Good evening. It's 7:30. I'd like to call to order the Old Bridge Township Planning Board meeting for July 23rd, 2026. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance 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. >> Daniel Curry, please have a roll call. >> Mr. DePalma. >> Here.
>> Mr. Winning is absent. Mr. Talamo. >> Here. >> Ms. Cannon is absent. Mr. Arena. >> Here. >> Mr. Petty. >> Here. >> Ms. Micella. >> Here. >> Mr. McIsaac. >> Here. >> Mr. Brennan. >> Here. >> Mr. Ferrara. >> Here. >> And Chairman Lawyer. >> Here. >> Uh okay. Swear them in after the
>> Yes. Um Do you swear or affirm the testimony you about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Okay, thank you. First, on agenda resolutions, uh resolution 13-2025P
95 Wesley Road, Peter Simi second extension of time for minor subdivision approval. Do I have a motion? >> Move it. >> Second. >> [clears throat] >> Mr. DePalma? >> Yes. >> Mr. Talamo?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Rana? >> Yes. >> Mr. Petty? >> Yes. >> Ms. Miscela? >> Yes. >> Mr. McIsaac? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brennan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ferrara? >> Yes. >> Chairman Lawlor? >> Yes. >> Uh next uh resolution is 13-2026P Elizabeth
NJ LLC >> Move it. >> Second. >> Mr. DePalma? >> Yes. >> Mr. Talamo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rana? >> Yes. >> Mr. Petty? >> Yes. >> Ms. Miscela? Mr. McIsaac? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brennan?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Ferrara? >> Yes. >> Chairman Lawlor? >> Yes. >> [clears throat] >> Okay, next uh minutes of June 25th, 2026. >> Move it. >> Second. >> Mr. DePalma? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lenihan?
>> Here. >> Uh Mr. Talamo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rana? >> Abstain. >> Mr. Petty? >> Abstain. >> Ms. Miscela? >> Yes. >> Mr. McIsaac? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brennan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ferrara? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Lawlor? >> Yes.
>> Okay, for on applications 48-2025P 3059 E-Town LLC a major preliminary and final site plan is being adjourned to >> be September 24th. >> Yes, um Mr. Chairman, if I can just make a
official announcement, this application, if you anyone here from the public on this application for application number 48-2025P, 3059 E-Town LLC, that application is being adjourned without further notice
to the planning board's regular meeting of September 24th, 2026. So, this is your notice to come to that meeting if you wish to address or comment on that application. >> Thank you, Mr. Sadullah. Okay. Uh next application, we're going to jump
out of order here. Uh we're going to go to application 01-2026P, Homes on Back LLC, a minor subdivision, um
represented by Lawrence Sachs, Esquire. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. >> Good evening. >> It's on. Okay. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Lawrence Sachs, on behalf of the applicant, uh Homes on the Back LLC.
Uh this property is located at uh 79 Park Avenue, uh over by Route 18 and 516 in that area in that neighborhood. Um it's block 26030, lot 5.11. Uh we're here this evening requesting a
minor subdivision of an existing parcel there. The property is located in your R-7 zone. Uh this is an application that will not require any variances whatsoever, so it'll be a fully conforming uh subdivision. Um I'm going to acknowledge that I
received the report of July 23rd, 2026 from Mr. Want, and I don't believe we have any issues with that. Um we'll go over it real quickly, and I also received a report uh from Mr. Lavallo, your forester, um and again, he's made some
recommendations and some requests which we don't have any issues with either. But I do have one witness, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Dan Parker from Parker Engineering. He did prepare the plans. So, if we can have him sworn in, he'll briefly describe what's being proposed.
>> Absolutely. Will you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this evening is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Can you just state your name and spell it for the record? I'm sorry. >> Daniel Parker, d a n i e l p a r k e >> And Mr. Parker, if you can, just give
the board the benefit of your educational background and professional experience. >> I have a geoscience degree from Penn State and I've been a professional land surveyor since 1993. >> All right. And >> in New Jersey. >> And your license is in good standing? >> Yes. >> And you've testified before planning
boards and zoning boards in the past? >> Yes, I have. >> Okay. >> You're accepted. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And Mr. Parker, you actually did prepare this particular plan. So, if you want to just guide the board through exactly what's being proposed. >> Yeah. What we're proposing is a an
existing single lot to be divided into two lots, two conforming lots. It's in a established residential area, single-family dwelling. And our the current use of our lot, it appears to be like a contractor's yard
or a parking lot of some kind. There's only a garage on it. There's no dwelling on it at this time. And what we're proposing is to divide it into two lots and propose two conforming homes on the new lots.
