impair the site
triangles or public safety. Does not create drainage or stormware issues or environmental negative impacts. It does not negatively affect neighboring properties. Surrounding properties contain homes of varied setbacks and dwelling does not
appear out of character. There is no substantial impairment of the zoning plan. The variances requested do not undermine the intent of the zone plan. They do not affect permitted densities or lock coverages. Central purpose of the zoning ordinance
is to maintain a stable single family neighborhood and that is fully maintained by allowing us to stay. My plan in conclusion. If I look at your master plan, granting the requested front and sideyard setback variances is consistent with the township's master
plan to preserve a district, create cohesive neighborhoods, encourage development that is compatible in scale and design with well established neighborhoods and maintain the character and integrity of the existing residential neighborhood. That's from your master plan. It also supports efficient use of land and infrastructure
by avoiding avoiding needless demolition and waste of resources. while ensuring that the subject property enhances public safety, streetscape quality, and neighborhood community. Based upon my review of the analysis is my professional opinion that the request of
front and side varianes can be granted. The benefits of granting the variances substantially outweigh any perceived detriment. Any relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, without substantial impairment to zone plan or zoning ordinance. That concludes my testimony.
Does board have any qu excuse me board have any questions for Mr. Dupont? >> I have a question. >> Vice chairman. >> So this A2 this survey is is an ASB built that was done on 1227 2024.
Correct. >> That's correct. >> Was how was the foundation laid out initially? Was there a survey performed? The applicant laid out the foundation without utilizing a surveyor.
>> So there was no survey. >> No, that was actually a mistake by the applicant. >> And then this A3, your testimony is 27 gene place. What's the setback? >> What is it?
>> Less I I said because it's Google because I didn't survey it. I said less than 25 ft. But what does that mean? I don't What is the number? >> I I did not send surveyors out there. I I don't want to I used the Google image. I I don't think it's 100% accurate. I could see the location of our house
versus their houses and I saw the pattern. >> Where is three Hillsdale? Where is that on? >> It's that corner one right across the street. Right across the street on Hillsdale. >> Directly in front of our property over here. So the best you can say, Mr. Dupine, is
this is a visual guesstimate. I mean, since you didn't survey the other properties, I mean, essentially what you did was utilize the the technology so as to provide just a visual guesstimate. >> So I will tell you this, Mr. Chairman, I physically walked the block. I stood
there at both ends and looked up that line. Our house is perfectly in line. As I first got there tonight, I couldn't even tell which house is further forward than we got there. There's two new houses being built. It's right in line. I'm thinking the setbacks are there's a couple that
are about 21 22 feet. There are a couple couple older homes, a little smaller homes that are pushed back a little farther, but every other home is is in it's a nice block and they're in good shape and they're very consistent. >> Word of any other questions, Mr. Dupont?
None. Okay. Thanks. >> Council, do you have anything? >> We have no further witnesses. >> Okay. All right. So, we will now go out to the public. Um, anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard, please approach. If you're within 200 feet, uh, you receive a notice via
via certified mail. Ma'am, >> now you want to raise your right hand. You swear affirm testimony you're about to give the planning board in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Yes. Just to correct you, zoning board. >> What? >> We're better looking than the zoning board. The zoning board is better looking than the planning board in this. >> Did I say planning board?
>> You said planning board. It's okay. >> You know what? I've been doing that for 40 years. >> It's all good. It's all good. >> So, it's the zoning board. >> It's all good. >> You know what board you're in front of, right? Yes. >> Ma'am, just please state your name and address for the record. >> My name is Joan Rose and I live at Nine Gene Place. >> Um, I have some concerns. Basically, my
concerns are about this whole process. um as a resident within 200 ft. When the neighbors when we first received this letter, it said that you were seeking a variance. The applicant was seeking a variance to construct a new home, which
confused the neighbors considerably because the house had already been constructed. And that right away um set a tone of of a lot of questions as to like what's really going on here? Um it was it did not set a positive tone. Um,
and I also just heard something that the mistake was noticed when the foundation was poured and the house was framed, but by the time we got a letter saying that there was a discrepancy, the house was
just about ready to be moved into. I mean, you could see fixtures hanging on the inside. So, a lot of time had passed between, I guess, when this mistake was discovered and the public was notified.
