The meeting’s primary focus was the application by AVE Partners LLC, owned by the Matoss family, seeking approval for a site designated for vehicle maintenance and repair. The discussion delved into the specifics of the variance for outdoor storage, with detailed testimony from Esme Severino on the limited nature of operations, which would involve minor vehicle maintenance with no heavy repairs on-site. Severino assured that the site would not function as a storage yard, as the Matoss family operates a larger facility in Union County for their equipment.

Residents voiced strong opposition, highlighting anticipated negative impacts on property values, environmental concerns, and disruptions from increased truck traffic. Objector Paul Rivere presented extensive evidence, including photographs of industrial equipment, to argue against the variance, citing inconsistency with the Jackson Township master plan and the site’s conservation zone overlay. Rivere emphasized the lack of necessary permits from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), a point that resonated throughout resident objections.

The meeting also scrutinized the applicant’s approach to zoning requirements, with critiques directed at their incomplete submission of essential documents, particularly the absence of a Letter of Interpretation (LOI) from the NJDEP. Concerns were further amplified by claims of inadequate notification to neighboring properties, with notices reportedly lacking essential details about the conservation zone overlay’s legal implications.

Board members acknowledged these deficiencies, yet clarified that the application had been deemed complete over a year ago by township officials. This point was contentious, with residents arguing that adherence to the ordinance is vital for fair public engagement and informed decision-making.

Further discussions addressed the ethical implications of proceeding with the application amid concerns of potential misrepresentation by the applicant. The Board emphasized their reliance on township officials to confirm application completeness and expressed a commitment to improving diligence in future application reviews.

The application process’s transparency was questioned by residents like Kim Reali, who criticized the planning board’s expedited approvals and lack of thorough vetting, raising alarms about potential environmental degradation affecting local wildlife and water quality, especially for those relying on well water.

Despite these concerns, the Board noted that the variance request was specific to outdoor storage, with no evidence presented directly opposing this aspect. The Board underscored the highway commercial designation of the site, arguing that it justified the proposed use and dismissed fears of a domino effect leading to further industrial development in the area.