Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on
Last updated
Transcript generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Use the audio player to verify any passage.
Aug 13 2026 · Zoning
0:00
–:––
Speaker 0 Got that going on.
Speaker 1 Okay, Laura, all is good on our end. You're live on air.
Speaker 0 Thank you. It's all you Chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you. Zoning Board of adjustment meeting will please come to order. Adequate notice this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the carrier news notice posted on the bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available to the township clerk notice sent to the Courier News and the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the roll?
Speaker 0 Mr. Weisman? Here. Mr. Tillery? Here. Mr. Patel. Mr. Regio? Here. Mr. Mitterando? Here. Mr. Ali Here And Chairman Cahill Here.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Will everyone please state Pat Patel Here. Sorry.
Speaker 0 Ah, thanks. Kalpesh Kalpesh is
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Flag America to the Republic for which it stands. One nation, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and Justice. Thank you Mr. Kinneally. Do we have any changes to tonight's agenda?
Speaker 3 Yes. We have two changes to tonight's agenda. The Muslim Center application hose Lane West will not be heard tonight. It will be heard on September 24th with no further notice by the applicant. NDK Realty South Washington Avenue is not going to be heard tonight. It will be heard also on September 24th with no further notice by the applicant. That's all the changes that I have.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you for that information sir. Let's move on to item number 6 26 dash ZB dash 29 V St. Moses and Amba Optic Church.
Speaker 4 Alright, thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Kevin Morris. I represent the St. Moses and Amba Ham Coptic Orthodox Church. Subject property is block 9 9 0 3 lot 9.03 50 Davidson Road East Property presently contains an existing two-family dwelling. It's located in the R 20 zone and we are before the board this evening Seeking to confirm that the status of the dwelling is a two-family dwelling is a lawful and permitted use of a property by way of a use variance request also with some bulk variances. Before we proceed, I would just like to confirm that we had submitted our affidavits of publication, that they were received an order so that the board has jurisdiction to proceed.
Speaker 3 They were received, they are in order that the board has jurisdiction.
Speaker 4 Right. Thank you Mr. Kinneally. I have two witnesses, father Gregory Beckett, although I don't see him on. And then I have Angela Tuto who is our licensed professional engineer and planner.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Good evening, I'm here.
Speaker 4 We have Father Beckett here. Great. So by way of introduction again the property's in the R 20 zone. It has an existing two-family dwelling. My client, the applicant purchased this property in 2019 and its configuration use as a two-family dwelling at the time. The available tan real estate tax records that we were able to obtain that I submitted with the application is the 1974 reval card which shows a checked office, a two family. That's as far back as the tax records go but they confirm that there's been a two family at this location since at least the last 46 years. Now the property was bought by the church or acquired when it came up for sale because it's adjacent to other property owned by the church. It is a two family dwelling that is rented out on the open rental market. It has two electric meters, two gas meters and two furnaces, one for each of the units. No construction or changes to the property are proposed except for the removal of an existing vinyl fence at the rear of the property. The bulk variances are preexisting conditions, nothing new there. And again, the church makes this application to just legitimize or otherwise confirm the two family is a lawful use of the property. So I have one question for Father Beckett. If he could be sworn please.
Speaker 3 Father Beckett, could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 5 Yes I do.
Speaker 3 Thank you. Your your name please.
Speaker 5 Father Gregory Beckett. Thank
Speaker 3 You.
Speaker 4 Alright Father Beckett, you've just listened to my introduction and description of the application and the church's use of the property. Is that correct?
Speaker 5 That's correct Mr. Morris. Alright.
Speaker 4 Now how long have you been at the church father?
Speaker 5 2007.
Speaker 4 Okay. And what is your position in the church?
Speaker 5 I'm a priest.
Speaker 4 And you're fully familiar with church operations as well as this property that was acquired by the church in 2019, is that correct?
Speaker 5 Yes sir.
Speaker 4 Is everything that I've just placed on the record before the board as to this application, the use of the property, is that all true and accurate and would that be your testimony if you were asked those same questions?
Speaker 5 That is true and accurate.
Speaker 4 Alright, so then unless there's questions of Father Beckett, I just wanted to get his confirmation in the board's discretion I would just call Mr. Tuto to get into the rest of the application. Father Beckett of course is available for any questions. Please
Speaker 5 Proceed. That's up to you. Proceed.
Speaker 4 Alright, so if we could have wo please
Speaker 3 Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 6 Yes sir. I do. Your
Speaker 3 Name please.
Speaker 6 Jeffs Angelo j Tuto, V-A-L-E-T-U-T-T-O 4:24 AM Moy Avenue, Woodbridge licensed professional engineer, licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. And both licenses are active as of this date.
Speaker 3 And I believe Mr. Tuto has been accepted by this board as an engineer and planning expert in the past?