Um, and building or improvements or whatever continued. Um, I have some concerns. I know nothing about building houses, but my mother taught me to sew when I was 9 years old and says you measure twice and you cut once. And I don't know anything about
the house. Is it a beautiful house? Absolutely. Um, my concern is you need a permit for everything in Edison, as in many townships. And I don't understand how we got to this point
with professionals. I I don't know how it got to this point where the house is already built and we're doing this. Um, I have a concern about if if you go through the neighborhood, any older home is being knocked down and new or more
than one new house is being built on the lot. If my neighbor sells their house on either side or I sell my house, I don't want to have to be the one out there with a tape measure knowing whoever's coming in and making sure that they're not too close to my house or they're not
doing something that they're not supposed to do. That's not my job as a taxpayer and I'm concerned about that. So I am just concerned about what this means in terms of you know some other person coming in and say and deliberately doing something. I
mean this appears to be a mistake but somebody deliberately doing something and coming to you and doing the same thing and saying well it'll I'm not going to fix it. It's you know it looks nice. It's going to be better for the neighborhood. So my concerns basically are about the process and where what
happened how how did we get to this point so far along in the house before these meetings were scheduled. Um I also have a question. I have a neighbor who could not be here and she sent an email um and I didn't know if I was allowed to
read her email. >> No, you cannot. >> I cannot. Okay. I just >> Now she has her right to be here but >> yeah, she's too she's too ill. She didn't want to make anybody sick >> and she sent an email thinking that it possibly could be used. But >> unfortunately, we have rules. They're
not as strict as the court rules are, but we do have one rule and that is if you want to be heard, you have to come. >> Yeah, it's it's hard. >> It's >> he has a right to cross-examine that person and the board has a right to question. >> Okay. >> And you can't do that.
>> I understand. Yeah. So I just wanted to express my concerns. >> Thank you very much. Thank you for coming out. Anyone with else with intuitive diffuse of sight want to be heard. >> You want to raise your right hand. You swear from testimony you're about to give the zoning board in this matter. Is
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> I don't know if you can hear me, but uh Mike Rosen, 19 Place. Um my biggest concern right now is that if this is whole ordeal, this whole process right now is going to set a pre president
precedent uh going forward for any other homes that may be built that well did say that um if somebody makes a mistake or quote makes a mistake that you would need to grant permission because they
made a mistake. Um everybody makes a mistake. I won't build a house because I know nothing about building a house. Um the fact that a uh person who was educated enough to build a house
wasn't does not seem to be um consulted before building or laying out the house laying laying out the um layout of the home and the and all that and doing the measuring or whatever is necessary. um the person who testim whose testimony
prior um the planning uh professional planner I think he said he was I okay um he should have been involved prior to instead of after the fact this would never have happened happened in my opinion
um but I'm just want to make sure that somebody doesn't go and say hey they built their house last year it's now instead of 25 ft, it's 20 feet from the front set back or front yard. Um, so now I can make it 19 and they're
going to let me do that. Um, I don't want to see that happen going forward and that's the only problem that I have with what has happened here. Um, there are checks and balances. There are people who go out and they check the property. They look
at it. person building it is there weekly, daily maybe depending on who it is. Um, also my wife said the same thing that it should have been follow it should have been found out prior to building the
entire house and that is very concerning to me. Um, people make mistakes. Yes. Is it really a mistake? I don't know. But um I do have a problem with the front setback of
25 ft in the proposed 20.9. Um the side yardage is only a few is only a half a foot. you know, it's not a big deal. But that whole five feet, if you look at the um going down the road, is there a curb and a sidewalk that's
going to be installed, which would bring the curb in more, you know, to would it align up with the neighbor next to me? Um, and that would also make his front yard shorter, smaller also. So, that's just my opinion.
