Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on August 12 2021
Transcript generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Use the audio player to verify any passage.
Aug 12 2021 · Zoning
0:00
–:––
Speaker 0Seven 30 on the dot chairman.
Speaker 1Thank you. Zoning board of adjustment meeting will please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the courier news notice posted on the bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available to the township clerk and notice sent to the Curry news and the star ledger will the clerk please call the roll,
Speaker 0Mr. <inaudible>. Mr. Weissman. He said he's coming. Mr. Reggio. Mr. Blount, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando, dear Mr. Ali chairman Cahill here,
Speaker 1Will everyone please stand for the salute to the flag, the United States of America public, to which it stands one nation under God, indivisible. Mr. Chameli. Are there any changes to tonight's agenda? Yes,
Speaker 2We have quite a few changes to the agenda. Uh, the application of Canadian Denzy 1834 west seventh street will be carried until September 9th, 2000. Excuse me. Hello?
Speaker 1Hello?
Speaker 2Hello, who's speaking, please
Speaker 0Speaking.
Speaker 2Okay. It appears Mr. Weissman has joined us in any event. Uh, the application of Canadian Denzy 1834 west seventh street will be adjourned until September 9th, 2021. There will be no further notice of the property owners surrounding the property. Only in the newspaper. The second adjournment for the evening is a w a D construction LLC, one 50 central avenue. Uh, this is adjourned until September 23rd. Uh, Laura, did they notice? Yes. So there will be no further notice. The next change that we have is Dwight Mitchell, 20 summer shade circle. That will be adjourned until September 23rd with no further notice. And the last change we have is Lauria landscaping. Uh, that will be adjourned until September 23rd, 2021. And did they notice? Yes. They all noticed. Okay. Uh, so that will be with no further notice by the applicant. Those are all the changes that I have this evening. Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 1Thank you, Mr. Conneely. Let's proceed. I have number 6 21 dash ZB dash 45 V Vijesh Kumar Patel,
Speaker 2Or the Patel's present. Yes. Could you raise your right in your hand? I need to swear you in. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? Yes. Uh, and is, was that aha a yes. Yes. I'm sorry, could we have your name and address please?
Speaker 3Uh, Rogers Kumar Patel, uh, it's 20 boxes road, Piscataway New Jersey was already a day five for
Speaker 2Thank you. And could you explain to the board what you would like to do here?
Speaker 3All right. So we applied for the virions for, uh, like for the bulk variance for the, uh, backyard shade.
Speaker 2Um, Mr. Chairman, I think Mr. Henderson has a report on this.
Speaker 1Yes. Henry, could you, uh, give us your findings?
Speaker 4Yeah. Uh, looking at this application, um, I really didn't see any issues with it. Uh, the applicant has a hardship, uh, due to the fact that the back of the property, as well as the front of the property, uh, what's a roadway. So there, there, by having two front yards, um, the shed is only minimally, um, at best over the height requirement. So I think you could grant that variance with, uh, without any issues. Um, and as long as the applicant knows that he's putting a shed in the easement, if for some reason, uh, the township needs to access the easement, any costs associated with the removal and replacement of that shed are going to be your, your responsibility, otherwise, no other issue.
Speaker 1Were you okay with that, Mr. Patel? Yes, he is. Okay, awesome. I'm going to open it to the public or is anybody else on the board have any questions for this application hearing none. I'm going to open it to the public. Anyone in the public portion have any questions or comments about this application? The sparkly? I do not see anyone chairman. Okay. Public portion is closed. I'm going to make a motion to approve this application. I would second. Perfect,
Speaker 0Mr. Tillary. Yes. Mr. Weissman? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando? Yes. In
Speaker 1Chairman Kao.
Speaker 2Yes. Mr. Patel, your hat, your application's been approved. Uh, we will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting. Uh, the second week of September, we'll send that document to you. You'll need that to get your permits. Okay. Good luck. All
Speaker 3Right. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Speaker 1I have a good night. You tell, thank you. Let's move along to item number 7 21 days. CB dash 46 V. Muhammad Robbie. Yes. How are we doing tonight?
Speaker 2Sorry, could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? Yes. Your name and address, please
Speaker 1Drive.
