I'd like to call the meeting to order. Would everyone please rise for a salute to the flag? Pledge >> allegiance to the flag of our standsy and justice. >> Please be seated. Welcome everyone.
Township of Albridge zoning board of adjustment, April 30, 2026. Adequate notice of this meeting of the Oldbridge Township uh zoning board of adjustment has been provided in accordance with the open public meetings act at least 48 hours
prior to announcing the commencement of this meeting by prominently posting in the municipal complex an announcement giving the time, the date, the location, the agenda of this meeting. also by mailing such announcement to the Home News and Tribune, filing a copy of such announcement with the municipal clerk, posting the agenda on the municipal
website. Emily, could we have a roll call, please? >> Miss Anders, >> present. >> Miss Gomez, >> here. >> Mr. Iso, >> here. >> Mr. Scogn absent. Miss Vanelli >> here.
>> Mr. Singh absent. Miss Fernbach >> here. and chairman Sullivan >> here. This meeting is being televised uh on CATV15 here in the township. Uh simultaneously, it goes out over YouTube live. Ever need to refer back to a
meeting and find those meetings on YouTube. I would ask anybody testifying before the board, please speak directly into the microphone. These are directional microphones, so in order for them to pick up, uh you have to be fairly close and in line with it. So, I would appreciate if you would do that.
Uh we have a curfew. I don't think we're going to reach that tonight. But should we stop all testimony by 10 allowing the last 15 allowing the last 30 minutes any public comment. All right. Having said that, I'm going to move forward. Uh board members, uh we
have on item number three is the minutes. Minutes of April 16th, 2026. Hopefully everyone has a chance to review them. Any comments? I would ask someone to move for adoption. >> Move it. Andrews. >> Second. >> Roll poll, please. >> Miss Andrews,
>> yes. >> Miss Gomez, >> yes. >> Mr. Iso, >> yes. >> Miss Spinelli, >> yes. >> Miss Fernbach, >> Chairman Sullivan, >> yes. Uh, item four is resolutions. We have one this evening. It's 35-2025Z.
Councelor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. This is a resolution granting the property owner a D4 density variance where 0.25 is proposed, but 2.21 21 was required as well as a front yard setback for the proposed reconstruction of the residence.
>> Board members, you've heard the resolution, so we'll move for adoption, please. >> Is there a second? >> Second. Second. Roll call, please. >> Miss Andrews, >> yes. >> Miss Gomez, >> yes. >> Mr. Oo, >> yes. >> Miss Benelli, >> yes.
>> Miss Fernbach. Chairman Sen. >> Yes. Uh our next item be squaring in for of the professionals for those who might be watching at home or those here in the courtroom. Seated to my right, your left as you would look at the day is our attorney Pat Var from Dasty McGucken. He
represents us on board issues. Please swear in our professional this >> gonna move right forward to the applications. We're going to take them in order as the this evening. I will just make one announcement in case anybody is here. Uh
the third one listed on our agenda 63-2025Z. That's Sophia's Takaria located 3030 Highway 9 South in Oldbridge for painted signage. That application is seeking approval for existing painted signs
located in the residential located on the resident restaurant. The application has been adjourned. The public hearing will be on this of May 7th, 2026 without further notice. You hear on that
matter, it's not going to be heard this evening. We will start uh with 47-2024Z. It's Bergen Concept Concepts LLC. This is located 801 zone block 1300 lot 9.12.
Physical location 3699 Route 9. Uh this is for a uh LED billboard. They're seeking major preliminary final sight plan with Dvarian. Jason Tuvel Esquire representing the app. Mr. Tvel.
>> Uh Jason Tuvel, attorney uh for the applicant. Um I believe this is our third um official public hearing on this matter. So, as the board recalls, um, you've heard from our operations person, you've heard from our civil traffic engineer, you've heard from our lighting
consultant, and now it's up to the professional planner who's our last witness. So, as the board recalls during the course of uh this proceeding, um we've made some changes to the application um just to refresh everybody's memory um in working with your um planning staff. So, we've
reduced the size of the billboard by approximately 33% from 1,000 square ft to 6672 ft. 1,000 square feet is what's permitted in the zone in which billboards are allowed. So, we've reduced it by 33%.
The height of the uh billboard has been reduced from um by 10 ft. Uh we've also eliminated, which is something the board had really focused on at the first meeting, the large lucil sign so that there's not two large pylon signs on the property and we've replaced it with a
small much smaller, more attractive, modern um uh lucil just uh freestanding sign um at the property. In addition, just again refreshing everybody's memory because I know these meetings sometimes blend in together. We've also agreed to
all the operational characteristics that are set forth in the board planner's memo. The um the messaging in terms of timing and how often it would change would be subject to what uh the board uh planner had indicated in her letter. Uh we would shut off the uh billboard at 11
p.m. Um as s also recommended in the um in the letter. We have our DOT state approval for this uh billboard. So, we've met all the DOT, New Jersey State Department of Transportation requirements for it. So, I just wanted
everybody to be aware that um you know, that's kind of where we are at this point. So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I'd be happy to call our final witness, um John Mcdana, uh who's our professional planner. >> Appreciate your right hand. Do you swear affirm tell you got >> Please state your name and bury your
last for the record. >> Everyone capital n Back to you, counselor. >> Thank you. Before I I I qualify Mr. Mcdana, do how many board members do we have? And is everybody read or been at
all the meetings? Just to before we get started, I just want to make sure we >> Everybody has. >> Yes. >> So, we have six or seven? >> We have six. >> Okay. All right. We'll we'll we'll proceed and see how we how we feel. All right. So, John, let's qualify you for
the record. Can you go through your uh qualifications as a professional planner for the board, licenses held, educational background, and whether it's current and good standing? >> Sure thing. Hi there again, everyone. Um my license is in professional planning on the state level. It's current. It's
in good standing. Um I'm also certified on a national level, AICP. Um also current and in good standing. And this is what I do on a nightly basis throughout New Jersey. Um, I've testified in all of the towns that that border you from East Brunswick, Seville,
Madawan, Aberdine, Monroe, Manipin, and I've testified here multiple times. >> We appreciate that, sir. And particularly for those who may be watching at home, but we don't understand when experts come up. We will certainly accept his expertise. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Okay,
so John, let's get started. Um, I guess before we get into the actual proofs or justifications, the board had asked at the last meeting before we came back, uh, we did provide our lighting analysis from our lighting consultant, but they
asked us to go do a light reader at the site and get some readings there to just confirm um, what had been testified to at least as to the gas station itself. So, can you speak to that as well as just remind everyone that the the actual
Lucille sign has been removed, the large one, and where it's been relocated on the property? >> So, in terms of the uh light meter readings, we did go out to the site. Your planner asked a very good question because we're talking about the light intensity increase. Interesting. The
lights are flickering as I'm as I'm speaking. Um, we measured >> That's a good thing. We measured where where when the lights were not flickering on the site and the light readings are very very low. Um the readings were generally in the range of
0.3 foot candles and you've heard our um lighting expert talk about the billboard being 0.3 above ambient. So even with the cumulative effect of what's out there now and what's proposed will still be in that 0.5 0.6 six range uh which is
well below uh or well within acceptable standards for a for a site plan uh application. Um I have a light meter on my phone and it's registering about 10 or so in here 10.0. We're magnitudes below that at 0.5 um on the site at at
nighttime. So it just gives you a little bit of a benchmark to show that from an illumination standpoint, from a lighting level standpoint, this land use at this location is not going to have a substantially adverse impact. >> All right. So now, why don't we just >> the sign? >> Yep.
>> Okay. So I believe on the plans that were submitted to the board and there was some testimony in this regard last time reminding the board that you've got that big gold post sign for Luke Oil that's out there now that is going away as part of the application. Uh there's
going to be a reduction of that. It's more of a monument type monument type sign or an upright type sign much more in keeping with the theme of what you would like to see along the corridor. So that's a drastic improvement as part of the application as well. The plan had
proposed that sign at the corner um on closer look based on sight specific conditions because there are trees that would block the visibility of that sign. We're moving the sign more to the middle of the site where we have a I I can refer to my exhibits in a second, but
more to the middle of the site in between those uh those two driveways where you won't have the trees that would impact the visibility. So, just a better >> I'm sorry. >> I don't have a I don't have a laser, but I can tell you just to point to you
where it would go. Um and I'll refer to the record. I I might as well enter this and aerial vote. >> Yeah, here we go. Thank you very much. >> And just for the record, this is an aerial photograph of the subject property. Um, this is sheet three of a
packet that I'm going to show you, but uh the proposed sign is now going to be relocated to between the two driveways. It was last time shown uh being closer to the intersection, but we've got the obstruction of trees which would block
that visibility. So, we think it's a safer alternative from a visibility standpoint to relocate that sign. And you can see here the current Luke Oil sign, that lollipop sign, I'm sorry, that goalpost sign uh is going away. Uh
clearly outdated and in contrast to uh the vision for the corridor. So, this is going to be much more in keeping and locating it again at a much more reasonable location than was where it was proposed last time. Right. Great. >> Where are you going further?
