Township of Edison zoning board of adjustment regular meeting of May 12th, 2026 is now in session. Adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open public meetings act of 1975 has been provided by the annual notice published in the home news and tribune on December 24th, 2025. has been posted in the main
lobby of the missile complex on December 4th, 2025. Please join me in the pledge allegiance to the flag to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all. >> Secretary, roll call, please. >> Mr. Carly. Miss Knight. Oh, she is away. Uh, Mr. Sammon >> here. >> Uh, Mr. Cerrito
>> here. >> Mr. Schneider >> here. >> Mr. Det >> here. >> Mr. Saddaka >> here. >> Vice Chair Gorman >> here. >> And Chairman Kumba >> here. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Secretary. Uh, minutes for consideration. >> We have the minutes of April 28th, 2026
for approval. >> What's the board's pleasure? Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman. Second by Mr. Sedado. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Schneider. >> Yes to the motion. >> Mr. Cerrito,
please. No vote on that one. >> Okay. Uh, Mr. Devet, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Saha, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Cumba, >> yes on the motion. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Secretary. Madam Secretary, next resolution. First resolution we have a Z28 2025 Vikas
Sharma for approval. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman. Second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. >> Uh Mr. Dvet, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Sada, >> yes to the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes to the motion.
>> And chairman >> Yes on the motion. >> Thank you. >> Next resolution, please. >> Z1 2026 Ronach Park for approval. >> What's the board's pleasure? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. Motion by by Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Sadat. Roll call, please. >> Uh, Mr. Det,
>> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Cerrito, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Cheryl Gorman, >> yes on a motion. >> And Chairman Kumba, >> yes on the motion. >> And our >> final resolution. >> Yep. Last one is Z4 2026 Solomon Afua
for approval. >> What's the board's pleasure? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion made by Vice Chairman Gorman, second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. Uh, Mr. Det, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Cerero, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada, >> yes on the motion.
>> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes on the motion. >> And Chairman Kumba, >> yes on the motion. >> Thank you. >> And let the record reflect that Mr. Chabra has arrived. >> All right. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. This is a regular meeting of the Edison Township 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. This land use law requires that members successfully complete a land use training course administered by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. This bold this board also holds in-house training conducted by our board professionals. The zoning board abides by the provision of the munipal land use
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 mipal 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 presentation of their case, the 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 rebuttal. Residents may ask questions of the applicant, the applicants professionals, and board professionals. The board requests that these questions are asked prior to any commentary being made on the
application. Once commentary begins, resident's timer will begin. The applicant will be allowed for 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 case the applicant will have the right of summation on their application.
Following summation, the case will go to the board for decision. This procedure has been followed by the board and is similar to the procedures followed by boards of adjustment statewide. The mipal land use law requires the board to engage in a balancing act and is not required to strictly apply a township ordinances, zoning plan or master plan.
As board of adjustment, variances are granted when appropriately necessary following all legal considerations. As has been the case with prior boards, we will see this board will see where we're at this evening. If we are 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 outbursts by applicants, professionals, or the public. Further, since most cases are being recorded by a court reporter, I ask that speakers do not speak over one another. Madam
Secretary, first case on the agenda, please. Case number Z36 2025 PSENG at 19 to 21 Meridian Road and 1750 Oak Tree Road. Applicant is seeking bulk and DU variances to construct an electrical
substation consisting of a 35 ftx 34.5 ft prefabricated control house with one bathroom, one toilet, one sink, and two access driveways off Meridian Road. and to construct two 181 foot monopoles. The following standards have not been met.
Electrical substations are not a permitted use in this zone along with bulk variances attached to the writer. Affected property property is located in the RAR and RA zones designated as block number 546.40, lot number 22 and block number 54617,
lot number 28 on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Good evening. Good evening, members of the board. Um, I think this is our third week in a row. It's a pleasure to be here again. I think I have to start coming here in my free time just to keep
the streak going. My name is Rebecca Myerelloo. I am an associate attorney at Connell Foley and I'm here on behalf of the applicant public service electric and gas company, also known as PSENG. Um, as your board secretary said, we are here seeking preliminary and final site
plan approval with D1 variance reviews as well as various C bulk variances um to construct a new 2030 KV electrical substation on two adjacent parcels within the township of Edison.
One parcel is known as 1750 Oakree Road. This parcel is in the RA residential district. And um the other parcel is 1921 Meridian Road. This is located in the RARI restricted industrial district. So this is actually a split zone
property. Now 1750 Oak Tree Road has actually been owned by PSNG for almost a hundred years. So it it predates zoning even though it is zoned residential. Um this site is a very long linear
parcel. It stretches over 200,000 square feet and there today is um existing electrical transmission line. There's various ladders towers there. Um there's underground gas pipes and other utilities located on the site.
PSCG is the contract purchaser of 1921 Meridian Road um existing there today. It's a vacant industrial building. It's about one story uh high and there's a pretty much empty parking lot there. Um, so in in addition to constructing
constructing a substation, PSCNG is also proposing various other improvements such as demolishing one of the existing lattice towers, constructing two new 181 ft high monopoles, the construction of a 20ft high
perimeter security wall, a 10-ft high security fence, access driveway, and various other improvements that you will hear about this evening. Uh we are in receipt of various reports uh by the board's professionals. We're in receipt of a neglia review later
neglia review letter last dated February 24, 2026. We're also in receipt of various review reports from Delaware Riden Engineering Inc. dated April 27th, 2026 and today May 12th, 2026. Um since
the uh April hearing date that we were initially scheduled for um we met with your board engineer. We discussed his review letter together um and in his review letter that he issued today you will see Mark's you know um has various language in it such as condition of
approval resolution compliance um some of his concerns were addressed in our u response letter to him. So we met with him. We will continue to meet with him. Um so we just ask that tonight un unless it's at the board's pleasure that um we don't have to go through the report line
by line as um we would like to just work it out with the board's professionals. >> Absolutely. If Mr. Carly's happy, we're happy. >> Yes. And I I think the board's >> pretty happy. >> And I uh thank the board's professionals
um for their time and meeting with us. So with that, I'm ready to call my first witness. Please proceed. Thank you. >> Um, I would like to call Richard Strauss, who is the PSCG project manager. >> It's okay. I like to stand. They did get you guys the comfortable chairs. Just
>> I know. I These are very nice. If you could raise your right hand, do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes. >> Uh can you state your name and business address for the record, please? >> Richard Strauss, S R A USS. Business address is 4000 Hadley Road, South
Planefield, New Jersey 07080. >> Mr. Mr. Strauss, if you could just bring the microphone podium closer to you. Thank you so much. You're welcome. >> Okay, Mr. Strauss. So, can you please state uh who is your current employer? >> PSEG. I've been with them over 17 years.
>> And what is your current role with PSEG? >> I'm a senior project manager. So I manage the scope, budget and schedule uh to design and engineer the station, procure material and equipment um oversee the construction, testing, commissioning of the stations. I'm
involved from inception all the way till turnover to our operations and maintenance organizations. C >> can you give the board the benefit of your educational background and training as a project engineer? I >> have a bachelor of engineering in mechanical engineering from Stony Brook University. I have a master of business
administration from Satan Hall University. I'm a certified professional project manager through the project management institute. >> So have as a project manager, how many projects have you managed while working at PSNG?
>> Um over the 17 years I counted 10 substations of which I am currently involved in two the one that we're presenting today and one in Middle Sex County. I've also been involved in other projects related to our electric infrastructure. >> Okay. So, um when you say you're
involved in are you're involved with the approval process like land use appro approvals from start to finish. >> Correct. >> And so can you tell the board about your involvement in this project in particular? >> Again I oversee the entire project life cycle. So I'm working with various
subject matter experts and stakeholders in executing and initiating the project. Um >> and are you are you do you have any familiarity with this site? >> Yes. >> Um and have you actually physically been to the site? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Can you tell the board about the site in the in the condition as it exists today? Um so before you um start talking about this um this is a this is a tax map um of the site and nearby sites. It's prepared by PSCG. Can we mark this into
evidence as A1? Um and just for the record, this is a it's an overall site plan. It is dated November 17th, 2025. All right. So, um, this application is touching upon, as Rebecca noted, we have
an existing transmission rightaway that's been around since around a thousand years. In particular, we're going to be um presenting or proposing a substation in this area, which the address is 19-21 Meridian Road.
And and for the record, council, I would like to mark this next plan as A2. This is prepared by PSCG as well. Um, this is the Meridian Road substation site plan which is dated November 17, 2025.
Uh, so Mr. Strauss, can you tell the board about what they're looking at with this site plan that's marked as A2? >> So what you're looking at is again this is a enlarged or close-up view of the prior exhibit and again this is the property at 21- um, excuse me 19-21
Meridian Road. Um so we are planning to construct a electrical substation on this property which is shown in this um pinkish area. Um so what is an electrical substation is probably your question. So it's an electrical facility
that converts the um electricity from electric grid and power plants which we call transmission voltage um to be um converted into >> bring the microphone closer >> which is converted to a lower voltage so we can feed customers residents and
business in the area. We refer that to distribution voltage. So the actual substation is composed of a variety of equipment. So first we have two um power transformers. We have a uh switch gear. This is a
control house here. And then the actual transmission to distribution it um is flowed through we call it bus work. It's conductive piping uh in this area here. Um
so with respect to this control house. So the control house contains a series of instrumentation and controls that really monitors and remotely operates the flow of electricity from the transmission to the distribution system. We also have in in here in what's called
the bus work, we have a series of circuit breakers and disconnects which again can be manually um or remotely operated to again to isolate for operations and maintenance. We're also proposing, and it's not easy
to see, and it was mentioned before, two 70 and 1/2 ft lightning masks, which protect the electric equipment from lightning m lightning strikes. And then also in the rightway, um actually it's up here, directions off. We're proposing two 180 foot
monopoles, and we're also going to be removing one of the old lattice towers. Last thing I want to mention is there are two access points off of Meridian Road. Um shown in it's kind of difficult to see here. There's one over here and
one over there. >> Okay. Now, Mr. Strauss, um can you give the board the benefit about how operations will be conducted on this site? How many employees will be on this site at any given time? So this substation is unmanned but we do have maintenance personnel that would be
visiting the site. They should be visiting site once per week. Uh that personnel will be on site about one or two hours. They will typically drive a small van or pickup truck. Now in extending circumstances when we do what's called manual switching, we
may need an operator to enter the site and similarly they would be on the site uh for a few hours depending on what they're trying to do. And again, they drive the similar small vans and pickup trucks. >> So, you mentioned that there might be small vans and pickup trucks on the site. Where would these small vans or
trucks be parking? >> Okay. So, again, um as an electrical substation, we do have a pathway in the facility, not really shown well in this view, made of asphalt. So when the um employee comes on site, they'll drive
that pathway which is around the equipment and typically park um near this uh control house back here. So >> are we proposing any parking spaces, any stripe parking spaces on this site? >> No. Again, it's unmanned. There's no need for any permanent parking spaces.
>> What about loading? Where will loading be conducted on the site? Similarly, we don't have any loading zone onsite or offsite because we're not necessarily consistently bringing anything in. Now, again, the maintenance personnel has their own tools. It's in their van. When they leave, they bring it with them.
So, these tools that will be coming on the site, I mean, I guess they're small or large enough just for one person to carry. There wouldn't be heavy machinery by other trucks carried on and off the site. >> Yeah. When this facility is completed, yes, that there's really no heavy machinery that's necessary on a on a
normal basis. >> How will refu be handled on and off the site? >> So, PSC's policy is that any refu, coffee cups, water bottles, uh food scraps, um whatever they take on the site, they have to take off the site. We also encourage them to walk around to
see if anything has been windblown to take that off the site. Similarly, um um anybody who comes on site again, whatever comes on has to come off. >> Now, how about um can you give the board the
the benefit about any environmental studies that have been uh conducted on the site? All right. Right. So PSC protocol is that we always do an environmental assessment of the sites that we're purchasing. So first we do a historical
study and we do visual um observations. We call that phase one. And then if we discover anything in phase one, we'll then do a second phase where we'll actually do soil or sampling and testing. In this case, we did a phase one and there was nothing found that did
um need for a phase two. But during research we did find out that there is groundwater contamination that um occurred from an offsite um sorry give me a second make sure I say this correctly. So air products and
chemicals at 1680 Oak tree road and they are responsible remediation. Um being at site you will notice that there are monitoring wells around the area. Now, we also did what's called a hazardous substance building assessment,
and that did not find any um evidence of land or PCB, but we did find uh what we call asbestous containing material. So, when that building is demoed, we will hire a certified or licensed asbestous handler who will be able to remove and then transport that material to the
appropriate off-site locations. Another thing I want to point out is that any soil that is excavated during um demolition or construction, we always replace what's called certified clean fill. >> So all soil that's coming off of the
site and onto the site will be thoroughly tested um through the proper legal procedures. Correct. >> Correct. That's another policy we have. So whatever we remove, we always test. So if there is anything there, again, we've done research, but we still test it. And if we did find anything, it always gets transported and disposed at
the appropriate uh disposal facility. >> Great. Now, I want to jump to security. So, this site has um a variety of security measures in place to protect the equipment they're on. Correct.
