Heat. Heat. Okay. Good evening everyone and welcome to the township of how planning board meeting for Thursday, February 5th, 2026. Opening statement, please. I hereby declare this meeting of the How Township Planning Board to be open, adequate notice having been given pursuant to the New Jersey Public Open
Meeting Act in the following manner. First, on January 8th, 2026, a copy of said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press and the Star Ledger. Second, on January 8th, 2026, a copy of said notice was hand delivered to the clerk of the township of Howell. Third, on
January 8th, 2026, said notice was posted in the office of the planning board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township Municipal Building, 4567 Route 9, Howell Township, New Jersey. In accordance with the fire prevention code and for your safety, please be advised that this facility is designed with two
emergency exits at the front and rear of the meeting room. Furthermore, smoking is not permitted in the municipal building. Please take note that this meeting is being videotaped for possible future broadcast on Howell Township TV77. Thank you. >> Thank you. Roll call, please.
>> Mr. Bato, >> here. >> Mr. Freriedman >> here. >> Mr. Gimble is excused. >> Mr. Greenfield is excused. Mr. Carbonic >> here. >> Mr. McNicholas >> here. >> Mr. Mercer >> here. >> Councilman Reubel >> here.
>> Mr. Wco >> here. >> Miss Core >> here. >> Uh Chairman Huzer >> here. >> Thank you. Um and would everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance. Uh and afterwards a moment of silence. Um
unfortunately we we lost a key member of the Howell Township community um yesterday in Sergeant First Class Shawn Aker of the New Jersey State Police. Um, I ask for a moment of silence for him and to keep his wife Lisa, his daughter Con or his daughter Sammy, and his son
Connor in your prayers to the flag of the United States of America to the stands nation. Okay. Thank you. Do we have any minutes to approve? >> No, there are no minutes to approve it. >> Okay. Any correspondence?
>> Uh, yes. There was an email from Michael Vidiello, attorney for SD3022, Cody Bilch, 2011 trust, saying that they need more time to obtain soil drainage data and complete the storm water design. So, they are asking to be rescheduled with notice. He also granted the board an extension of time to May
1st, 2026. >> Thank you, Andy. Could you make the announcement on that one? >> Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. Uh, case number SD3022 Cody Cody Milch 2011 trust an application for preliminary and final uh
major subdivision approval. If anyone is here this evening for this application, there will be no testimony this evening and the matter will be rescheduled to another date with notice. >> Thank you. And we also have a letter from uh Steve
Guian, attorney for case SD3027 RCH 162 Newton's Corner LLC, asking to be carried to the board's March 5th, 2026 meeting with no further notice. He also granted the board an extension of time through March 31st, 2026.
>> Okay. Andy, can you handle that one, too? >> Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, yeah. With respect to case number SD 3027 RCH 162 Newton Newton's Corner Road LLC, this is an application for preliminary
and final major uh subdivision approval regarding block 1 uh 112 lots 1401501. Uh the address 162 Newton's Corner Road. If you're here this evening for that,
this application will be carried to March 5th, 2026 with no further notice. >> Great. Thank you. That's it. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Couple resolutions. Uh the first being uh for
board attorney resolution appointing Pashman Steinwalder Hayden PC and Mr. Andrew Bayer as our the planning board attorney. Eligible voters, Mr. Bato. Uh, Mr. Freriedman, uh, Mr. Carbonic, Mr. McNicholas, Mr.
Mercer, Councilman Rebel, and myself. Do I have a motion? >> Motion, >> Mr. Mr. Bato and Mr. Freriedman with a second. >> Mr. >> Mr. Bato, >> yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic.
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Yes. >> Councilman Revel. >> Yes. Chairman Hudner. >> Yes. >> Resolution is memorialized. >> Okay. The next is the resolution appointing CME Associates and Miss Laura
Newman as our board engineer. Eligible voters, Mr. Bato, Mr. Freriedman, Mr. Carbonic, Mr. McNicholas, Mr. Mercer, Councilman Rebel, and myself. Do I have a motion? >> Motion. >> Mr. Bato. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Councilman Rebel.
>> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas, >> yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Councilman Rebell, >> yes. >> Chairman Hudson, >> yes. >> Resolution is memorialized.
>> The next resolutions appointing Leon Savvakian Incorporated, and Jennifer Beam as our board planner, eligible voters, Mr. Bato, Mr. Freriedman, Mr. Carbonic, Mr. McNicholas, Mr. Mercer, Councilman Rebel, and myself. Do I have a motion? >> Motion. >> Mr. Bato. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Rebell. >> Yes. >> Chairman Huzer. >> Yes. >> Resolution memorialized. >> Thank you. And the last is a resolution appointing CME Associates and Sher Sparrow as our board licensed tree expert. Eligible voters, Mr. Bato, Mr. Freriedman, Mr. Mr. Carbonic, Mr.