You're saying it's going into the middle. >> That's correct. >> The north the other section right next to the >> wasn't wasn't >> No. So at the last meeting, if you
remember, we the applicant proposed it at the inter close to the intersection of Spring Valley and Route 9 and >> not the Luke oil sign. the L oil signs coming down back down Springfield Road. The actual sign
the billboard was supposed to be on the back. >> That's correct. The billboard sign >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry. The billboard sign what you were saying. I'm sorry. >> No, he's sort of You're talking about the Luke Wells. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> That was supposed to go down near Spring Hill Road.
>> That's correct. near the intersection, but it's not it's it's not going there because of obstructions that would in visibility. >> And actually, when we were here the last time speaking about the Luke Oil sign, sorry, not not the billboard. Um, one of
the board members had indicated that because there was a a signal there, you know, is not the best place to put it as well. So, we decided to flip it over to there >> and it's going to be back far enough from the road exits. Yes, >> it's way it's way back. It's actually
close to the point of >> the point of that grass area because the right of way occupies a significant portion >> which I'll go. >> Yeah, you have this. You have this up here. We could just put it up on the screen. >> Yeah, why don't you go through with your testimony?
>> We can come back to that's a that's a piece of the puzzle here. So, we'll we'll come back to that piece. >> Thank you. So um you want me to start Jason? So the applicant is asking the board to move on use relief. We've got some other interrelated relief here. And I'm going
to start in terms of the justification and my planning evaluation with the land. Uh this is a land use board, a land planning board. And so all our considerations start with the the physical characteristics of the land itself. We always look at site conditions. We always look at site
context um as a basis for the variance relief. And what I've done um is enter or about to enter at a six page exhibit, a six slide exhibit, which is going to start with a very broad view and gradually start to zoom you into the property just to give you a better sense
of where this site lays in the context of your community and the characteristics of the site that I believe lended very well to the use that's before the board. So, I have it on the screen, but I also have little handouts so you don't have to crane your necks if that's easier.
So I'll keep going. >> Yeah. >> All right. So while while we're looking at this and do I mark this, Mr. Chairman, A1 for the record, >> we have my notes have two exhibits. Are you >> okay? So A3 for the record again is
going to be a six part or six slide exhibit. And I might as well go through it as it's getting handed out. You will see on the first sheet very broad top down is a map of your community. And you can see
in red we've outlined the municipal boundary and the subject site. You can see that uh your municipality as you well know is bisected by a number of arterial roadways. The most notable of which are
Route Nine and Route 18. Um, this site, which I put a little flag on there, 3699US9, um, happens to be at the junction of those two roadways. So, we're certainly at a a node from a transportation standpoint. This is a land use that by
its nature hugs the highways and we happen to be here at the junction of your two main arteries. So in terms of site suitability, I think that's certainly something that we're going to look at is distinguishing this site from other sites, which is really one of the basis that you would look at from a
variance standpoint. So clearly a distinct site by virtue of its location along not one but two transportation arteries and and at the junction of both. Next, we look at the physical characteristics of the land. And you can
see that not only are we at the junction of these two roadways, but we're also within a large, and this is sheet number two of A3, we're in the middle of a very large and vast nonresidential district that has manifested here, which
is also important as well. One of the concerns we may have with this land use is that the sign will shine in people's homes or or um create a visual nuisance to those homes. There are no homes within eyesot of this as is clearly evident from this satellite image that
you see here. To the north we've got again a wide swath of commercial or non-residential uses. To the south you you have uh woodlands. So again we're looking at a well suited site in terms of its context and the transportation uh
network that we're following. Sheet number three on a number A3 is what we just looked at. It's a view of the subject site and the physical characteristic of the site. Again, at a signalized intersection, um you do see three grass patches in the front of the
property, which are largely right-of-way land. So, the sign is going to be set back so that it's not within the right of way. And in that general location of where you see the Lucille uh goalpost sign, you get a sense of how that Luke Oil sign again may be dated in its
appearance. and we're going with a much more contemporary version which I think is a comment that came from from the board at the first meeting was a very good comment and anytime we have an opportunity for site betterment uh that's a good thing as well from a planning standpoint. It's commercial
artery as you can see from here. Multiple lanes. You've got an established auto service use or motor service use along the roadway as well. And that's where this site is going to be this sign is going to be located. A retrofit of an established site. Neither
use will interfere with the other use and actually a perfect fit from a physical planning standpoint. Sheet number four just gives you a sense of the vast woodlands uh that are uh to the south of the site, the intersection that
we're at, and also the characteristic of that existing Lucille sign. Sheet number five is we've actually these next two views are views of where the board would hang, I'll say, at 55 ft. We went to the location of where the
board would be and looked out. So, you sort of get a reverse view. And looking at both sheets five and six, you can see that there are no residential homes within eyesot. So if you can't see the windows of homes, homes from their windows can't see this board as well. So
I think our applicant has done a really good job here of picking out a location where this use can service its purpose. It certainly is a useful land use, and we'll get to those positives in a second, but also a very nice uh infill or retrofit of an established site. And
same thing for sheet number six on A3. again showing the surrounding context and how it's a very innocuous location from that standpoint. >> Keep going. Yep. Okay. So, just some of the key summary uh facts of the application. It's a single tax lot 1300,
lot 9.12. It's about a half acre, 25,012 square feet. You've got that developed Luke Oil Station with the Mini Mart. In terms of the surrounding area, again, you've heard all of this. This is just a a recap. We're at the junction of Route 9 and Spring Valley Road. We're
surrounded by commercial uses on all sides. We've got Mavis Auto Repair. We've got All American Ford Auto dealership. You've got the Renaissance Plaza retail center. You've got an equipment rental center, industrial flex
uses, you've got Route 18, and then you've got those vast woodlands beyond. The proposal before you has evolved. This is meant to be an interactive process. That's what our Supreme Court envisions and that came out of the uh
Medici case. I'm sorry, not the Medici case, the Piso Man case. I should know I live that case. Um this plan has evolved. We're still looking for construction of a monopole billboard with two multimessage LED display panels in a V-shaped
configuration. So, it is a single sign with with two panels. In terms of the key changes, the billboard has been reduced in area by 33% from where we started. We were at 1,000 square ft. We're now down to 672 square ft. The
billboard has been reduced in height by 15%. We were at 65 ft. We're down to 55 ft. We'll go through that rationale as well. The existing Luke Oil pylon sign is proposed to be removed and replaced with that monument sign. And that monument
sign is going to be much lower in height than the pylon sign. In fact, a 41.5% reduction from 27.9 ft to 16.3 feet. Those are the key facts of the application. From a zoning standpoint,
we're here in your ED1 zone district. That's your economic development opportunity district which we know is commerceoriented. This is a commerceoriented use. There are a wide variety of uses here and the stated purpose in quotes in your uh your
ordinance is to stimulate economic development which is exactly what this land use does. There are 21 categories of permitted principal uses and another five categories of permitted conditional uses. The relief here is really two
buckets. You've got the the D relief where we have use relief for billboards not being permitted in the EDO1 zone. It is a conditional use in your CC, your SD1 and your OG zones, but those don't
zones don't necessarily have the massing that we have here in terms of the overall width of this particular area. If required, we have D1 use relief to have two uses, two principal uses on one property, gas station and the the
billboard or the outdoor advertising sign as being separate and distinct. Also in that bucket of D relief, inherent to the nature of the use is the height relief where the maximum allowed in this zone is 35 ft. The applicant is
asking the board to move on 55 feet, taking it down from the 65. We need a certain level of height for visibility and readability purposes and we'll get to that as we go through the D6 proofs. >> And John, I know I know there's C variances that are subsumed with the
application, but can you just explain I guess kind of getting into the special reasons first under Medici like what aspects of a billboard and case law on this promote the general welfare and purposes of the means of land use law?