>> So, sorry, just before you start flipping around, Rich, let me um I just want to enter this into the record. >> Oh, sorry. >> That's okay. Council, I would like to mark this next exhibit as A3. This exhibit, it's multiple pages and
it's prepared by PSCG along with their project engineers at Burns McDonald. It's one, two, three, four, five. Okay. So this next exhibit A3, it's five pages consisting of a
aerial map and renderings. And um I want to pass this out to the board. We have um 11 by 17 copies. >> Is there a date on it? >> There is no date. So we can date it for today, uh, May 12th, 2026.
>> I'll give a minute for it to get passed around before we start. Hey, Rich, please proceed. So to help you understand, so this is um this exhibit represents uh images or photos of the existing facility and then computer simulations of what the
facility will look like after the substation is constructed. And the first page shows those vantage points looking like for example off of Elmy Road um also from Pendleton, Oak Tree, etc., etc.
Okay. So, um, first we're looking at viewpoint one. So, can you can you just describe to the board what this is? Right. So, what we're seeing now is this is looking from Oak Tree Road down the existing transmission right away. I mentioned before about a lattice tower.
This this obviously will be removed as you don't see it in the image down below. And this is uh what we refer to as a monopole. So the design of these transmission towers has drastically changed from the 1930s,4s, 50s and beyond. So that's the reason you see
something different. Um constructibility is actually uh the benefit of this particular um style >> and then what are they looking at below? So, uh, again, this would be the image of the, um, proposed substation on the
property, and you'll see here is the existing, uh, building, um, that I believe is, uh, um, unoccupied. >> Great. Do you want to turn to the next viewpoint again, the next image? Um, so this looks
like this is from Elmy Road. Um, looking across the Elmire Street, there's a public rightway, transmission right away, and again, this is what you would see today. And this is our proposal um later on. And as you can see, lots of um landscaping.
>> Great. Thank you. >> My name is >> again uh viewpoint three. Um so again this is another view from Elmyer Road I guess farther south again existing there is some greenery here we would improve
that um and that's what's going to be shown future I think I might have skipped one or two >> so Rich uh you know as we talked about we're proposing some security measures here right one of which being a 20 foot
>> wall and and the next one being a 10-ft fence. So, you know, as a project manager because we have another witness here to talk about security, you know, can you just talk about PSEG's policy with respect to these security measures? >> So, and the reason I wanted to show this is because it gives the best visual. So,
PSEG sec safety and security requirements. So in this particular case, we propose building a 25- ft pre pre-cast concrete wall around three sides of the facility um shown here. And then um on
the So that would be the north, south, and east. And on the west side, and again it's kind of hidden, we have what's called a um anti-limb anti-cut fencing, which is typically uh black. kind of looks a little bit like maybe road iron.
>> We have a physical >> part of the fence if it would please the board to see it. >> Would the board want to see it fence? >> But correct me if I'm wrong. There's landscape there's landscaping in front of where the fence is. So you were proposing trees so you wouldn't see the
fence anyway. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah. It's pretty pretty much all you can see from here. >> Yeah. No, we're good. Thank you so much. >> Yeah. So, another one I want to point out is that uh aesthetics is very important to PSCG and many many uh util um municipalities over the last several years have asked us to sort of hide our
stations and that's one of the reasons why we have this concrete wall. And you'll also notice in particular this has faux windows and architectural columns. So, we worked with Mayor Johi and his commu and his administration to discuss options and part of it was picking that it looks like a two-story
commercial building to blend in in uh with the remaining uh area. Another thing I want to point out is um and I don't know how well you see this, but I mentioned the access. So, the um access ways from Meridian Road will have
motorized slide gates in the wall and those slide gates are opened by a card reader and only authorized PSSE personnel who have um employee badges, they would be programmed to allow them into this facility. Similarly, for some
flexibility, we also have two manual swing gates. And again, I'm not sure if there's a good image here. Um, in the anti- climb, anti-cut fence on the corners, and those manuals, uh, swing gates have cut proof locks. And
again, only authorized personnel will have a key to those locks to allow them into the station. And again, part of this scenario is the fact that you don't want anybody entering an energized um, substation or doing any kind of damage. And that's probably one of the main
reasons why having these walls um around the uh the station. >> Thank you. I I don't have no further questions for this witness. Have any questions for Mr. >> Mr. Chairman? Mr. Dav. >> So as I understand this structure is
basically four walls. Three side is the uh structural wall panels with the columns and the one side is uh just the fence rot iron fence correct how high the rot iron fences >> uh complies I think it's 10 it's a 10
foot it's a 10 foot high fence >> so nobody can climb over and go go in >> again it is considered anti- climb anti- cut so it does prevent um people from climbing it >> and then aesthetically to make it nice looking on on that side because there a
lot of residential properties from the easement you are putting the planting the trees there shrubs right >> correct so one of my thoughts about having the anth on that side again a lot of aesthetics so any resident that's on Elmyer road there's a pretty decent
distance between Elmyer road the public rideway the transmission rideway and then the shrubbery so even on some of these images you know it's kind of unless you really get right up close to it you will not see that >> and and these wall panels you say are removable wall panels, removable
columns. >> Well, well, I get the constructibility there are a a column and then these um pre-cast panels slide in there, but then there's also these architectural features again that helps it make it
look like a um commercial building, >> which they are not removable for the access or something in the future. No, it's just station You would almost need a crane to to do that. Yes. They're not really made to be removed >> and there is no roof on top of it.
>> Correct. >> So I see that to they're not they're not tripods but like a bipod the wood structure probably to just to protect the switch gear and other equipment from falling the high tension lines. What do you have those uh is a wood structure
that you see on in inside the go to uh view point two. What are those things sticking up beyond the roof line? >> We note this here. So, I mentioned before we have these lightning masks um for protection for lightning strikes.
This is the very similar or the same as any commercial building having a lightning rod. >> What about those A-frames? >> Yeah. So, this Okay, so this is our transmission rideway where we have an existing transmission line that will feed the transmission um voltage into
the station. So what you see here is this metal structure that allows the uh wires on here to be routed into the station. >> It would be through A-frames. >> Well, we call them we call them H frames. >> And that those are metals. >> Correct.
>> And those are visible on all four sides. >> Um I don't know if they're reachable. I I you look at the viewpoint three massive structure A-frame is uh beyond the roof line you can see them far from
a distance correct it's a massive structure >> correct but I don't know if this representation gives you a good good view of depth if I go back to to this um so the the A-frames let me just help you
uh come off of here so the A-frames are actually here. So there is a a distance between here and the uh edge of the wall. I don't know that >> three viewpoint three those A-frames are 70 foot tall
>> the A-frame 70t tall or is it >> that's correct correct 70t tall. That's correct. >> And then looks like a massive tower structure. No. So, Rich, I are the A-frame set back further from the property line than the existing
lattice tower that's getting demolished. >> Yes. >> And the the existing lattice tower that's there now that tower is approximately um I apologize. >> Yeah, I don't know if I know the top of my head.
>> Okay, that that taller is 142 feet. Correct. >> I don't know that uh specifically. We have an engineer to testify as to like the engineering specs. But I think the point I'm trying to make is that yes, the A-frame is about 70 foot tall, but it's further set back from the property
line and that the existing tower that's there today is is much higher than the A-frames. >> Are you concerned if someone can actually reach that A-frame that H frame? >> I think the I think the the board member's question is just the given just
the height of the uh of the frame. Um, but as council noted, I think that just given the lattice tower that's there now, given, you know, then given what the proposed height is of the H frame and then with the landscaping that you're proposing around it, in in my opinion, it would be that what you're
proposing is an improvement to what's currently there. >> So, currently you I'm sorry, currently you only have a one tower, correct? transmission tower 142 foot tall >> um >> existing
>> which will which will be removed >> correct >> I mean there's other there's other transmission towers along the way >> in that place you are putting two 181 ft towers correct the poles >> well you call monopoles that is correct >> correct and then you are putting another A-frame structure there which is 70t
tall beside the lightning pole which is also about 70t tall They're all visible structures beyond the building roof line is going up that high.
Do you need those airframe 70t talls? That's the question. >> Yes. The basis of all the heights and distances of equipment is relation to OSHA standards for safety clearances. >> Do they need to be that massive in size?
Because I just see it based the way I look at. What's the size? What the what's the uh diameter of those A-frame columns? >> Who's we have an engineer that's going to testify? I don't know. >> Okay. Is there any way you can reduce the
>> circumference or diameter? >> We can just we can get that out then when when the engineer comes testify. >> Okay. >> And then all your equipment including the switch gear and transformers all of them would be within the enclosures. Correct. Yes.
>> And switch gear are enclosed in any kind of structure. Is there still exposed? >> Uh it is a it is a we call it an enclosure. I wouldn't necessarily call it a building. I probably didn't mention the control house is an IBC certified modular building.
>> The switch gear would have some kind of enclosed building. Correct. >> Yes, it it is enclosed. That is correct. >> And what what's the maximum KV of these transformers? Uh these are 230 to to uh uh 13 KV. >> 13 KV. >> 60 MVA I believe is the uh
>> And what do we have currently on this side? Nothing, right? No equipment. >> Correct. >> Well, that's not sorry that's not correct. Um because we there is an existing one-story building there today. Was that your question? Are there is there anything current what do you have currently there?
>> So what's currently there? If you see it's a warehouse building. So that building on the top is what's currently there today. on the bottom is what we're proposing including right the A-frame the various poles and additional landscaping to try to enclose
>> correct >> what's the what's is proposed >> there is no PSNG transmission facility here existing currently no >> correct not this location that is correct >> why did you pick this this location and not somewhere else you had did you try
to look any other locations >> this octi road is very busy road and even there's the meridian >> all right so the reason for this project which we didn't get to is so we have a substation uh called New Dover in Edison and we have another substation Kilmer in
Piscataway and those are both overloaded. So if you think about our distribution system it's like a network. So we need to pretty much create another node and this location is almost um equally spaced within those two other
substations. So those stations which feed um residents in in Edison will be fed from this this facility. So approximately 6,000 customers will be fed from this new station. >> You couldn't find any other remote locations more interior than
>> we actually found something on Oak Tree Road that the administration um actually was opposed to. So another thing the fine property so we need basically three criteria. One, we need a a piece of property that is configured and sized to
allow to build one of these substations. Two, we want to be located in such a way that we can get to a transmission and a distribution uh system. So, right now, the transmission is right next door on this transmission rightway. And the distribution lines, pole lines are on
Oakree Road. And the third major criteria is we need an owner who's willing to sell us a piece of property. So you say one piece of property is owned by PSENG and other piece of property is leased
rented or PSCG bought the >> they are under contract. So that other the vacant building that you see on top that's it's currently a vacant commercial building. There's no operation in it whatsoever. PSG is currently under contract to purchase it. >> Oh
>> um and yeah if they should get the approvals then they would purchase it. Yeah, we would we would close on the uh the contract. >> And you said the if there's any contamination, it would be remediated >> before you any contamination of any kind
of environmental issues, it could be remediated before you build the facility. Correct. >> Yeah, we're obligated. So if we found anything on site I mentioned before we then um test it and then there is notifications that have to go probably NJD >> and your transformer will have some kind
of oil which is also if it leaks can create contamination you'll have some kind of way to control that in case it leaks. Correct. >> Correct. So those transformers which have mineral oil in them for cooling, we actually have a um containerized um
foundation. So if there ever is a leak, it is um contained in that open area and they're designed to handle more than whatever is inside the vessel. >> So there will be enough containment there so they will not be leaking in the ground. >> Right. I also mentioned the control house. So there's a lot of monitoring
going on. So there would if there was anything going on with this transformer um we would be notified or operations or would be notified and they'd come out and they take a look before anything happens. So yeah I mean maybe temperature may go up you know that meet
could be a leak um and they would come out and investigate. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Thank you Mr. Dav. Any other questions Mr. Truss? >> Mr. Chair I have a question Mr. Chabber. So just to clarify um on viewpoint 2 um you'd mentioned that the existing li
tower which is 142 ft is being demolished correct? >> Yes. >> But it's also you installs installing a closer up monopole that's 181 ft. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> So it is going to be closer up to the road and a greater structure.
>> Um yeah a little closer. I don't know if if there's distances on that. That is correct. Would you happen to know how far away from the Oakra Road this would be the big monopole? >> Our site plan would have that and we could have our engineer testify. >> I don't know off the top of my head. >> Okay. >> There might be dimensions on some of these drawings that we've submitted in
the package. >> So just to clarify that transmission area between uh the warehouse and the residential area is PSG's and PSG is looking to purchase the warehouse to also convert this and add it to their existing lot. Is that correct?
>> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Thank any other questions. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Ch. >> Thank you. >> Up next, I would like to call um Jerry
San Severini um who will testify as to the purpose of the 25 foot tall security wall. Good evening. >> You raise a hand. Do do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I swear. >> Could you uh say your name and business
address for the record, please? >> Jerry Sans Severino, PSCG, 80 Parkplace, North, New Jersey. >> The same thing. >> Okay. So, um can you please state that your who is you who is your current employer? >> I work for uh PS&G in the corporate
security department. I'm the senior manager of infrastructure assurance, which is basically our physical security program and regulatory compliance. >> How long have you worked for PSENG in that position? >> Four years now. >> And prior to that, what is your educational background, experience, and
other credentials and licensing? >> Um, I went to uh uh college in Philadelphia, bachelor's degree in criminal justice. I worked for the United States Marshall Service here in New Jersey for 28 years before retiring coming to PSCNG. I currently hold a
certification as a CPP, a certified protection professional by ASUS International. >> Thank you. I would like to qualify Mr. Sanberini Sino as um our expert consultant in security.
>> Without objection, I feel safer with him here. >> As do I. Okay. Can you please give the board the benefit of of why PSCG needs this 25 foot wall as part of this project? >> So PSENG takes a very holistic approach
to protecting our assets, especially new stations that are being constructed. We take a layered approach and that begins at the exterior and obviously there's additional protections as you move closer to the critical assets. Obviously in this case it's a combination of walls and fencing. It's uh to restrict
unauthorized access uh prevent any criminal activity which can be vandalism, theft, sabotage, etc. Um obviously we've found the benefit of fortifying the first level protection. It's not the end all beall but that's the first layer in our in our security
plan. >> Thank you. Um now can you please in the engineering report I wanted to point out there was some discussion about NAR SIP standards. Can you please um give the board some education and myself a little
bit about how that is applicable or is not applicable to this site? >> Sure. Uh NERK is the North American Electric Reliability Corporation. They govern all of the electric um uh regulations for our region here. Basically, uh they classify stations
based on uh certain criteria and criticality. Uh at the bottom end of the spectrum is a NERK low impact which is probably what this station at a 230 KV will be rated as. That goes up to medium impact and then finally high impact. A
subset of the medium and high impact is classified as a Nerk SIP 14. That's a specific standard in the regulations and that applies to stations that are critical to the bulk electric system. If something happens to that station, it
has cascading effects. um on upstream and downstream stations and the bulk uh in bulk electric system in general. Um this is not a SIP 14 location. Uh it will never be a SIP 14 location based on where it's at and the transformers that are there. We do have other SIP 14
locations, not in Edison, but nearby, but this is not one of them. >> And can you give the board the benefit about how the height of this structure, 25 ft, why that's necessary to protect the equipment? >> Sure. Um, obviously the assets that are
inside are tall, some of them over 24 feet. So, obviously we want to protect that from the outside, any of the bad actors that would look to engage or target those assets to impact the bulk electric system. Obviously, on the front side with the 10-ft anti- climb fence,
um there's not a line of sight for the internal um assets. the only three sides are are the ones that we're concerned about um from certain vantage points based on some of the risk assessments we conducted here. >> But again, this is not marked as a
highly risk site. And is it fair to say that PCNG is taking these preventative protective measures in the utmost abundance and of caution? >> Yes, the company takes a very proactive approach. Um obviously you know based on
the criteria and the ranking of these stations um we look to build above and beyond our minimum baseline. Um in this case this is a perfect example um where we're taking the opportunity during construction to build uh at a higher
level and above the minimums that's required by the regulation. >> Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness. I defer to the board. >> Does the board have any questions for Mr. Senino? See none. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Our next witness is our project engineer, Michael Blake. Good evening. >> You raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony we give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Please say your name and business address for the record, please. >> Uh, it's Michael Blake. Uh, I'm with
Burns and McDonald Engineering Company, 9400 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, Missouri. >> Mr. Blake, you've appeared before the board prior. If you could just give us a brief summary of your background qualifications. >> Uh, yes. I've been with Burns McDonald seven years, but I graduated um with a
bachelor in science, civil engineering in 2002 from the University of Missouri. I've been doing substation design for well over 20 years. Uh I've been working with PSEG since 2019 and I have been licensed in New Jersey
since 2019 as well and my license is current and active. >> We'll accept you. Thank you very much. May proceed. >> Okay, Mr. Blake. Um so what have you done in preparation of this hearing tonight?
>> Have you you have you prepared the materials in support of this application? >> Uh yes um along with my team I oversaw the the site site development design storm water management and have been involved in the project you know for
since it was at the previous site location. >> And you have full familiarity with this site correct? >> Yes that's correct. Okay. Um, can you please give the board an overview and a description of the existing conditions of this site? >> Um, do we need to go back to one of the
exhibits that we marked? And just for the record, this was already marked as A2. This is the Meridian Road substation >> site plan. >> Site plan. >> Okay. Uh so existing conditions
as pre as previously mentioned it's an existing you know there's two lots the lot on the lower half of the drawing is an existing industrial facility that is basically going to be removed or torn
out and then the top portion shown on the drawing is the transmission rightway. Um, right now it's a combination. The rideway is, you know, mostly grass, some shrubs, trees, etc. And then the existing, you know, facility is mostly
just a concrete building with asphalt parking lot. >> So, can you please um give the board the benefit of what we're proposing? >> So, what we're proposing is an electrical substation. Um, we're going to demo out the existing building. There
is also a storm water easement that runs through the property. Um, currently that pipe um we had CCT CCTV inspections done on it. Um, it did show some collapsed pipes in the rideway. Um, so not only
the benefit of building the station here is that we're going to repair that by also rerouting it around the station. So, we're going to take where it comes across Meridian Road, route it to a new easement around the station, and then
we're going to tie it back into an existing manhole uh up in Elmer Meer Road. Um, additionally, um, the building will be torn out. We'll be removing all the asphalt and concrete and replacing it with the substation.
Now, there are concrete foundations associated with it. Um there is you know impervious surface access road around the outside but within the general area of the equipment it is a clean crush rock stone which when I say clean crush
it it's not like a gravel road you'd think when you're driving on you know county road or something like that. It's has minimal fines and really helps um you know not only stores some of the storm water um but it also is there for
safety reasons. >> Okay. Um, do you want to go through the the proposed store monitor management that PSCG is proposing for the site? And in addition to that, I guess the testing that PCNG has already conducted to to
plan and prepare a proposed storm water management plan. >> So, the existing storm water that was on on the property drained to just a general low spot. Um, you know, because that pipe
was collapsed, a lot of the side didn't really drain very well in my opinion. Um, nor did the water that was passing through because we're repairing that, you know, we're basically helping the the upstream system route around. Now, we are tying
some of our storm water into the existing system, but it's going to mimic um existing conditions assuming that the pipe hadn't been collapsed. Um but that's how we have to analyze it. Um and then as far as like storm water
management, you know, to meet the regulations of NJC 78, um we have proved that because we're removing a lot of that impervious area from the existing facility, our you know storm water hydrograph is going to be equal to or
less than the preconditions. So, we're actually helping improve the property even though, you know, it looks bigger than what was currently there. Asphalt doesn't allow storm water to infiltrate. The crush rock will help with that. And so, it should uh it will improve the
storm water runoff and it meets, you know, the requirements from 78. And you know, for the record, can you just um let the board know, we already made a submission to the D in connection with any improvements on this site? Correct.
>> Yes, that is correct. Um the main reason we did submit to D is because there is impacted wetlands and they have deemed us as administratively acceptable or complete. >> Right. Thank you.
um you know can you just share with the board we're we're proposing an access driveway on this site. Can you just for the record because we are requesting some variance relief with with respect to that access driveway share the dimensions of that driveway and and access to and from the site.
>> So yes, we were adding two access points um off of Meridian Road basically on either side of the property frontage. Um, this is basically to help with circulation paths, especially um, if
there ever needed to be maintenance done with one of the larger pieces of equipment. Um, but in general, uh, the main, you know, individuals or PSNG personnel that come on site will, um, be able to circulate through the station
with a a minimum width of a 16 foot wide road. And that's designated, you know, you can see that it's a different material. It's not, you know, it's like it's asphalt. Um, and so it's not uh, you know, the
crush rock surface, but that is also where maintenance vehicles will be routed through the station. That's where they'll park if near the equipment that they're working on. Both both uh, access points do have 20 foot wide gates, though. Uh, and that
does allow for, you know, larger vehicles to get in there. One of the things we did discuss with, um, is, you know, if if a fire apparatus did need to to gain access, could it make a circulation through? And it can.
>> And we submitted a set of your site plans to the fire department. That's correct. >> Yes, that is correct. And I'll stipulate as a condition of approval um we will work with the fire police emergency services so that they also thoroughly review and vet these plans and uh find them acceptable.
Um okay, Mr. Blake, can you please go through the proposed lighting plan for the site? >> So the proposed lighting um PSNG has kind of their own requirements. Most of it's for maintenance and safety. Um they
they are a motion sensored lighting. It's not something that's going to be on all the time. Um if there is night work that would be required maybe like in case of you know an outage or an emergency or something like that then yes those lights would be on but they are timerred. So if they if if they were
to leave they would eventually time out. Um other than that most of the lighting will will be just standard you know your standard lighting that you would see. Uh we did a lighting study. None of the lighting should leak outside, especially
with the perimeter wall. It it helps contain it, but all lighting is contained within within the station facility or within the property, I guess. >> So, Mr. Blake, we are not seeking any variances or waiverss with respect to um
lighting spillage or illumination. Correct. All of our lighting is compliant with the township ordinance. Uh yes, all our lighting is in compliance. The only thing um that one of the review comments was with regards to would our lighting be in compliance
with like street lights. Um there was a few other items. I don't remember the specifics without looking it up. But in general, we won't because this is a a private site, you know, it's not the public access isn't going to be there and it's not going to be something that
will be lit up every night all the time. So that's why we're not in complant with like street lights, but we are in, you know, we do put in lighting that is, you know, in compliance with what PSEG has for their standards for, you know, substations.
So I guess in other words, right, um there are some lighting requirements with respect to public facilities. Correct. But we do not consider this a public facility. This is a private substation. No public access. Correct. >> Correct. >> But to the extent that a waiver might be
required, if it could be interpreted, um we would request one. Okay. Um so the board asked a couple questions before with respect to the setbacks of the ex existing lattice towers. Um the
removal of that and the proposed monoples. Do the site plans have the setbacks? Could could you give us the benefit of the setbacks of what's existing and uh what's proposed from the street? Sorry. Okay. So, um
the setback requirements, the front yard setback, a minimum front yard setback of 50 ft is required and 3.7 ft is proposed. So these are the variances that we're requesting a relief on which our planner
can elaborate on more. Um we have a sideyard setback which is a minimum sideyard setback of 50 ft one side and 100 ft both is required and uh ours is 4.7 ft and 22 feet 22.8 ft as is
proposed respectively. We have a rear rear yard setback a minimum rear yard setback of 50 feet is required and we have zero feet as proposed. And then uh sorry and that was that was for lot
22. And then lot 20 lot 28. There is a front yard setback. A minimum front yard setback of 35 ft is required and we're at 34.7 ft. We have a rear
yard setback. uh a minimum setback of 60 feet is required and zero feet is proposed and that's and and like I said the planner will elaborate more on those.
>> Okay, thank you. I I don't have any further questions for this witness. >> Okay, so we'll go through the professionals reports. Uh we'll start with Miss Knight. I think most of my comments are going to be steered towards the uh planner's testimony. >> Okay. So then we'll uh yield to the
gentleman to your left. Mr. Carly, >> excuse me, Mr. uh chair. As uh Miss uh Mayor Mayor Aurelo uh advised the board at the outset of her presentation, uh this office had prepared three reports
and uh had met uh with uh Mr. Boy and the design professionals to go through the first report and then the second report. what the board has in front of it now is our third report and I think it's modestly
streamlined where it draws uh the applicants attention to just outstanding items uh which I believe Miss Mayorello uh um and Mrs. Strauss, Savino and Blake have uh adequately addressed
uh in very many instances. I asked for testimony that has been provided and clarific clarification to supplement the uh that report. But otherwise, what the
board will see in front of it is a a pretty long list of recommended conditions of a board action. And so the question goes to Miss Marello. Those conditions that I uh recommend to the board, are they acceptable to the
applicant? They are acceptable to the applicant. >> Okay. >> And that's the uh the stem and the stern. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Carly. Any questions from the board for Mr. Blake? >> Seeing none. All right. You left some speeches. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much.
>> Okay. Um my next witness is going to be Lisa Defranza. Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Can you state your name and business address for the record, please?
>> Lisa DeFranza, L I S A D I F R A N ZA. address is 2517 Route 35 in Manisquan, New Jersey 08736. >> Can you please state the name of your employer? >> E2 Project Management where I've been
employed for the past uh almost 5 years >> and can you please give the board the benefit of your education background licensing credentials? >> I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering technology from NJIT. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the
state of New Jersey for approximately 15 years. Uh my license is in good standing. I'm also a certified municipal engineer for the past 16 years and I've been a civil engineer for the past uh 30 years for both public and private uh clients.
>> We'll accept. You may proceed. Thank you so much. >> Okay. So, Mr. Franza, you prepared a landscape plan in support of this project. Is that correct? >> Correct. Can you please give the board the benefit of what you did to see the
landscaping that's there now and prepare your landscape plan? >> Okay, I'll go. I'll present the landscaping plan which is in your packets. And for the record, we will also mark the landscape plan as A4.
