[Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music] Eileen. Opening statement. Howell Township zoning board of adjustment Monday, October 27th, 2025,
regular meeting. I hereby declare this meeting of the Howell Township zoning board to be open adequate notice having been given pursuant to the New New Jersey Open Public Meeting Act in the following manner. First, on January 2nd, 2025, a copy of said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press and the Star
Ledger. Second, on January 2nd, 2025, a copy of said notice was hand delivered to the clerk of the township of Howell. Third, on January 2nd, 2025, said notice was posted in office of the zoning board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township of 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, Eileene. Could we have a roll call, please? >> Mr. Burillo >> here. >> Mr. Caner >> here. >> Mr. Hughes is excused for tonight. Mr.
O'Donnell >> here. >> Mr. Rosco >> here. >> Mr. Ryan >> present. >> Miss Scottson >> here. >> Mr. Kabarakus >> here. >> And Chairman Mertens, >> I'm here. >> You have a quorum. >> Thank you. Could everybody rise for the
pledge of allegiance, please? I >> aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Okay, Andy, could you swear in our professionals, please? I do. >> Please state your names for the record. >> Charles Kliff, >> Jennifer Beam. >> Witness. The professionals are sworn, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Andy. Uh, approval minutes. I see we don't have any, right?
>> No minutes to approve tonight. >> Correspondence. >> I have one thing for correspondence. Case number BA25-05. Jacob and Shira Eli will be carried to December 22nd, 2025 with no further notice. An extension has
been granted to the board through December 31st, 2025. >> Okay. What was the reschedule for them again? >> Till December 22nd. Okay. >> 2025. >> And the extension is till January 26.
>> No, December 31st. December, 2025. >> Okay. Okay. Anybody here for case number BA25-05? That will be carried till December 22nd. >> Yes, sir. >> Without further notice. Okay.
And since there's that was the only resolution. Okay. Applications before the board. Case number BA21-28 Freehold Welding for an extension of time. applicant is seeking a one-year extension of time on
previous approved certificate of nonconformity memorialized on September 11th, 2023. The applicant was granted certificate of nonconformity confirming that an existing residential use an existing commercial welding business multiple
princes principal uses and structures is a pre-existing nonconformity. If the property along with the use variance approval for expansion of the welding business and the new vehicle detailing uses along with the C variance and waiverss, a one-year extension of time
was previous granted on September 11th, 2025 and the applicant is requesting another one-year extension. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of board Salvator Fury on behalf of the applicant. Uh the applicant is about ready to start the work. Um the only
outside agency approval we're waiting on is uh free old soil conservation district which has apparently taken longer than they had expected. Otherwise once we receive that we'll submit it to the board professionals and hopefully get resolution compliance. I think there's one or two documentation issues
we need to deal with. >> Yeah there I think they're still working on some of the stormwater odds and ends with our office but they're they're close >> right. So we hope we asked for a year just because that's typically what we ask for. Hopefully, we won't need anything near that. Okay, that's right.
Start in the spring, hopefully. >> And this isn't a code compliant case or anything like that. Um, uh, it's an existing welding business that's been there since this property and the adjacent areas were farms going back in the day. So, it's, you know, they got a use fair to continue that use. There was also another
autodetailing use on the site. So, uh, you know, it's just cleaning up the site for some mods and ends kind of thing. But, they're close to compliance. >> Okay. You're good, Jennifer? I am good. >> Okay. Members of the board, any >> Okay. Well, I entertain a motion at this
time, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> I'll make a motion to grant the requested extension of time for one year >> to have a second. >> Second. >> Second by Jose. Roll call. >> Mr. Burillo? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Caner? >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rosco? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ryan? >> Yes. Miss Scottson, >> yes. >> And Chairman Merren, >> yes. >> Approved. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Okay. You're welcome. >> You're welcome, sir. >> Okay. Case before the board, case number BA24-20, Julie Rich LLC. Looking for a use variance, bulk variance in the preliminary and final site plan. The
applicant of Julie Rich LLC is applicant and owner seeking use variance both variance and preliminary and final site plan approval for a demolition of an existing bank and construction of a 5,670 ft one-story convenience center and
fueling station with other site improvements and premises known as block 141 lot 646 US Route 9. This application was previous heard on May 19th, 2025,
July 28th, 2025, and September 15, 2025. Expiration October 31st, 2025. >> Good evening again. >> Thank you. Good evening. Um, so when we concluded our last hearing in September, we we had we had finished the