>> All right. And in terms of the zoning requirements for this particular district, the minimum lot area is 7,500 square feet. Both of the lots will have 7,500 square feet. >> Yes. >> All right. And the minimum lot width is 70 feet and both lots will have 75 feet
of width. >> Correct. >> And in terms of uh uh minimum front yard setback, 25 ft is required. You'll conform with those requirements. >> Yes. >> Uh the minimum side yard setback is 10 ft. You'll have that for both for all of
the uh all of both lots. >> Correct. 10 on one, 25 total. >> Okay. And in fact, just there was a I think a an error maybe on the plans, just a scrivener's error, but uh I think we had indicated that it was 10 and 10. It will have to be 12 and 1/2
ft and 12 and 1/2 ft. And this way it'll combine it'll satisfy the 25-ft combined side yard setback minimum. Um, in terms of the rear yard setback, 25 ft is required and we'll comply with that as well. >> Yes. >> All right. And um
in terms of uh the landscape area ratio and the minimum floor area ratio, uh the house that's proposed to be built here will comply with that as well. >> Correct. >> So, we will not seek any additional relief for that. Okay. Um, and in terms of the report from uh Miss
Suwan, uh there's a couple recommendations. Let me just go over them real quickly with you. Um First of all, we're going to file this subdivision by deed, I assume? >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh secondly, I think that uh there's a there's a
request that uh the meets and bounds be uh uh revised uh carried out to the second interval. Uh you can comply with that as well? >> Yes. >> Uh the bearings to be provided for the proposed subdivision line, you can comply with that? >> Yes. >> All right. Uh
Zoning schedule on sheet two of three, you'll revise that to indicate what the appropriate combined side yard Yes. All right. Um And um I can indicate for the record uh that we will comply with whatever the pavement repair detail and concrete
driveway uh apron detail and we'll make sure that that's on the plan. Uh we'll apply for a road opening permit. We'll provide you with the grading plan, a soil plan. You'll also, Mr. Parker, can you add the dimensions of the proposed driveway onto these uh
>> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Chairman, I don't have any other concerns regarding Ms. Suwan's report. And as to Mr. Lovallo's report, um He's requested obviously that we comply with any tree removal permit. Uh there's
very few trees on this site. It's pretty a pretty open lot, but uh whatever Mr. Lovallo is uh concerned about will uh will address in his memo. So. Um anything else, Mr. Parker? >> Uh no. >> Okay. Mr. Chairman, I don't have anything
else. >> Okay. Uh Vina. >> Uh I don't know if I missed that, but with the floor area ratio, do you agree that you will comply with the zone standards and the house will be built within because if not, you'll have to go to the zoning board for a D4.
Um I think and then there was one inconsistency between the architectural plan and the grading plan with the uh patio versus deck. Um I believe the architecturals show a centrally located
deck area. And I uh I just want you to testify whether it's a patio or a deck that you're proposing. >> it's a deck that's being proposed, a small deck. >> Okay. Perfect. Uh the deck complies with the setback requirements, so no variance will be required uh for that. And that's
pretty much it. I think you have agreed to comply with every of the other comments that was in here. So, should the board act favorably, you will have to submit the plans to my office for compliance review, and we'll take it from there.
>> That's That's acceptable. >> I have no further questions. >> Okay. Thank [clears throat] you. Uh Eric. >> So, the the adjacent property like on Austin Avenue right behind you guys, the subdivision, are you doing the exact
same subdivision? You guys kind of split it? >> Yeah, it's it's I pretty much Yeah, and I actually observed that when I went out there. It's pretty much a mirror image of that. >> Okay, so we're just cutting it in half and it's really going to mirror those two houses that are right behind >> Thank you.
Any questions to my left? Okay. I do have one question and I know it's out of our jurisdiction, but I I noticed on the plan that you have two services tied into one. I I
I didn't think that was uh correct. I I mean, I know it's under the OBMUA's. Uh but uh >> I mean, we'll we'll comply with whatever they require us to do. >> Okay. >> Um you know, sometimes what we we've
done in the past is like a regular um dwelling service to the point where it goes into the the sewer and then in that area have like a larger pipe to compensate for the uh you know, the two the two dwellings. But, we'll comply with whatever they require. >> Okay. Thank you.