Uh this is a sight and sealed landscape plan prepared by E2 project management uh signed by Miss Def Franza and it's dated November 18th, 2025. As can be seen on the landscaping plan, uh the the team basically gave you the
layout of of the land. Uh but just for your benefit, Elmeer Road is to the top of the page to the west. Uh Oak Tree Road is to the south to the left of the page and the Meridian Road would be to
the east. Uh at the bottom of the page, as I indicated, the majority of the site will be developed for the new substation. And for the new substation, we had to remove some trees just for new um new water lines, sewer lines, the
rerouted uh storm sewer, and some overhead lines. there's some clearances that we have to maintain overhead wire zones. Uh with that, uh I'll just give you a quick synopsis of the trees. Six trees will be removed from lot 22, which
is the commercial lot. 43 trees will be removed from lot 28, which is the PSEG right ofway, uh the Elmyer Road right ofway adjacent to the PSEG right ofway for a total of 49 total removed trees.
And per the ordinance 114 replacement trees are required. Uh we are proposing to install 23 new trees. 17 will be evergreen. Six will be deciduous and install 40 new 49 new shrubs evergreen
and deciduous. There will be a 91 tree deficiency and PSNG desires to contribute to the township uh tree fund for that deficiency. The majority of the trees are going to be native and drought tolerant.
And as I indicated, the majority of the trees will be planted in the Elmer Meer Road rightway, as can be seen at the top of the page in in a light green. The existing trees are shown uh with black
with black outlines and X's through the ones that are to be removed. And I will also show the exhibits that were uh presented before by Rich. This would be A3. Going back to the
renderings. I'm not I think this might be A2. I'm not certain. But this is a view from Elmy Meyer Road closer to Oak Tree Road near the intersection of the other residential street that comes in on a TE from Elmeer. As can be seen right now,
you could see the commercial facility at the top view which is the existing view. Pendleton, I'm sorry. The street is Pendleton at that intersection with Elmmyer. As can be seen right now, uh this is a
fall or winter view which doesn't show a lot of leaves on the trees. And for the benefit to show what it would look like uh for the majority of the year, uh we showed some of these existing trees uh with some leaves on it. In addition to the supplemented trees and shrubs that
will be planted along here, these high evergreens that can be seen, you can see the A-frame and the structures in the back of the facility. And with planting evergreen and deciduous trees, there'll be a year round buffer.
>> Well, Mr. Franza, is it is it accurate to say that PCNG really concentrated and took care into planting on Elmire Roads who um enclosed the substation from the residents on the other side. >> Correct. As you can see, there's some spaces in between here. There's not a
lot of lowlying shrubs or just some overgrown weeds. We plan to infill the highstory with some lowstory vegetation for a better screen at a lower level if you were walking along Elmeer. I'm going to show you the next view.
The next view is uh further down uh north on Elmyer away from the station sort of looking at the corner of it. The top view again is the existing view showing some of the existing vegetation.
uh some of the tall trees there, some of the existing trees in in in one of the areas, water and sewer will have to be installed and in addition to some overhead lines that will have to be rerouted around the station. So, we try
to best plant some tall evergreen trees at the corner of the wall that you can see in the back uh in addition to some low-lying shrubs that will be infilled along Elmy. >> So, Mr. Franza, in other words, PSCG is is it accurate to say that they're faced
with some restrictions on planting additional trees due to overhead and underground utilities? >> Correct. PSNG has to abide by uh numerous federal and state regulations as far as clearances such as no planting
inside the the BA the new station. Uh no planting within 10 ft of a fence or a a wall for security reasons. uh in addition to other overhead wire clearances uh like say 15 feet from the wire zone there's certain regulations
that they have to follow so we uh best fit as much as we can within the length of the new station. >> Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness and I submit to the board. >> Thank you very much. Um would you agree
to work with the township engineer on a condition uh of a tree and landscaping maintenance plan? Absolutely. >> Okay. All right. That's that's my that's my my only question. Uh does board have any questions for Mr. Def Franza? >> Seeing none. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
>> Thank you. Thank you. So my next witness, you know, I want to discuss confer with the board. We have a sound consultant here tonight. We are not seeking any variances with respect to the sound. We are complying with the sound ordinance. We also have agreed to a litany of conditions of approval that
were outlined in the board engineering level letter, including um a six-month lookback study post construction. Um very similar conditions that we agreed to with a meadow road application if this board remembers from a few weeks ago. So would the board like to hear
acoustic testimony or >> Mr. Carly? just uh advised uh the board will remember you had a young man standing up close to you and talking about the same essentially from an acoustical perspective an identical project. Uh so
that is up to you Mr. Chairman whether you feel the need for a rehash. >> Does the board feel >> want to refresher? You good? Okay, we're good. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Although riveting, we're good. Um okay. I was trying to find a music
reference, but I'm like I'm a little off my game like you know like you know about the acoustic but it's they'll come to me about 10 o'clock so hang around. >> Perfect. You got two hours. Um okay so with that we are ready for our last witness our project planner Norin
Mariner. Raise your right hand please. Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Could you say your name and address for the your business address for the record, please? >> My name is Norin Marener. N O R E N.
Last name M E R A I N E R. I'm a licensed professional planner in the state. >> Can you bring the microphone closer to you? >> Thank you so much. >> I hope they're watching. >> Your We want to make sure your fans hear you at home.
>> Let me see. I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey and my license is current. >> Okay. Um, can you please state your current employer? >> Yes, my current employer is Public Service Electric and Gas Company. The
address is 4000 Hadley Road, South Planefield, New Jersey, 07080. I've been with PSENG as a licensing project manager for 28 years. What my job is is to secure environmental and
land use permits for company facilities. >> And can you please give the board the benefit of your education licensing background credentials? >> I have a bachelor's degree to master's degree, also certification as a project management professional. I've testified
in dozens of municipalities in New Jersey, including the New Jersey Sports and Exposition uh authority as well as state of New Jersey. I last testified in West Orange, Clifton, Jersey City, and Bon and just
last Tuesday in front of the Bridgewater Township Planning Board. >> We'll accept you. You may proceed. >> Thank you very much. Okay, Miss Mariner, can you please give the board the benefit of the various u of the D1 variance that we are seeking as well as the litany of C bulk
variances that we are requesting in connection with this project. First, if the board is willing, I'd like to give a little bit more information about the property. There are two lots. One is 19-21 Meridian Road and that is lot 22. The other lot is 1750 Oak Tree Road,
which is lot 28. Meridian Road is in the restricted industrial zone and Oak Tree Road property number 28 is in the RA residential zone. So in Meridian Road, what you can do in the restricted industrial zone is offices, scientific
and research labs, some manufacturing, processing and printing facilities, and commercial recreation. and the purpose of the zone as an industrial zone, but it's less intensive and intrusive than would be a more traditional industrial zone. Based on my research, the building
at 19-21 Meridian Road was constructed sometime between 1966 and 1970. I believe it was last used as a store for Cricut sporting supplies and an ice cream distributor. I believe it was quality
ice cream. PSEG's transmission line, which is lot 28, is in the residential Azone and it was built in 1927. PSEG owns the entire right ofway. We call it the Roseland Matuchen electric transmission line
because it goes from our Roseland substation to our Matuchen switching station. The lot is very unusual because it's 100 ft wide, but it's 4,500 ft long. It currently has five lattice
style transmission towers on it. It also has wood utility poles for overhead electric distribution and telecommunication lines. And there's also an underground gas line. According to our records, the towers were built in
1927 and replaced in about 1978. Most of the transmission line, and this is the Roseline Matuchen transmission line, goes through the residential areas of Edison. So, this line heads north towards Oak Tree Road. The res the
residential zone allows single family detached homes, places of worship with a minimum lot area of three acres, private schools on a 5 acre or more site, and private golf courses of at least 100 acres. The existence of the public
utility right ofway precludes all of the uses I've listed above. The Elmyer and Pendleton neighborhood was developed in the mid 1960s and the neighborhood north of the restricted industrial zone was developed in the mid 1970s through the
1980s. So uses in the area going from right to left, restricted industrial, public utility transmission, undeveloped municipal land which is part of the Elmyer Road rightway and residential. And all of these uses have been there
for over 40 years. Now I'll go into the variances or first the waiverss and then variances we're asking for. First, we're asking for a waiver from standard sheet size. There's a lot of information. We made the sheets larger because it's easier to read. The
second item we're asking for a waiver from is number 24, the method of providing garbage collection. As Rich Strauss explained, we this is an unmanned station and roving technicians will pick up any of the garbage.
We're also asking for a waiver from item 25, which is submitting a woodlands management plan. Instead, you already heard Lisa Defransza explain our proposed landscaping plan. And finally, if anything is needed for a design
waiver for uplights and flood lights, we are asking for a waiver in accordance with section 73-61.1. Uplights and flood lights will only be used in emergency situations. So, now we get to the fun part, the variances. The first thing we're asking for is a D1 use
variance. This is for a use or principal structure in a district that's restricted against such use or principal structure. Use variances can be granted in accordance with NJSA455D-70D1. Public utilities are not permitted by right or conditional use in either the
restricted industrial zone or the residential zone. In fact, they're not permitted anywhere in Edison Township. Kind of ironic given that it's named after Thomas Alva Edison. We're also asking for a variety
of C bulk variances. And this is for placement of utility process equipment. And now you're going to fall asleep when I give you the whole litany of stuff we need. And all of this is on our site plan application. So first for 19-21
Meridian Road, insufficient lot area. The lot is supposed to be 80,000 square feet. It's only 40,01 square feet. So the lot is undersized. It also has insufficient lot depth. 275 ft is is
required, but there's only 135 ft existing. There's an insufficient front yard setback. 50 ft is required for Meridian Road, but our walls are 3.7 ft. Insufficient sideyard setback. 50 feet
is required and our wall would be seven, excuse me, 4.7 feet. There's insufficient both sideyard setbacks, 100 ft required and only 22.8 ft proposed. There's an insufficient rear yard. 50 ft
is required and zero proposed. There's too much lot coverage. 80% is required and we're asking for 98.72%. There's not enough gross floor area. Our proposed building is actually too small.
5,000 square feet is required and ours will only be 1,032 square feet. And this is the control house that Rich Strauss had mentioned. The fence is too high. 6 feet is required. We're proposing 25
foot walls on three sides and 10 foot of an anti-cut anti-climb fence on one side. We have insufficient parking and loading. We have zero spaces provided. As Rich Strauss explained, we have no parking and loading needs and we have an
insufficient drive aisle width. 22 feet is required. We're proposing 16 ft because this is an unmanned electric utility facility. The only people coming in are authorized PSEG employees.
Now for 1750 Oakree Road, this is the rightway. Remember this is only 100 feet wide. There's an insufficient front yard. 35 feet is required and 32.3 feet is proposed. Insufficient rear yard. 60 ft
required. Zero proposed. Not enough gross floor area. The ordinance requires 1,400 square feet. And we don't even really have a building. We actually have a piece of switch gear equipment that
will only be 1,032 square feet. The fence again too high. 6 feet required and we have walls that are 25 ft and a fence of 10 ft. Minimum yard depth to residential area 70t required. Zero
proposed. Minimum landscape buffer area 30t required. Zero proposed. The lot has insufficient depth. It's only 100 feet wide and on according to the ordinance it should be 150 feet wide and again no
parking and loading spaces. Rich already explained station is unmanned which is why no parking and loading. So what's odd is you've got variances due to existing nonconformities due to the size and
shape of the site. The station will straddle two lots. So, of course, you're going to have problems with front yards and rear yards essentially overlapping each other. The transmission corridor and the Meridian Road lot are not regularly shaped lots and they're
undersized. Now, I'll get to more exciting stuff because planning this is riveting. According to the New Jersey courts, bulk variances are subsumed within the use variance. I believe there are three reasons this board can approve this
substation application and those three reasons are first the station is an inherently beneficial use. Second, there's special planning reasons that are advanced by this substation. And third, this station provides upgraded reliability and aesthetic improvements.
Inherently beneficial uses. What does this mean? It's a use that's considered universally valuable or important to the community because it fundamentally serves the public good and promotes the general welfare. Provision of of reliable electricity is essential and
critical to our modern way of living and is an inherently beneficial use that fundamentally serves the public good and promotes the general welfare. Public utility installations have been determined by the New Jersey courts to be inherently beneficial. Rich Strauss
already explained the importance of the substation to the township of Edison and the surrounding area. 6,000 residents served. He alluded to the fact that the station is essentially another node in PSNG's electric distribution and
transmission system. The transmission line Rosland Matouch and right ofway has been carrying electricity for almost 100 years. And frankly, the public, all of our rateayers, many of us included, we expect PSENG to provide safe and
reliable service with modern-day equipment. Not all electric substations are under transmission lines, but it's not unusual to see just that. There are other stations in Edison that are similar. New Dover substation, which is currently
overloaded, is located north of this facility on New Dover Road. So, you're seeing how our naming convention works. We also have Matuchen Switching Station, Pearson Avenue substation, and Meadow
Road substation, also known as South Edison substation. They're all along the Matuchen Trenton rightway. So Meridian Road substation would be positioned by and under transmission lines just like New Dover substation to the north. From
a land use planning perspective, it makes sense to consolidate public utilities in one place. Rights of way are corridors for above and below ground utilities. Besides electric transmission, this corridor also has gas
and telecommunication lines. Texas Eastern, now Embridge, holds an easement, as does Bell Telephone, now Verizon. And those easements are from 1964 and 1973, respectively. There's also a
perpendicular storm sewer easement from 1966. This is what's connecting Meridian Road to Elmyer Road. When we first started working at this station, we said, "Why are there wetlands on this rightway?