Um, that's basically all I really have to say about that. I just don't want this to be something for somebody to go and say, "Hey, well, these houses are now all less than 25 ft. We think we should make our house less than 25 ft because
they'll let us do it." That's all I have to say. >> Thank you very much. Anyone else within 200 feet of subject site want to be heard? Anyone from outside 200 feet of subject side want to be heard? Seeing none, can I get a motion to close
the public portion? Close. Motion to close public portion. >> Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Schneider. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppos? Nay. The eyes have it. Public portion is now closed. Council, do you have anything to add? >> Uh, if I may, I would like to just call
Mr. Dario just to explain the timeline as to some of the comments that were just made so it's clear for the board. So if you then coun council you can correct me if I'm wrong but if you had the applicant come back we would then have to reopen to the public. >> That's correct. The the hearing is essentially closed. >> So you can give a summation
>> but if your client gives a summation >> you're then reopening the hearing. >> I'll just close it out then. Um >> you bring the microphone closer to you please. >> Thank you very much. So, it's our understanding that the
foundation was laid in May of 2024. Uh, the issue was discovered in December of 2024 and all construction stopped since then. Um, with that as a summation, chairman, members of the board, uh, we're seeking
this variance. Uh, the side deviation is 4 in. It's plainly dimminimous, has no planning impact. The front yard setback does not alter the neighborhood character and streetscape of the alignment. Um the applicant has agreed
to uh follow through with the recommendations of the municipal report and the engineering report. Um there's no engineering planning or public detriment associated with granting the relief. Uh we're seeking the relief under the C2 variance um and uh without
impairment to the zone plan or public good and applicant respectfully requests uh approval of this application. >> Thank you very much. Um and I'll go to the board, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Vice Chairman. >> Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to to
deny this application. It hasn't met the positive and negative criteria. Also, this this um application is self-imposed. There was no survey done uh to lay out the foundation and um it doesn't meet the
characteristics of the neighborhood. >> Second motion made by Vice Chairman of Gorman, second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. >> Uh Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Uh Mr. Johnny, >> yes on motion.
>> Mr. Schneider, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes on a motion. >> And Chairman Gamba, >> yes on the motion. This application is denied. Madam Secretary, next case on the
agenda, >> case number Z34, 2025, Bargive Chokeski at 22 Augusta A. Applicant is seeking bulk variances to construct an addition to the existing single family dwelling. The following
standards have not been met. Front yard setback required is 25 ft. Proposed is 13.78 ft. Minimum lot depth required is 100 ft. proposed is 90 ft. Access accessory building sideyard setback required is 3 ft. Proposed is 1.1 ft.
Existing affected property is located in the RB zone designated as block number 976.02, lot number 14 on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Good evening. >> Sure. He's properly lic.
>> Um you're Mr. Choksky. >> Yep. Okay. Um, our attorney Soran he's the applicant. He's the one. All right, sir. You want to stand? Raise your right hand. Sir, you swore
guys affirm testimony. You're about to give the zoning board the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. your name and address, sir. >> 22 August 11. >> I'm sorry. 22 what? >> August 11.
>> Okay. Sir, you can have a seat. You can tell the board what you'd like to do and why you'd like to do it. >> Yeah. So, uh, first of all, good evening, Mr. Chairman, and the members of the board. Um, my name is Ba Chi, as I mentioned. uh with my wife. We own the
house at 22 Augusta Avenue which on the Edison map goes with the um block number 97602 and the lot number 14. Um we live in the house with our two children and my parents. Um so last year my parents
underwent some major surgeries which preventing them to take the stairs. Um so as they aging um it's going to be more and more challenging for them to take the stairs um and is going to be causing the risk for their safety as
well. So we here to seek for your approval to create construct the master bedroom on the first floor and this will allow my parents to u live safely and comfortably without needing them to take
the stairs. Um, so I'm here this evening with Paul. He's representing me as the planner. Uh, if you have any questions, I'm happy to address otherwise to Mr. Paul.
