Edison Township Planning Board Approves 14 Mercer Street Minor Subdivision on August 17, 2026

On August 17, 2026, the Edison Township Planning Board met but lacked a quorum because its regular members were conflicted out of the main application. The Zoning Board, seated in place of the Planning Board, heard Case P08 2026, 14 Mercer Street, and approved a minor three-lot subdivision with a private driveway variance. Adequate notice under the Open Public Meetings Act had been provided by the annual notice published and posted on December 4, 2025. All routine items and other pending cases were carried to future meetings.

Consent Calendar / Carry-Overs

• No minutes, resolutions, miscellaneous items, or extension requests were approved; they were carried to the next month.
• Case P04 2026, 44 Lincoln Highway, was carried to September 14, 2026, with no re-notice required.
• Case P07 2024 (amended), 135 Whitman Renewal LLC, 135 Whitman Avenue, was carried.
• Case P06 2026, Raron Plaza 3, LLC, 105 Fieldcrest, was carried with no notice.
• Case P07 2026, Narali Patel, 2116 Oak Tree Road, was carried with no re-notice required.

Public Comments & Testimony

• John Hickey, 18 Lombardi Street, said he circulated a petition and presented 39 signatures; he stated that 62 percent of homes within 200 feet signed it. He opposed the subdivision, citing stormwater runoff, increased impervious coverage, loss of privacy and sunlight, density, private-road noise and lighting, and emergency-access concerns. The board attorney said the petition itself could not be accepted because the signers were not sworn, but Mr. Hickey's sworn testimony could be considered.
• Hagid Lassan, a Lombardi Street resident, opposed the application, arguing the private road would effectively become a public road, property values and living conditions would be harmed, and the notice and documents were difficult to obtain before the hearing. Board staff said the notice was mailed August 5 and met the 10-day deadline; the attorney added that each future application would be judged on its own merits and this decision would not set a binding precedent.
• Kathy Hickey, 18 Lombardi Street, asked how emergency vehicles would access a gated private driveway. The applicant said the gate would include sensors or transponders that open for emergency vehicles.
• Michelle Timpco, formerly of 6 Lombardi Street and now of Colonia, opposed the plan, saying the surrounding streets already cannot handle traffic and that the cited 1671 Woodland Avenue precedent was distinguishable because that area had more green space. She argued the proposal was a private benefit rather than a public safety benefit.
• Hai Chao Wong, 12 Lombardi Street, asked about the mayor's influence given the conflict. The attorney explained that the regular Planning Board members were appointed by the mayor and were recused, while the Zoning Board members are selected by the council; completeness review for this application had been outsourced to Carteret.
• Mary Davis, 21 Lombardi Street, asked how runoff increases would be avoided. The applicant said roof drainage would be directed to an existing on-site drain, and he planned more than 100 Green Giant arborvitae around the property to absorb water and provide privacy.
• Jing Wang, 60 Lombardy Street, cited state fire-code and site-improvement statutes and questioned emergency-vehicle access. The chairman responded that the engineer had certified the 20-foot private driveway would meet minor collector road standards and accommodate emergency vehicles; the attorney said compliance would be a condition of approval.
• Carl Davis, 21 Lombardi Street, asked why the applicant did not simply dedicate the extension as a public road. The applicant said a public road would not allow a private gate. Mr. Davis also described worsening neighborhood flooding and asked whether the promised trees could be made a condition. The board proposed requiring trees every 5 feet along the perimeter.

Discussion Items

• Case P08 2026, listed as Niati Shah, 14 Mercer Street, was heard with Sam Joshi testifying as the applicant. Mr. Joshi said he grew up about 890 feet from the property, recently purchased it, and planned to build his family home there. He stated he was requesting no use variances; the only variance issue was a private driveway instead of a public roadway.
• Engineer Paul Fletcher, a licensed professional engineer and planner with about 32 years as principal of Fletcher Engineering, testified that the 0.881-acre property, containing 38,366.82 square feet, would be divided into three lots: 18,055.22 square feet, 10,267.67 square feet, and 10,043.93 square feet. The plan includes demolition of the existing structures, a 20-foot-wide shared private driveway within a 30-foot easement, and lots intended to meet RBB zone bulk standards. He said the application needed a planning variance under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-35 for lack of frontage on a public right-of-way, plus design waiver relief, and he cited the prior 1671 Woodland Avenue approval, Case P5255, as precedent.
• Board Engineer Charles Carly reviewed his August 11, 2026 report and testified the project would create minimal trip generation, involve less than one acre of disturbance, and not meet major-development stormwater thresholds. The planning report supported granting the variance under the C2 criteria. Mr. Fletcher cited benefits including conforming residential lots, additional housing, and no taxpayer cost for maintaining the private road, and he saw no significant detriment to the zone plan or master plan.
• Board members asked about lot width and depth measurement, confirmation with the township tax assessor, and emergency-vehicle access. Mr. Fletcher confirmed the driveway would be 20 feet wide with restricted parking and would safely and efficiently accommodate emergency vehicles. He also agreed to conditions regarding the access easement and maintenance.

Key Outcomes

• The public portion was closed by a motion from Mr. Schneider, seconded by Mr. Chabra.
• Vice Chair Gorman moved to approve the application, seconded by Mr. Chabra, with conditions: arborvitae trees planted every 5 feet along the property perimeter; the private driveway maintained by the owner and coordinated with the township engineer and attorney; and any changes to the approved plan, even de minimis changes, requiring a new or amended approval.
• The roll call vote was 6-0 in favor, with Mr. Johnny, Mr. Cerrito, Mr. Chabra, Mr. Schneider, Vice Chair Gorman, and Chairman Cumba voting yes. The application was approved.
• All other agenda items and pending cases were carried to the next meeting, and no minutes or resolutions were adopted.