Speaker 2Mr. Robbie, could you explain to the board what you would to do
Speaker 1Here? I would love to have a, basically a garage and a six feet fence. Okay. Henry, have you looked at this application?
Speaker 4Yes, I have. I've looked at this application and although some of the variances that are being requested seems to veer to think he have some, uh, extenuating circumstances that exist, uh, on the property. Uh, one being that, um, the property has, um, a paper street adjacent to it. So that's where some of these extreme bearings is, uh, sort of stemmed from, is the fact that the paper street, although not developed is considered a roadway. Therefore, um, the garage that they're proposing is, is relatively close to this paper street. Uh, I don't really see this paper street ever being developed due to the fact that the, uh, railroad right of ways directly behind the property, that's sort of the other constraint on the property. So, uh, for that reason, uh, I don't see any issue. Um, uh, I think you could, you could, um, approve these variances without any, uh, any detriments.
Speaker 4Uh, my only, my only, my only issue would be, is I think they should, if possible, just step the garage back a little bit so that it conforms a little bit more closely with the front yard setback. Um, we always try to improve the setbacks instead of exacerbate them. So the applicant would be willing to maybe just look at his plan and maybe he could, he could step the garage back like two feet, just so it steps back to give it a little bit of interest and also improve the front yard setback versus just making the existing front yard setback worse. I think that would be a positive and, uh, anything located off your property, you really need to remove the fence or anything that's off your property because we cannot give approval for that. So think your survey had some, some items that were off of your property. I believe Laura stated that that was the case when you bought the property. So again, as long as you take the things that are off your property, out of that area, and maybe step back the garage slightly, I don't, I don't see any issues with this application.
Speaker 1Are you okay with that, Mr. Robbie? Yes, I am fantastic. Anyone else? Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant hearing none. I'm going to open it to the public. Anyone in the public portion have any comments or questions about this application? Okay. Close the public portion. I'm going to make a motion to approve this application with the restrictions at added on a second. Coral,
Speaker 0Mr. Tillary. Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Reggio, we never got Mr. Blowout. Mr. Patel, Mr. Minna Rondo. Yes. Yes.
Speaker 2Mr. Robbie, your application's been approved as amended. Uh, we'll memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting in September. You don't need to be present for that. We'll mail that document to you, but you'll need that to get your permits. Good luck, Mr. Chairman, before we call the next application, there was one additional adjourned application that I neglected to mention during that long list earlier, if I can place a Buddhist worship center, uh, 1 57 memoirs lane is adjourned until September 23rd, 2021 with no further notice by the applicant. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker 1Keneally. September 23rd is going to be a busy night for
Speaker 2Us. It seems so. Okay. Let's get,
Speaker 1Oh, really? Thanks. Let's go to number 8 21 days. ZB dash 49 V. Jessica. Ghouta. Good evening
Speaker 2Is Ms. Gutha present. Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? Yes. Your name and address please.
Speaker 5Jessica Ghouta 1 0 3 Stanton AF Piscataway New Jersey.
Speaker 2Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you would like to do here?
Speaker 5We'd like to install a fence, six feet privacy fence.
Speaker 2Did you see Mr. <inaudible> report in this matter?
Speaker 5No.
Speaker 2Okay. Mr. Henderson, could you address your report, please
Speaker 5Emailed it to you?
Speaker 4Basically I reviewed the plan and, uh, again, this is a corner property. We've had several of these applications in the past. Um, they're looking to put a six foot solid fence, uh, directly on the property line of the problem with that is it sort of impedes the site corridor and the visibility of a neighboring, uh, neighboring driveways, um, due to the fact that this is a court doesn't impact too many homes and do the nature of the theme of court. I think if they relocate the fence back approximately five feet from the property line, which is approximately, you know, give us about 10 feet or so from the sidewalk closer to 20 feet from the, from the curb. Uh, I think that would be an acceptable, uh, compromised. Um, again, in the past we've made people move the fence back in situations like this, uh, anywhere from 10 to 20 feet, but because this is a court and, uh, I don't think it's gonna impact too many homes. I think the five foot, um, relocation back into the property would be, uh, would be a reasonable compromise.