presentation. when the public was finished and we had asked the board not to vote because we wanted to have one last chance to discuss some of the traffic and safety issues that the public raised uh with the DOT. Um, so there I I've so we're not here to
present any new testimony, but I want to just update the board on what has happened since the last hearing and then our professionals are here if you have questions of them. But um, >> s don't mean to interrupt, but just since the last proceeding was different than this one, just put your name and um, >> Salvator Alfury, Clearary G, Kobe
Alfury, and Jacobs on behalf of the applicant. Sorry. So, uh, first as it relates to the NJ DOT, uh, our traffic engineer went to the NJ DOT and the NJ DOT felt that the design that, um, has been presented to this board is the
optimal design. So, they would not change what we had presented to you. One thing that did develop is that there's this new technology um and I'm just going to read briefly what it is, but it's a um it's a state-of-the-art they call it a jersey
extension which isn't a a AI related technology which scans 360 degrees and um picks up whether there's pedestrians or anything and it helps with the traffic signals during that time frame. It's brand new technology. Uh, my client
did the engineer did send it to Charlie and I'm sure he just got it today or Friday. So, he I don't know how well verssed he is on it yet. But the my client did the engineer did speak to the NJ DOT and the NJ DOT said that they would allow the installation of that
technology at this intersection as well. It's about a $50,000 expense that my client would absorb um in addition to all the other improvements which will which they're going to make which I'll summarize when we get to our summation but that's something that we would
stipulate as a condition of approval that we would install that technology as well. Um, in addition, um, in reviewing my notes from the last hearing, we indicated that there would be a bread delivery at the front door with a box
truck, and we said 3:00 a.m., but it's not, it may not be 3:00 a.m., it might be 2 a.m., it might be 4:00 a.m., but there'll be one there'll be a bread delivery off hours, front door, no idling, box truck. My summary just said 3:00 a.m.
Lastly, so I just want to clarify the time is it could it could fl it could fluctuate. The last thing is we discussed the fuel trucks. the fuel trucks. Um, at the time we said it would not occur between 10 p
1000 p.m. and 7 a.m. In discussing it with quick check corporate, there are occasions where there will be fuel truck deliver, pardon me, fuel truck deliveries during those hours. But we want to point out to the board that
number one, it's at the front of the property, nowhere near the residence. So it would be between the building and Route 9. Number two, the during the fueling, the trucks do not idle. And number three, there's no pump. It's a it's a different system. Well, you it's
a system that's used for all the trucks, but it's not a pump, so it doesn't make any noise. So, those are the clarifications from the last meeting. >> And sir, what was those what was that time again? >> Well, it it'll it'll occur off hours. So, it it could be the what we said on the record was we would not do it
between 1000 p.m. and 7 a.m. >> Would not do >> would not. But now there will be occasions where that could happen because the trucks when they come and make deliveries, they do it through the region and sometimes it happens at different hours
>> on occasion. I mean, what are we what are we talking about? >> There's no way of not >> I like I don't like that word on occasion. It's like a very open-ended. >> Yeah, it could happen. We're proposing no limitation because it can happen. It can happen. We talked about the >> they it we cannot control it and o by
the way the other gas stations along the route nine corridor it's the same scenario I mean they will come when the delivery is available what I think is being represented is
that the tanks are in the front up against Route 9. There's a building. There's additional area. There's a burm. there's buffering. So I I hate to say it this way. You buy a piece of property that backs up to
commercial property fronting on Route 9. There could potentially be activity in the morning that or all hours. We don't have restrictions. By the way, you could go to McDonald's 24 hours a day. You could go to Taco Bell 24 hours a day. So
we don't restrict that. and they attempted to comply, but they're being honest here and saying that they're going to attempt to keep the deliveries off hours, but it they can't control it.
It's a state highway. I have no issues with it at all. >> And those those filling ports usually are between the highway and the pump, the outermost area of the pump. Correct. >> Yeah.
>> Nowhere near the res. >> So, um those are the three things I wanted to clarify. So, if um if the board has questions, uh we're here to answer them. Otherwise, I'd like to do a quick summation and then ask for the vote. >> Well, I do have a question because I did
bring this up at the last meeting. Were there any other properties along Route 9 South looked at? Um, my client did not look at other properties. >> We really can't ask that. You can't ask that. >> That's they don't have to provide us
with the information on what like their request here is based upon this property. We really can't ask them what else they looked at. >> Okay. But there was another time that we had the same question and you even brought it up.