There's no stream. There's no reservoir. There's no water body. How did these get there? It turns out it's that collapsed storm sewer that Mike Blake mentioned that we CCTVed. We believe that's the source of the
wetlands. And as mentioned, we did file permits with NJD to remove the wetlands. I'll go back to the planning testimony. Because Meridian Road substations an inherently beneficial use, the positive criteria or special reasons are
satisfied and the bulk of the application should be the negative criteria. However, even if this board did not consider the station an inherently beneficial use by definition, you can confer inherently beneficial status and approve the bulk and use
variances because special planning reasons are advanced by the substation project. The special reasons essentially positive criteria are purposes in the municipal land use law and the township zoning ordinance. The special reasons why the station can be granted are
because the following purposes of the municipal land use law are advanced. Primarily promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community and benefiting the public. The station would offer a reduction in potential outages, which obviously
advances safety from and during natural disasters. It also will promote energy resources in the state. And the second purpose of the municipal land use law that is advanced is encouraging coordination of various public and private procedures and activities
shaping land development with a view of lessening the cost of such development and to the more efficient use of land. Purposes in the Edison Township ordinance are advanced, namely promoting public health, safety, morals, and
general welfare and encouraging the most appropriate use of land. Safe and reliable electricity promotes the public health, safety, and welfare. It's efficient and practical to use land already devoted to public utilities to
the maximum extent practical. This is good land use planning. The transmission corridor has been in public utility use for many years. It was there before almost all the other uses in the area. What makes this property particularly
suitable or appropriate for a substation is its location along a transmission right ofway and it's also in an industrial area that is for sale. The project's also consistent with the township's master plan. There are two sections in the ordinance, excuse me,
master plan addressing utilities. The first is the infrastructure resilience and sustainability section which states that a goal of the master plan is to maintain and improve township utilities to support the current and future populations. That's exactly what this
station that's doing. The station's improving electric reliability and resiliency. It's replacing a broken storm sewer. And there's more because we are providing sidewalks along Meridian Road in front of this substation. And we
will also be providing a sidewalk along Oak Tree Road where our right ofway is. This will connect the corridor that people can walk on to get to Oak Tree Road. Another goal of the master plan is coordination of infrastructure upgrades
and maintenance with PSEG. As Rich Strauss explained, PSENG and the mayor's administration worked collaboratively, excuse me, together to develop aesthetic and landscaping improvements. The master plan shows the right-of-way as transportation and utilities and the
Meridian Road property as industrial. The third reason that you can grant the approval of this station is because the upgrades provide electric reliability and aesthetic benefits as explained by Rich Strauss, Mike Blake, and Lisa Defransza.
I believe the station would be viewed as an intensification of public utility uses. You've already seen the renderings. The 25- foot walls will will shield the station from north, east, and southern views. The landscaping will be
planted on the side of the transmission rightway because we cannot plant trees in the right ofway. So, what we will do is augment the existing buffer. And for security, we will provide a 10-ft high fence. If you're interested in the fence, we do have a sample. And I will
if you want I will ask one of our strong younger team members to bring it forward. The purpose of the walls is to obstruct views. The purpose of the landscaping is to soften the views of the substation.
Will you see it? Yes. Do you see the transmission towers? Now you have five of them and they are ranging in height from 142 feet. As you go north, the transmission towers that are existing
162 ft and then go down to 142 feet. The new landscaping we're particularly proud of because it will provide mostly evergreen trees with some deciduous species. This will be more sustainable, coordinated, and attractive than much of
the random landscaping that currently exists. So, I've given you a lot of evidence that the proposed station is an inherently beneficial use. For a D1 use variance for an inherently beneficial use, PSENG has to demonstrate that the proposed substation doesn't
substantially outweigh the detriments. The New Jersey courts have established a four-part test for this, and this is known as the SECA test. So the first part of the test, what's the public interest at stake and what's the benefit? The public interest is to
provide better electric infrastructure. The station will have the latest technology and if there are outages, there will be quicker restoration of sto of service. Second, what are the detrimental effects from granting the variance? These sorts of things could be
noise, dust, pollution, traffic, storm water, drainage problems, or visual impacts. And PSENG has already considered that. For traffic, the station is unmanned. It will generate approximately one minivan or a utility
truck every week. This is much less traffic than it would occur at most establishments in the restricted industrial zone, and it's actually less residential household use than would occur in the residential zone. There'd
be no increased impact to township water or sewer, community facilities, or schools. The existing building currently has two bathrooms. The proposed control house will have one bathroom and that's mainly for the convenience of the roving
technician technicians. There'll be no creation of dust or negative air emissions, no impact from lighting. We believe most of the lighting will be contained by the landscaping and the walls, no odor, no industrial wastes, no storm water increase, and a major
increase in infrastructure, namely the storm sewer that is cracked. Plus, you also will get sidewalks on Oak Tree and Meridian Road. No increase in noise. We'll revitalize the residential, excuse me, the restricted industrial zone, but
without any traffic. And our final benefit is visual screening with walls and traffic. The third prong of the see analysis is are there any reasonable conditions that could reduce the potential detrimental
effects. I don't believe any conditions are necessary, but the zoning board is always able to impose new conditions as they see fit. The fourth prong of the test is how can the positive criteria and the negative criteria be balanced so
that the CND variances can be granted without causing substantial detriment to the public good and substantial impairment to the intent or purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. We satisfy the positive criteria because the proposed station is for an
inherently beneficial use. Electricity benefits the public good. The requested zoning deviations are for beneficial improvements. I've explained how the lot is particularly suitable for public utility uses. There's no change to the
character of the neighborhood and no change in existing uses. The major uses in the zone, excuse me, in the area, residential, public utility, municipal, and restricted industrial are not being changed.
The new landscaping in particular will be an improvement. Station security and aesthetics will be improved. The improvements will not alter the health, safety, or welfare of existing residents, the surrounding area, or alter the character of the neighborhood.
For inherently beneficial uses, application should be improved unless the negative criteria substantially outweighs the positive. In this case, I believe the negative criteria is satisfied because the upgrades don't substantially impair the intent or
purpose of the master plan and development regulations. Safe, reliable, and sufficient electric supplies are needed to support all of the objectives of the municipal land use plan and the township of Edison's planning documents. There's no adverse public safety or
health impacts. There's no substantial public welfare or visual or fiscal impacts. Therefore, it's my opinion as a professional planner that the CND variances to construct Meridian Road substation can be granted because there's no substantial detriment to the
public good. No impairment to the intent and purpose of the township's zoning ordinance, development, excuse me, development regulations or master plan. You're still awake. Thank you very much. >> Okay. I just have one question. Um
although we are arguing the SECA case here that our bulk variances are subsumed with the D1 variance. Um you know we talked about various setback variant bulk variances that we are requesting. Um, can you just walk the
board through, you know, where what do these setbacks have to do with? What are they set back from? >> Setbacks that I described are primarily from Meridian Road and the walls that we are proposing. The other road would be
Elmy. However, for the new monopole that we're proposing, that would be off of Oak Tree Road. So, we certainly are in compliance with the front yard setback for the new monopole that will be constructed.
>> Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness. >> Thank you very much, Miss Knight. >> Yeah. So, my only question really is pertaining to um the substation being kind of designated as an inherently beneficial use. You know, you spoke
about that um for just the board um for their own information. Can you just provide them with some of the case law that backs that as an inherently beneficial use? I will leave that mostly to our attorney. But you know, inherently beneficial uses are described in the Cox
book, currently a black book from 1926. And things that are inherently beneficial uses would be hospitals, schools, religious facilities, believe it or not, a seeing eye dog facility and a telephone substation. Those are all
declared as inherently beneficial. Also, many municipalities have considered public utilities as inherently beneficial. Uh that would be Hoboken, Jersey City, Bayon, and those are just
three. Also, I believe our Matuchin switching station was considered an inherently beneficial use. So, I believe that a public utility substation which is providing necessary electric service
is an inherently beneficial use. I I you know just to add right um the Cox book has a lot of discussion about what an inherently beneficial use is. It's not so black and white, right? Some examples that they always give, schools,
daycarees, hospitals. It doesn't necessarily have to be a forprofit or not for profit, right? That's not really um a check in the box whether it counts as a use. I think um Norin sums it up perfectly that an a beneficial use is
something that provides a service. PSG is a utility and they're providing a service, a very necessary service to the nearby residents and community. Now, some maybe similar um beneficial uses that have been determined by the courts to be in a beneficial use would be maybe
like a wind and solar energy facility, something like to that effect. Um but again, it's I would say I would argue that it's a facility that's providing a service a necessary service to the community.
Miss Knight, >> some of the municipalities that you guys have said, I just was wondering if you had any specific case law that >> the case law would generally be the Bell Telephone substation that was considered to be inherently beneficial. >> Perfect. Yeah, sounds good. Just I
wanted it for the board's knowledge. >> But as an example, one inherently beneficial use is a school bus depot because it provides necessary transportation. Is it for profit? Yes. Are hospitals for profit? Yes. Daycare
is also for forprofit and it includes child daycare and now senior daycare. >> Great. Thank you so much. Does the board have any questions for Miss Mariner? >> Um Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Aat. >> Uh at its closest point, how close will
this substation be to a home? The homes are all on the other side of Elmyer Road. So the road probably about 50 feet cartway and then there's about 30 or 40 feet that's never been
developed. Then is the transmission right ofway. So I will also ask our engineer who's hopefully busy with his scale figuring this out. So, correct me if I'm wrong. Are you
saying roughly 90 ft to the nearest? >> I would say, sorry, I'm not an engineer. I'm just looking at the site plan that's in front of me marked into the exhibits. I think this is A2. Elmy Road in and of itself is an 80 foot right ofway width.
>> Um, beyond the right of way is is the landscape. I don't know. I don't think the landscape is included in that. Um, >> thinking from the fence or from the first >> from the substation. >> Okay. So, I'll go from the fence at least 80 feet.
>> Okay. All right. Will there be any lights installed on this substation? >> As Mike Blake explained, we will have lighting for safety. Most of these are lights that are only 11 ft high. Our
lighting plan shows that the >> Yeah, I know. fixtures are mounted at 11 ft high. Now remember these walls are 25 feet wall or 25 ft high and the anti-cut anti-limb fence is 10 ft. If anything is
seen it would be above the walls and as I explained that would only be used in emergency cases where our crews had to come at night and turn on the flood lights and any of the uplights and those of course would be timed out when they
leave. So would you see something? It's possible. But there will be no lights on the transmission towers. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thanks Mr. Board. Have any questions? >> Mr. Chair, I have a question. Mr. >> Um, is there any kind of regulation for
PSG and their employees on, you know, leaving diesel powered trucks running when they're on site? They're in the middle of the night. They're parked there. It's 100 feet away. Um, is anything going to stop these workers from leaving those trucks on? A policy we have is the threeminut rule.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Also, um it was it was noted in the in um Mr. Carly's report, but as a condition of approval, we will not have um heavy machinery trucks parked here overnight like long-term, right? This is
going to be the operation of the site will be very transient, >> workers on and off the site. No heavy machinery truck staying on for a long period of time. >> Thank you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> I I think um our engineer, if it would please the zoning officer, the the setback between the station and the >> Yeah, I I can't our drawings don't show the actual front of the house, but to
the property line to the anti-cut, anti- climb fence is roughly 90 ft. So then the house may be a little bit farther than that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much.
>> Council, do you have anything to add? >> Next would be the go to the public portion and then you could then if you wanted to sum up after that, but that's up to you. I don't tell anybody to do that. >> Yeah, we could we could move on to the public and then I would reserve a couple minutes for some for summation. >> Absolutely. Uh so now go out to the
public. Anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard. If you're within 200 feet, you received a notice via certified mail. Seeing none, we now go outside of 200 feet of subject site. Please approach. Seeing none, can I get a motion to close the public portion? >> Motion to close public portion.
>> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Schneider, second by Mr. Chabber. All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Oppos? Nay. The eyes have it. Public portion is now closed and we'll go to you councel. >> Okay. Thank you everyone for your time this evening. In summation, I just want to say that um based on the testimony
that was presented here tonight, um I believe that this application meets the proofs that this site is an inherently beneficial site. Um, and I think it goes without saying that the need for this for this site, the need to generate more electricity, it's it's just necessary as
as um this town continues to grow, the continued and more heightened use of electric vehicles, people needing power, and this is something that's necessary for everyday everyday life, and that um we have sufficiently met the proofs to
assert that the the benefits of this project outweigh the detriments. And like I said, that includes providing more power to this town. The storm water improvements. We're leaving this site in a better condition than it is today. Um, we're replacing a vacant dilapitated
building with um a new substation. There's going to be landscaping, a wall to augment it, to enclose any, you know, maybe unwanted fixtures to the eye. And I think that this site, it's going to be in a better condition than it is today.