>> Sure. Um there are certainly uh public benefits to this land use. I think you can say that basically about every land use. Um but certainly this land use has been recognized as a form of constitutional free speech. We've got some case law in that in that regard in
the Bell versus Stafford case. Um suffice it to say a billboard is another word for a message board. It's a form of communication. Any way that people can talk to each other or communicate with each other is a good thing from a planning standpoint. Uh the specific
users or beneficiaries of this land use will certainly be the the motoring public that gets information on the driveby. uh the use promotes businesses and these are the companies that we work for, companies that we work with or the companies that we put our nest eggs in
or are uh again our our investment companies that companies that we want to see succeed. So uh those are all business benefits which is certainly recognized by our state regulations as well uh being that
this land use is recognized as a form of stimulating economic development. The use also promotes institutional uses and these uses would be inherently beneficial uses. I'm not saying the use itself is inherently beneficial but it's
certainly an arm of inherently beneficial uses. That would be uh your schools. We see ruters and other higher education advertise or or promote messaging on these signs. Healthc care institutions, hospitals and the like and
religious institutions as well all use this tool to communicate with people. Uh the project also can provide public service announcements or PSAs as you heard through the operational testimony at the very first hearing. And then the
real nice benefit of this land use as it has certainly evolved from paint on a rock to uh painted stickers on a sign. Uh certainly now we've got through innovation and then technology assigned that can multi- message or change giving
real time alerts, real-time benefits that benefits our state police um emergency alerts, emergency services, Amber alerts and and the like fugitive alerts all in in the real time, which is certainly something that gets out to the
public and the motoring public uh that this land use may not have been able to do in the past. and and as part of that testimony was from the applicant at the first meeting and I know that was a while ago but just to refresh everybody's memory that the applicant works with the municipality with the county with nonprofits to get their
messages up there because they're because of the digital aspect of it and the the amount of room on it they work with those and for the most part allow them to to um advertise for on a philanthropic basis. Correct. >> That is certainly correct. Yes. Um, I always have to take this back to the
land use law. That's what this board is is charged with. We have 18 or so purposes of zoning in the land use law at NJSA405D-2. That's the reasons why a municipality has the right to zone in the first place. And the board always needs to
look if one or more of those purposes are are being advanced. Again, under section two of the land use law, I believe the board can find four or five here, including purpose A, the promotion of the general welfare for the reasons that I just gave you as a form of
communication. Purpose G, the pro planning goal to provide for a variety of uses in appropriate locations according to the needs of all New Jersey citizens. This goes towards sort of the site suitability arguments that I just made based on the physical
characteristics of the land and the surrounding land context. Uh purpose H, the promotion of the free flow of traffic. Again, um you've heard the testimony about how this does not cause driver distraction and can actually benefit drivers with those real time
emergency uh alerts. Uh purpose I the promotion of a desirable visual environment. This is going to integrate with that which is already there. You've got the Luke Oil sign which is going to be a sub substantial visual improvement over that which presently exists and I
think an overall nice integration with the overall property. Uh lastly, purpose M. That's a planning goal for efficient use of land. This is not a wholesale clear cutting of this site. Sometimes with billboards we see trees need to be trimmed or even cut down for visibility.
You have excellent line of sight capacity here. You can see how clear the right of way is and again I think an excellent location in terms of efficient use of land in in that regard. Also towards the positive criteria the board needs to see look at the
particular suitability of the site and how this land use fits within its context and its condition. Um again for the reasons that I just gave you conditionwise this is an easy retrofit of an existing site and also by virtue
of its context we are on a trans transportation artery and perhaps most importantly the NJ dot itself which are the stewards of of highway safety have determined that this is a quote unquote as defined in the statute permitted
location as defined by our outdoor advertising rules. So it has passed muster with the state. That doesn't give this application a free pass by any chance, but I think that gives some weight to the board's consideration as well that that concern we wouldn't be
here in front of you unless we pass that test with the state. >> And these characteristics that you that you've been describing, they're very unique to this property. >> Yes. Unique and and distinct. And also what I said before and the pictures point to it. It's a vast commercialized
area at the junction of two of the highest order roadways in the community. It's again a land use that that follows the roads. We didn't put the roads there. Um but we we go with the roads. That's what this >> presently not near any residential zones or residential uses.
>> Correct. So we flip from the positives. Now we always have to consider the negative criteria. And here I think we have good absence of negative criteria. I think it's without say functionally this is an inert land use, an innocuous
land use. There's no traffic generation. There's no noise generation. There's no waste. You need no water or sewer services here. So again, functionally inert from a land use standpoint. Uh the use is visually mitigated by the
state-of-the-art light technology that you've heard through the witness witnesses before me and that very narrow cone of vision that really focuses on the road uh not the not the surroundings. That light output would automatically adjust to ambient light
levels which means it's going to automatically dim at night. Again that's an innovation of this land use. Um the illumination foot candle levels will not exceed the light uh the ambient light levels already in the area. That was
bolstered by the light uh tests that we had done last night and just reported to the board. And then finally, again, you heard the testimony of a traffic engineer and you've got multiple studies that conclude billboards do not impair driver safety here. Uh I think the last
thing the board needs to consider with respect to the negative criteria and the public impact um would be whether one use interferes with the other. The fact that we do have dual use use here and uh for all of the reasons that have already been put forth on the record. Uh this
sign will not interfere with the ingress, the egress or circulation through the property. So suffice it to say I think that aspect of the test is met as well. um that you can have dual use here for these two uses and not have a substantially adverse impact. Um
lastly, we always have to look at your zone plan and whether this would constitute a substantial impairment to the zone plan. We know when we zone, we sort of paint with a a broad brush and when we get down to the variance level, we're painting with a much finer brush.
here based on the site specific conditions that I've given you and the context I think the board can move comfortably that grant of relief here will not be tantamount to a reszone which only your governing body has the power to do. You're certainly not
opening up a floodgate or precedent for this land use elsewhere in the zone. It is a very very distinct site. Um this will promote this uh project here will promote the master plan goal for economic development and a stable
ratable base. We are here in a commerceoriented zone. The site is commerce oriented in terms of its its use and the use is less intense and less impactful than I believe many other uses that could go here. Um, in terms of some
master plan consistency excerpts, look at your 2022 master plan. Um, I have three excerpts here. The 2011 land use plan element included recommendations for improving jobs to housing ratios.
For example, significant changes to non-residential zones and addressing needs for goods and services, for example, the EDO economic development opportunity zones. Second bullet. Current EDO zones have a purpose of encouraging the development
of businesses and non-residential uses. The land uses permitted in the EDO1 and EDO3 zone should be studied to determine whether they should be expanded to create greater flexibility and diversity that would strengthen the local economy
and benefit Oldbridge Township. And then the last bullet I have here from the master plan exerpts, review the zoning map and the land development ordinance to eliminate any redundancy amongst various zones. Some of the commercial zones within the township have the same
purpose and zoning standards as the current EDO zones. These commercial zones are generally located within areas that are similar to the EDO zones. In such instances, a zone consolidation should be considered. So I certainly
don't think that this application is in contrast to any of those goals and and helps actually advance or substantially consistent with those goals. With that said, I think that parts of the Medici test are met here for for the D1 relief. >> Right. So why don't we talk about the
the height? So we move now from Medici, our D1 case, over to the Graasso test, which is somewhat of a a lesser test that focuses more on the legislative intent behind our height controls. We have the same
positive and negative criteria to deal with here. The positives from the use, I'll just carry them all down to the height that the height is necessary here to affectuate those those public purposes. A sign that can't be seen from the road does not serve those public
benefits that I that I just gave you. The height is going to allow for proper clearance over some of those obstacles that are in the road, such as moving trucks, traffic, and the like, and then objects along the road, such as trees and power lines. We want the visibility
to to be clear to the motoring public. So, I think that folds within the positive criteria. Within the negative criteria, again, we have this Graasso test that articulated the reasons why we have height controls. And whenever we have excessive height,
we look to see if any of those Graasso purposes for height control are violated. I don't believe this land use or this application will violate any of them. Number one, the edit height is not going to block any scenic views or
create any negative shadow effects. Um, number two is the intensity of use control. The added height here is not to get extra stories on a building, which would translate to extra population density, extra parking, >> parking, water, sewer that would exceed
the carrying capacity of the land. And lastly, we are not raising this billboard up or the land up to give this height an unfair advantage over the surrounding properties by, for example, directing runoff onto other lots. So, >> John, does the the lighting testimony that was provided by the lighting
consultant and all that data also go to the negative criteria for the D6? >> Yes, it does. That that all folds in as well that this is not going to create an excessively upright condition on the ground um in terms of the height. >> That's the D6 relief. So, we've taken
care of the D1 and the D6. We've just got that bucket of C which are really subsumed within the D consideration and they're laid out well in uh in the planner's report. Um set back from route nine. We're at zero feet and that's for
the nose of the sign, not the base of the sign or the pole. Um zero feet where 30 feet would be the minimum that's required. Bearing in mind if I were to drop a scale on the plan, the effective setback because we have all that grass
area in the front is well above that 30 foot requirement. We have grass area that exceeds over 50 feet in the front at its closest point. So I think the intent is clearly met there to achieve separation from the road and from the
sign. Um, again, the sign base is at 17.1 feet from the from the rightofway line and then another 50 feet or so from the curb line or or the cartway on the highway. And >> that really all the all the setback relief is really related to the fact that the property line is so far in from
the ride of >> so far in. Yes. And you can see that again from the from the site plan. You >> use the um pointer maybe just to illustrate that. >> Yep. And it might be hard for the board to see, but the road the road uh comes
in right above the labeling of of Route 9 right ofway is another 50 ft back at the closest point at the pinch point. >> So where you would normally have your driveway like in your house at the property line of your house, the driveway to enter this site is in the right of way and then it's another 40 or
50 feet back so you can actually get to the property. >> Correct. Yes. So I think the land area achieves an effective setback that meets the planning intent. >> Is the location of the new monument sign? >> It's a really good question. We were
kicking that around. I think we'll we'll vet that before we go. The new monument sign is going to be two feet set back from the road. That may well need relief. I'm I'm going to check that with you all before I don't know the answer as I sit here right now.