>> I agree and I got smacked about it. So, >> okay. I don't want to get smacked either. So, >> no. Right. So, we can't we can't ask that. >> But yes, but just to allay concerns, the key to these gas stations is intersections, right? So, and there's very few intersections heading south
that they felt would be adequate for this type of use. So, that's why they didn't look since the last meeting or before. >> Okay. S I think we spoke about um the the fuel truck deliveries only coming in through the entrance on nine.
>> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Box trucks or that other soda bread and everything are they they they will maybe come in off of um Strickland or everything's coming in off of nine.
>> Everything's off nine. >> Okay. So that's going to be a condition of approval. >> Yeah. I have a summation which has all of that so that the board would understand what we had agreed to and what the benefits we believe are to this application. But that's one of them. >> So your submission is going to have
everything we've talked about as far as conditions of approval. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Okay. Uh professionals anything >> or we let's go to summation. Go ahead. >> Thank you. So we had uh two public hearings. We heard from the board
professionals, the board members, and the members of the public. We've attempted to address everything um that was raised during the course of the testimony. Uh we have we did work with Charlie specifically relating to storm water management, the buffering and the
the intersection improvements, if you will. Um we agreed to address all of the comments that cont that um were contained in the board professional reports. We understand that this is not a permitted use in the zone, but there
are permitted uses that will be potentially far more impactful on the neighborhoods, not on the neighbors. Um, fast food restaurants primarily and also health clubs. Uh, we have a vacant building on Route 9 that was a bank. That bank is never going to reopen. So
there will be and that intersection is primed for some heavy traffic commercial development whether it be this business or a Chick-fil-A or something else. They that's what's going to go on that corner. Um the if it were a Chick-fil-A
or a other permitted use, the design would essentially be exactly the same. We will still have that 50-ft BM in the back. We'll still have the storm water management where it is. It's really just a function of what the use is because the design is such that that's what that corner is going to have regardless of
the use. Um the traffic improvements, which I'm going to get to in a moment, are pretty significant. If we were to go to the planning board for Chick-fil-A, for example, um my client would not be required to do some of the things that
they've agreed to do, such as install that that feature, that technology feature that I just talked about. We agreed to install 600 foot of sidewalk along Route 9. That's something that the planning board can't compel. The planning board cannot compel off-site improvements, only on-site improvements.
Zoning board, of course, is different. You have more powers and and we've agreed, and again, I'll get into what they are in a moment, but we've agreed to make infra off-site improvements that would not necessarily be done at the planning board level. So, you can't lose sight of the fact that there are
benefits coming if this were built that might not otherwise be um be constructed or installed. >> And S, where was the 600 ft of sidewalk again? >> The 600 ft. >> It's south. It's south of Strickland, which is not their frontage that they're
not obligated to do to connect to the sidewalk farther to the south. So, so again, if we're at the planning board, well, let me get into the the primary concern was the traffic and the safety of that intersection. So, I want to summarize the things that we've
agreed to and would be a condition of approval and specifically an NJ do permit would have to be obtained containing all of these things that we've agreed to because it affects the intersection. So, um, three things have
already been put in place as a result of our application. There's the pedestrian button, um, has been activated. >> They in the NJ do DOT installed a high quality crosswalk, >> um, already in place. And they also
installed a lead pedestrian um, interval for Route 9 crossing already in place. Um the lighting these are things new things that we would have to do through the NJ dot's approval. Lighting at the inter intersection will be upgraded in
uniform. All lefts out of Strickland's western driveway. Uh all lefts will be at the Strickland western driveway. The eastern driveway will be right in right out only. At the western drive driveway, Strickland Road will remain a two-lane street with
sufficient width to bypass a left turning vehicle in either direction. This was decided so as not to create any issues with the overlapping left turn lanes uh that the Moors Landing development uh would have. The existing left turn lane for the eastbound
Strickland Road uh traffic will be extended approximately 260 feet and will be more than three times as long as it is today from 100 to to 360. Um all tractor trailer deliveries will be limited to Route 9 access only and we'll
provide signage on site to advise the drivers. Uh we're going to install that sidewalk which we just talked about along the south of our south of our property um approximately 600 feet along Route 9. we would agree to install that
that technology that Jersey extension technologies that I described at the beginning um of the uh presentation. Um we believe as a result of all that and with the DO's involvement um and of course we would leave Charlie we keep