And with that, I submit. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. And I'll go to the board. >> Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. Davi, >> I'll make a motion to approve this application. The applicant has met all of the negative and positive criteria.
The site is particularly suited for the intended use. The use is not detriment to the public good or public safety and general welfare. It is a less intend use than any other industrial facility and there are no objectives. Um, the
applicant will comply with DNR engineering and neglia group reports dated uh February 24, May 19, and April 27. Um, this motion will incorporate all of the testimony of the applicant,
attorney, planners, engineers, and members of the board, as well as incorporate all of the conditions um as testified to. Uh, I'm also going to add that the applicant will agree to work with Edison Police and Fire for compliance. Uh, and they will also work
with Township Engineer to ensure a tree and landscaping maintenance plan. >> Yes. >> Okay. Motion made by Mav. >> Second. >> Second by Mr. Sedata. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes to the motion.
>> Mr. Tabra. Yes to the motion. >> Mr. Certo. >> Yes on the motion. >> Mr. D. >> Yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada. >> Yes to the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Kumba. >> Yes on the motion. Unanimous approval. Congratulations. >> Thank you everyone. Have a wonderful
evening. >> Thank you too. The board's going to take a fiveminute recess and then proceed with the rest of the agenda. Board will return to session. Madam Secret, next case on the agenda, please. >> Case number Z33 2025 NHDP LLC at 136
Floyd Street. Applicant is seeking bulk and a deuse variance to construct a second story addition to the single family dwelling. The following standards have not been met. Max F required is 0.25. Proposed is.35. Affected property is located in the RA zone designated as
block number 956, lot number 8.01 on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Good evening, Mr. Prasad. >> Good evening, board chair, members of the board. David Prasad from Bob Smith and Associates, licensed attorney in the state of New Jersey, here tonight
representing the applicant NHDP LLC uh for property located at 136 Floyd Street, block 956, lot 8.01 01 in the RA zone. This is a continuation hearing from our first appearance uh before this
board on March 24th, 2026. Uh just to give the board a quick recap of the prior application, uh the lot that we are speaking about has an existing one-story single family home. Uh the applicant tonight is proposing to do a
second story addition to that uh single family one-story home. Uh the main purpose of the testimony tonight and the testimony at the previous hearing is a F variance. Um originally the application asked for
041 for an F variance where 0.25 is required. Um however after testimony and after consideration by the board we have came to a compromise. Mr. Dav had suggested maybe getting the F variance
down to.35. Uh we tried to do some quick calculations at the last hearing, couldn't get it done. Um but the architect has uh revised the plans and was able to get the F down to.35. Um
the revised floor plans and elevations have been submitted to the board for review and as mentioned it is a.35 F now with um the sun room that was previously removed. Uh Mr. Chabber had asked about the sun room. That sun room has now been
removed and also an bedroom that was on the second floor has been removed so we can get the square footage down to be more compliant with previous approvals in the neighborhood. As I mentioned at the prior hearing, uh there are two homes uh located in on the same street,
both approved for 0.35 F. This this home is uh situated on a significantly undersized lot, which leads to such a high F. Um but even with this 35 F and the undersized lot, this home will be
smaller than other homes situated in the surrounding area. Uh we do have uh our engineer and professional planner here tonight and we also have our architect sitting to my right. If the board has any questions of the revised board plan and layout to reach the agreed upon.35
F. >> Mr. Sad, I have a question. You're you referenced the two homes on the street were approved at.35 F. Did you do an OPRA review of these homes being approved or did you seek this from
another source? >> I sought these from the agendas that were approved from the board. I do have the Opras but not with me tonight. Um I can give you the application numbers. I do have those written down. Um the first is Five Hollywood Street which at towards the end of Floyd Street. It's on
the intersection. Um and Mr. Dupont did provide a exhibit at the prior hearing. uh five Hollywood Street application Z15 2021 uh 3.35 F was approved and also 903 Newover Street which is I believe
immediately next door to ours also on the next intersection is uh 35 F and as I mentioned Mr. Dav did suggest bringing it down to 3.5 just to match the surrounding uh variances in the neighborhood and match the surrounding area.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Any questions, Mr. Pad? Okay, you may proceed. >> Uh, I would like to call our our architect, Mr. David Dugas, here to uh just walk the board through the revised floor plans just to show how we did reach this 0.35 F bear.
>> Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> You say your name and business address for the record, please. My name is Dave Dugas. I am a partner at Dugas Ember and Architects. I'm located at 24 Egan Avenue in Fords,
New Jersey, and I have uh testified in front of this board. >> Your license are current and still in good standing? >> Yes. >> Okay. May proceed. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, at the last hearing, uh, there was concern about the F.
We addressed the F by removing the rear bedroom which extended into the backyard. Um, so at the first floor, it's currently a living room, family room, dining room, kitchen, and we do maintain the bedroom.
The existing garage is maintained as well as is on the second floor. We had uh pulled in the left side of the building so that the second floor doesn't extend over the entire first floor
approximately 42 by 31 square ft. It has a double height foyer and contains three bedrooms. We also removed some of the other rooms that were ancillary to the master bedroom suite. >> Mr. Dugas, that that achieves the uh.35
F to be more compliant with the board's recommendations. Is that correct? That is correct. >> Does board have any question for Mr. Dugas? >> Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. David, >> uh, you're putting word in my mouth, but if I'm not mistaken, I think we asked
around 31 to 32, not 35. I recall >> if I if I can just I watched the the videos and read the transcripts from the prior hearings. Um, it was originally you did ask for 31 to 32. Uh after we did remove uh we did some calculations
with the sun room removal and uh tried to reduce the square footage where we could um it came down to 38 you the board was not acceptable of 38. We did reach a compromise towards the end actually at the very end to try to
achieve 35 >> lot is simply too small for this. Now what is your applicant here? What's the purpose of adding this additional floor? What's the purpose? He's trying to leave there. Hardship there, a family increase. What's the purpose? >> Well, currently, as as we mentioned at
the prior hearing, the home is uh as a one-story single family. It only has two bedrooms and a completely non-compliant basement and garage. Uh there's stairs in the garage that go down to the basement. The purpose of this second story addition is to provide more living
space, to modernize the home, and also make the house compliant. Um they're at the current uh status of the home and Mr. Dugas can confirm uh is non-compliant. The basement level going from the garage and also only a
two-bedroom home does not fit the character of the neighborhood. Uh this second story addition is to modernize and and present a home that is more conforming to Edison Township and the surrounding neighborhood. >> What's the current use of the house? Who's living there?
>> Currently, the house is vacant. And then this is LLC. The purpose is to just commercially put additional floor and sell it and then ask for variance since there's no hardship here, right? >> Well, currently, yes, the the plan is to
add the second floor for resale, but it's also to bring a home more into compliance. The lot is significantly undized. Um, most houses that anyone tries to build on that house would be on that lot would be difficult to match. uh
the the requirements of the zone. Adding a second story and making it more reasonable compared to what the board had uh recommended at the prior hearing would achieve a more conforming home to the neighborhood. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> Thank you, Mr. Dav. Uh any other questions from the board from Mr. Yugos? >> Mr. Chair, I have a question. Job architect. Um so the basement is we're still keeping existing, right? Uh we're going to be finishing part of the basement and we're going to be making any kind of structural repairs that need to happen there.
>> Okay. But the existing CMU or such masonary struct substructure will stay the same. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.
>> I have no uh further witnesses for tonight's application. >> Okay. Um All right. So, we will now go out to the public. Anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard, please approach. If you're within 200 feet, you received a notice via certified mail.
Seeing Seeing none, anyone outside 200 feet of the subject site want to be heard? Seeing none. Can I get a motion to close the public portion? >> Motion to close. >> Second. Motion made by Mr. Sadata, second by Mr. Schneider. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Pose. Nay. The eyes have it. Public
portion is now closed and I'll go to the board. >> Do you have a I'm sorry. Do you have a summation? >> Um, just very very quickly, not too much to put on the record tonight. Um, as I did mention, it is a significantly undersized lot. this the second story
edition will just make a more complying home, a more modernized home and a more conforming home to the neighborhood and also correct some of the issues that are with the existing home. Uh so I do ask this board if they can look favorably on this application. >> Okay. Thank you. And I'll go to the board. >> Mr. Chairman,
>> Mr. Jav um I'll make a motion to approve this application with the condition that the F will not exceed no more than 32%. Um applicant will comply with the engine
report and uh this is a dimminimous request. It is not detrimental to neighborhood. It may enhance the neighborhood. It may not be out of character with the with the with the neighbors. Um yeah, I guess that's it.
I would also add that um the applicant would uh submit revised site plans, revised plans uh to conform with uh the proposed F. Uh >> yes, we agree. Okay. >> Motion made by Mr. second.
>> Second by Mr. Sadata. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Schneider, >> uh, no to that motion. >> Mr. Chabra, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Certo, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Dvet, >> yes on the motion.
>> Mr. Sadda, >> yes to the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> no on the motion. and chairman Kumba. >> Yes. On the motion. >> 345. >> Okay. This application is approved. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, board members. Have a good night.
>> Madam Secretary, next case on the agenda, please. >> Case number Z24, 2025, Vivian Pierra at 1651 Woodland A. Applicant is seeking bulk and use D variances to construct a
new single family dwelling. The following standards have not been met. F required is 15%. Proposed is 16.3%. Affected property is located in the RAA zone designated as block number 415. Lot number 4.36 on the Edison Township tax
map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Good evening, Mr. Shu. Wait for the light. >> Okay. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Jason Tubelle, attorney for the applicant. Um, this is an application for an F variance for a
single family house. It's block 415 lot 4.31. The applicant was here several months ago on this application and the board had many comments regarding the relief that was being sought. So when we were here the last time the applicant needed
not only an F variance but the applicant needed a building coverage variance, a lot coverage variance and some setback variances as well. And I think the board was pretty clear that the the board felt that the application was was seeking too
much relief. So the application is now been revised where the building coverage was reduced in half. So now the single family home complies with building coverage at 10%. The application complies with lot coverage is actually
less than what's permitted. So in the in this zone, you're allowed to have 25% lot coverage. The application now is at 22.9% lock coverage. So the application actually has less impervious than what's permitted.
The F which is still within the footprint of the existing building of course or the proposed building is now 0.01 larger than what's permitted. So.15 is allowed. We're seeking.16.
So after doing all the revisions that we felt the board felt was important, we're just down to this 0.01% F deviation. So it's just noteworthy to to say and we'll put this on the record with our professionals, we comply with
all of the setbacks. In fact, for uh rear and side, we exceed this the setback requirements. The building coverage complies, the lot coverage complies is less than what's um permitted. The height, parking, everything complies other than having
that additional 0.01 um F. So, what I'd like to do, Mr. Chairman, if it's okay with the board, is bring back our engineer and architect to just explain the revisions that were made, and then I would bring up our professional planners. I don't think anybody's going to be too long. I just want to be able
to explain to the board what revisions we made between the first and the second meeting. >> Uh without objection, please proceed. >> Okay. So, the first witness I'd like to call is our civil engineer. We'll swear her in. >> Good evening.
>> Could you raise your >> Yep. Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear affirm that the testimony give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. Can you say your name and business address for the record, please? My name is Olivia Kenonuk, spelled K O N O N I U K and I'm a project engineer at Stonefield Engineering located at 700
Bangs Avenue in Asbury Park. >> Okay. Do you want me to re-qualify her? >> No, I will. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. If you could please provide the board with benefit of uh your background qualification. >> Yes. I graduated from Rowan University with a bachelor's in civil engineering and I'm a professionally licensed
engineer in the state of New Jersey and my license is in good standing. I've been practicing in the field for about seven years and have experience on over 75 developments of both commercial and residential scopes. >> You may proceed. Thank you very much. Great. >> Thank you. All right. So, Olivia, if you
could just go through the revisions that were made um to the plan itself from a civil engineering perspective to get the cover building coverage to compliance, the setbacks to compliance, and also how we reduce the lot coverage to less to less than what's permitted.