Speaker 4 Yes, on on many prior occasions. When we would ask that you accept again without further description of his credentials that's fine. Proceed. Thank you. Alright. Now you've also listened to my introduction of the application, Mr. Tuto. Is that
Speaker 6 Correct? Yes sir, that's correct. And it is in line with everything that I've done in my research.
Speaker 4 Alright, you prepared The variance plan is that that is before the board, is that correct?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, that is correct.
Speaker 4 It shows the existing two-family structure, does it not? It does. You're confirming also we're not making any changes to the proposed structure, not creating any additions, not creating any new variances, is that right?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, that's correct.
Speaker 4 Vault conditions are existing conditions only, is that correct? They are. The only change is not in addition but rather removal of a vinyl fence at the rear of the property. And that is zoning board meeting on the variance plan, is that correct?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, that's correct.
Speaker 4 Okay. One item in particular for which we have requested a variance is there is a six foot high solid fence in the front of the property, is that correct?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, that is correct. It's a a stained red wood solid stockade fence.
Speaker 4 Right. And it's our understanding from Father Beckett that that was really put up for the, the tenants to afford some front privacy in the front yard, is that correct?
Speaker 6 It is and based on my observation it does that also.
Speaker 4 Alright. Now look, the tan ordinance requires 50% only solid and this is a hundred percent solid fence, is that correct?
Speaker 6 Correct. Plus only four foot in height.
Speaker 4 And this is a six foot fence, correct? Yes sir. Alright. This is a bit of an anomaly based upon the location of the property and and the use of the property in general, but have you from an engineering standpoint reviewed the six foot fence vis-a-vis egress ingress site distances on the road and so forth?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, I have and, and based on my visitation and going out a vehicle who would be leaving the property would stop and have sufficient view to the left and to the right beyond where the limited offense is installed to be able to see well over the 350 400 feet that's required. So there's no problem whatsoever with regard to site visibility in the present condition that the fence exists
Speaker 4 And no site triangle in issues of any nature also
Speaker 6 None
Speaker 4 Whatsoever. All right. So I know the applicant and this will be up to the board, is going to request that variance to allow the six foot fence to continue, is that
Speaker 6 Correct? Yes sir, that is correct.
Speaker 4 Alright. Now I believe your testimony has, from an engineering standpoint, the plan has addressed the July 22nd staff report and I know that you'll through your planning testimony address Mr. Chadwick's memo that we received today, the board planner, is that correct?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, that is correct. Right.
Speaker 4 So
Speaker 6 And I believe quite honestly, number and two with regard to the number of years that it's been a two family was in your opening testimony as well as your questioning and opening statements with regard to the nature of the tenants being open market and not members of the church family
Speaker 4 Right now. So it, you have the oppor, you've had the opportunity to, besides your engineering work, to analyze the application from a planning perspective. Is that
Speaker 6 Correct? That is correct. And as you indicated, this is a use variance and we have to prove with regard to the positive criteria, special reasons and the fact that the variance we're seeking outweighs any detriment or anything with regard to the municipal ordinance and land use.
Speaker 4 Alright, so to you again, we're, we're requesting the use variance, the bulk variances which are existing conditions and again the variance for defense, is that correct?
Speaker 6 That's correct. And both of the other bulk variances are with regard to the depth of the property as well as the front yard setback, which both are somewhat not quite di minimis, the required depth is 150, we're at 1 35 0.99 just under 14 feet and the front yard setback requirement is 40 and we're at 35.28. Both existing conditions and have been there since the dwelling was constructed based on my observation and does not appear to create any particular issue with regard to the neighborhood or the area in general.
Speaker 4 Is that also from an engineering standpoint? Would that be your opinion?
Speaker 6 Yes sir, it is.
Speaker 4 Okay. So let's talk about the use variance, the positive criteria that you're about to mention.
Speaker 6 Correct. First is in we've taking a look at the were special region with regard to the advancements to the purposes of admissible land use act commonly referred to as 40 55 D dash two. And I believe just to keep it brief, there are four I wanna place on the record to support the variance letter A to encourage municipal action to guide appropriate use or development of all lands in this state in a manner which will promote public health, safety, morals and general welfare letter C to provide adequate light air and open space letter G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial and industrial uses and open space both public and private according to their respective environmental requirements. In order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens and letter M to encourage the coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping land development with a view of lessening the cost of such development and to the more efficient use of the land in this case, we are pretty much utilizing everything that's there so that all of the items I've listed are my opinion would qualify based on the particular use of the property and what we are seeking the board's approval from tonight to, to support.