>> It very well could be. Just check 52 uh 250-52 says that all freestanding signs shall be placed at at least 10 ft from the
street right ofway or 20 ft from the pavement whichever is greater. >> So it would be the 10ft standard which is a very common standard that we see. So, we're asking the board to move on a setback if I'll get the exact dimension.
>> Sorry, did >> you say 10 feet from the street? >> No, 10 feet from the right of way. >> From the right of >> and and 20 feet from the street, >> 20 feet from the pavement, whichever is greater. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, the more restrictive standard would be the the 10 feet from
from the right of way. >> And we're at I believe I'll get the number. It's about 2.2. And I think my pointer either fading or there it is. >> But again, the the sign is probably close to 60 or 70 feet back from the
street. >> Yes, it is. >> And my other question is there's an existing non impervious I'm sorry. I said my other question is there's an existing non-imperous coverage condition on the property. Does
this increase your ex your existing non-imperous coverage based off of the square footage of that sign footprint? I just want to make sure that we have all the variances covered. I don't think it will just based off how small that is, but math is hard. >> And even if it was like a few square
feet, we could probably fix that somewhere else on site to balance it out. If the board felt that that was necessary, we could probably do that. >> Up to the board. I'm just pointing things out. >> Um
John, so what is the height of the uh Lucille sign? >> That hasn't changed. It was uh I believe it was 16 feet the whole time. >> So it complies? >> Yes. >> The the new sign 16.3 >> 16 16.3. Yes.
>> And it is exactly 2.0 ft as proposed in terms of setback on setback. Um, >> assuming your notice has the catchall. >> It does. >> Okay. >> I even think if we had to move that back slightly, we probably could if the board
felt that was appropriate. >> And I'm just pointing is the microphone pick me up if I stand up. Jason. Okay. Well, I was I was going to point, but I really can't point and hold the microphone. But the only reason I'm showing the actual physical plan is
because I think Thanks. I think the um the screen may not be doing justice to all the land area that is actually between the sign or between the right of way and the road. So, that's just to help you visualize That's it.
I didn't really finish all the C's. We got through a couple of them. Yep. >> So, you've got the front set back from Route 9. Again, zero feet where 17.1 is I'm sorry, zero feet where 30 feet is required. That's to the nose of the
sign. Um then from Spring Valley Road you actually have a maximum standard of 50 feet. The sign is proposed basically where the Luke Oil sign is at 156.6 feet away. So that would fold into the
package of relief that the applicant is asking the board to move on. >> And the benefit of that is having it away from the traffic signal there. >> Correct. Furthest away from the signal. Yep. Uh there's a sideyard setback of zero feet where 25 feet would be the minimum that's required. Again, that
relates to the panel above the ground. The post itself is at 17.1 ft. Um and then finally, the rear yard setback is at 10.1 ft where 50 feet is the minimum
that's required. It is that is also to the above ground portion of the sign where 27.2 two is to the signpost itself >> and again all these setbacks would besides for the maximum one would meet or exceed the requirements if it wasn't for the right of way being so far into
the site. >> That's correct. That's correct. So there is an element of hardship here. I think it also folds into the overall balancing where the benefits of the application as a whole would uh substantially outweigh any negative impacts. And I think I'll
also throw in there to the extent it's required any existing nonconforming conditions on the property, the board thinks we need to fold that in as well. Again, none of them are being worsened by >> Yeah, nothing's being exacerbated. >> So Jason, I
>> if anything, the height of the other sign is being reduced by making the new sign for Luke Oil 16T versus over 20 feet. So I gave the board the D1 rationale, the D6 rationale and the C rationale.
In conclusion, I think that the criteria here are met. That's really what the board needs to consider as part of the application. The best under Medici and under Graaso are met. Um the seas being folded in to your consideration there. And it's a good application. It's a good
fit. The land use does serve a good community and and public purpose. And really the the lack of negatives here I think warrant the the approval. >> And I think this is one of those it shouldn't be the rare instances but it is I think one of the cases where it really site suitability goes to the crux
of all your testimony here that the characteristics location the relationship to the surrounding properties or lack thereof to certain uses really goes to the heart of all the testimony you've given. >> Yes. Um, arguably you could like any planner could stand before you and spit
out positives about virtually any land use. Anything that serves a public purpose, I think passes that test. It really comes down to the suitability or the I call it the why here question. And for all of those reasons I've given you, I I think this board can clearly find
this is a a distinct site, a unique site that may not carry you to other properties in the zone. So, I think you're protected in that regard in terms of moving favorably. Great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. McDonald. So, what
>> um I actually don't have any questions. Um John covered every uh he had a very thorough testimony. I don't have any. >> There was there was an agreement I think put on the record that
everything in your report was going to be correct. >> Yes. If there's any technical comments, we'd be happy to address them as a condition. No problem. >> And Mr. Chairman, I I I forgot to say and maybe maybe you were going to ask me. I believe the applicant made stipulations as to timing.
>> Yeah, I went over those at the beginning. I can go over them at the end as well, but yes, the board planners letter um on the initial project, the initial matter when we came here had requested the shut off at a certain hours, messaging um requirements in
terms of how often they change um and other characteristics that we would comply with. all agreed to and if there was an approval be part of >> yeah everything set forth in Miss Swant's letter Swance letter dated December 1st 2025 we would comply we would comply with
>> that's good >> yes >> I want to go for questions I'm going to start down on my left back >> yes can you I know what the square feet of the new billboard is can you give me the width >> yes 14 by 48 is industry standard and
that's what this is so we're 14 feet top to bottom And then 40 feet across. 48t across. >> You're welcome. >> SPL for me. >> Anything else? >> That's it. I mean, obviously we'd like
to sum up, but >> of course I'm public. >> We may have some comments as well. >> Memo was you haven't heard the last of me. >> Yes. >> You're still on the clock. You're getting paid by the word, right? >> Isn't that the old joke? >> There you go. That's true. >> All right. Uh, if you don't mind, I'm
gonna open a public portion up on this thing. >> Number 47-2024Z. This is Bergen Concepts. This is for an LED board, uh, commonly known as Spring
Hill Road and, uh, property of Luke Oil. Anyone wishes to be heard in this matter, please raise your hand or stand. We don't know that there will be any further testimony uh after tonight's hearing. So this may come to a conclusion tonight.
The last attempt for public comment I see none oppose the public portion. Now I'll go back to if you have any final comments. Let me ask the board first if there's any issues. >> I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Discuss. >> Uh there's a lot been thrown at us here.
Uh this is not unique. We've seen these applications before where many of us have sat here for quite a while. Uh I do like the fact that says it was prefaced that there's no no concern for any residents.
Of course that would be a big concern. It's a commercial highly commercialized area and uh I think Mr. Mcdana put it put it to rest uh about sight suitability. I'll comment as we go across. Uh you had nothing, Miss Angus.
You had nothing. Then I'll continue. Uh the sites the site suitability I would absolutely agree with there that corer is is right for commercial establishments. Very little residential
if at all. You'll find the major cores. I think that once billboards became digitalized, you didn't have to guy who hang paper up there. The young people, they don't understand what I'm saying, but >> they literally hung them up and looking
at me. >> Uh, so it is the it is a digital information overload at times, I guess, but you see it on your phones, you see it on the internet, you see it traveling, but I do like the public service area behind that for usage uh in
emergencies. I think that's important. That's a that's a key about these digital boards that towns, the state, maybe even the federal government could rely on on some interjection state of employers. Uh passive use, I agree.
