Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on December 12 2024
Note: Transcripts are generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Please listen to the recording (below) if you feel any text is inaccurate.
Speaker 0 00:00:00 You know, whenever you are ready, systems are a go. Speaker 1 00:00:03 Thank you, George. Go ahead, chairman. Speaker 2 00:00:05 Okay. 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 at the municipal building notice made available to the township clerk notice sent to the carrier News and the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the role? Speaker 1 00:00:22 Mr. Tillery? Here. Mr. Patel? Here. Mr. Regio. Here. Mr. Bla. Here. Mr. Mitterando here and Chairman Cahill Speaker 2 00:00:33 Here. Please stand and, and salute the flag over my shoulder. Here I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. Kinneally, do we have any changes to tonight? Tonight's agenda? Yes. Speaker 3 00:00:55 We have several changes to tonight's agenda. The two Ronco development applications, 1 46 Hillside Avenue and one 60 Hillside Avenue are adjourned at the applicant's request until January 9th, 2025. With no further notice, the application of Mary Jo Barki is postponed until January 9th, 2025. She must notice the people on the property owner's list within 200 feet. Finally, on switch 51 New England Avenue is adjourned until January 23rd, 2025 with no further notice. Those are all the changes that I had. Speaker 2 00:01:36 Thank you, Mr. Speaker 4 00:01:39 You all good? Alright. Okay, good bye. Speaker 2 00:01:43 Okay, let's move on to item number 6 24 dash ZB dash 76 V. New singular wireless at t Speaker 3 00:01:51 Is Christopher Quinn present? Speaker 5 00:01:53 Yes. Good evening. Can everyone hear me okay? Speaker 3 00:01:56 Yes, we can. Sounds Speaker 2 00:01:57 Great, sir. Speaker 5 00:01:58 Thank you very much. Speaker 3 00:02:01 It's all yours. Speaker 5 00:02:02 Okay, great. Thank you. So again, as mentioned, my name's Christopher Quinn. I'm with Firm Pinellas Halper. I'm here on behalf of the applicant, Inger Wireless, P-C-S-L-L-C, which everyone knows is at and t. This is, I'm gonna give you kind of a, a prequel. This is the first of a several applications you're gonna hear me on over the next several months. It's one of those modification projects where your ordinance and your practice of the township has been to require carriers to come before the board to make a formal interpretation that any modification to their facilities comply with all requirements. They meet all code requirements and that they're appropriate and fit within the federal guidelines for a permitted modification. Just by way of background, this is at t's proposing modification to all of its sites in Piscataway. In fact, primarily, almost all of its sites in the entire country. Speaker 5 00:02:57 Right now, it's part of a national, nationwide equipment modification project they're doing where they're basically replacing most of their equipment and most of their antennas on, on these facilities. In order to do that, it's done in order to accommodate future growth and development for the network for future needs coming for the decades ahead. But for this particular application, the property, it's a 1711 second South Second Street block 2 0 1 lot 2.02. It's in the M1 zone at t's had antennas on top of this water tank for decades. I think I've been here at least three other times in the past 10 years for previous modification applications here. Speaker 5 00:03:39 What this modification is, is at t's going to replace the existing 12 antennas on the top of the tank with nine new antennas. There's equipment, there's a shelter inside the building. There's gonna replace some of the equipment cabinets inside the shelter and on the outside of the shelter where there's a rack that replaces some of the kind of infrastructure that's on the rack that's outside of the shelter as well. No ground disturbance, no increase in height, no increase in width. It's a fairly straightforward project, no ground disturbance being proposed. So it's really just a, a simple modification of their equipment and swapping out equipment for, for Speaker 3 00:04:18 Mr. Quinn, can I interrupt you? Yes. The board's heard dozens of these applications recently, so I just have a couple of questions for you. No new variances are being created, is that correct? Correct. Okay. You're not going any higher than the current? Speaker 5 00:04:32 No. It'll be at the exact same height. Speaker 3 00:04:33 And you have already said there's no ground disturbance. Speaker 5 00:04:36 Correct. Speaker 3 00:04:37 You've supplied an RF report showing that it complies? Speaker 5 00:04:41 Yes, we have. There's no change in emissions or well below the emissions requirements Speaker 3 00:04:44 And a structural engineer's report saying that it can handle the load? That's Speaker 5 00:04:48 Correct. Speaker 3 00:04:49 Okay. Mr. Chairman, that's normally all we require on these applications. Speaker 2 00:04:54 Thank you Mr. Cane. I think we can move on as well. Do any other members of the board have any questions for this? Speaker 6 00:04:59 Any, any, any prior conditions you should extend to this as well? Speaker 5 00:05:04 Yes. That, that's one of the requirements as well pre as well. Speaker 2 00:05:10 Thank you. John. Any other members of the board of any questions or comments? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions about this application? Speaker 1 00:05:21 No. One chairman. Speaker 2 00:05:21 Thank you. Laura, I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? I second Paul roll. Speaker 1 00:05:28 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Bla? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes. Speaker 3 00:05:39 Mr. Quinn, we'll memorialize this at our next meeting. Speaker 5 00:05:41 Great. Thank you. And I have a feeling I might be seeing you next in the next meeting, so happy holidays everyone. Have a great new You Speaker 2 00:05:46 Too, sir. Thank you. Take care. Thanks. Speaker 5 00:05:48 Bye. Speaker 2 00:05:48 Item number 7 24 dash ZB dash zero nine slash 10 B, wellspring Adult Care. Thank you. Good evening, members Speaker 7 00:05:56 Of of the board, board professionals. I'm Tim Arch, attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. As you may recall, I'm here representing Wellspring. You may recall Wellspring put their case on before your board at the last hearing. We went through all of our witnesses. We put our case on the record and I believe that the, the chairman and Mr. Kinneally had a few questions. Wanted the professional staff to review the plans just to make sure that they had time to review that. I'm happy to report that I, I personally met with, with Ms. Corcoran. We went over all the plans and I'll, I'll defer to staff, but I believe that all their questions have been answered and that they are all satisfied as to any questions that they had of those. In addition, we have taken that time from the last meeting there was a request or a condition that was requested of us was to enter into a developer's agreement. Speaker 7 00:06:45 We have finalized that developer's agreement and worked out and negotiated all the terms of that developer's agreement since the last meeting. I do have my client here, Mr. Ben Honing, as well as Joan Marie Granado, who you will recall both testified at the last hearing in case the board has any additional questions for them. But I do believe that we placed our entire case on the record last time. We will stand by that prior testimony, and I believe that we have worked out to the satisfaction of your township professionals any lingering questions or any other conditions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker 2 00:07:20 Thank you, Mr. March. Jonathan, do you have any comments to add to this? Speaker 8 00:07:24 I think we will address everything through a developer's agreement. I just wanna make mention of a tail condition for the access for the accessible route and the pickup and drop off logistics. Speaker 3 00:07:39 And Mr. Chairman, if I may jump in there, I, I have reviewed the developer's agreement. It does contain that tail condition, which is essentially says we're gonna keep an eye on this for a year, and if the Piscataway professional staff have any concerns about safety, they may have to come back and rework the drop off area. I also have a resolution tonight that contains the same condition, but I concur with Mr. Arch that it appears that we've answered all of the open questions from the last hearing, and I don't know that any testimony is necessary unless the board has questions. Speaker 2 00:08:11 Got it. Thank you. Jim, any other members of the board have any questions or comments? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public portion have any questions or comments about this application? Ms. Buckley? Speaker 1 00:08:24 No. Chairman. Speaker 2 00:08:25 Okay. Let's close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve this applica, this application with the developer Ag agreement. Can I get a second? Thank you. Please call the role Speaker 1 00:08:36 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Blo? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Speaker 2 00:08:46 Yes. Speaker 3 00:08:47 Mr. Arch, we'll memorialize the resolution at the end of this meeting. Speaker 7 00:08:51 Thank you so much. Speaker 2 00:08:52 Okay, Tim, we'll see you in 30 seconds. I'm Speaker 1 00:08:54 Sorry. I'm sorry. Ms. Buckley, who seconded that motion? Kalpesh Patel. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 2 00:09:01 Stay in 10 seconds, Tim. Alright, number 8 24 dash ZB dash 68 V. Grand Homes Investments. Speaker 7 00:09:10 Thank you, chairman. Again, I'm Tim March, attorney license of the State of New Jersey. I'm here representing Grand Home Investments. By way of a little bit of background, this was, this is a home that has already been built. Plans were submitted to the township, reviewed permits were granted. The home was built as per those plans and an as-built survey was taken after the home was built. And to my client's surprise, the as-built survey differed from the architectural plans that were submitted. When I say it differed, it's actually exactly the same as the plans. The architect candidly admitted that he made a mistake in the calculations when he submitted it. And so there was not a coverage variance caught at the time that it was submitted in. So the, the home is actually built exactly the same as the plans that were originally submitted indicated. It's just that the architect screwed up his calculation essentially at calculating the overall building coverage. And so instead of a 20% building coverage, which is what is permitted in the zone, there was a, I believe, let me just check the agenda. I believe it was a 22 7 Speaker 2 00:10:19 If I'm correct. Speaker 7 00:10:21 Let me just look real quick. 