Speaker 5Okay. So you mean like the, uh, the, this is the sidewalk and then five feet from that would be the fence?
Speaker 4No, from your property, if you look at your survey that you submitted, your, your property line is approximately maybe five or six feet, the sidewalk. So you would have to go another five feet from the property line. So you'd have to determine where the property line is and go find feed in from that. So you showed the fence on the property line, which as a board, we very rarely ever issue of
Speaker 2Mr. Henderson. What is the setback requirement per the ordinance
Speaker 435 feet?
Speaker 2And you think that five feet is, is reasonable
Speaker 4Reasonable for the reason being is that for some reason, the, if the survey's accurate, the right of way line is further back and normal. So normally I would ask for 10 feet, but because of the, the right of way line being according to the survey, approximately five or six feet from the sidewalk already, one of the reasons I'm only asking for an additional five feet. So I think ultimately the intended similar nature to what we've asked for in the past, as far as distance from the sidewalk, just the way I think the right of way falls in this particular instance.
Speaker 5Okay. Yeah. I appreciate your consideration of that. Um, I don't know if it helps to mention that the directly across from us as a park that they'll never build any houses or anything. It's just true.
Speaker 4Yeah. That's not, that's not the side. I'm concerned about this, the side on Donna court. So you're right on that property line. And it has to do with the, typically it should be open for 35 feet on each side of the property. So your house is even over, I believe the front yard setback by, by some, uh, some measures, but I'm asking for, for five feet, I think it's a good compromise. It opens up that quarter a little bit because it's a court. Uh, again, I think we can live with the five feet and the fact that the existing right of ways already, approximately five feet from the sidewalk. So,
Speaker 6Um, thank you, Mr. Henderson. Uh, can I ask one question
Speaker 2I have not sworn you in, I need to swear you in, could you raise your right hand? You swear that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth. Yes. Your name and address, please.
Speaker 6My name is <inaudible> and my address is 1 0 3 Stanton avenue. <inaudible>. Thank you. Um, so let me still here to stand. Um, so just to, I'm also one of this property, um, a quick, quick question is, um, and, uh, and stuff, setting the, uh, and stuff, having a pipe set asset back can make <inaudible> so that, um, so that's the issue.
Speaker 4It's not a sight triangle issue. It's a site corridor issue. It's that, that corridor, the road corridor is supposed to be unimpeded by structures 35 feet on each side of the property line. And you're asking to go right up through the property line. So you're asking me for a zero setback requirement with 35 feet is required and I'm asking it to be five feet. So no, if anything, and as you heard, I think from Mr. Keneally, he's sort of surprised that I'm only asking for five feet in this case. Cause usually we ask for more. So I think you should probably look at that as a sign that, you know, maybe the five feet is something that you should consider. Um, cause like I said, I've never seen the board approved a variance for a fence right on the property of, of a six foot nature.
Speaker 1Okay. That sounds great. I appreciate it. That's that's it's a good deal. Trust me. I've been on this board for 16 years and we've never done zero. Thank you. Okay. No problem. No problem. Any other members of the board have any questions hearing none. I'm going to open it to the public portion. Anyone in the public have any questions for this application? No one chairman. Okay. Public portion is closed. I wanna make a motion to approve this application with the flood foot, um, agreement that the applicant has made like a second, two seconds, two seconds. That's beautiful. Yep. Please. Mr. Tillery. Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Reggio. Yes. Mr. Patel. Yes. Let's commit a Rondo. Yes. And chairman Kao. Yes.
Speaker 2Your application has been approved as amended. Uh, we memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting. You don't need to be present for that. We will mail that document to you and you'll need that to get your permit.
Speaker 1Um, so, so much deficit, the solid fence, six feet. It was approved yeah. With the <inaudible>
Speaker 2Off the property line.
Speaker 4So you'd have to revise the survey.
Speaker 1Yeah. Okay. Yeah, we will. I appreciate it. Thank you so much guys, to have a great night. Thanks. Let's move on to item number 10 21 days, ZB dash 38 V. Do your park, us holdings, Inc.