There couldn't probably be any more passive use than something like this. I would stand in favor of it on one vote. >> Final comments, sir. >> Sure. Um I'll I'll try to sum up. Um I appreciate the board's time. I know we've had a couple hearings on this
matter, so thank you. Um, again, as John stated, and I won't go into belite at the con uh convergence of two major highways. There's no residential properties. I think we measured it's over a thousand feet away from something
from a residential zone or site. Um, there's a lot of DOT infrastructure around which isn't going to harm any aspects of the of the general public. the right of way also comes deep into the site which creates a lot of you know the variances here which I would call paper paper variances in connection with
with the application. So I think from a site suitability standpoint, this is a very unique location and it also makes the project serve the public. Um because of that the billboard benefits as indicated in the case law that we talked about having the the the commercial
messaging to help the public nonprofits that it would help community-based messaging safety and law enforcement alerts that would help. That all services or promotes purposes of the municipal land use law as our planner stated. and then also the businesses,
local businesses and others that would benefit from advertising um on the site. Um we're also taking down some of the site benefits. We're taking down the outdated Lucille sign. That was something that the board wanted us to do. Putting a new attractive monument sign that we worked with Miss Swant on
those those items. Um again, site suitability. The DOT approved the site. Uh the traffic testimony indicated that there wouldn't be any issues as it relates to traffic and circulation. Um the lighting, you just heard a lot of testimony on the lighting on how it
could be adjusted, how the impacts are going to be really minimal. In fact, at the at 0 degrees at 200 feet, meaning looking at it straight on from the lowest point of 200 feet, you're not even at one foot candle. And then as you go further out, it's even less. So, it's
really not as a lighting impact as John also um testified. We've reduced the height of the bill of the billboard. We've reduced the size of the billboard significantly. So, I think all those items demonstrate that both the positive criteria have been met as it relates to
purposes of the MLUL site suitability and special reasons. And then the negative criteria, I think we hit all the issues that could potentially be a concern as it relates to this type of land use and vetted them thoroughly to ensure that we don't have any substantial detriment to the public good or substantial impairment to the zone
plan. As John indicated, it meets some of the goals and objectives of your master plan. So with that, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I would uh respectfully request that the board grant the application as proposed as we've as it uh has evolved over the couple meetings and then um with all the conditions that
we talked about um regarding operations and also working with Miss Swan on her comments and her letter. So, thank you very much everybody. Really appreciate it. >> Thank you for your presentation. Uh counselor, we have D1
D16. No major preliminary final site plan with both variances as well as both variances under the C1 andor C2 criteria. >> Thank you. That makes it easy. >> Board members, someone I'm sorry. Did you want to say so? >> No.
>> Board members, someone in favor of uh moving this for preliminary and final site plan with the variance. >> Andrews move it. >> Is there a second? >> Is a roll call, please. >> Miss Andrews. Yes, >> Miss Gomez. >> Yes, >> Mr. Iso.
>> Yes, >> Miss Spinelli. >> Yes, >> Miss Fernb and Chairman Sullivan. >> As I said before, I think the site is suitable. I think you made a great presentation on saying that passive use there's no clearing of the land. I which
I also noted repurposed without any disruption. Uh and I don't think it's going to impair the plan at all. My vote is yes. Great. Thank you very much. >> Has been approved. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
>> Seat there. take care of it. >> Mr. Saxs, feel free. >> Do you need a quick minute or something? >> Oh, that's right. >> You're leaving. >> You leave.
still on the record, please. >> Yeah, not a problem. application 162 zone residential 13001.11 lot 7 physical locations 35 circle Long Beach. >> Applicant proposes to construct a pool
house. >> You got all the rest of it, I hope. Okay. Applicant proposes to construct a pool house at the rear side of the property. Lawrence Sax, Esquire representing you. >> Yes. Thank Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening, members of the board. Lawrence Saxs on behalf of the applicants Raul
and Elena Francisco. They are the owners of 35 Ellen Circle block 13001.11 lot 7. Uh and Mr. Chairman, as you accurately described, we're in front of you this evening uh seeking u a bulk
variance approval for an accessory structure setback variance. Uh where 10 ft is required, we only have 5T uh with our proposed construction. Uh and we are looking to build a pool house uh which
will be a very attractive addition to the rear yard of this property. Uh Mr. Chairman, I have one witness uh who is the property owner, Elena Francisco, uh who will just briefly describe what we're planning on doing here. Uh and if I can have her sworn in, that would be
great. You swear or affirm, tell the truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Okay. Please state your name. Let's spell your last for the record. >> Hi, my name is Elena Francisco. Good evening, everyone. >> Just spell your last for the record. >> Oh. F R A N C I S co. >> Take it away, counselor. >> Thank you. Uh, Miss Francisco, obviously
you're one of the owners of the property at 35 Ellen Circle. How long have you resided in that house? >> So, my parents bought this home in 1989. So, I've been there since I'm eight years old, and now you know how old I am. Um, so my brother and I grew up here and now we're raising our girls here and
so we're just um making some improvements to the property so that we can thoroughly enjoy it. >> Okay. Uh, so let's talk a lot a little bit about what's proposed. So I know the board has the plans. I think you know what if we can get the architectural plans up because I'm going to refer to that
>> architectural submitted the application. >> Yep, >> we have them. Y >> Okay. All right. So, um, Miss Francisco, I'm going to show you, uh, a plan that was prepared by JDR Consultants by Mr. Paul Rodc. Uh, it's dated October 9th of
2024. Uh, first of all, on the lower part of the plan, we actually have an elevation of what, uh, the side of this structure will look like. >> Yes. Correct. >> And that that'll be facing the pool. Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. And if we go to the uh uh the proposed construction now, uh what we're
proposing is a 298 square foot uh pool house uh which will be 27 by 11 or so. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Yes. >> All right. And what we show on here at the rear of that pool house is a storage area. What is that storage area going to be used for?
>> So just some pool floats and chairs if we have to put in there. Um that's really about it. Some >> Okay. All right. And and the bulk of this uh pool house, it's almost like a cabana as well, uh will consist of a uh you're going to put a bar in here.
You're going to put some shelving. Uh there's going to be a refrigerator, correct? >> Yes. >> There's going to be a sink. >> Yes. >> Now, there's no stove or oven proposed here. >> No. >> Okay. Uh you're going to have obviously seating for your bar and entertainment area. Uh the uh the doors that are
facing the pool on the left side, those are going to be sliding doors. >> Yes. I think more foldable doors. Okay. That fold out so it can be open or closed. >> All right. And the same thing on the portion that would be facing the house. >> Yes. >> All right. You're also showing an outside covered area. Uh is that going
to be covered with an awning? >> So yeah, basically that's just an awning. Uh there'll be grass underneath there. Just a little more extra coverage. >> Okay. All right. Uh so essentially what you're seeking the approval for is to construct this pool house which we indicated is about 298 square feet. Um
the storage area is going to be utilized uh for storage of pool uh equipment and chairs. Um there's not going to be a bathroom proposed here. Is that correct? >> No. >> All right. And um no heat. >> No heat. >> All right. So this is only to be used during the summer months.
>> Yes. Um, and in terms of what is on the right side of this, there's an open area of about five feet at the uh sideyard of the uh pool of the pool h proposed pool house. There's a a fence over there now. >> There is. >> And that's a white
>> white uh like PVC >> PVC vinyl fence. Yep. >> Okay. >> Um All right. I don't have any other questions of Miss Francisco. I just want to just state for the record uh that um the height is compliant. This is going to be 15 feet high this this structure.
All right. And um we're not increasing any uh imperous coverage. The imperous coverage uh in the zone is maximum is 45% even with the construction of this pool house. We'll still be at 34%. So we're well under the imperous coverage.
Uh so no storm water uh is is required here. Uh and in terms of the landscape area ratio uh it is 55% in this zone and uh we will have 66% still uh even with this construction. Um I assume there is
no available land to your right to abate this variance. Is that correct? In fact, there's a house over there. >> Their yard. Yep. >> And it's their yard. Okay. >> Y >> um Mr. Chairman, I don't have any further questions of Miss Francisco. Uh certainly she's available for any
questions. >> See with the township >> just one question. >> Uh there's another I believe there's another house back there. Fence and another house. >> Is there a house? >> Yes. So there's an easement in the back and then there's another house and there be back up to their yard.
>> Right. because I was discussing this application with Danny and I was like, is there a way to move the pool house closer to the pool and closer to the rear yard? But um a there there is a
house on the rear side. So this pool house would be kind of closer to that >> and two if they try to even comply with the rear yard setback which is like 10 ft then they wouldn't have the width for the pool house um like to create a
usable open space. So the location it has been proposed although it requires a variance it still is an ideal location for uh the pool house. I just wanted to chime in on that. But um the only reason
they're here is because of the side >> down on my left. >> I don't see any particular issues. It's just the bottom of the pool house that's gets too close to the uh >> Yeah. And in fact, yeah, and I think Miss San is correct. If I try, if we tried to move it back, first of all, I'd
be triggering another variance, and we do have a neighbor back there. Um I'm also told that the neighbor that's affected by this variance is actually very good friends with my client, so I don't perceive there'll be any issues. Uh and they're not here obviously to
object. So >> right otherwise they would know >> correct assumption. >> I don't have any other questions. The uh it actually all lines up. >> It does. It's very neat.
>> I went by the property and areas a very unique house. It looked white house on the an Ellen. Yes. >> Very nice.