Charlie involved in the whole process um that this operation will operate safely and efficiently. Uh we've covered all the B variance testimony through planning and engineering. Um and because of that we would request that the board
uh act favorably and grant both the use variance and site plan approval. >> That's all. >> Okay. >> Professionals. Uh so the only thing I I'll have to add is uh they talked about the uh new technology that they're going to
implement. My general understanding of it is in a general typical crosswalk you press the actuator gives a pedestrian some lean time to walk across the intersection but that's on a on a timer that'll ultimately run out. Right. Um there's cameras that are installed that
monitor 360 degrees at the different crosswalks locations. And if a pedestrian is still in the crosswalk beyond whatever that set time is, it'll extend that until they safely cross the crosswalk. So, it is another enhancement to pedestrian safety at the intersection. You did hear them talk
about the extension of the sidewalk from uh I think the community, the senior community to the south on Route 9, which was also a pedestrian improvement. Um really, it's weighing the positives versus the negatives. you know, there is going to be regardless of any type of use here, you know, what's being proposed tonight versus other permitted
uses in the zone, there's going to be traffic associated with that. And this intersection does have some issues, especially that left turning move into Route 9, you know. Um, but there are significant pedestrian safety improvements that are coming with this application, which this applicant, you know, if this was a planning board case,
would potentially not be required to do. Um, so, you know, you have to weigh that in your consideration of this application tonight. Okay, >> board members, any questions? >> Can I ask? I'm sorry. Triggered something. If we were to install a fast
food restaurant there, um, and you look at the traffic patterns of Chick-fil-A, just a classic example, because we did I did one on Route 9 in Freehold not that long ago, and it's a major traffic generator. >> That traffic is is destination related
traffic. people are going to the quick check, I mean to the um Chick-fil-A, whereas the quick check is primarily passers by. They're heading home from work, they stop at Quick Check, fill up their tank, get something and go. So, the fast food restaurant, although it may not generate the the the num the the
number of tra trips per day that a quick check might generate. It might, but it may not. But it will have more concentrated traffic and destination traffic. people heading north on Route 9 will likely use the gas station rather than at the Exxon gas station rather
than try and make the turn and come over to QuickJack to cross nine and then get back and go back on North. So we think that from a traffic pure traffic point of view, although this is a a heavy traffic generator, every fast food restaurant will be similarly a heavy
traffic generator >> and fast food is only one permitted use at this location, >> right? and the health >> and and once it goes to the planning board as a permitted use, all the off-site traffic improvements
are off the table. They cannot evaluate off-site traffic. Here we have, it's up to you guys, but here we have an application that is proposing significant off-site traffic improvements
to the benefit of their application that will not be on the table. And let me just be very clear, we've had a number of issues here in the past several years where be careful what you wish for, right? So, like, you know,
perhaps Victory Road is kicking themselves because they could have had a solar field and now they potentially have a warehouse. Like, be careful what you wish for because when it goes to the planning board, there are definite limitations on what can or cannot be
requested from an applicant. >> So, this is a strong corner on a state highway. So, I just want you guys to really think about it because all these things that they've agreed to, the extension of the
left turning lane, the extension of the sidewalk, the reconfiguring of the signal timing, this a new technology that they're implementing goes to the planning board. Those improvements go away. So, this intersection is difficult. I
understand that and I respect it. However, it's a strong corner on a state highway. So, just think about that when you guys are considering whether or not you want this there or something else there >> because something's going to go there.
Let's be very clear. >> No, nothing's going to it's not going to sit idle. It's a It's a piece of property on a state highway in Mammoth County. Something's going to go there. So, we should consider the entirety of
the application. That's all I'm asking. And and one last thing, there's a gentleman here tonight from the public. He lives next door to the property on Strickland. He's lot two. He had requested that we uh install at the property line an 8ft high >> fence an 8ft high
>> would agree to do as >> which we will as long as it doesn't encroach in which we can approve without relief as long as it doesn't encroach into the front yard setback. So, if the board approves this, the gentleman asked at the beginning of the meeting, he I guess he did maybe wasn't at the last
meeting. We agreed that we would do that. >> Okay, >> that's good. >> It's good to hear that. >> Yeah, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, s we spoke um it was brought up the last meeting the area where the air fill and vacuum
>> was going to be moved. >> Yes. Yes. They'll be shifted um away from the intersection. >> Away from the ingress. >> The ingress. Yeah. >> Not the intersection, the drive the drive. >> Yeah. We're we're coming in off a nine.
