Franklin Township Planning Board Meeting - August 8, 2024

(Note: The agenda and transcript indicate the meeting occurred on August 7, 2024; however, the provided date is used per instruction.)

The Franklin Township Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 8, 2024, beginning at 7:30 PM. The board unanimously approved four resolutions, heard two subdivision applications (one continued, one denied), and received public comment. Key topics included variances for lot size, setbacks, and pipeline proximity, as well as the character of the neighborhood.

Resolutions (Unanimously Approved)

• L’Oreal USA Products, Inc. (PLN-21-00021): Motion to approve. Board members Bob Lecourt, Sammy Shabon, Mahir Rafik, Rebecca Hilbert, and Mark Dancy recused themselves from voting. Remaining members voted yes; approved 6-0.
• BSREP III Logistical Acquisitions, LLC (PLN-22-00001): Motion to approve. Only Rebecca Hilbert recused. All others voted yes; approved 7-0.
• Executive Drive Investments, LLC (PLN-20-00009): Motion to approve. Only Rebecca Hilbert recused. All others voted yes; approved 7-0.
• Cal-Sterling, LLC (PLN-21-00009): Motion to approve. Councilman Mbarson and Charles Brown recused. All others voted yes; approved 6-0.

Public Comments (General)

• No members of the public spoke during the general public comment period.

Hearing 1: Chad Rossbach Minor Subdivision (PLN-24-00003)

• Proposal: Subdivide a 32,000 sq ft through-lot at 4 First Street into two 16,000 sq ft lots in the R-20 zone. Retain existing 1,000 sq ft home on one lot and build a new two-story home on the other. Variances needed for lot area (16,000 vs. 20,000 required), rear yard setbacks, and proximity to a gas transmission line (25 ft vs. 50 ft recommended).
• Discussion: The board questioned whether the lot is truly conforming (the lot currently has frontage on both First and Second Streets, which may be a through-lot issue). Board members suggested modifying the lot line to make the new lot larger (closer to 20,000 sq ft) and the existing home's lot smaller, or expanding the existing home instead of subdividing. The pipeline grading and potential water connection were also discussed.
• Public Comment: Cynthia Bacon (representing her mother at 1440 Easton Avenue, abutting property) spoke in opposition. She argued that subdividing a conforming lot to create non-conforming lots sets a bad precedent, and cited safety concerns regarding the pipeline, referencing past explosions. She urged denial.
• Outcome: The board instructed the applicant to revise the plan and provide more information on water access and pipeline grading. The hearing was continued to October 16, 2024, at 7:30 PM. The applicant was granted an extension of the deadline to late November.

Hearing 2: Twelve 31 Properties Minor Subdivision (PLN-23-00024)

• Proposal: Subdivide a 25,000+ sq ft corner lot at 1231 Hamilton Street (R-15 zone) into two lots: an interior lot of 11,237.8 sq ft (required 15,000) and a corner lot of 14,410 sq ft (required 18,000). Variances needed for lot area, frontage (90 ft vs. 100/120 ft), and existing setbacks. Applicant proposed removing an old garage and driveway to improve the neighborhood.
• Discussion: The applicant’s engineer/planner argued that two smaller lots are a better zoning alternative than one oversized lot. The board’s planner (Mark) pointed out that the existing lot is compliant and that no evidence was provided that smaller lots are consistent with the neighborhood (lots in the area are generally larger). The board struggled with the C-2 variance criteria, noting that the benefits to the township were not demonstrated beyond the applicant’s benefit. The TRC report also flagged a potential wetland issue requiring a letter of interpretation.
• Public Comment: Edith Berrigan (neighbor at 4 Wheeler Place) opposed, stating the subdivision would reduce privacy and change the neighborhood character. Bill Connell (25 Spring Street) also opposed, questioning the applicant’s motives and noting that a 3,100 sq ft home on an 11,000 sq ft lot would be out of character.
• Outcome: A motion to deny was made and seconded. Board members voted unanimously (9-0) to deny the application. Reasons cited: failure to show that benefits substantially outweigh detriments, lack of factual support for the “better zoning alternative” argument, and the potential harm to zoning integrity and neighborhood character.

Key Outcomes

• Four resolutions were approved unanimously with recusals noted.
• The Chad Rossbach subdivision hearing was continued to October 16, 2024, for revised plans and additional information on water and pipeline grading.
• The Twelve 31 Properties subdivision application was denied unanimously based on insufficient positive criteria and lack of public benefit.
• The board scheduled its next meeting for September 4, 2024, at the Route 27 location, contingent on site access confirmation for an Onyx project.