>> Um, that's it. >> That's it, Mr. Chairman. No further testimony. >> We don't have any questions here. Mind if I go to public? >> Absolutely. No problem. >> 62-2025Z 35 Allen Circle. Anyone here this evening wishes to be heard in this
matter? Please raise your hand or stand. make a note that there are only two civilian people sitting in the courtroom. Neither has responded. Final comments, sir. >> Uh, Mr. Chairman, I think we've said it all. Uh, obviously this will be a very
attractive improvement to the rear yard, uh, to a family that has been in town for quite some time. So, uh, I'd request that the board act favorably on this application. >> Thank you. It was my first time in that area. I mean, I've been in that area, but I never went down that street.
What I noticed was everyone was out there >> in their front yard and on their side. They take very nice care of their homes. You do as well. Your neighbors look the same. >> It's a great neighborhood. >> Glad that there's harmony and there's
>> Yep. >> Having said that, let's see if someone wants to move this for approval. This is for C variance for the Anyone interested? Is >> second >> Miss Andrews? >> Yes. >> Miss Gomez.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Iso. >> Yes. >> Miss Finelli. >> Yes. >> Miss Bernbach and Chairman Sen. >> Yeah. It's always nice when people here in the township, you know, upgrade their own homes. Uh makes your investment
better and it's better for the community. My vote is yes. Your resolution available the next. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of the board. >> Yes. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. >> Please be in touch with uh the zoning I mean with the uh building department.
>> Okay. Great. Yes, of course. Thank you. >> Good night. >> You too. >> Everybody good? All right. 3-20 26Z. This is Josephine Sabatino.
This is uh R9 zone block 503, lot 9, physical locations 19, Brewster Circle here in Oldbridge. Applicant seeking to legitimize a concrete patio in the rear yard of property. You would be >> I'm Josephine 17. >> Council, the council will swear you in. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you
swear or affirm, tell the truth, and nothing but the truth? Please state your name and bur your last for the record. >> Josephine Sabatino. S A B- A T I N O. >> And you're the owner of the property? >> Yes. >> Back to you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. When people represent themselves on on these minor searianes,
you see professionals here before you, >> they know team and and and of course it it normally is. Uh people don't normally come back often, but all we want you to we're civilians here that that live in the township and and volunteer. So we're we're at times very empathetic
to the situations but obviously we take a square note make sure we follow the laws what we want you to do is tell us the who what wise you know what are you doing how you're doing it why you're doing it etc and then we may have some questions of you you may have some questions of us I'm going to ask the
tension professional why you need a variance uh after that I'm going to ask ask the public there's any comment concerning this there is none I'll come back to you and I'm going to give you final uh say in the matter of do you
want to take a voter if you feel for some reason that you haven't accomplished your goal and impressed the board uh you may want to ask for a continuous okay >> to maybe bolster your testimony here you don't have to do that I'm really suggesting that it might be opportunity
>> okay >> okay thank you >> proceed at your own pace >> um so when I first moved in there were rocks in the backyard um taking up most of it and then there was a deck. So, I didn't know that I needed a permit for inside the property. So, I had put
concrete on part of the on part of the property. Um, and then they told me that I So, I guess I don't know how it happened. Um, I think Mike Pharaoh is the one that came by the property. He told me that it was a violation. So, I had to put in for
a permit. I put in for a permit. It got denied. I didn't know what I had to do next. So then um he told me how to do a variance. I didn't know how to do that. So I went and spoke to a contractor. Um at the same time he told me that the
deck that I have in the backyard, which the previous owner told me they had up since like 1992 or somewhere in that vicinity. He sent me a picture of like a piece of paper that was some kind of permit. I sent it to him. He said that wasn't good enough.
The deck kind of needs repair anyway. It's not bad, but I was like, "Who cares? We can take it down." So, I spoke to the contractor. He So, I I said, "Hey, can you help me because I don't know what I'm doing. The variance application was a little bit confusing to me when it came to like measurements
and things like that." Um, so he put the permit in, it was denied. He said, they said, "Okay, you have to put a variance in." So, he helped me fill out the variance application. I put that in. So, what I would like to do is to legalize that concrete that I have there and then
take the deck down and then put concrete to finish off the backyard basically so that it's completely clean cuz there are rocks under that deck as well, which was the same that was the rest of the backyard. So, I have kids and they go in the backyard and they play. So, the rocks were kind of weird to have them
play on the rocks. So, that's why I put the concrete and that's pretty much the gist of what I want to do. So I think the biggest problem was the feet I guess that were like from the fence. So I had put the fence up when I first moved in
and I guess the amount of feet from where the fence was I think was the issue. I didn't completely understand. >> Okay. >> But I do have a contractor helping me at this point. >> So the deck on your on your survey is
going to go >> Yes. So that's going to completely be taken down. Yeah. >> And you're going to put >> And I Yeah. I want to finish it off with the concrete, >> right? It'll be steps down to the side like the survey shows. >> So like wood steps if that matters. >> Is the wooden shed still in the back? >> No, that was taken down.
>> Okay. That that's over the >> Yes, because when I put the fence up, they told me I had to take that down. >> That's gone. Not >> I threw it out. >> Let me see what the township is. Say our professional planner. >> Mr. What? Actually, she already answered one of my questions because um uh I saw
that the shed was encroaching into the open space for the other uh adjen lot. So, you answered that. Um just to give a background um to legitimize this concrete patio
um they they have a zero set a zero ft set back from the rear and the side where 3 ft minimum is required. Um also that triggers the minimum landscape area
ratio where 50 ft is required. So that translates into roughly 1750 square ft whereas uh the proposed is going to be 68
uh square ft. So that's the reason why um they are the applicant is in front of uh the board for the rear yard setback variance, the sideyard setback variance and the landscape area ratio
>> is it 10 on the back side >> um from the >> that's what required >> for for for the concrete patio it's only three feet >> two feet >> three >> three feet And you're at zero. >> Yes. >> Okay.
Consider cutting it down a little. >> I don't know. So, I asked the contractor about that and I think they're worried about it breaking and then having to redo it and that would be a lot of money to try and do that. >> My >> cuz I had put up the Sorry.
>> No. So the only concern that I have because um unfortunately Danny is out on vacation but I don't know if we checked it with the engineering department since the uh landscape area ratio is
significant >> uh the variance that is sought and uh I just want to make sure that there is no drainage issues because now if you look at the back It's going to be fully paved.
Um, you already have the driveway and then everything else is going to be paved. So, that would be a slight concern. Um, >> be curious. Do you have any irrigation in the back? That's a community. That's it's you're covered by an HOA, right?
>> Uh, yeah. It's an annual HOA. >> Um, is there irrigation in the back? >> Not that I'm aware of. I mean, I know I have like from the roof, but I don't know if there's any specific >> meaning like the lawn in the front and the lawn lawn in the back. Is it regularly watered without you doing it?
In other words, irrigation? >> No. No, >> there is no. >> No, >> not even in the front. >> No, >> I was worried about extra work underground. >> No, I there is no >> underground drainage. >> Yeah. Yeah. So,
>> so I do know that the neighbor on So, if I'm in the backyard, the neighbor on the left of me, 17, their back backyard is concreted and I think the one on the other side that's not attached to me, I believe they're they have concrete as well, but there both of their yards are
a little longer than mine. And my when I went to put up the fence, so that um that shed was over the line, they told me there was no fence at all when I went there. So when I had to put up the fence, it kind of like cut back the the property line compared to the both
neighbors on the sides of me. So my property line is a little bit shorter. I don't know why, but that's what they told me. >> No, but actually that's not true. In fact, when I was reviewing this application, uh I saw your neighbors. Uh
>> I don't want to get anybody in trouble. No, no, but I mean we do code enforcement too, right? So that was a concern I raised to the zoning officer too because it's not like the lot is deeper. It's just that
they are encroaching into the backyard. >> So um a and I did ask him to follow up on that. So, um I think that's your 17 Brewster.
>> I'm Yeah, I'm 19. The one attached to me is seven. They just bought the house like recently. >> But I think it's um it's an existing nonconformity. I don't believe that it was uh approved through a variance, but we need to
check. But my my my only concern is because your entire backyard like there is no landscaping. There is nothing um pvious that is left in the backyard once
you uh pave it to the sideyard and the rear yard. Um it would be >> Where does the water go when it rains right now? Where does the water go on whatever you had there? >> Well, so I'm guessing it goes through
the deck and then there's rocks under the deck. >> But eventually it's got to go somewhere. It's either got to go that way. >> I mean, I never had any >> to the rear issue. Well, that's the other problem. If you become if this whole floor is concrete, we poured water
on it. It's got to go somewhere. It's not going to just pull. Is there like any >> you can't you can't allow the water from your house to go to someone else's property. And actually if you notice um Jim on I I don't know if I can share my
screen like that but if I'm checking the near maps imagery which is the most current the March one um your there there is a there is a strip of land
which is not paved right uh wait I'm >> you mean where the deck is? >> Yeah >> cuz under the deck it's not paved. Just rocks. >> No, no, no. On your neighbor's side. >> Yeah. So, in the So, he has it concreted up until where like my property line is
and then it's uh like a fake piece of grass like you know that you put down. That's 17. And then there's like a gate that he has in the back. But the previous owners had done that. That was before I even moved in. It was just like that since I moved in. So, I don't know
when or how. I don't know anything about it. >> I stood in front of your house. 17 is it would look to the left. >> Yes. >> Because it appears from the aerial again that there is a strip of uh green like I
don't know if it's pvious if it's fake. >> You mean in between their house and the >> No, it it is between the your fence and their concrete. Um >> Oh, >> yeah. there is a strip of land that is
pvious. >> Um so you know I would assume that probably you should have a similar strip of land to absorb in water if there is any drainage or to the rear. But I would
really like to discuss this with engineering a little more um because I want to make sure that before since it's a varian situation and both side and rear are zero and everything is behaved.