Speaker 7Uh, good evening. Members of the board, Tim arch attorney, uh, listens to the state of New Jersey for the applicant deer park, us holdings. Um, uh, before we get into this, uh, some housekeeping I would ask that I would ask of the board attorney, uh, whether he had, has had an opportunity to review the notices and whether we are in front of the, uh, the board has proper jurisdiction.
Speaker 2Yes I have. And yes, the board does have jurisdiction.
Speaker 7Thank you. Um, we are here asking for, uh, two bulk variances. Uh, tonight. This is for 1, 1, 2, 2 Brookside road. Uh, they're both related to the same, uh, dimensional, uh, restriction on the lot, uh, which is, uh, we have a 73.2, six foot lot with, um, where a hundred is required. Uh, and that also affects the lot frontage. So at the same measurement, um, there, I will note that, uh, prior to, uh, our application, we did send out letters to the adjacent property owners, um, asking for interest as to, uh, selling or purchasing property in order to make a lot more conforming. Um, the responses that we got back were that they were not interested in any purchasing or sale. Um, we do have, uh, two, uh, one witness for you tonight. Uh, and that would be, uh, Mr. Paul Fletcher, uh, our engineer and planner, uh, who will testify as to the, uh, justifications for this. We also have Mr. Uh, Faruqi jaws. He's the, um, uh, the representative of deer park who is here in case there's any specific questions that the board has, uh, for him, but, uh, uh, since we're trucking along here pretty quickly, I don't want to take up any more time and I would, uh, appreciate that I would, uh, turn it over to Mr. Fletcher, uh, for his testimony,
Speaker 2Mr. Fletcher, are you present?
Speaker 8I need to swear you in,
Speaker 2Could you raise your right hand? You swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth.
Speaker 8Yes, I do your name and address please. Yes, it's Paul J. Fletcher, uh, 54 west pond road. Hope lawn, New Jersey.
Speaker 7Um, Mr. Fletcher, have you, uh, testified in front of this board in the past?
Speaker 8Uh, yes, I have, uh, also numerous boards, uh, throughout Middlesex county in New Jersey. In fact, I was, uh, uh, recognized as an expert in engineering and planning last night at the Piscataway planning board.
Speaker 2I believe his credentials are acceptable credentials up fine with me,
Speaker 7Please proceed. Uh, Mr. Fletcher, uh, the floor is yours. If you can let us know about this application,
Speaker 8Certainly, uh, the subject property commonly known as, uh, 1122 Brookside road. Um, lot 12 in block 8 0 0 1. Uh, it is a, uh, a lot that is a well-known access of the, uh, of the area that's required in the <inaudible> zone, uh, which is, uh, 10,000 square feet where almost an acre or 43,561 square feet. Uh, however we do have, uh, uh, a lot with, uh, non-conforming, uh, 73.26 feet wide. Uh, although we are, uh, an access of 500 feet, uh, almost 600 feet in depth. Uh, so clearly we have the area that we have lots of buildable area, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family home, uh, which will comply with all the other, uh, setback requirements with regards to side yard, front yard, rear yard, a lot coverage by building a building height, et cetera. Uh, so I, I, I believe that this is clearly a C1, uh, hardship of various, uh, where the board can, uh, approve this variance because, um, as, uh, Mr. Richard mentioned that we've attempted to buy additional land from property owners on either side, neither one is, uh, prepared to sell us any land.
Speaker 8Uh, so again, it's a hardship situation, uh, to, uh, to not allow a building to be constructed would be essentially a taking of the land. Uh, and, uh, I think the, the applicant, uh, uh, is, is not requesting anything other than the existing non-conformity to be allowed to be, uh, utilized, uh, uh, in the manner that's, uh, uh, allowed in this, uh, R 10 residential zone. I don't see any, uh, adverse effect of these own plan or the master plan of the township of a Piscataway. And I think the, uh, the board can approve this variance, uh, was no a detrimental effect to those documents or to the neighbor. In fact, I believe that, uh, there's an existing, uh, foundation, uh, which is basically an eyesore of it will be removed. There'll be a new aesthetically pleasing home, which will be an asset to the neighborhood. Uh, I think all in all, it's, it's a, uh, it's a good application. I think the board and, uh, uh, can, uh, in good face, uh, prove this application.