>> Sure. Um, I'd like to put up the site plan. This was previously submitted, so I'm not going to mark it as an exhibit. >> So, this is the site plan sheet C4 prepared by Stonefield Engineering dated April 29th. Um, so as Jason mentioned,
when uh we were originally in front of the board in November of 2025, the footprint of the building was approximately 7,800 square ft with a total floor area of 14,300 square ft. Um, today we are here with a 8,360
square foot building. Um, there's the the twostory uh, sorry, twostory single family home with a twocar garage. So, the first floor is 4,675 ft and the second floor is 3,685
ft. >> Okay. So, does the application now comply with building coverage? >> Yes, the application does comply with building coverage. We have decreased building coverage 2,716 square ft. So originally it was 15.3%
and now it is 10% which is compliant. >> Okay. And then in terms of lot coverage the required or the sorry the permitted lot coverage in the zone is up to 25%. What is being proposed now after the revisions? >> After the revisions and a decrease of
1,795 square ft we are proposing a 23.6% lot uh lot coverage. >> Okay. And then in terms of the setbacks, do all of the setbacks comply? >> Yes. Originally we were proposing um
just 40 ft of where 50 ft is required on both sides. We have improved that to 51.5 ft to comply. >> Okay. And the rear yard is which 75 ft is required. We're substantially higher than that. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. So all setbacks comply and all
coverages either comply or or are a little bit better than what the ordinance permits. >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. You also designed a stormwater management plan as it relates to this project uh that the board engineer reviewed. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. Can you explain how that design
meets or exceeds the township ordinances as well as applicable state regulations and why that's a benefit to the property and surrounding area? Yes. So, we are proposing an underground storm water basin. It's in the front beneath the driveway. It will attenuate the runoff
generated by the proposed development then gets discharged into the existing conveyance system that is along the private road uh named out of bounds. Uh the system complies with all NJD green infrastructure requirements and really
um so the D the uh they dictate reductions that are needed for the peak flows coming off of the site based off of the existing conditions. So basically when you have a two-year storm you want to reduce the peak flow that is coming
off your site by 50%. We reduce this by approximately 77%. So it really is a an in a improvement for the P flows coming off this site. You also are required to reduce the 10-year storm and the
100redyear storm. The 10-year storm we are reducing by approximately 77% where 25% is required and for the 100redyear storm 58% where uh only 20% is required. So what this really means is that what is entering the conveyance
system in the roadway is going to be significantly less than if we didn't have this basin. >> Okay. So again, that's not only a benefit for our property, but it's also a benefit to the surrounding area. Would you say that that's correct? >> That is correct. >> Okay. And then ju just to be clear because I know some of these numbers are
um confusing. The bottom line is in the 2 10 and 100year storm the application which is seeking variance relief but be that as it may is is providing better storm water management than what's required under the regulations. >> Yes, that is correct.
>> Okay. Um you've had the chance to review um the board engineers latest review memo dated May 12th, 2026. Yes, I have. >> Okay. And there was also a prior memo as well. Did you have a chance to review that? >> Yes, we had uh resubmitted regarding
that memo as well. >> Okay. And would we agree? Does the applicant agree if approved to comply with all the recommendations set forth in the board engineers letter? >> Yes, we will comply. >> All right. And that includes inspections of several of the excuse me, of the pipe of the storm system that goes out into
the road. Correct. Yes, we will uh inspect and then uh work with the board engineer to repair and replace anything that is in disrepair. >> Okay. All right. That's all I have for the civil engineer. We're happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Carly. >> Yes. As Mr. Tuell said uh the uh the application's been significantly amended uh to uh diminish the requested relief. Uh we issued a review in March 2026 uh
really focusing on uh the uh interaction of the uh the site driveway uh with out of bounds and also uh commenting on the uh storm uh sewer. Uh as is reflected in
our current review, the second review of this date, uh most of the comments that we looked for clarification uh for from site planning, not from planning uh but from site engineering have been addressed. Uh there have been
uh some uh uh new comments uh but they have been addressed by the applicant. Again, Out of Bounds Road is a private road, so you're going to have to get road opening permits, but you're going to you're going to have to make sure that any activities within that private
road uh correspond with whatever agreements, accesses that you may have. That's a job for uh people with ESQs behind their names, not pees. And uh and that's about the stem and stern of it.
Uh uh subject to Mr. two vals uh uh offer on behalf of the applicant to accept the potential conditions on a resolution of approval which are expressed by this uh report.
>> Yes, we would we would accept all of the technical comments. We would if they haven't been revised already, we would comply with everything in Mr. Carly's letter. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Carly. Does the board have any questions? Mr. Chair, I have a question.
>> So, what exactly has been reduced? Um, I see that previous documentation you were asking for a 40 foot uh frontage from this front step back. Now, it's 50 ft. So, what has been done to reduce that? >> So, that's the sideyard. Um, so the the
building has been narrowed a little bit to allow for the compliance within the sideyards. And in addition to reducing that footprint, we've also um reduced the car the garage from a threecar garage to a twocar garage, and we've
eliminated sidewalk in that goes to the rear of the property. We've also limited the some of the driveway pavement and then removed uh the gazebo that was in the backyard. >> Yeah, I think this is sorry, I think this is the best uh explanation for the
reduction. It's a good question is that when we were here the last time it was at 19.6% building coverage which I we got you know loud and clear from the board was not something that was wellreceived. Um
and that building coverage was at was 10 was a footprint of 10,60 square feet and now the building coverage at a compliant 10% is 5,110 square feet. So it was almost a cut in
half of the building coverage. So is there an updated F sheet that you guys provided? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Um because this one still shows three garages. >> No, we that was >> Yeah, we we provided a new one. I have >> And the new one is what is the F the new
one adding to >> point? I'm sorry. Do you want to know what the what the exact number is? >> Yes. The exact What's the exact? >> Yeah, no problem. I'm I'm happy to provide it. So So in the original application, just to go back to where we
were previously, >> total floor area where the new one showing now >> 8 Okay. So it's point So where 0.15 is permitted, it's.16 at 8360. >> 8360. Yeah. But that's with an attached
garage of 300 613 ft, right? Is that what your paper shows? >> Yes, that's that is including the garage. So 33 613 foot I would assume is threecar garage, right? >> It's a twocar garage. I think originally the garage was over 800 ft² when it was
a threecar garage. >> Um >> actually it was 96 ft when it was originally proposed and now it's >> So that's where you reduced it. Okay, makes sense. >> Yeah. And then within the house has also been reduced as well, you know. um to
help comply. >> Yeah. I mean, the build, like I said, the building coverage was basically cut in half and without, you know, being giving you the exact number, it went from over 10,000 to a little bit over 5,000. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah, no problem. >> Any other questions?
>> And the the is not I'm sorry, Mr. Sorry, I couldn't hear you. >> Uh area, if you just pick up the microphone there. >> 700 square ft attic area is not included in >> Right. check that with your planner and that that is correct. We that that is Yes.
>> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Any other questions? >> Mr. Chairman, >> in reference to the the attic, why isn't the attic included? Because of the height >> based on the ordinance, we went through that with with your planner and the attic space is not included in the F.
That's the way the ordinance is is read. >> It has to be habitable space. that condition. >> Yeah, we we we made sure to when when we we took to heart what the board said at the last meeting about this. So when we went through the revised plans, we we
went made sure with your planner that we really hit made sure everything was compliant or as close as as we could. >> So the attic is to be used only for storage, >> correct? It's not h like you said, it's not habitable. Correct. >> Any other questions?
See none. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay, the ne next witness, again, we'll be brief. I'm just going to have the architect explain the changes to the footprint um and where that was um where that was reduced as well. could you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm that the testimony you give
tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Can you state your name and business address for the record, please? >> Sure. My name is Nihal Zederi. J H A V E R I. My office address is 250 West Main Street, Sweet 206 Morstown, New Jersey
08057. >> Mr. Za, you've appeared before the board prior. If you could please give us a brief summary of your background qualifications. >> Yes. Uh I have appeared in front of the board before uh numerous times. I hold a bachelor's degree in architecture and
masters in urban design. Um I have been licensed since 2009 in uh and right now I have about seven state licenses and my license is in uh good standing. Right. >> We'll accept you. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you sir. Okay. So um now just if you could just stick with in terms of the building just describe to the board what was reduced in size in order to get to the current F and the compliant building coverage that we have. >> Sure. Um
so currently without garage we have 7,747 square ft uh of total uh livable space. The garage is 613 ft. So that puts us 16.3% uh altogether which is.16%.
Um what we have changed is we made twocar garage instead of threecar garage which was part of F. We used to have a covered um outdoor kitchen area. We got rid of that. We reduced uh number of
room sizes also inside the house. There used to be an office space uh in front of the house. Uh that also we took it down. So we were able to significantly reduce uh the size of the house in that case. >> Okay. And just just to clarify the numbers that I mentioned before, um the
building coverage was was originally 19.6% 6% and now it is exactly at 10% which is what is permitted under the ordinance. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Which is compliant. And that was a reduction in overall building coverage
from 10,60 ft to 5,110 ft. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. All right. That's all I have for >> Does the board have any questions for Mr. Zer? >> See none. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Last witness, Mr. chairman is is our
professional planner. Um Thomas Reichi from Stonefield Engineering and Design and he did not testify the last time um we were here. >> You swear affirm Do you swear affirm the testimony give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes. >> Okay. State name business address for the record, please.
>> Name is Thomas Reichi. Last name is spelled R I CCI. Um professional planner with Stonefield Engineering Design. Business address is 92 Park A, Ratherford, New Jersey. If you could please provide the board with the benefit of your background qualifications. >> Absolutely. Licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I'm
also nationally certified by the American Institute of Certified Planners. I received my Bachelor of Arts degree from Ruckers University as well as my master's degree in city and regional planning also from Ruckers University. I regularly testify before boards throughout the state of New
Jersey. Um I've also been on the other side preparing redevelopment plans and master plans and draft zoning ordinances. >> License current good standing? >> Yes, it is. >> You may proceed. Thank you. >> All right. So TJ, in connection with this application, you visited the site in the surrounding area. >> Yes.
>> Okay. And um you've heard the testimony from the from the last hearing and have reviewed all the plans in connection with the application. >> Yes, I have. >> Okay. So why don't you give in I guess a zoning overview of the project and also provide the testimony um for an F
variance and whether we've met the standard under the New Jersey case law. I'd be happy to. Um, so this is a property that's located in the RAA residential district. Obviously, single family is what's being proposed and that's uh what's permitted under the ordinance. It's it's a pretty unique
neighborhood. There's six houses out there. Um, there is some >> Mr. I'm going to interrupt you. I apologize. If you could just bring the microphone closer. Sure. Sorry. >> Thank you so much. >> Is this better? >> That's perfect. I'm not as young as I used to be. >> Um, there's some remoteness to this neighborhood. attacks. These six
existing homes are accessed via a private roadway off of Woodland. Um, but the houses out there right now are um pretty substantial in size and they're also um very very aesthetic that's very similar to what we're actually proposing
um here tonight. So, we're here seeking a D4 F variance. As you've heard, we've we heard the board's comments. They made um a substantial reduction. Um now the F um variance is this the burden of proof is much less than a D variance. Um what
we do is we look towards the Randolph Town Center case and that confirmed the appropriate um threshold that we review F variances. So the focus is not on the use, it's on can the site accommodate um the problems or the potential issues
associated with an increased floor area. So that's mainly what I'm going to discuss um with regards to the F. Um, in my experience, the theoretical problems or issues associated with an increased F, they're usually a lot greater when you have non-residential
um, applications typically, uh, once again, in my experience, the the theoretical issues with residential F applications are usually a home that's too big for the area. It's usually a home that, um, is much larger than what's uh, the existing what the homes
are like in the existing neighborhood. Um, but with this application, I did review um the coverages, both uh impervious coverage and building coverage, and what I found was there's actually three out of the six homes, there's three that are non-compliant with both of those aspects, and then
three that do comply. Um, now, if you remember, we actually comply with both of those metrics. So, we're under um that level of coverage intensity in the neighborhood. Um, I also looked at F. We fall roughly in the middle of the FS. There's a couple houses that are larger
than us. There's a few that are um a little bit less than us, but we are uh in generally in that middle range of existing FS um out in the neighborhood. So once again, the the um the threshold is can the site um accommodate these
issues of this increased uh floor area. Uh with regards to impervious coverage, we're actually 727 not only compliant, we're 727 square feet under what's allowed. So that's we we tried to balance that with the increased F, but
we have a little bit um less coverage. So that that is uh you know what we think is is a better planning alternative for the site. So we could have less impervious coverage and actually a better storm water system. Now with regard to the storm water system, as our engineer mentioned, uh nothing about the increased uh building
uh F um inhibited our ability to provide not only the required storm water management, but but we exceeded what those minimums are. So better storm water management, less impervious coverage. So that that is something that that we feel is a public benefit um for not only the the applicant but for the
neighbors. Um all the setbacks now comply and the height the height was always compliant. Um but the setbacks and the height taken together they give you that three-dimensional space in which you're allowed to building. This building fits 100% within that three-dimensional space. Um, oftentimes
with F variances, you you are proposing a building that's outside of the bounds of those areas. This building that's as it's being proposed right now has no issues complying with that three-dimensional space. Um, parking, parking complies under RSIS, which is uh
what the ordinance requires us to um to utilize. So, parking complies, we have no issues with that. Um, there are wetlands on the site. Uh, a small wetland buffer area in the rear. this property I mean this uh proposed development is in no way impacting not only the wetlands but the wetland
buffer. Um so so the way I see it is we are compliant or overcompliant with all these other metrics that govern this site. Um so I I I can't identify a a problem associated with this this increase uh in F because when weighed
against all the other metrics uh we either comply or we over comply and again the the the difference is just 0.01 01 per percent. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, that being said, I think that this project aligns uh with the purposes of the MLUL, particularly purpose A,
which is to encourage uh the appropriate use or development of land um that supports general welfare. I absolutely think we're doing that. This is a a previously subdivided piece of land that zone for single family residential. This is really the undeveloped kind of last piece of this neighborhood. Um and we're
bringing, you know, coming in and proposing a a permitted use that we feel is in line and consistent with that neighborhood, that single family neighborhood character. Um really the same theme for purpose G, which talks about providing sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of
uses. Residential is one of the uses that's lift listed. This is a single family neighborhood. and once again coming in here and proposing a brand new beautiful aesthetic single family house consistent with the neighborhood in this appropriate um location. Um so with
regards to the negative criteria um I don't see I don't foresee any substantial impacts. As I mentioned, we're compliant with all of these bulk requirements. I actually see it as a benefit. We have uh more storm water management that's needed. Um really I think the the home is kind of in a unique location, too. It's positioned
kind of at the uh the bottom of its neighborhood. it it kind of um is it it's in its own um area if you will. Um with regards to the setbacks, we overcomply with that rear yard setback. So this building although it's you know it's slightly over on F, it's actually being pulled away from the other
existing houses. Um but once again, I don't I don't see that as a as an impact that we would rise to the level of of substantial uh or substantially impacting neighbor. Um, with regards to the master plan, the master plan talks a lot about um, preventing overdevelopment
and and buildings and homes that are too big for the neighborhood. Once again, in my review, I don't think that's what we're doing here. I think we're exactly in line with it. And there was actually an interesting um, uh, discussion in the master plan where they say um, bal, you
know, balancing the needs of modern households. And I think that's what we have here is is the applicant um proposing a house that that um has to balance the zoning but also the needs of you know modern-day single family household. And then once again they talk about uh maintaining and improving
aesthetic quality. And I think that's that's absolutely what we're doing with this house. So really to sum it up um I do believe that we met the statutory criteria for the Dvariance um uh for the negative criteria. I don't believe that there's going to be any substantial detriment to the public good. I do see
this as a benefit. This is exactly what um this property was subdivided for and zoned for and I believe that um you know aesthetics and um you know construction of a home there is going to kind of complete this uh this empty lot or this this last piece of this neighborhood
>> and and just again just to go to the typical things that you would consider with F, right? So in terms of the of setbacks and the building footprint, the additional F doesn't result in an expanded building footprint. Correct. >> No, it doesn't. >> And in fact, we comply with the coverage and we're better or meet all the
setbacks. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And then in terms of impervious coverage, it doesn't allow for more pavement on the site than what's permitted. >> Correct. >> And in fact, we actually have less pavement on the site and more green space. >> That's what I was going to add. Okay. In terms of parking, we have the correct
number of parking spaces under RSIs. >> Yes. >> All right. And then as to as far as storm water management goes, even though um the there's that slight increase in F, the applicant was able to meet the stormwater regs and in fact provide better storm water detention than what's
required under the regulations. >> That is correct. So again, just sticking to that Randolph Town Center, any issues typically involved with a increase in F are not present in this case. That's correct. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um we'll go to the board for
questions. >> So I have a question. Mr. Richi, have you uh reviewed the uh resolution of the planning board to subdivide this property? >> Yes, I have. Um so provision 8
uh letter I states that the dwellings are constructed with the within the permissible building envelopes and implicate no variance relief. >> Correct. >> You're seeking to for the zoning board to override a planning board decision.
>> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Ei? Seeing none. Thank you. Mr. Vel, do you have anything to add before we go to the public? >> Nope. >> You good? Okay. All right. So, we will now go out to the public. Anyone within
200 ft of subject site want to be heard. If you're within 200 feet, you receive a notice via certified mail. Please approach. Ma'am, >> good evening. >> Mr. Ma'am, before you start, is it possible to remove that just Thank you so much.
And may we please raise your right hand? Our attorney will swear you in. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Can you say your name and address the record, please? >> Rita Meta. Um, before I begin my comments as a homeowner, I would like to, as a
representative of the Out of Bounds Homeowners Association, first like to confirm for the record that the committee has received the notice from the association's attorney dated January 30th, 2026. The purpose of that notice was to
ensure that the committee's review and cons and key consideration of this application remain consistent with the requirements and obligations set forth in the agreement previously executed between the property owners out-of-bounds association and the
township. Would you please confirm for the record that the committee is in receipt of this notice? >> I can confirm that we are in receipt of it. We do we do have it. We have reviewed it. >> Thank you. With that said, as a
homeowner, we have no objection to having this approved. We only want to ensure that the conditions in that agreement are met first and foremost. And that particularly reflects on the
road. I think that if you if you've seen the agreement, it's clearly stated that they are required to meet with the township and have a clear understanding of what the requirements for the road are going to be. So, I'm not sure if they've done that already, but this is a
requirement from the agreement. So, I want to make sure that goes on the record. >> You want do you want me to respond to that or >> ma'am? Are you are you is that uh the conclusion of your >> Yes. >> comments? Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Dubo. >> No, and and thank you for for for
bringing up that issue. So, we did provide roadway plans in accordance with the with the initial subdivision application to the township engineer and they were approved. The town and those were done by the same engineering firm that you heard testify uh this evening.
So, we plan on abiding by that 100%. the town did not want to as my understanding um accept the road. So under that settlement agreement that we had with the town if the town does not accept the road as a public street it then becomes it stays a private road with certain and
this is all public information certain percentages paid by the association and the um and the applicant in terms of how it's maintained. So the goal would be to which is I think where what the what you wanted to know is that before when
constructing this home here before the CO is issued we we want to make sure that the road is in as part of that initial construction process. So the goal is to build the road with the house and make sure that the road is complete because the applicant wants to build the
road as as well. >> So would that be at the time of the first home being built? Yes. >> Okay. And I think um the other issue is the storm water. >> Yes. >> Um you have mentioned something about having the storm weather under the
driveway. >> So So there's there's two issues with the storm water, right? One is in the initial settlement agreement that was was transpired. The applicant as to the roadway was supposed to was has to when it reconstructs it fix any storm water
issues in the roadway. That was it says drainage but storm water drainage interchangeable terms right >> Mr. Carly's letter in connection with this application and I just wanted to make sure when we were speaking that it was on the record >> not only requires that but also asks us
to to inspect the pipe asked the applicant meaning my client to inspect the pipes in the roadway to make sure that it could accept the water and if it can't we have to clean those out. So that's that's Mr. Carly, just correct me if I'm misstating anything just to be
clear. So, so we have to do that. And then I was also going to mention this in relation to what the chairman said regarding the planning board um approval. Al although the planning board approval does talk about the the a compliant application,
this application, it doesn't say we can't seek variances from it, which obviously that's why we're here, but we feel that this is a better planning alternative in a sense that we could do more impervious coverage. We're doing less. That'll be a benefit for storm water. And we're also, as a condition of
this approval, which we wouldn't have to do if we just pulled a permit, we're increasing the storm water detention, and I wanted our civil engineer to explain that that the ci that the storm order goes above and beyond what's required by the um the town ordinance
and the D regulations. So, stormwater wise, we're going to fix the road as required under the settlement agreement. And as part of this house project, this house will also provide better storm water management in terms of what's going to come off the site than what
would be permitted by code. So it's going to it's going to be better than what the code allows. So that that's to answer your I hope that answers your two questions. >> So regarding the storm water detention, the water is not going to be going into the existing storm water that we uh
detention that we have behind the uh Dr. Scots property. >> Now you're getting technical on me. >> Okay. >> I just want the engineer to answer. Is that okay, Mr. Chairman, if I just >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. I just want the the professional answer. >> I don't want you to answer anything you can't answer. >> Okay. >> So, um the storm water basin that is
located on our site will connect into the inlet that is in front of the site as well. And it will it's it'll be a part of the conveyance system that's already existing there. So, would it be draining off of um Woodland Avenue, out of bounds to Woodland Avenue, or would
it be coming back to >> No, it'd be going out of uh from out of bounds out to Woodland Avenue. Okay. >> Yes. >> Thank you for answering my questions. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you so much. Thank you for coming out. Anyone with else within 200 feet of
your site want to be heard? Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Can you say your name and address for the record, please? >> Scott, 1643. >> Speak to the microphone, please.
>> Is that better? >> Better. >> That's better. >> Okay. >> Thank you so much. >> I'm sorry. I just want to be clear on um the storm water. The water there is an underground detention basin. Sorry. I just I I if you're going to ask a technical question, I just want to make
sure you get the right answer from the right person. >> And is the water stay in there? >> Uh no, >> it it it's draining down the hill. >> Yes. That's the the way that the storm
water system flows at this time. >> Okay. Because some of the water goes the other way to the end of the culde-sac. This is going straight down the hill to the main Woodland Avenue. >> Yes. the from the inlet that is in front of our property, it goes down the hill. >> Okay. And then is that for just that
house or if you build potentially other houses, would you need more um underground storage? >> Yeah. If a if a new development were to come on those two remaining lots, they would have to do the same thing that we were doing. >> Okay. And then also the you said you
submitted a plan for the road. Um that's all for you. Thanks. Let's keep her here just in case I can't answer something. That's >> um for the road, >> right? >> And the township denied it. >> No, they didn't. They they were fine with the plans. They didn't want to accept the road as a public street. So,
under under the settlement agreement, there's two options. Either the town accepts it as a public street or it stays a private road with easements for utilities that the developer has to construct. I'm paraphrasing, but that's basically what it says. >> Okay? because my understanding is that
they we would dedicate the road after it was built if they accepted at that time not be not prior. >> By the way, I'm happy to revisit that conversation, okay, with the township engineer and if they if the township engineer wants has sec second thoughts on that and wants to accept the road,
we'd be happy with that. >> And I think the I think the neighbors would also, >> right? So, but so I mean this is not really part of this application, but I'm happy to revisit that conversation and see if um if the town is willing to accept it. The other thing that you
should know too on the stormwater rules and Charlie and and Olivia can correct me by by the fact that that this hasn't gotten built yet and because it was settled the case was settled in 2021, I think 2022, right? There are new there
there are actually more stringent storm water rules that we have to comply with now that are actually better for the homeowners in the area. So we're we're actually you're getting better storm water than if it were would have been built previously.
>> So when you say you submitted a plan for the road, do you know what changes you made to the road? Because the road had to be built to township standards to public road standard. No, they my understanding and and again this is going back a little bit is we is they were fine with the road design. They
just didn't want to accept it as a private as a public street. >> In that case, they would have to maintain it themselves and they would be the ones repaving it. But again, >> but again, it was supposed to be after everything was built, we would formally attempt to dedicate it to >> I'm happy to try that again.
>> Okay. >> The developer would want that too. So where are are is the public able to see the plan you submitted? >> Sure. It's all pro if if you um again this is getting a little bit outside the F variance, but if if you're okay with it. Um
>> go ahead. I'd like you to answer yes question. I just want to make sure. >> Um I know you have the contact info for our our uh client. >> Yes. >> We're happy Stonefield prepared those plans. We're happy to have you look at them. >> Okay. In addition, if if this gets
approved and we go back to the um township engineer, I'm happy would be happy if a representative from the association >> came and had that discussion about the dedication with us. >> We would we would like to be >> and we can we can talk about that. That that's more than fine. >> Yes, we would definitely like to >> and that actually might help if you're
also involved in the conversation. So, we're happy to to do that. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Anyone else within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard? Anyone outside of 200 feet?
>> Seeing none, can I get a motion to close public portion? >> Motion to close public portion. >> Motion made by Mr. Schneider, seconded by Mr. Sedata. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I nay. The eyes have it. Public portion is now closed. Council. >> Yeah. The So, one thing I just want to
say and Mr. Juvel sort of got to this a little bit, but all the discussion that you guys are just having about the uh the drainage and the road work, all of that will not be affected by whatever the board does here tonight. That is a private, you know, contractual uh obligation. Um subject to the settlement
agreement and so whatever the board decides to do won't affect that. That's going to go forward as the contract lays out or as the agreement lays out. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Simon. And I'll go to the board. >> Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. I make I make a motion to approve the
application. The applicant has met all of the negative and positive criteria. The site is particularly suited for the intended use. The applicant has um substantially reduced the size of the the the uh project and F um also is
meeting the um the require in compliance with the the uh zoning uh regulations. Um the use is not detriment to the public good or public safety. Um this motion will incorporate all of the testimony of the applicant, attorney, planners,
engineers, and members of the board as well as um in it will incorporate all of the conditions as included in DNR engineering report of dated May 12, 20, 2026 and as testified. >> Motion made by Mr. D.
Second. Second by Mr. Schneider. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Chabra, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Certo, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Dvet, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Sada,
>> yes to the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> no on the motion. >> And Chairman Kumba, >> yes on the motion. This application's approved. >> Great. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. >> Secretary of Business come before the board this evening. That'll be all this evening.
>> Uh, seeing none, can I get a motion to adjurnn? >> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Sadata, second by Mr. Schneider. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Those nay. The eyes have it. Board stands adjourned. Thank you everyone.