I would want to make sure there is no drainage issues on this site. >> Yeah, that's the concern uh that I'm sure that interview the other members here, they're going to be say the same thing. >> You know, water has a has a tricky way
of go well, it goes where it wants to go. >> Goes by gravity and can't allow the water to go over and if there's drainage that you're covering up maybe causing a problem. I know for the record I'll say I know we have a letter from the HOA
>> uh from a Deborah Marquez. >> Yes. uh HOA president and she plans that the resident at number 19 circle has permission for the HOA to and while we recognize this as as
probably a true document. Um I think that the town and the engineering is going to have to look at the general area. There were just homes put in behind you as well. >> Yes. Yeah. there was old trees and then they knocked everything down and then they had put um >> I don't think that probably the board is
going to have a problem with it but I think we need to be assured. >> Uh so I'm I'm thinking you might want to ask for continuance just until our next meeting >> it's just next week so I will make sure >> um it is next week and this shouldn't
take time for me to report back >> uh to the board. >> Yeah. So I would just say continue it to um next week so that I can have engineering just take a look at it before the board takes
>> I mean I'm I'm willing to put any kind of drainage if I need to do that. I just don't know what >> I would say hold off from making that comment. >> Let them take a look. >> Okay. >> We'll see what's going on there and nothing bad. >> Yeah. And then then it'll we'll schedule it for next Thursday again. Okay. Come
back. >> Okay. Um just to make sure that not only you are protected but your neighbors are protected as well. >> I understand. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. So you would >> So I I request the continuence. >> Okay. Uh counselor. Anything else? I don't have to open it up. >> Just request.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry that you spent the time here tonight, but >> it's okay. It's my first time. It's a learning experience. >> Well, there you go. Uh it is life is a learning curve, isn't it? >> Yes. >> Uh again, we want to protect not only you but the tent. It's Wells. >> I get it. >> We have to defer to our opinion of the
professional. >> Okay. >> And it would be probably in your best interest as well. >> No problem. >> Thank you for appearing here tonight. >> Thank you. >> This matter will be scheduled. It's a May >> May 7th. >> Same time. >> Just need a motion to carry the application to May 7th without further
notice. >> Okay. Someone make that motion. >> Andrew move it. >> Is there a second? Is a roll call as to the motion. >> Miss Andrews? >> Yes. >> Miss Gomez? >> Yes. >> Mr. Oo? >> Yes. >> Miss Vanelli? >> Yes. Miss Fernbach and Chairman Sullivan.
>> Yes. Thank you very much, M. >> Thank you everyone. >> Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a comment. Um, let's carry it to May 7th, but it appears because Moren is texting me. Apparently, u next uh week's agenda is full uh is quite packed. So maybe we
might have to carry it again to the uh second meeting in May because there is a second meeting. Uh, however, the the office will inform you. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Okay. Because if it's just going to be carried again, you don't have to come.
We can handle it and we'll just let you know it. >> I got it. I understand. Okay. Thank you so much. >> Thank you everybody. >> Thank you. >> I appreciate it. >> Final matter of the evening is 5-2026 Z.
John Rodriguez. This is R six zone 18044 lot 14 physical location 21 Stony Brook Drive proposing to expand the current driveway to the property. Mr. Rodriguez
attorney will swear you in right hand. Please state your name and spell your last for the record. >> John Rodriguez. R O D R I G U S. >> You're the owner of the property. >> That is correct. >> Back to you, Mr. Chairman, >> you heard what I explained to the lady in front of you. It's the same thing.
Just want you to tell us what, why, how. >> Um, so we recently bought the house in August and uh, >> as we've been there, we've noticed that we both work opposite schedules. So I work from 7:00 a.m. till 3:30 and she works 3:30 to 9. So I I go to work at
4:30, 5 o'clock in the morning. So it's always like shifting cars. And Stony Brook Drive is a tighter road. So, we noticed also with the past snowstorm that when the snow is all there, it's hard to find parking around.
So, we were just trying to mitigate where to park. And >> I went by your house and I see what the problem is. >> And your wife sent you here to make sure that you have permission. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, you're not going home unless Okay.
>> Uh when you say to the line to the property line, how How much property you talking about there? Why do you want to go all the way to the property line? There's a fence next to you. That's your neighbor. >> That's my neighbor's fence. That's where I'm trying to go >> close to not. >> Okay. >> So, when I had bought the house, they
had surveyed the lot. So, there's the markings there in all four corners. So, I would basically go put the the curb, I guess, of the driveway right around that line within maybe like three inches of it. Two, three inches of
it. just to maximize as much because she does have a larger vehicle and so do I. So >> just trying to maximize the amount of width we can get. >> Yeah, you might. It's going to be a design waiver, isn't it? If >> it is. >> It used to be five foot that that
property line that council had changed it to uh design waiver, but it's still five. So here's here's my take. >> Go ahead. >> Right. Um
the zero feed setback is definitely an issue because then again the same thing drainage and where the water drains becomes an problem. But in your case actually you have you could leave and in
the past we have at least required we have granted the waiver but we have at least require a foot from the driveway. All you need to do is just you you can keep your 20 ft. Just slide it slightly
so that you give us the one foot along the property line and then where you have landscaping and the walkway you just extend you shift your driveway by one foot. So I wouldn't have a problem with that because I was I was literally
sketching on your survey that how can we make this possible? I would hate for the board to deny it. I understand that you know it becomes challenging when you two have two cars but I was discussing it with Danny and I'm like all they have to do is just slightly slide it and it is
going to work and maybe that resolves the issue of drainage and >> the problem with moving I can't really shift it because there's the gas meter there and then there's the utility lines underneath there. There's the gas line under >> where is >> to if you're facing my property
>> uh >> between the like there's like the left side of the driveway right where it starts the walkway to the front door >> there's the gas the gas man is there the water man is there the sewer main is there so I can't really I don't want to cover it in case I ever needed to be
serviced >> where is it on the end of the property >> the the tiny box >> is that the tiny box can you zoom in Emily I'm sorry. >> Is it the tiny >> black mark on the
>> So, right. Right. She's telling, if I understand correctly, she's telling me to just take the whole driveway and the foot that I'm losing here to put it here. Correct. >> My gas meter is right there and all the water and sewer and entrances and all
the main utility is right along that curb. So it's >> what I'm saying is >> can I >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Correct. >> So just extend pave this part
by one foot. You lose the put here, right? You just add paving here. So, it's really not changing anything. >> But >> the situation your car right now when it's parked here or here, it's anyways
blocking it. All I'm saying is extended by one foot here. >> That That's where my all my utilities are right there. >> Wait. So, I'm just going to I think I understand. Do you are is it going to be a continuous driveway from the left to
the right or are you going to have a gap in between? >> No, it's going to be one. >> So you're already going to cover your proposed utilities by adding this addition. >> No, the utilities are on the left where she's telling me to go to the left. >> Okay. Your utilities >> my utilities are there. So she's telling
me to go a foot over, but the utilities on the driveway >> utilities are a little bit to the left of you. >> Correct. If you move it over one foot >> and it's every utility sewer, >> water and and gas is all right there.
>> They're attached to the house. Yeah, I understand. >> Well, you could very well make it nine nine foot instead of 10. >> Correct. >> Or there's one more option. Maybe on that one foot
grass so that there is still some percolation for the water to seep in because typically we don't allow it for drainage purposes. But you if for that one foot
you have those grass papers and tiles then it is going to soak in water anyways. So you you can still park. Right. But it also allows water to perculate. Just just a suggestion.
>> It looks like I don't know on the survey it looks almost as if >> it looks almost as if at some some point that fence is your neighbors, right? Correct. Looks like it almost comes on your property at some point. >> I mean, >> I don't know. That's all. >> Yeah, it might. I don't I don't know.