Speaker 4 But you find that the site is particularly suited for this
Speaker 6 Use? Yes, I do. The subject property is for its age well-maintained, two family dwelling that has been in existence based on the records that we both reviewed from the tax assessor card reval in 19 74, 46 years and probably even longer than that. But at this point what we can support is that it's in records as 46 years the existing property has sufficient off street parking for the continued use of the property, which is one two bedroom and one one bedroom, which would require three off street parking spaces. And this more than adequately has sufficient for the three spaces without having to have cars back up one after another so that vehicles can get into the property and then drive out without having to back out onto the road and not having to interfere with someone else's ability to park on the property.
Speaker 4 Alright, and again, no changes are required to maintain this two-family dwelling as you've discussed. Is that
Speaker 6 Correct? That's correct. From my observation at the property.
Speaker 4 Right. What about the enhanced quality of proof?
Speaker 6 The application in my opinion, is not inconsistent with the surrounding property, which wouldn't, in all honesty wouldn't be difficult. There's a a, a variety of uses within the area and that the township master plan and zoning ordinance is also would be consistent with it. The continued use of property as a two-family dwelling will not have, in my opinion, a negative impact on the adjacent properties as it fits into and is consistent with the fabric and character of the neighborhood. And as Mr. Chadwick indicated in his report number three, that the use is isolated from other residential development and it abuts as we've in we said earlier, church owned property.
Speaker 4 Alright, what about the negative criteria?
Speaker 6 Two items. Number one, without substantial detriment to the public good for a reason that I have just testified, I see no detriment to the public good and no negative impact on any adjacent properties and number two, without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance as the application is not inconsistent with the master plan and zoning ordinance for these reasons that I've already stated.
Speaker 4 Alright. Now we also need bulk variance relief really for the preexisting conditions and of course for the fence that we're requesting. Is that right?
Speaker 6 Yes sir. That is correct.
Speaker 4 Alright. Now I know you have an opinion that you see bulk variances under the C one or undue hardship based upon the uniqueness of this property, the fact that the dwelling is already located in place
Speaker 6 And the size of the property is such that we cannot acquire any additional property without adversely impacting any adjoining property. So as to create a fully conforming lot size of which as I indicated is very minimal.
Speaker 4 Alright. And again, you find the same negative criteria for the use variance that you just testified would exist for the bulk relief, is that right?
Speaker 6 Yes, I do.
Speaker 4 Also, I understand you find that under C two or flexible C, again we have a unique property and really the same standard under the C two is advancing the purposes of zoning, which you've testified to under the use variance. Correct? Is that, would that be your your opinion?
Speaker 6 It is my opinion and on believe it's been accepted throughout my decades of testimony and that the, my opinion, the purposes of zoning are advanced as I've already testified under. As you've indicated my use variance analysis and opinions.
Speaker 4 And the same negative criteria would also apply to your opinion that the flexible C or C two can support all this variance as requested?
Speaker 6 Yes sir. It
Speaker 4 Has. From the bulk standpoint, that is correct. I mean from a technical standpoint, is it your opinion that you know, because you gotta use variance that the the bulks are really almost subsumed by the use variance request 'cause it's a higher standard of proof?
Speaker 6 That's correct. A hundred percent. If the board is prepared as we hope to accept that this is a two family use, then the minor variances that we've discussed all come into play with it.
Speaker 4 Alright, thank you. Alright, so Mr. Chairman, I believe that concludes Mr. Tudos testimony. Thank sir plan stand planning standpoint there any questions to the board? Yeah,
Speaker 6 Jonathan, do you have anything to add sir?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Thank you. Yes, I had a question for the father. In our Piscataway staff report, we suggested the board contemplated a solid four foot solid fence within the front yard setback. What, is that something you would be amenable to?
Speaker 5 Yes sir. We could do that. Ms, Mr and Ms. Rahi. We could, we could do that. That's not an issue. I mean, definitely would require a little bit more work, but if, I mean if you can't take it into consideration to leave it, that would be great given the testimony of of the engineer but, and the planner. But, but yeah, it's not an issue at, at the end of the day.
Speaker 4 Well, well again, but, and Father Beck, we did discuss this. So here's the bottom line. Unfortunately it's not a fence that we can just take a chainsaw and cut two feet off at the top. It's gonna really require that the church remove that entire fence, which is an expense and, and then have to install a new four foot solid fence and there and there's an expense there. And obviously the church is very concerned about his expenses. Is that right? Father Beckett? Yes, that's correct. We're here, we're here requesting relief. And again, as, as the good father has said, they'll do it if they have to, but we're really hoping that the board will consider just allowing that six foot fence to, to stay even though we're willing to do it because again, father Beckett, my understanding is the tenants really like it because it affords some privacy in the front yard and that's kind of unique to this location of the two family house, which is really not so much in a residential area, it's kind of a unique area. Is that correct? That's correct. Alright, so we leave that up to the board. I mean we'll do it if we have to. Certainly
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Understood. But thank you for proffering the, the option. Anything else, Jonathan? No, that's it. Thank you. That's it Mr. Chadwick.