22.7% building coverage. I do have my client here, Mr. Amir Ali, in case the board has any questions. I will note that I did do a little bit of research as to the board's practices in the past. I know that I found multiple examples of the board granting these minor coverage variances from greater than 20%. 22, 23, 20 4% is not uncommon. I believe I was, I was actually present at a hearing one time where Mr. Hinterstein said that a a two perc 20 to 22% was di minimis. I made note of that because Henry almost never said that anything was di minimi. So I certainly, I certainly kept track of that. So I believe that it is something that the board can certainly grant. One of the conditions that we were asked to agree to was that we would also enter into a developer's agreement just in case there were any, any other issues that the township needed to work out. We're certainly happy to do that. And one of the things that I do wanna stress on the record is that my client is aware that this was an honest mistake if this ever came before the board on some other house in the future where this was a, a trend, he certainly is aware that, that the board will view this as intentional and not an error. And so you're not gonna see this, this sort of thing coming up in the future. Good Speaker 2 00:11:44 Call. Good call. I'm sorry, Speaker 7 00:11:46 Unless the board has any other questions of, of myself or my client. Speaker 2 00:11:51 I was just about to ask him. So let's, we can move this on quickly. Any other members of the board of any questions for this application? Comments, hearing done? Just, Speaker 6 00:12:01 Just procedurally, did you file, did you file for a variance as we're just discussed? Speaker 7 00:12:08 Yes. We're we're here not as a, we're here as a variance application. Yes. Speaker 2 00:12:12 Variance application. Okay. Thank you John. Any other members questions? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? Speaker 1 00:12:25 No. One chairman. Speaker 2 00:12:26 Okay. Close the public portion. I'd make a motion to approve this application. I would second with the developer's agreement. Of course. Can I get a roll call? Speaker 1 00:12:36 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blo? Speaker 2 00:12:42 Yes. Speaker 1 00:12:43 Mr. Mi Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes. Speaker 2 00:12:48 We will memorialize this in our next meeting. Speaker 7 00:12:50 Thank you. Speaker 2 00:12:52 Thank you sir. Let's move on to item number 9 24 dash ZB dash 64 V. Lisa Williams Gaffey. Speaker 7 00:13:02 Thank you members, the board, board professionals. Still Tim Arch still in Speaker 1 00:13:05 Third time's a charm. Speaker 7 00:13:06 Third time's a charm. Well, I hope so. Anyway, I'm here representing Ms. Lisa Williams Gaffey. This is for a property at 40 Bristol Road. This is a request for a use variance, not a preexisting non-conforming, but a use variance in order to keep the existing multifamily two-family home at the location. We've provided documentation to the board and to the staff professionals. This was a home that was actually moved from an another location and placed on this lot when the lot was created through subdivision back in 1960. It was moved as a multi-family home and it was placed on that lot. In fact, the home that is right next door that was on the other side of the, of the subdivision is also a almost identical multi-family home that was owned by my client's uncle. My client's father owned the home. That is, that is in question today. Speaker 7 00:14:02 He, in 1960, from 1960 until now, it's been always maintained as a, as a two-family home. There have not been any significant changes made to it. I do have my client who is present today in case the board has questions. And I also have Ms. Allison Coffin who's our professional planner. I do want to acknowledge the reports that I received. The first is from Mr. Chadwick that was dated November 12th, 2024. He indicated that the photographs clearly show the building as a two-family structure. He also indicated that, that he recommends any fire inspections be conducted to ensure emergency detectors and proper code is up to place. We absolutely agree that that proper fire code applies that that is the case. And then the other staff report that I have is dated December 2nd, 2024. And I'll never do this before. I'll never do this again, but I'm gonna do it tonight. I'm gonna read it in its entirety. Documentation has been provided showing that the home was a two-family dwelling back in 1960, has been used as a two-family since that time. The dwelling is maintained and there is sufficient room for parking. Furthermore, the lot is conforming and the dwelling conforms to the setback requirements for the zone. The staff has no concerns for the subject property to have a continued use as a two-family dwelling period. Speaker 2 00:15:20 Okay. That's, that's, that's a smoking gun for me as well. Speaker 7 00:15:24 That's gonna be frame, yes. Speaker 2 00:15:26 Any other I'm cut you to the quick thing 'cause I think this is a, an open and shut case at this point. Once the staff gives us a report like that. You, you, you're good to go. One thing I will, Speaker 7 00:15:38 The only thing that I will add is we do have Ms. Coffin, our planner here, just for the sake of making sure that the record is complete for justification. 