>> Yes. And there was there every condition that we agreed to during the course of the testimony would all remain in place. But yes, we did agree to that. >> Okay. >> One one question, Mr. Chairman. So, in the previous testimony, I don't remember
hearing any estimates of how many average daily trips there would be to the quick check. >> There were and there was a traffic study submitted in your packet that you have access to that has that information was provided. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. I missed that.
>> Anybody else from the board? >> Okay. What is the pleasure of the board? Mr. Chairman, >> yeah, >> I make a motion that we approve this applicant and their application. I think that uh there are many things that quick
check people have done to help facilitate especially on the traffic on route 9 which was pre-existing prior to go there. Um they've continued conversations with DOT to make improvements and several improvements
have been or are being made. So I think that's a positive. I think the setback and the buffers are more than adequate for the residents there based on observations of other quick checks in the area and other gas stations in the area. And I believe
taking one abandoned property off of Route 9 where there are far too many is a very positive thing for the township. So I suggest that we approve this >> expense of children. >> Okay. I have a motion for by Mr. Ryan.
Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Mr. Arasco. Could I have a roll call? >> Mr. Burillo. >> I think Mr. Ryan sub summed it up pretty well. Um, the applicant
has agreed to a lot of significant traffic improvements. Um, they've met the p the positive criteria. So I am going to vote yes.
>> Mr. Caner, >> this is in front of the zoning board because the town council did not include this usage in determining this zone. Um so it's it's our decision whether or not to override what our count town council
decided. In my opinion, based on the testimony given, the negative impacts to this neighborhood and to my neighbors in this neighborhood living there do not surpass any of the positive aspects of the proposal. So, I vote no,
>> Mr. O'Donnell. Um, I'd like to say that uh every case is based on an individual case and no two cases are exactly the same. I've done three inspections up there
and I find it horrific even to make a left turn because you don't have a left turn lane and the traffic is overwhelming. The area is already outgrown. anything like they want to put in. And I'm only giving my vote based on
this particular type of case. If it were at a different location in a different area, I may consider it more favorably, but my vote is no. >> Mr. Rosekll, >> yes. >> Mr. Ryan,
>> yes. Miss Scottson. >> So, I also live in a very high density area where we have similar issues. That being said, um
that I feel like the applicant has extended more than extended what they needed to do to try to make this safe for our for children, for all residents. I really believe that. I've also been up there several times and
um it's it I I feel I understand. >> Believe me, I do. My vote is yes. and Chairman Merren, >> this is without doubt a very difficult decision for me because I
I do feel for the people that live in this uh this area because it does affect them whether we want it. We don't want it to, but unfortunately it will.
But one of the things that I heard tonight cuz I was on the I was really undecided. But one thing that I do understand and I've learned that if we do not approve this, this
will probably go to the planning board and the planning board is going to have no leverage on what is done to improve the site. And as much as I do not like seeing this location being used because I understand
it's a it's a tough intersection, but it's still going to be there regardless if we approve it or the planning board is going to approve it. But at least we have leverage on what we can do. So I will vote yes as well.
>> Application is approved. >> Thank you everyone. [Applause] I thank the people for what you do and I thank the people that voted know. You opened up a can of worms and none of you know what this new technology is. Who's
going to look into it? Who's going to oversee all Miss Jennifer? >> Rich the hearing done. >> You could talk to somebody privately if you want, but like >> I will come back every time there's a death or an accident. I promise.
>> You got to go to the post office. I think you should think of >> Okay, that's okay. >> That's enough. >> It was a tough decision for us. >> It was a very difficult decision. That's enough. >> Okay. Um, >> is there any more further business of
the board? >> I have nothing. just the next meeting is November 10th. >> Okay. I think tonight we'll hold off with the classes. Now, you had Nick, you had asked about the classes. I just want to maybe for us to take a
breather tonight because this was a little overbearing tonight as far as making a decision. So I think I would like the professionals and uh Eileen you'll get more information for us as far as doing those uh classes with uh
that we had previous >> uh yes I was told that um there is money to do it if you want to do it this year or you can do it the beginning of next year >> so we can do it next year as well. >> Yes. >> Yep. >> Okay. That's good to hear. >> Okay.
>> Seeing no our next meeting is uh Monday the 10th, right? >> Yes. Correct. Seeing no other business, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Okay. All in favor? >> Yes.