>> Okay. Um, does the board have any questions for Mr. Chosky before we go to Mr. Fletcher? Seeing none. Okay, Mr. Fletcher, if you could please stand and our attorney will swear you in. >> Uh, Mr. Flesh, you swear from the testimony you're about to give the zoning board, the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth. >> What license will you be testifying under? >> I I can't go into the microphone. Mr. Fletcher, >> you can sit down because I've sworn you I'll mainly be testifying as a planner. However, I will provide engineering
testimony if necessary. >> Are your licenses in planning and engineering? Uh, >> they are both current and valid. Yes. >> You have a valid engineer's license from the state of New Jersey? >> I do. >> And you have a valid license, a planning
license from the state of New Jersey? >> I do. Okay. We'll accept it. Thank you, Mr. Fletcher. >> Thank you. Yes. The the subject property uh known as 22 Augusta Avenue. Uh it's lot
14 in block uh 976.02. Uh it is a corner lot. It's uh located in the RB zone. Uh we're conforming lot area. We have uh
7,629 square ft. Uh the lot is uh conforming with regards to uh lot area. However, it is uh substandard. It's an
existing condition uh for lot depth. U both uh sides are uh only 90 ft where the requirement is uh is 100 ft. But those are existing conditions. Uh and that does lead to one of the reasons
we're uh seeking this variance. uh because of the uh restricted size of of the lot, the dimensions uh are reducing the usable rear yard considerably. The applicant proposes to
enlarge the uh two-story frame dwelling by adding uh on the side of the house uh in the uh on the Lynch Avenue side facing the house from Augusta to the left uh
12t wide by uh 25T 9in long uh one-story edition that will accomodate ate u a master bedroom for his parents as he had mentioned. Uh and
the uh the reason it's proposed to be on that side uh is that to put it to the rear of the house uh it would uh severely curtail the usability of the rear yard. Uh we're proposing it to be
on the side uh which does cause a front yard uh setback variance. However, it's the uh area of the lot that is that is not really used for recreational purposes. Uh and the testimony I will
provide I think will show the board that uh uh this is not inconsistent with the existing pattern in the in the neighborhood. Uh first of all the uh location of this addition will be
13.78 ft uh from the rightway line of Lynch Avenue where 25 ft is required. Uh it is set back from uh Augusta and it is offset from the front of the house. uh there will be no uh
sighteline uh problems uh with the location of this. It will meet all uh ashtto standards with regard to uh site distances. Uh there
will be a variance for as I mentioned the front yard setback. However, all other uh bulk standards uh with regards to this uh proposal uh will be met. The lot coverage by building uh F uh total lot coverage by
impervious. There are two existing nonconformities. One is the uh shed in the rear yard uh is existing at uh 1.1 ft off the side and approximately uh
1.8 or 2 ft from the rear yard line. And uh the other nonconformity is the lot depth. We're at 90 ft where the zone requires 100. Again, those two uh conditions are existing. >> Look at his notice.
>> Uh I did prepare an exhibit. I walked the neighborhood uh recently on the weekend. I prepared an exhibit that I'd like to uh enter as exhibit A1. I'll pass it out to the board if I may.
Thanks. >> Sorry. What are you doing here? What is it? >> Tony M. >> Yeah. No, but as long as he calls them. So, exhibit A1 is a copy of the tax map uh showing the subject property and the
surrounding neighborhood. Subject property has been highlighted in blue. Uh there are five other properties in the immediate neighborhood that are colored uh orange. Uh these are other homes with
uh front yard violations uh existing conditions. Uh I do want to point out to the board that I want to assure the board no construction has started on this house. We're here to get seek if possible approval uh to do it.
Uh across the street, immediately across the street, uh there is a home that is uh has a double car garage and it's a uh it's 8.5 ft from the property line. Um
on the next block on the corner of Christy and Lynch uh uh the driveway uh is 18 ft to the from the garage face of face of the garage door to the property line.
Similarly, on uh the corner of Monroe and Lynch, there's a property that's 19.5 ft. Uh going down the block uh on Delwood Road, the corner of Christy, there's a
property that's 17.5 ft uh from the front rightway. And uh lastly on uh Calvert, the corner of Calvert in Delwood, there there is a property that's 14 ft. Uh and I I bring this to the board's
attention to show that the the requested variance is is not uh particularly out of character. Uh in fact, it's uh at 13 7 ft. It's it's considerably more than the uh the home directly opposite at
8.5. I believe that the board uh has the ability under the C1 criteria uh because of the unique shape of the property uh to put this addition uh at the back of the house would uh impact
the usability of the rear yard, take away the functionality. uh and u I saw no I see no adverse impact to the zone plan or the master plan uh by the granting of this variance. I see no adverse impact to the
neighborhood. Uh certainly see no concerned neighbors uh with anything to uh the voice uh in the audience.