Speaker 7Thank you, Mr. Fletcher. Um, I would turn Mr. Fletcher over to, uh, any questions on the more,
Speaker 1Um, Henry,
Speaker 4Um, Mr. Chairman. I have a conflict with this application, so I believe Dawn wrote the report. I think it's pretty self-explanatory maybe Jamaica.
Speaker 2Yeah, I can handle it. Um, Mr. Henderson, um, Mr. Arch, have you had an opportunity to re re review Ms. Corporan Gardella his report? I
Speaker 7Have your honor, uh, sorry. I have certainly, uh, I I've, uh, I've had two reports. There's one from Ms. Porphyrin, and there's also one from DPW. I have had an opportunity to discuss that with my clients and we, uh, absolutely agree to any conditions in the report that they're very minor.
Speaker 2Uh, and I agree that they are minor. Um, Mr. Chairman, so I think the board can proceed.
Speaker 1Alright. Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant or that last witness,
Speaker 8The new house gonna be? You told me about 2,800 square feet, plus the garage.
Speaker 1Thank you, Mr. Miranda, anyone else on the board hearing none going to open up to the public portion, anyone in the public portion have any questions for this application and, or the witness had just testified. Brian wreck.
Speaker 2Hello, Brian. Yep. Mr. Rec, can you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth. I do your name and address please. Brian rack 1247 Brookside road. Thank you. Uh, I'm I'm, I'm definitely in support of this. We've been looking at that horrible foundation for the last five.
Speaker 9Every time we walked by it. I'm just curious. So the property next door is owned by the town. The town didn't want to sell you the land, so you didn't need this, uh,
Speaker 2Variants.
Speaker 7Um, I will note that we did, uh, send a, a letter of interest, uh, to the town. And, uh, my understanding was that, um, I think because of a wetland situation, I'm not positive, but there was a, uh, there was not interested in selling.
Speaker 9Okay. Yeah, that was my only question.
Speaker 1Thank you, sir. Smuggling. Anyone else? No, sir. Okay. Public portion is closed and I will make a motion to approve this application. Second. Thank you all second Clerk,
Speaker 0Please call the roll. Mr. Tillery. Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Reggio, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando. Yes. And Jeremy Kao. Yes.
Speaker 1Yes.
Speaker 2Mr. Arch, we will memorialize this at our next meeting and send a copy to you.
Speaker 7Thank you so much. Have a wonderful night and good luck on the 23rd. Thank
Speaker 0You. Thank you.
Speaker 1Let's move over to item number 14. Adoption of the resolutions from the regular meeting of July 8th, 2021.
Speaker 2The first resolution is Carmelo Medina. Uh, this was an application that the applicant decided to withdraw during his testimony. I will need a motion and a second on that. And then a roll call.
Speaker 1I'd make a motion to accept withdrawal. And I get a second. That was Weissman. I think clerk, please call the roll.
Speaker 0Mr. Tillery. Yes. Mr. Weissman. Mr. Ratio, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando and chairman Cahill.
Speaker 1Yes.
Speaker 2Next application was, or next resolution is Rubin for gaze. This application was approved. Um, Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Reggio. Yes. Mr. Patel, the Mirando Fairman Cahill. Yes. Next is Santos Lopez. This application is approved. Um, Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Reggio. Yes. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando? Yes. Yes. Uh, next is Ridgedale. Gordon's a Piscataway. This application was approved Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Weissman? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Mirando? Yes. Jeremy Cahill. Yes. Uh, last is Mohammed Raekwon. This was an application for a certification, a non-conforming use, which you approved? Uh, Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Weissman? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Dr. Patel Mirando. Yes.
Speaker 1Yes. Jeremy Cahill. Yes. Those are all the resolutions that I have for you this evening. Okay. I remember 15. That's optional. The minutes from the regular meeting of July 8th, 20, 20. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Number 16. Make a motion to adjourn. I'll second. All in favor. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Once again, thank you all for coming out and volunteering and let's push a Warren Zevon, speedy recovery. He got knee surgery. I will absolutely take care of Warren. You guys have a great everyone by all recording.