Speaker 8 The only comment is that this building is in pretty good shape. If it were in a dilapidated condition, I don't think it warrants approval, but because it is in good shape, I think it does meet the standards as outlined by Mr. Morse.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay, thank you. John, any other members of the board have any questions or comments about this? Yes, Steve, I have a question for John. Jonathan, can we, why would you think if the, the fence at the time the fence needs re repair that we could make it a conforming fence? In other words, if the six foot fence fell into ill repair, they would've to replace it at that point with a four foot solid, we can make it a condition, correct Jim? Yes you could.
Speaker 4 Alright, so let's, and and that sounds very reasonable, but I guess you know, obviously, and because the property is well maintained, they intend on main maintaining that fence, of course being good neighbors to the community, but so I just wanna make sure it's structured correctly. I understand. I think what you're driving at, if the fence has to come down and has to be replaced at that point, a new six footer is not going back up if the board That's correct. Okay. So
Speaker 8 I mean the, a stock gate fence has a limited life. I mean it
Speaker 4 Really does. It does. That's what I'm saying. So they're gonna maintain it, but at some point if it has to get changed out, then it would have to go to four.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Got it. Any other members of the board? Any any questions? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone the public have any comments or questions?
Speaker 0 If you're on the phone at star six, if you wanna speak, please raise your hand. No one chairman,
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm gonna close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? I'll second. Okay, please call the roll.
Speaker 0 Mr. Wasteman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Tillery. Mr. Patel?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Regio?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ley? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 3 Morse. We will memorialize this at our next meeting.
Speaker 4 Alright, thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. Good to see everyone. Have a
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Good night. Same here. Good, you all so much. Have a great evening everyone. Alright, thank
Speaker 4 You. Alright Father Beckett, I'll give a call tomorrow. Thank you.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Alright guys, you don't have to stay. We do go away. Item number seven is a discussion. Can you elaborate on that Mr. Cornelius For Scott Ulrich,
Speaker 3 Sir Ulrich is present. He was granted on, on approval by this board for his lot on River Road. He rebuilt a garage that appears to have been rebuilt 3.6 inches closer to the side property line than the board. Granted, he is running into some problems getting his sign off from the building department and he is here to ask the board for some help, Mr. Ulrich, is that correct?
Speaker 9 Yeah, that's correct. The, the new measurement of the new survey says that the garage is 1.8 inches from the property line as where the original variance indicated two feet. So I'm asking for a new interpretation of this new land survey, which also included a FEMA elevation certificate. And I have that here if, if the board needs to see either the new survey and or the, the elevation certificate. So I'm just requesting a new interpretation of my new land survey indicates that it's 1.8 and, or, you know, a difference of three to four inches, which I, my understanding it's not unusual for land surveys to be off when different entities do a, a survey. So I'm just res respectfully asking the board to adopt these new certifications and amend my existing variance to reflect these new certified changes that I have before me.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you Ms. Silver, any other members of the board have any question, comment? Jonathan, is there anything you would like to add or we clear?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) I think two important clarifying questions just to frame this. Mr. Ulrich, since you got the approval in 2025, you have not moved the structure at all?
Speaker 9 No, sir.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) And I can confirm that Joe Herrera did receive all the appropriate documentation that was conditioned in the prior approval.
Speaker 9 That's correct.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Okay,
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you Jonathan. Anyone else?
Speaker 8 I
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Think no questions.
Speaker 8 Maybe ask Jim Kinneally did we do this by just a motion? Jim?
Speaker 3 You mean the original application, John?
Speaker 8 We're we're reducing the vet we're reduced. We're increasing, yes. The violation.
Speaker 3 Yeah, I I think what we're being asked to say is that the existing location as shown on the survey is close enough or a de minimi
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Theft difference
Speaker 3 That should be accepted by Piscataway.
Speaker 8 I agree with that because I've had couple cases like this recently and the opinions are all a lot. But I, I agree with your assessment.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Well, I hearing no other questions. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application or this discussion?
Speaker 0 No. One chairman
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Close the public portion. I I agree. It's de minimis it's two inches or whatever. I make a motion to approve. I'll second. I get a second. Please call the role
Speaker 0 Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 3 Mr. Alrich, we'll prepare a written document for you to submit to Scott away.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you very much. I really appreciate the board and have a good evening guys. Good evening, sir. Listen girls, that is bye-bye. Take care. Item number 8 26 dash ZB dash 36 v Dix Patel
Speaker 3 Is Dix. Yes. Patel present?
Speaker 10 Yes. I'm
Speaker 3 Here to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 10 Yes, I do.