Uh as I mentioned uh clearly uh the needs of a family are not a particularly uh solid planning reason. Uh uh but they're
clearly a a reason and a need for this family uh to provide uh accommodation for uh its extended family. Uh again, I believe the variances can be granted without uh detriment to the public good
uh to the master plan or their zone plan. And I would uh respectfully request that the board approve this application. >> I before the board uh before the board asks you any questions, if they do, I
just had a question about the public notice. Did you draft the public notice or did the applicant? >> I did it. >> Okay. Mr. Fletcher, have you reviewed the notice that
the applicant provided? >> I don't believe I did. >> I'm sorry. >> I do not believe I did. >> In In my opinion, this public notice that he provided is very close to being completely
inadequate. So, when you tell the public that you're seeking variances, you don't refer to the codes. People don't have the codes. You need to specifically identify the relief that
you're seeking from the zoning board. This notice does not. In addition, the second paragraph says, it leads one to believe, if you're the public reading this, that there's only one variation. It says quote this variation. It's not
this variation. It's these variations. And why most you might think that I'm nitpicking about this, I'm not because the notice provisions of the municipal land use law are very specific. The public who reads the public notice
has to be informed what relief you're seeking from the zoning board or any land use board. Otherwise, they may not come here because they don't understand it. i.e. there's nobody here or maybe they didn't understand it. I have no idea. But from a legal
standpoint, you know, any court that looks at this might consider this to be inadequate notice regardless of what the board does. So my question to you is notice is jurisdictional.
If the notice is inadequate, the board doesn't have jurisdiction to decide this matter. >> I would like to ask the applicant. >> What do you want to do? >> I'd like to ask the applicant. He would like to say something. >> So, where did you get this notice?
>> It doesn't matter, Mr. Fletcher. It doesn't matter where he got it or why he did it. It is what the public sees. whether he got bad advice or flipped the wrong page or or whatever. I
mean, his notice says you're seeking bulk variances to add an addition to the seconds story family dwelling for this four four which is incorrect the section numbers 37-63.1-4
37-63.1-17 37-63.1-8 and any other variances that you need. That doesn't say anything. You need to identify the relief. Front yard, setback, sideyards, maximum
coverage, lock coverage, so people understand what you're talking about. It's very misleading. So my question to you is if we proceed, I mean, I understand there's nobody
here, so maybe nobody appeals whatever the board does. I have no idea what they do. I don't do that. They do. You can either redo it or have the board decide it. What's your pleasure? >> Could you repeat the question?
>> Really, >> what were the options there? >> If if your notice is if your notice is potentially defective, which I kind of just explained to you, >> you have to make a decision. Now,
Technically speaking, it could be my opinion to this board that says since notice is jurisdictional, as you know, because you're a planner, then we don't have jurisdiction to decide it. If it were a closed case, I
don't know that it is, then you could proceed at your own risk. And if somebody appeals it because it says they say that notice is defective and you get you get sued, you can get bounced. Your approval could go bye-bye
if we approved it. I don't know. They may I don't know what they'll do. So this I'm I'm asking you given what I just said to you, how do you wish to how does the applicant wish to proceed? Now you're not a lawyer. You're a planner
and an engineer. So, he needs to decide what he wants to do without your advice because if you give him advice, that's legal advice. He can't really do that. So, sir, you want two minutes?
>> So, I have a question. >> You want two minutes to talk to him? >> Yeah, definitely. So, just for the record, um these notices, the template was given to me as I submitted the variance application. >> I'm sorry. Can you raise your voice? I can't hear you.
So this particular template that we are seeing for the notices was given >> the template >> the the notice template that you are seeing was given to me as part of submitting the application. >> It sir I I don't want to be rude. >> Okay,
>> I understand what you're saying but you don't have a lawyer. There are legal requirements with respect to notice and they're pretty stringent. I mean in close cases you know if you tell if you in it's all about informing
the public properly of what you're looking for and if they look at this and can't figure it out it becomes defective now having said that because I've spoken too much already what is your pleasure do you want to
proceed and have the board decide this or not >> because if you don't if you opt not to that means it's a doover. You have to do new notice and come back and do it all over again. But you placed yourself in that position
because I don't know where you got this notice, but it is what it is. >> Can I consult with him? >> Would you like to take a two-minute recess? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. So, the board will stand uh for a two-minute recess.