'cause it is a use variance. I would like to, for her to very, very briefly just put on the record that the justifications in case there is ever any prerogative red action. If Speaker 2 00:15:56 Your, if your expert could be very brief, Speaker 9 00:15:58 I can be. Absolutely. I promise. Speaker 2 00:16:00 Thank you ma'am. You Speaker 3 00:16:03 Raise your right hand. You swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth. Speaker 9 00:16:07 Yes, I do. Speaker 3 00:16:08 I believe you've been accepted as an expert planner before this board previously. Speaker 9 00:16:11 Yes. And my license is still in good standing. Thank Speaker 3 00:16:14 You. Your name and address please. Speaker 9 00:16:15 Allison Coffin, C-O-F-F-I-N. I work for James W. Higgins Associates. We're at 14 Tilton Drive in Ocean Township, New Jersey. Thank you. Since this application requires a use variance, we do need to satisfy the positive and negative criteria. It's my opinion in this case, the positive criteria are satisfied in that the site is particularly suited to the use because the site has been developed with a two-family dwelling for 64 years. It is, it is a two-family dwelling and that does lend it towards the particular suitability for being a two-family dwelling. It has two units separate, two kitchens, separate living spaces and separate entrances. The site provides adequate parking for the two units. There's no substantial detriment to the use variance. It's occupy the site for 64 years without issue. It is visually in character with the area. In fact, it's one of the first homes to be located on that road. It helped establish the character of that area and it's my opinion that the continued use of this site as it has been for decades, would not create a substantial imposition to your master plan and zoning ordinance. Speaker 7 00:17:22 Thank you very, very Speaker 9 00:17:22 Much. Welcome. Speaker 2 00:17:24 Okay. Any other members of the board have any questions or comments about this application? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions about this application? Mr. Buckley? Speaker 1 00:17:35 No. One chairman Speaker 2 00:17:36 Close the public portion. I make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? I second. Thank you. Please. Full the roll. Speaker 1 00:17:43 Mr. Tillery? Speaker 7 00:17:44 Yes. Speaker 1 00:17:45 Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Speaker 2 00:17:48 Mr. Blo? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes. Mr. Urch. We'll memorialize it on our next meeting. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful holiday everybody. Everybody. You too. Take care sir. I believe we're up to item 12. Yes. Yes. Okay. That's 24 dash ZB dash 60 B 36 Haight Avenue Height. Hey, but Speaker 10 00:18:16 I'm, but I'm not a hater. Good evening. Speaker 10 00:18:19 Good evening. Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, Kevin Morse, Woodbridge, New Jersey appearing on behalf of the applicant. 36 Haight, A LLC Subject property is located at 36 8 Avenue in Piscataway Township or before you seeking certification that the existing two-family dwelling at the property constitutes a lawful, preexisting, non-conforming use or alternatively use variance approval. Although I don't believe we will ever need to make the use variance request. Before you proceed, I would just ask to confirm, I have submitted our affidavits of publication and mailing. I wanted to make sure they have are received there in order. So the board has jurisdiction to proceed. Speaker 2 00:18:56 They have been received and they are in order. Speaker 10 00:18:58 Alright, thank you. Alright. My intention to streamline this matter, Mr. Chairman, is I'm gonna put some very brief information on the record and then just ask my client to confirm under oath what I've set forth. If that's acceptable to you sir, Speaker 2 00:19:11 Please proceed. Speaker 10 00:19:12 Alright. So I set forth in the application rider and I'm really summing it up. The subject property is a two-family duplex or side by side style dwelling at the subject property. My client purchased the two-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling in 2007. At the time it was purchased and as it exists today, there are two separate front and rear entrances. One for each unit, separate driveways for each unit. Ample off street parking in those driveways for each unit. Two separate electric and gas meters, two separate furnaces and water heaters. Again, all be speaking that this is a two-family dwelling. We submitted as part of our application package. The tax records obtained from Piscataway Township, which clearly show back to the 1956 Val card, that the subject property was being used then as a two-family dwelling. Really the leap of faith is, was it being used prior to 1953 when this municipality adapted its zoning ordinance. Speaker 10 00:20:12 We note that the tax records themselves show the property was built in 1914. I think it's clear based upon the location, all the factors that I've just