Speaker 3 Your name and address please.
Speaker 10 Dixie Patel. 59 Avenue Picard.
Speaker 3 Thank you. Could you explain to the board why you're here?
Speaker 10 Good evening chairman and members of the board. So my name is Dhi Patel and she's my wife Mary Patel. And we are honor of the, this property and a and applicant of this property, which is landed on Picard Way 59 Avenue. We are here tonight to request a variance for a new construction single family house on this lot.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Mr. Ms. Rahi?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Yes. So the proposed application, the proposed home in the application is deficient in lot area, lot with and frontage. And the new dwelling is being proposed in addition to a new shed and a existing shed that's to be retained. The applicant came into the office today and I would just ask for the record for the Patels, are you you willing to make revisions to the drawings to conform to the lock coverage amount of 20%? Yes.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Mr. Patel?
Speaker 10 Yeah, so, so yeah, so we have like, we just came into office and like we have like 21% proposed and our like requirement is like 20. So we are a with to re if you allowed 10 by 10 shade and we remove our existing shade, smaller shade, our seven by seven shade, we remove it. And if you allowed 10 by 10 shade, so that's good for us. And like we did use our percentage as well.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) And there's also some additional drawing details like seepage bed design details as well as updated notes for the fiber optic conduit line on the plans. Would you agree to make revisions to those in line with the staff report?
Speaker 10 Yes, I agree.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Okay. That's, that's really all I have Mr. Chair. So is
Shawn Cahill (Chair) There,
Speaker 3 Is there still a setback issue for this shed?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) If the applicant proposes to remove the retained shed and reduce the size of the proposed shed, they would eliminate the variance for rear and side yard setbacks and it would also remove the building coverage setback only leaving the pre-existing non-conforming lot area lot width and lot frontage variances.
Speaker 3 Thank you.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other members of the board have any questions? Well Jonathan, we could approve this with conditions with the conditions you just mentioned, correct?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Yes. Laura would need updated drawings for the folder and this would get checked again when they come in for permits if it's approved tonight with conditions. Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) You understand that Mr. Patel?
Speaker 10 Yes. Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Hearing no other questions from the board members, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone of the public have any questions or comments?
Speaker 0 No One chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Close the public portion. I'll make a motion to approve this with the conditions laid out by Jonathan. Can I get a second? I second. I'll second. Please call the roll.
Speaker 0 Yes, sir. Fast today. Mr. Weisman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ley? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes.
Speaker 3 Your application as amended is approved. We'll memorialize this at our next meeting. You don't need to be there for that and we'll mail that document to you, but you'll need that document to get your permits. Good luck.
Speaker 10 Thank you everyone. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0 Have a good night guys.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Good night. Item number 9 26 dash ZB dash 37 v Burley. Did I purchase that or no? That's
Speaker 11 Perfect. Yes. Okay. Chairman member the Mr.
Speaker 3 Swear, could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 11 I do.
Speaker 3 Your name and address please. You can put your hand down.
Speaker 11 My name is Burley and the address is 5 4 6 Williams Street. Piscataway.
Speaker 3 Thank you. Could you explain to the board why you're here?
Speaker 11 So I'm seeking a variance for installing a six foot fence, especially on the front frontage for Hobart Avenue, which is a paper road.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Hey Jonathan, you wanna jump in? We talked about this a little bit today.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Yes, it's the staff's opinion this, this represents a true C one hardship because of the Paper street frontage. I was wondering if the applicant could provide some testimony on why the fence layout is the way it is and the reason why there's a proposal for two different fence types.
Speaker 11 Sure. So we are requesting a chain link, a six foot chain link at the frontage of Hobo Avenue. And the reason for that is at that edge of our property we have a lot of trees and some of their roots are procuring out. So the contractor informed us that making a fixed fence would be difficult because it would not line up with the ground. A chain link is a better option. It goes closer to the ground and just avoids any smaller animals coming in from under.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Works for me. That's all I have. Thank you Jonathan. I appreciate it. Sir. Any other questions or comments from any other members of the board?
Speaker 8 Jo Jonathan, is this gonna be a chain link coded or just a straight chain link?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) I don't know if that was provided in the sample. The image provided does look like a powder coated chain link fence, but Oh, here's a lemme receipt here.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Is that what Elizabeth Perley?
Speaker 11 That is correct.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) It's coded. Okay. Yes. Alright. Thank you for John.
Speaker 8 It cut, it cuts down on visibility is really what it does.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other members of the board? Any questions, comments? Hearing none? I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone on the public have any questions or comments about this application? No one here. Okay. Close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? I'll second. Thank you. Call the roll. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. It's okay. I have it. Mr. Ali? Yes. And Chairman Kay? Yes.