Okay. Uh I'd like to open it up to the public. Seeing no hands, I close the uh public portion. Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, a vote uh in favor of this application would be granting the subdivision application as
presented. Uh and the only specific the only conditions would be the standard conditions including the compliance with the uh the the con- conservation officer's report and the uh planner and engineer's report as was testified before the board.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh Do I have a a motion? >> Move it. Second. >> Mr. DePalma? >> Yes. >> Mr. Talama? >> Yes. >> Mr. Arena? >> Yes. >> Mr. Pedi? >> Yes. >> Ms. Masella?
>> Yes. >> Mr. McIsaac? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brennan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ferrara? >> Yes. >> And Chairman LaRue? >> Yes. >> Mr. Chairman, always a pleasure. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good evening. >> Have a good evening. >> Okay, next on the agenda is 60-2025P
1 3 5 Michelle Avenue, a minor subdivision with a C variance, represented by Dante Alfere Alferi. Good evening. >> Good evening, Chairman, members of the board. Dante Alferi on behalf of the
applicant. We are here with regards to 1 3 and 5 Michelle. It's block 4185 lots 31, 32, 33 and lot 20.12. Um just a little background as it
relates to this application. Um my clients, they purchased the rear property many years ago um together. Um these are existing single family home lots and there's this [snorts] vacant lot in the back that my clients purchased. One
of my clients um last year sold their lot and through the process they said, "Well, we have to chop up this back lot so it can form so it can so we can connect it with our existing lots." So, that's what brings us here tonight. What we're looking to do is simply adjust the
lot lines from the three existing lots and then that back lot to now just be three existing lots with that back lot back lot removed. I do have one individual to provide testimony tonight, Mr. Heiser, who is a licensed surveyor and planner.
Um we did receive Ms. Swantz's review letter dated July 22nd, 2026 and we have no issue with complying with any of her comments or recommendations. Um without further ado, I'll have Mr. Heiser sworn in and just testify. >> Thank you.
>> Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this evening is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Could you please just state your name and spell it for the record? >> Yeah, Bruce Heiser, B R U C E H E U S E R. >> Thank you. Mr. Heiser, can you please provide your credentials for the board?
>> Sure, I've been a licensed land surveyor in New Jersey since 1991, a licensed professional planner since 1992. Um Bachelor of [clears throat] Science degree in Civil Engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology. >> And your licenses are current? >> Yes, they are. >> And you've you've presented in front of planning and zoning boards?
>> Yes. >> They're accepted. >> Thank you. >> Uh so, Mr. Heiser, you heard my introduction. If you could just orient the board to the site itself and to describe what what the existing lot lines are and what we're proposing today. >> Okay, well, there's there's three houses, number house number one, number
three, and number five, and they're all fronting on Michelle Avenue. Uh basically, we're we're going to extend the property lines back towards Steamboat Landing Road, but not quite to it. And the current backyards are all fenced in. Uh so that
each lot will get the property behind it. >> And the roadway that you you noted, Steamboat, is that a paper road or is that an existing >> Portion back there is a paper street. It's unimproved. It's un- unopened and unimproved, basically. >> And what's behind that? >> Uh Cheesequake State Park. >> Okay.
And I already noted, but you've reviewed uh Ms. Swantz's letter. Were there any conditions or comments in there that you had any issue with? >> No, we can meet the you know, we can make all the required changes as, you know, indicated on the uh in the report. >> And we're going to propose to uh perfect
the subdivision via deed. Nothing further at this time. >> Okay. Uh Bina. >> So, um board members, you will notice that there are uh couple of um bulk variances
that are uh triggered with this um subdivision, but they are technical in nature. They are existing conditions. Um the reason and actually I have spent so much time on this application, Dante is
aware, only because there is a tiny strip a 1-ft strip of land behind the the back lot. And it took us a long time to figure out what that strip was.
Uh there was so much back and forth, but guess what? That strip of land belongs to the neighboring lot, which is owned by NJDP and it's on the state's uh Green Acres program. And what the state did is when
they subdivided, so this this lot 20, which abuts these three parcels, 20.12, which abuts these three parcels, and then on to the left is lot 20.11.