described, that the subject property was built into two family dwelling. It's been existing about a hundred years or or a century. And I do note that it's on an oversized lot. In fact, this lot is twice the required lot size and the subject property even meets the density for two units because it's, it's like a double lot. We had the opportunity to look at the staff reports. There's one issued by the in-house staff dated October 29th, 2024, where I quote The certification of the pre-existing non-conforming dwelling use should be favorably considered by the board. Close quote. You don't get that very often. Sure. Speaker 10 00:21:03 And then we did look at Mr. Chadwick's report. There's no issues in any of these reports and we are aware that if the board were to certify this as a pre-existing non-conforming use, you really can't impose conditions. However, in Mr. Chadwick's report, he noted there's some wires on the side of the building that are a bit unsightly. I can tell you that the applicant looked at that. He's spoken with his electrician and in the spirit of cooperation, the applicant is prepared to strap or otherwise clean that up so it looks nicer. It's a good thought and a good comment and something he would do anyway. Now it's been brought to our attention, so I would That's awesome. I would just ask Mr. Profaci to be sworn really for the purposes a good confirming everything I just told you. Speaker 3 00:21:43 Mr. Please proceed. You raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Speaker 11 00:21:48 Yes. Speaker 3 00:21:49 Your name and address please? Speaker 11 00:21:51 John Profaci. 15 Cleveland Avenue, Monroe Township, New Jersey. Speaker 3 00:21:56 Thank you. Speaker 10 00:21:57 All right. Mr. Pro Profaci, you're a principal of the LLC that owns the property, correct? Speaker 11 00:22:03 Yes. Speaker 10 00:22:04 And you've owned the property since 2007. First in your own name and then you put it in an LLC that you're the a hundred percent owner of, is that correct? Correct. Right now you heard my introduction to the board, all the information that I just placed on the record, including your willingness to correct the wires on the side of the building. Is that all true and accurate? Speaker 11 00:22:23 Yes. Speaker 10 00:22:24 Okay. Other than that, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to get that on the record for the benefit of the board. Sir, I do have Mr. I do have Mr. Resa in the wings. He is our professional planner who I thank because he helped us get all this information together. He, he would testify, I'm not gonna call him that he believes the record supports certification, but unless the board has an issue, I'm not gonna belabor the testimony. I think it's clear that this was a two-family for about a hundred years. This one makes sense. It's about the clearest case I've had and I've done a number of these before the board as you're aware. And we respectfully request that you grant our application and certify 36th Avenue as a lawful, preexisting, nonconforming two-family dwelling. Speaker 2 00:23:08 Thank you Kevin. Anyone on the board have any questions or comments? Hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone on the public portion have any comments or questions about this application? Speaker 1 00:23:22 No. One chairman. Speaker 2 00:23:23 Okay. Close the public portion. I'd make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? Speaker 1 00:23:28 The second Speaker 2 00:23:28 Thanks, please call the roll. Speaker 1 00:23:30 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Bla? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Speaker 2 00:23:41 Yes. Speaker 3 00:23:42 Your application's been approved? We'll memorialize it in our at our next meeting. Speaker 10 00:23:46 Alright. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, it's my last zoning board meeting for the year, so I wish all of you the best for the holiday season and a blessed New Year. Thank you. Speaker 2 00:23:56 Thank you. Let's settle us up. Number 15, resolution from the regular meeting of November 14th, 2024. Speaker 3 00:24:06 First resolution is order to four, which you voted to approve. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Next is Juan Torres, which you voted to approve. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Speaker 2 00:24:29 Yes. Speaker 3 00:24:30 Next is Liberty Tech, which you voted to approve. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Speaker 2 00:24:41 Yes. Speaker 3 00:24:42 Last is Wellspring adult daycare, which we heard tonight, which you voted to approve. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Speaker 2 00:24:53 Yes. Speaker 3 00:24:54 Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Those are all the resolutions I have this evening. Speaker 2 00:24:59 Okay. Item number 16 is adoption of minutes from the regular meeting of November 14th, 2024. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Item number 17 is adjourn. Have every one of you please have a great safe holiday, whether it's Christmas, Hanukkah, whatever you personally celebrate and be safe and my best to all you, my friends and your families. Thank you. God bless you. Bless you all guys. Take care everyone. See you next year. Yay. Happy and healthy everyone. You too, John. Thanks. Good night everyone. Care.