McNicholas, Mr. Mercer, Councilman Rebel, and myself. Do I have a motion? >> Motion. >> Mr. McNicholas. Do I have a second? >> Mr. Bato. >> Mr. B? >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebell? >> Yes. >> Chairman Hoser? >> Yes. >> Resolution is memorialized. >> Thank you. Uh, no submission waiverss this evening. >> No. >> Okay. So we will move on to our only application this evening is continuation
of case number SP-1130 Vanderver Industrial Partners LLC for a minor subdivision and preliminary and final major site plan with ancillary variance and design waiver relief. Mr. P, >> Mr. Chairman, members of the board, all good evening.
>> Good evening. >> Uh Mr. chairman, as read into the record, this is a continuation of a hearing that we started on January 8th. On January 8th, the um substance of the design was presented by Peter Strong,
the engineer, and the architecture was presented by Mr. Rodosti. Um we left with the board was allowed us the opportunity to stop at that point. We had asked for permission to spend more time with your professionals. There was
a short list of items that we wanted to have answered more completely before we returned. Since January 8th, we've had the opportunity to convene with all of your professionals. Um, and I can with your permission, I can summarize what has been accomplished working with them.
>> The with regard to engineering, there was a a recommendation from your from Laura that we not rely on two EV charging stations for parking. uh and we found there's more than enough room to add two more parking spaces. So, we're
not relying on any fictitious statute. We now have the right number of parking stalls and we still have the EV charging stations. The second was that we had been asked to explore the size of our trash enclosure. Um it was the written
report that had been rendered indicated that we had a 16 foot wide trash enclosure. It had been increased to 20, but we found that we have the room to increase it to 24. And 24 is significant because every eight feet is another dumpster. So, we are able to make the
dumpster 24 ft long. It fits exactly where it is on the plan. It's 4 feet larger than it was shown, but we now have that additional storage capacity. There was one radius on radi the radi on the driveways entering the truck area
and Laura had pointed out that should there should be some modification and that area that's the straight up driveway that's in the that that one over there. Yeah. Um and I know that Mr. Kennle and Laura
got together and discussed that and we will modify the radius on either side of that driveway to make certain that the tractor trailer movements can be accommodated. We met with the fire chief. We went over the this with the fire chief. I think
that board members are aware. I I like to meet with the fire chief on every application. I had met with him a year and a half ago. There was some modifications that had occurred. Wanted to make sure that he was comfortable. He had a short list. He wanted us to add fire lane striping on both sides of the
building. We have his detail and that'll be part of the plan. He asked that we show where the FDC connection on the building is is to be located and he asked that it be right where the um the I just forgot what the word is. The
>> sprinkler >> right where the sprinkler room is in the building and Mr. Redi will be adding that. He asked that we have a Knox box on the building. We're adding the Knox box, but he indicated that the balance of the plan remains satisfactory to him.
Unusual. Chief Prochna always writes a report. Uh I didn't see a report come in, but I'll share with you that was me working with him. We also reached out to Sherry to go over her report. She has in both the September and the November CME
reports recommendations for landscape modifications. We went over those with her and got her permission to make this statement that we will make those revisions and if those revisions are made that Miss Bureau is satisfied. So to the letter the the recommendations
that appear in the September November report and my recollection those were the open promises that we had to come back with answers and we had indicated that we wanted to go over with Miss Beam her report and then we would have our
planner testify to that report. who as unusual as it is, I have with us this evening the engineer, the architect, and the traffic engineer. I did not intend to call them unless there was a request from any member of the board. I
summarized what we accomplished with your professional since January 8th. So before I move >> any questions, any questions? >> No, we're fine. Thank you. And with your permission, we'll go right to Allison
Coffin, who is our professional planner. She has met with Jennifer to go over her report, and it's my understanding that she and Jennifer are pretty much in agreement, but we owe you the proofs on the record this evening. >> Great. >> So, Miss Coffin, you could be sworn.
>> You swear the testimony will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you. >> Yes, I do. >> State your name for the record. Spell your >> Allison Coffin. It's spelled C O F F I N. I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I'm also certified by the American Institute of
Certified Planners. I've had my license and certification since 2005. In the years since then, I've been accepted as an expert witness in front of more than a hundred boards throughout the state. I have appeared here in Howell a great many times. >> We will accept your credentials, Alison. Thank you.