Already I'm making a mess. What the hell was this? What the hell was this? I was the ones that are nonconforming cuz I was looking to notice out of all of these lots. This is what's
That'll avoid that'll avoid a two over. >> You'll be okay. >> I'm not sure what's not the need to look at that. >> You just looked at it. Just had you had a feeling. >> Yes. >> Sidewalks. >> Yes. We'll see what they do.
>> Is that under your jurisdiction? Yes. the board return to session. Sir, >> um so I have a question to the board that is there a recommendation from the board itself to proceed ahead or like is
the board suggesting to do the reo the notices part? I can't >> for the clarity. >> We can't show our cards and tell you how the board's going to going to vote because we haven't made a decision in how we're going to vote. So we we don't know that that you have a green light or a red light that that we can't legally
that we cannot do that. So it's a you decision as to what you want to do. If you want to proceed, you could proceed. If you want to renotice, properly renotice as council suggested and then come back and present your case again at a later date, you could do that. That's
a you decision, not an us decision. Does this affect the maybe I'm rephrasing the same question um but yes it can directly impact what I'm trying to do here for my family. So if I can ask again that does this impact
the decision that the board is going to be taking in terms of the the notices as currently been drafted. >> Council I don't know if I want to answer that question. >> I what >> I don't know if I want to answer that question. I don't even know what he said. >> So if if he if he the notice doesn't
make a difference on how the board's going to >> going to decide. No, they're going to decide the case on the facts, sir. >> Okay. >> And the law. >> Okay. >> Not the notice. >> Okay. So, in that case, I like to proceed. >> Okay. All right. So, Mr. Fletcher,
you're are you con have you concluded your testimony? >> Yes, we did. >> Okay. All right. So, we'll go to the board for questions. Um and I will kick it off. Um so Mr. Fletcher on um this sheet that you submitted um I think it's A1.
>> Okay. Thank you council. So A1 is your subject site is in the same zone. I know you're in the RB zone. Is are the sites that you site are they in RB as well? >> Yes, they are. Okay. Um would you agree
with me that your site is a smaller site? So your lot is a smaller lot compared to some of the lots that you are citing. >> Yes, I would. >> Okay. So cuz I mean so yours at the
portion of where yours is is 75 by 65 maybe 66. Um but your comparative lots are 90 by 100, 80 by 100, 90 by 100, 80 by 100. Um,
so that type of setback would make a big bigger difference on a smaller lot than it would on a larger lot. >> Yes, it would. >> Correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. Um, does the board have any other questions for Mr. Fletcher? >> Yes, I have one. >> Vice Chairman. So on this A1 with these
uh these other existing setbacks are they um existing setbacks or were they approved with additions or the there are existing setbacks? Uh I don't know the history. I I I don't
know if uh they were in front of this board or uh I just Yeah, I don't I don't know how it happened, but they're clearly those setbacks. I measure them myself. Um
>> thank you. >> Okay, sport. Any other questions for Mr. Fletcher? >> Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much, sir. Do you have anything to add before we go to the public? >> Um no, I'm good. Okay. All right. So, we'll now go out to the public. Anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting
to be heard, please approach. Anyone outside 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard, please approach. Seeing none, can I get a motion to close the public portion? >> Motion to close public portion. >> Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Schneider. All in favor signify by saying I.
>> Close. Nay. The eyes have it. Public portion is now closed and I'll go to the board. >> Mr. Chairman, >> Vice Chairman, >> I'd like to make a motion to deny this application. The positive and negative criteria has not been met. The exhibit on A1 is is insufficient and and not
clear and objective and the lot sizes are smaller and pre the presentation uh was not clear and it doesn't meet the characteristics of the neighborhood. Second
>> motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Johnny, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sadalha. >> Yes to the motion.
>> Vice Chair Gorman. >> Yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Gumba? >> Yes on the motion. This application is denied. >> Madam Secretary, any further business come before the board this evening? That'll be all this evening. >> Seeing none, can I get a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman,
second by Mr. Patel. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Nay. Eyes have it. Board stands adjourned. Thank you. >> That's our problem.