Speaker 3 Ms. Birdie, your application's been approved. We'll memorialize this in a written document at our next meeting and we'll mail that document to you.
Speaker 11 Thank you very much. Have a good rest of the evening.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you. Have a good night. Item number 10 26 dash ZB dash 38 v. Kathy Shoemaker.
Speaker 3 Is Kathy Shoemaker present?
Speaker 12 I am, yes.
Speaker 3 Okay. Could you raise your right hand please? I need to swear you in. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 12 Yes.
Speaker 3 Your name and address please
Speaker 12 Put your hand down. Kathy Shoemaker. 7 0 8 SunBrite Lane in Piscataway.
Speaker 3 Thank you. Could you explain to the board why you're here?
Speaker 12 Yes. I, I would actually like to share some drawings. I think that would just make this a little bit easier as we go along. This is, can you see my screen?
Speaker 3 Yes, we can.
Speaker 12 Okay. So this is my home at 7 0 8 Sun Bright Lane in Piscataway. It was built in 1964 and I have lived there since. I'm sorry.
Speaker 3 No, that's somebody not somebody was talking.
Speaker 12 Oh, okay. And I've lived there since 2012. I'm in the process of selling the property, at which point when the inspection came through, I had made changes to my garage that need to either be grandfathered back to the way that they were, or I need to look to do a variance. So I am hoping to do a, a variance for a variety of reasons. This is the current space of my garage, if you look to it, is it is currently to the back door. It is about 13 and a half feet. It is, floor space is 10 foot nine to the chimney, then nine, nine feet, three inches from the chimney. And if we go back to the grandfathered part, it's even lower than that because of a bump out in the garage that was already there. So this, and when I talk about the bump out, you can see in this drawing, this is one of my neighbor's houses.
Speaker 12 There are a variety of different bump outs that are in these garages that were there from maybe when they were built. I'm not really sure. So this photo here is right now, the original door was to the, on the side of this taller cabinet. The cabinet was there when I bought the house and the door and that space was open at about nine feet wide. So it, this little car of mine that's in the driveway, I mean that's on the street right now, was one I could get into the garage. I did that for getting for the snow, but I literally had to back in, wedge in. As you can see, there's carpeting on this wall here, which was put there by the previous owner to avoid, I guess hitting the chimney or the wall, I could squeeze in this little car backwards and then squeeze myself out and be able to get to the door in order to get in. So the reality is on a day-to-day basis, you can either have a car in the garage or you can walk through the garage. You can't do both.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Understood, understood. Jonathan, can you jump in here?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Certainly the quote unquote grandfather portion, even if it was reverted, does not meet the minimum requirements for enclosed parking space based on our code. It's too narrow. And I would ask the applicant if they've read the staff report, the second item, the consideration for street driveway parking, a expansion of the off street parking.
Speaker 12 I did do that because this is what my street looks like at 7:00 AM in the morning most days. So I totally understand that. Why the township would like to see more off the street parking because I have been in the, you know, in my neighborhood as as nobody can park in their garage. There are cars all over the street. And so I would propose widening the driveway to two two wide, which would allow four cars in the driveway in place of having to revert the garage back.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I think it's a perfect solution.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Okay. That works for us.
Speaker 12 I'm not looking to widen the apron, I think it's called. Right. There's plenty of space to turn this into a four car space without having to do that.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Not a problem. Take your screen down if you would ma'am,
Speaker 12 Please. Yes.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other members of the board of any questions or comments? Hearing none, I'm going to open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions? We go?
Speaker 0 No.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Close the public portion and I would make a motion to approve this application with the widening of the driveway to accommodate four cars. I'll second. Second. Call the roll please.
Speaker 0 Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes.
Speaker 3 Ms. Schumaker, your application's been approved with that one condition. We will memorialize this at our next meeting and send a copy to you. Good luck.
Speaker 12 Thank you.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Goodnight ma'am.
Speaker 12 Goodnight.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number 1126 dash ZB dash 39 V Pro Chadha boa
Speaker 12 Aye.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Done.
Speaker 3 Hi. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 13 Yes.
Speaker 3 Can I have your name and address please?
Speaker 13 Promen Chadha Bojo at 1 0 3 Blackford Avenue in Piscataway, New Jersey.
Speaker 3 Could you explain to the board why you're here?
Speaker 13 Yes. I'm proposing to have a fence same as Anup. Burley. We have a paper road of Hobart Avenue and that requires a variance.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yeah, I think I'm gonna cut to the chase with this one. I have Jonathan give a little bit of comment.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Only comment is this, this should be a very similar, very familiar sounding hardship. Then the previous application. Nothing substantive to add.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Gotcha. Any other members of the board have any questions or comments for this application? Nope. Hearing none, Weisman? No, not me. Okay. I will open it to the public. Anyone of the public have any questions or comments about this application?