>> I thank you. So, Miss Beam rendered a report on January 7th and she identified that there was certain waiver relief that the applicant would require for his design. And I'm going to ask if you could um indicate what you did to be prepared this evening, the consultations
that you had with Miss Beam and if you could take us through the necessary proofs that would support the waiver relief requested. >> Yes. Uh to prepare for tonight, I looked at the application. I met with Ken to discuss it. I discussed it with Jen. I visited the site. uh looked at the zoning ordinance in the master plan and
talked with the applicant's other professionals. There is one variance relief that that the applicant is asking for and that's relative to buffer intrusions. There are some features of the site plan that do intrude into the required buffer and that's the parking
and some storm water facilities. Um, and there's some minor waiverss with regard to lighting and and the parking lot design, which I think probably would have been dealt with by the engineer, but I think those are justifiable. So, I'm going to focus on that buffer variance since that's the most
significant relief the applicant is requesting. This is a bulk or C variance, and there's two tests within the municipal land use law for this type of variance. The first is the C1 variance. That's the hardship standard. It's not really applicable in this situation. But the second standard, the
C2, it's sometimes referred to as a flexible C variance, that's justified when the variance advances the purposes of the municipal land use law and the benefits substantially outweigh the detriments. It's my opinion that this variance can be granted under that standard. Uh this site plan advances
purposes of the municipal land use law. Purpose A uh to encourage municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Uh purpose G providing for an appropriate use in an appropriate
location. And in this case, there's a clear benefit to the application in that the site is being developed with an appropriate use in a manner that is consistent with the character of the surrounding development. uh there's no significant detriment with the requested variance or the waiverss. There's no
negative impact to the character of the area, which is the intent of a a buffer requirement. It is to protect the surrounding area from impacts from the site. Uh typically Allison, I don't mean to cut you off, but I I believe I had the opportunity to to review with Miss
Beam, but I think we questioned whether or not the buffer was even applicable because you are not adjacent to any active farms. Is that correct? >> I would agree with that. Yes. and and you're not adjacent to any residentially zoned properties. So, I think this was actually just noted in error. Obviously,
we have site plans that abut residential um there's a buffer requirement. Major subdivisions require a buffer or if you're adjacent to an active farm. So, I believe in our code. While I I appreciate the testimony, but just so the board is aware, um, having had the opportunity to also review this with uh,
Jen, I I think it was just kind of flagged in error because this is adjoining all commercial uses, and it doesn't it's not even like sometimes we have a residential zone across the street, but there's no residential zone or farm across the street. So, I did just want to put that on the record. I I
appreciate the testimony. >> Yeah, I would agree with that. >> Thank you. if um if A18 could be put up on the screen as we continue. I think A18 will assist us in embellishing the statements that Laura
just made on the record. This is the middle of an industrial park. This is actually a central lot in the industrial park. Our client owns all the lots that are contiguous and you'll and I think that's that tells a really good story. Um >> yes,
>> correct. So, just so the board is aware, the the parcel that is in orange, that is the lot they're here for. Um, this is industrial use. This is also industrial. So, given the nature of this, again,
like I said, it's not adjoining any farms, nor is it adjoining any residential properties by way of use or zone. So again, I I would it's my opinion that the buffer um relief is not necessary and therefore a variance is not needed.
>> Well, we came prepared to address Miss Beam's concern, but I like the fact that your professionals have taken it off the table. I think that um the purpose of having that A18 was just so that you could see this is a similar building, similar design, similar placement of
parking and we're surrounded by other similar buildings. I think the one significant difference of this I think this is the smallest building in the industrial park. It's about four has a footprint of about 46,000 square feet which it's a fairly small. Is there anything further? No, I think I
think the exhibit tells the story of how this fits within the the fab not this exhibit but A8 >> A18 tells the story of how this fits within the fabric of development on industrial court and and the waiver relief is all fairly technical um and can be granted without any
detriment. >> If I may, Mr. Chair, the that rests the applicant's presentation to the board. Thank you, Miss Miss Newman. um remind the board that there's two parts to the
application. We are asking for a minor subdivision lot line adjustment. Two lots that our client owns that had an oblique angle. We wanted to get a straight angle between the two of them. >> And we're asking for the preliminary and final major site plan approval for the
building as shown. >> I was about to say with limited variance with no variance relief and the limited waiver relief that was just identified on the record. Excellent. >> All of the witnesses, all of the experts are here if there are any questions. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Anybody from the board have any
questions? >> No. >> Okay. Uh at this time, I'll open it up to the public for any comments, questions about the application. Seeing none, I will close the public portion. Okay.
>> Mr. Chair, the summation is very simple and direct. This is a comp a complying a compliant building in zone. It's one of the buildings that's in the industrial park that this board created a few years ago. Um we were pleased that Miss Beam
liked the architecture and said so on the record. We agreed to all of the technical re recommendations of Miss Newman. We now have the fire chief's blessing. We'd respectfully ask the board to consider the application favorably. >> Okay.
All right. So, at this time, uh, I will entertain a motion for both a minor subdivision and preliminary and final major site plan with ancillary variance. Well, >> minor >> is there variance in design waiver
relief? >> No variances, only design waiver relief. So, with ancillary with with design waiver relief. Yeah. So, I'll entertain a motion. >> Make a motion. >> Mr. McNicholas >> and Mr. Mercer for the second. Roll call, please.
>> Mr. Bato, >> yes. >> Mr. Freriedman, >> yes. >> Mr. Carbonic, >> yes. >> Mr. McNicholas, >> yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Councilman Rebell, >> yes. >> Mr. Wet, >> yes.
>> And Chairman Hutel, >> yes. >> Motion pass. >> Chairman and all board members. Thank you all on behalf of the applicant and personally, good night. >> Thank you, Ken. Good seeing you as always. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, so the master plan update, I
heard uh some some folks showed up today, but uh there's a uh a master plan meeting next meeting in two weeks. Uh Andy, is there any reason to go into executive session this evening?
>> Not tonight, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. All right. Well, 7:24 I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion >> motion to our second. >> Second. >> Good night everybody. Thank you.