This entire thing, 20.11, 20.12, were part of one lot, lot 20, which was um taken over at some point by NJDP, handed over to Green Acres, and is on their state Rossi. But when they did so,
they subdivided it. 20.12 was sold to these three owners, but they probably wanted to have access to the Green Acres parcel. So, they left the one's one foot strip in between the
right of way and this land because more than often if the township decides to vacate the roadway, then that would be offered to these owners and DEP would not have access to their parcel. So, to avoid that, they kept the one foot
strip. But boy, it took me so long to figure that out because there was a monument placed on that small juncture where the strip meets the parent lot and it was very hard to figure that out. We
went through deeds, I went through uh houses office. It was It was It took me much more time than what I thought anticipated. But long story short, I just wanted to give you a brief background. Um although there are a bunch of variances, those variances are all existing
conditions. There is nothing new proposed. They have been using the backyards because it was in common ownership. So, nothing really changes. And um Dante, you agreed to meet with any conditions. I think most of them
bulk variances are facts, right? >> Correct. >> And uh you will have the map filed based on map filing law, right? You're filing it by deed. >> We're going to file via deed. >> But I would still need a plat for my office.
>> plat with with the notes and all of the >> With the deeds, yeah. And um I think everything else is just um minor clarification on your plans, so >> And Vinnie, just for the record, um as
the board planner, you find that there's justification to grant these variances based on the background and explanation that you just provided. >> Yes, that is true. >> Thank you. >> Does not have any detriment to the public no negative impacts. Uh all I think there's one request that
that juncture where you have the monument which covers that opening between the sliver, we just want a zoomed-in image uh so that it clarifies. Because none of the older deeds have that information. >> We have no objection. >> Um I don't have any further questions.
>> Okay, thank you. >> You would have to submit it for compliance review and then we take it from there. >> Yes. Eric? >> So the the only I guess question or comment I have is so in essence what we're doing is we're taking that back lot that is
shared between the three, cutting it into thirds, and really just making the existing three lots larger for everybody else. So nothing no new buildings, no new nothing. It's literally just now from a from a deed perspective, lot one is 20
ft wider, lot two is 15, lot three is 10. >> That's correct. >> Okay. [laughter] All right, thank you. >> No, the only question I have is it appears the center lot the there's a structure that's beyond
the line already. So am I looking at this accurately? >> Yeah, so so the the three there's the three existing single-family lots and then there's the common ownership lot in the back. So they were using it as their own space anyway.
Um we're just removing that imaginary line now. It's essentially what it is. So we're not >> up a structure >> in that lot which is they they've owned that lot. >> Right. All right. I guess that goes the same for the lot on the right side. >> Yeah, and they all owned it in common the back lot was owned in common
ownership and what triggered this whole application was one of the one of the property owners was selling, so this was their opportunity to clean it up. >> All right. Thank you for that. >> Okay, thank you. Uh any questions to my left?
Go ahead, Ed. >> I just like to say that the that was a no man's land back there pretty much and the young lady who bought it cleaned it up. Uh got a dumpster and cleaned that whole area up and has become a
a nice area now. It's part of that park, so I think she did a great job. She happens to be sitting right there. >> [laughter] >> Okay. >> is. I moved to Purchase Street for my parents, so that block is right into my whole family lives there. My brother
lives there. Mary Ann is my cousin. >> Okay, thank you. Any other question? Well, I just like to go on record to say that uh I hope that Steamboat Landing never gets vacated uh because uh I believe it's the only,
even though it's blocked off, it's still the only public access to tidal water in the whole township. So, that's just my little comment. Okay. >> You can still walk there.
>> You can still walk there, that's right. Uh okay, let me open up to the public. See no hands, so close the public. Um >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, a vote in favor of this application would be granting the
uh minor subdivision application as presented by the applicant as well as granting the uh variances that are um identified in the planner's report and then testified to in support of by our uh board planner uh and the uh there was
no other uh specific conditions of approval other than our standard conditions of approval including compliance with the board's uh professionals reports. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sedillo. Uh okay, we're looking for a a motion. >> I'll make the motion.
>> Okay, thank you. >> Mr. Obama? >> Yes. >> Mr. Talamo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Arena? >> Yes. >> Mr. Pettey? >> Yes. >> Ms. Masella? >> Yes. >> Mr. McIsaac? >> Yes. >> Mr. Brennan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ferrara? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Lawler? >> Yes. >> Thank you, Chairman.
>> Thank you, Board. We appreciate your time tonight. >> Good evening. Okay. There's no further business. We're looking for a motion to adjourn. >> I'll move it. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye.
>> Aye. >> Mhm.