Um, >> so in other words, you you may be you may be too very close to the line >> and you can't go >> over the line. In fact, I think these >> probably extend the neighbors because see these favors,
this is the property line. This is the fence. The favors go straight till the fence. So probably it encroaches slightly into The PA the pavers there have about I
would say between like six seven inches between the fence. It's not directly on the fence. >> Yeah. >> That means that means they're >> over the line. >> Okay. Just when you look at your survey the suggestion would be you can't go
right to the line. So, make it a nine foot. >> Uh, what's the word? You have Is there pavers coming down? >> I don't remember. >> There's like a like >> I looked at the house, but I can't remember >> the cobble. Yeah, the cobblestones. >> 9 foot is going to put a car in there, >> right?
>> Certainly. >> I don't know what else you wanted to put in there. >> No, it was it was I have a Ram 2500 if you're familiar with vehicles. So, it is a larger truck. >> Yeah, but it's not it's not more than 9 foot wide. >> No, >> I mean you could you could very easily do it, >> right? Just make it at nine. So you
still have that area. >> So between the fence and my driveway is what you you want a foot. Correct. Just just for my clarification. >> Not your fence. Their fence. >> Correct. Yeah. Their fence >> to the edge of to the start of my driveway. >> A foot, >> right? Because you're not supposed to be
able to go right to the line. It's an imaginary line in a sense. >> Okay. >> So you you really can't you both share that. So you really can't be actually on the line. >> Okay. So we're asking if you would leave a foot, no one would be neighbor with or
you're not >> and and it is your way of kind of fixing the encroachment. We're not asking you this part because there is an encroachment there. >> So like a given game. >> Yeah. Because you have it extended but
it's an existing condition. I wouldn't say go and touch that but at the same time when you're proposing something at least try to fix it as much as possible. So the choice would be to either cut down the driveway to 9 ft. Right? So to
make this 9 ft or then if you want to continue it too and you want to meet with me we can probably try to brainstorm and see if there's any other solution. But in the past, I doubt if the board has allowed a zero for setback
because we I remember the residential area close to Cindy Street there were a lot of applications that were coming in with zero feet setback and uh it was becoming an issue. So the board u
although has granted we don't require the five feet because sometimes when the lot is narrow getting that five feet is next to impossible. So variance would be required but as a rule of thumb we have always said that at least have one foot
and then you could have your drive. >> So so it's completely >> typical of that neighborhoods when they were built. They were probably 1960s builds and they only had single car driveways because back then you had one
car in your family, you know, and dad took it to work or mom used it to go shopping, but you didn't have multiple cars. Now everybody and I've seen up and down the block there and and as well as all around the township where people have expanded their drive, but what we're just saying is try to make it if you can make it nine. If you want to
meet with uh Miss Sant for any other information, I don't I don't know how how you want to handle it. I can make a nine. >> You can make a nine. >> Yeah. >> You think that would satisfy everything? >> Yeah. >> And uh that's going to stop at your house there, right? Because there's already papers going
>> correct. Yeah. It would meet up to whatever the length of the existing driveway. So it would just be >> great. And then we don't care about what's going on. >> The address is 21 uh right? >> Correct. >> Let me see if the u any of the board
members have any questions. coming across. >> No, >> counselor. >> Nope. >> Would you agree? We can't go We can't go zero. >> I agree. >> Well, we have gotten close, but you
can't go zero. >> I mean, I would love I would love six inches, but if we could do that, >> I think let's do six inches at least. I wouldn't say zero. >> The problem is when it's so finite when
you're talking about, you know, >> let's just listen to >> So he wants 115. He gave the 10. >> Well, it says 10 on the other. >> It says 10. >> 10 foot is in the back, right? >> Uh yeah, it's >> where the pavers are. They're 10. And
you're coming out and you want to go. >> That's good. It's going to be straight like >> you want to go 115. >> That's what it says on here. Or no, the curb cuts 115, right? See where it says that? >> Yeah. Yep. Yeah. That would be the the start of the the April.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Curb cut they call >> which I would have to get the road open permit for. >> Just give us one. >> No problem. >> Just give me one second. I'm trying to pull up on I just want to see the front view of the
home. It's not working. It's not working. >> I have a picture on my phone in the front of my house if that's easier for you. >> No, actually I'm okay. >> Yeah. Yeah, that will help because I'm trying to get the view and Okay, I have
it here. So, Is this this is your house, right? 21. Okay. You know what? Actually, I see. >> I think that house was recently redone. >> You know what? There is a there is a
drainage pipe. I don't know what year he did it, but >> he was the original owner number two in Southwood. Actually, >> grew up in that house. >> Is that right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Now, >> you bought that house as a lot. >> Actually, even more reason for you not
to pay it. And uh I would say just continue it to um the next meeting only because I notice that uh I wish uh Emily you could show an in the aerial next to your driveway through the lawn or right
now it's like a lawn space right I see a drainage pipe that is >> Yes. So, I just would want to talk to Nicole or anybody in engineering before
letting it be to even 1 ft or 6 in. If if with the pipe the drainage is not an issue, then we could do easily 6 in from >> I mean the pipe it's a pipe. It's I
think an inch and a half. >> Correct. But that collects the water from the back and brings it because I see the road is a little wet in that area. Right. >> It comes from the one gutter right above the right in the front of the driveway. There's a down spout and it's just one
single down spout come down. It's not like backyard drainage or anything. It's just a gutter. >> Okay. This is one down spout on the right like on the house side of where the pavers meets the house up back there. There's
one down spout that comes out and that's where that pipe is for. >> All right. >> And it's only like inch inch and a quarter pipe maybe inch and a half at the biggest >> your suggestion. I would really want to discuss this also
just to make sure that I I don't want you to have issues. Uh I mean just delaying it by 15 days is not going to change anything. I want to help you. I don't want to make it difficult for you. But if the engineering office says
everything is fine, I'm not an engineer. I want to be able to come in. But I'm seeing there's a pipe there. Right? So before we say that okay a zero feed setback is granted. If there is a way where you know you or or we say that
give us one ft if there is a way engineering officers no this is fine then you could actually do with the 6 in uh setback >> similar to the one the application before you. We're just asking you uh that we need to review it
>> in your best interest. It doesn't do much for us, but it certainly does something for you and want to have that problem going down the road once you assume you put them in there or concrete. >> What do you put pavement? >> Yeah, pavement. Black top.
>> Because all I would do is I would ask the engineering staff to go and check it all. So um Dave Hall from engineering will come check he will report it back to me saying everything is okay and then maybe with a just a 6 in you should be
able to put your driveway in and get at least 9 and a half instead of nine then >> does that work? Yeah, that's >> Yeah, >> but now just one question. I'm not >> That's right. >> It's just a genuine question.
>> If if I was to do the driveway and the with the pipe being there, which is wouldn't the same isn't it the same amount of water coming out of that pipe regardless where the pipe is? >> I don't know what that pipe is. Unless the engineering office, like I said, I'm not an engineer. So, unless uh they tell
me that they're fine, especially because you're asking for a variance. If you were not asking for a variance, we wouldn't even have this discussion. But since the board is gr going to grant you an exception, it's just I want to make sure that they are okay with it.
>> Okay. >> Right. So we would only be we can we do the by the the same time and then >> um >> do you know what is >> May? >> Yeah. >> Just looking at the schedule. I think
because this is not going to take even five minutes. So I think we can put them on put him on for next week. >> Yeah, it's it's going to be one way or the other. I mean, we've already heard the testim. >> So it's not like you have to say anything. I'm just going to report to
the board saying that I recommend a 6 in variance like a six to come though. >> You probably don't, but it would be in your best interest. >> Yeah, I mean >> uh if you can >> have to be here, >> would that be a problem? Because I know you have a
>> I mean I just I have a weird work schedule. So that's why but I could I can make it happen. I made it I made it happen today so I can make it happen again. If you're not available, if your wife can come in your place, she can come. Alternatively, just if you're not available at all, shoot an email. We can
carry you without notice to the next meeting as well. >> Okay. >> Is that okay? >> Yeah, that's fine. >> But trust me, it's going to be like a five minute thing. >> It's good. >> It's just that I'm going to report to them and it's going to be easy.
>> Yeah. Yeah. We'll make a motion to carry this to the next meeting. >> A second local motion to carry next meeting. >> That's May >> 7th. >> Seven. >> Without further notice,
>> Miss Andrews, >> yes. >> Miss Gomez, >> yes. >> Mr. Iso, >> yes. >> Miss Spanelli, >> yes. >> Miss Fernbach. >> And Chairman Sullivan? >> Yes. >> Next Thursday night. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for appearing.
>> Thank you. board. That brings us to the end of the applications this evening. The only other thing would be general public comments on the right item seven. There is no one else in the courtroom this evening. I'll close that matter as well. Any comments from council? >> Nothing from me, Mr. Chairman.
>> Any comments from the township? >> Nothing. Anybody? >> We're good. May 7th, next meeting. Someone move for an adjournment, please. >> Move. >> All in favor? >> Any opposed? >> We stand adjourn.