Speaker 0 No. One chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Close the public portion and I would make a motion to approve this application as well. Take it a second. Yeah. I'll second. Thank you
Speaker 0 Mr. Weisman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 0 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel Kalpesh. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes.
Speaker 3 Awa your application's been approved. We'll memorialize this in a written document at our next meeting and send it to you.
Speaker 13 Awesome. Thank you. Good
Speaker 0 Night. Have a good night.
Speaker 13 Good night. You too.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm, I'm item number 12.
Speaker 0 Thank you. Kalpesh.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number 1226 dash ZB dash 43 v Riva,
Speaker 3 The applicant present?
Speaker 14 Yes. Yes.
Speaker 3 Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 14 Yes, I, yes I do.
Speaker 3 Okay. Could I have your name and address please?
Speaker 14 Re 6 1 4 Buckingham Drive. Picard. Thank
Speaker 3 You. Could you explain to the board why you're here?
Speaker 14 We want to add a bedroom in our backyard site backside for my elderly parents. They are handicapped and my father has lost his eye visit in last two years because of glaucoma. So he is completely blind. So my father is 87 years old. My mother is 84 years old. They are handicapped and they use walker and wheelchair. So that's why we asked for a little bigger room. But now we received the letter from the townships stating that, that we need to do some revisions. So could someone explain that? What are, what will be my next steps now so then I can proceed with constructing the bedroom? Because it's barely needed.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Well we appreciate that. Jonathan, would you like to jump in here and give her an idea of what we're looking for?
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Sure. Just for context, the properties very deficient in lot area as well as width, width, depth, front yard setback and frontage. I believe the critical path on this application is going to be reducing the, the overall relief necessary. So if there's any sort of revision that you would feel acceptable, that would reduce the lot coverage as well as the side and rear yard setbacks. That's something that the staff would, would like to suggest.
Speaker 14 So here it says, needs to reduce the covered area, right? So the prop we, once we applied that was the proposal was about 400 square feet. So then how much we need to reduce, so then we stay in compliance.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) Your lot area is 10,528 square feet. And I will get you an exact number right now. So it's 10528.36 square feet. 20% of that would be 2105.67 square feet. So 2 1 0 5 0.67 square feet. That would include all covered structures, sheds, overhangs over 18 inches as well as anything else like a covered porch as well.
Speaker 15 We don't have, I'm sorry, our husband, we don't have a porch.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) I, I'm just explaining what, what I see. Okay. Counts towards building coverage. Yeah.
Speaker 15 I see. Okay. So originally
Speaker 8 From, could I jump in here a second? Okay. Before,
Speaker 3 Before you do that, John, before you do that, the gentleman that was just speaking has not been sworn in. Could you raise your hand?
Speaker 15 Yes.
Speaker 3 Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 15 Yes, I
Speaker 3 Do. Your, your name and address please.
Speaker 15 Suha. She 6 1 4 Buckingham Drive in Pisca Bay, New Jersey.
Speaker 3 Thank you. Go ahead Mr. Chadwick.
Speaker 15 Thank you. I'm sorry, I would just ask
Speaker 8 Jonathan if he had a chance to meet with the, this applicant.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) No,
Speaker 8 Because I would think we had a similar case where they came and saw you and you worked out a solution that was acceptable. Well, I don't think it's good for the applicant or the board to design it on the fly. Yeah, I So I would, I would suggest the board
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Ms. She
Speaker 14 Yes.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yeah. Would you be able to come into one of our public works building and meet with at the, at the front desk with Jonathan and be able to iron this out so we're not just having a debate here on lot coverage and whatnot? Absolutely. Are you, are you available during the day to come down between, was it eight 30 and
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) 4 4 8 30 to four 30? Yes.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Eight 30 to four 30.
Speaker 14 We make ourself on bus.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) It's the right, it's the right thing. A lot of times when, when the applicant doesn't agree with the, the engineer or our expert, it's frowned upon. If you have an opportunity to work it out with Jonathan, the township will be happy. You'll be happy and there'll be a happy meeting. So
Speaker 14 Yes. You know, because we need to get the permission. So then, then, then we can start the construction.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Correct. Understand that There's no reason why you guys couldn't meet tomorrow. I mean, Friday's a little late down, but next week Jonathan works Monday through Friday.
Jonathan Rahi (Planner) I'll, I'll just, I'll just say, I'll ask if the phone number on the application is still the best one to, to use. I won't repeat it on the Zoom call, but I can give you a call. That number we can schedule a time.
Speaker 0 Mr. Chairman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes sir.
Speaker 0 He's not gonna cut you off. Somebody has their hand raised. It might be Mr. Fletcher.
Speaker 16 Yes,
Speaker 14 He's here. He's here. Linda? Yes, he's Albert. He
Speaker 0 Came in on his phone. He didn't come in so I can let him in, but I unmuted him. Thank you. Mr. Fletcher, is that you? Yes
Speaker 16 It is. Can
Speaker 0 You hear me? Thank you.
Speaker 16 Yeah, I apologize. I had trouble with the, the link.
Speaker 0 That's all right. Paul Fletcher,
Speaker 3 Could you raise your right hand?
Speaker 0 Thank you. Do
Speaker 3 You swear I have the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
Speaker 16 I do.
Speaker 3 And your name and address for the record, please.
Speaker 16 It's Paul J. Fletcher. Business address is 54 West Pond Road in Hope, New Jersey.
Speaker 3 I believe Mr. Fletcher has been accepted as an expert before this board on prior occasions.
Speaker 16 I have on numerous occasions. Thank you.
Speaker 16 Yes. The applicant and her architect and myself have worked over the last few days and come up with a, a, a plan that would meet the setbacks that are, that are required that would be just to the rear of the house. It would comply with the rear yard setbacks, would comply with side yard setbacks and would comply with the lot coverage requirements of 20%. So the, the applicant from I speak for is, is prepared to remove those requests from the variance application. And my, my my only question is, if we were to carry this to talk to the, to the staff members, would we still have to come back to the board for the variances, variance relief for the existing conditions of lot area and lot width or could that be done now? And would the understanding that we have to come back with a totally compliant application to the zoning department or else we're back here with in front of the board?
Speaker 8 Before you answer that, are you gonna wind up the only variances you're gonna have a lot dimension variances?
Speaker 16 Yes. All existing conditions of lot dimension area frontage depth, front yard setback for the building.
Speaker 8 So you eliminate all the variances, but the existing lot size. All right.
Speaker 16 Yes. Only the existing nonconformities would remain. No, no new variances would, would be created with the new, with revised plans.
Speaker 8 Jonathan, I would think that's probably the best solution you could come up with. I agree. So maybe the board could move forward with the revised plans certified by yourself.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) That's where we would ultimately,
Speaker 3 If we approve this with just the lot size variances and they can submit a revised plan demonstrating that they comply with the setback variances and the lot coverage, that would be sufficient. If they can't do that, they'd have to come back. But if they can, they would not have to come back.
Speaker 8 The the only other thing I see is the fiber optic
Speaker 16 And that would be on the new plan.
Speaker 8 Okay. It was just
Speaker 0 Question. Should I, if they have to come back, I don't want them to have to Reno. Could we could approve it tonight and then if
Speaker 8 That's what we like, how,
Speaker 0 How would that work?
Speaker 8 That's what we suggested. They would approve it.
Speaker 3 We approve it tonight. And they could submit a plan that conforms with the side yard, rear yard setback and lot coverage. They don't have to come back at all. They could just apply. Apply to the permits.
Speaker 16 We're confident. If
Speaker 3 For some reason they can't comply with that and they have to come back, they may have to notice.
Speaker 0 Okay. That's what I just wanted to know. Thank you. Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other members have questions about this or what we just discussed hearing? No, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application?
Speaker 0 No. One chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay. Close the public portion. And I and d will ask for an approval of this application based on the changes that we discussed and the testimony from Mr. Fletcher. Can I get a second? I second. Okay. Call the roll please.
Speaker 0 Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ley? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Yes.
Speaker 3 You've been granted an approval based upon your amended application. We'll memorialize this at our next meeting and send a copy to you.
Speaker 15 Thank you. Thank you very much. And
Speaker 14 I have one question. So now for we gonna see someone, right?
Speaker 15 We don't, we don't need to.
Speaker 0 You don't need.
Speaker 15 Thank you.
Speaker 14 Thank you.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Have a good night. Good. Thank you Item. Thank you Ms. Fletcher. Item number 15, adoption of resolution from the regular meeting of July 9th, 2026.
Speaker 3 First resolution for Mirage Car, which you voted to approve. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Next is New singular Wireless, which you voted to approve. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Next is Karen Johnson, which you voted to approve. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Next is the application of Harold Israel, which you voted to deny a vote. Yes. Is to deny the application Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 3 Next is Dream Homes nj, LLC, which you voted to approve. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Finally is a resolution of withdrawal for tillage Sony. I'll need a motion and a second and a roll call on that please. I'll make a motion.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'll second.
Speaker 3 Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman Cahill? Yes. Those are all the resolutions I have from this evening.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you sir. Item number 16 at adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting of July 9th, 2026. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. I notice 17 AD German. All in favor say aye. Aye. Once again, everyone, thank you so much. Enjoy what's left of the summer. See you in September. Yeah. Have, have a safe evening everyone. Everyone. Goodnight everyone. Thank you. Goodnight. Bye.