GARWOOD — Applicant Paul C. Munz, the owner of a lawn sprinkler business called Hydro-Tek, appeared at the Garwood Planning Board Meeting last week seeking permission to continue his operations despite local zoning challenges.

Munz runs Hydro-Tek, which the Board described as a “service department” out of 465 Second Avenue in Garwood. It is located in a single-family residential district (R-A) and is currently zonedtoallowstand-alonehomes, community residences and small additions garages or sheds. Existing ordinances do permit certain types of homebased businesses to operate within the area, but these are subject to size and employment restrictions.

Planner Paul Ricci represented Munz and spoke before the Board. Ricci stated that “the property was historically zoned” and is in a business district based on past use. He proved this by providing the Board with zoning maps and images dating back to 1922.

Specifically, he had examples of businesses that were in the lot previous to Hydro-Tek.This included WesternTermite, which resided on the property about 10 years prior to Hydro-Tek taking over. Hydro-Tek has been working out of the property for 21 years. Ricci said “Ibelieve this is important contextual evidence,” he said, continuing on to explain that the property is used as an office, has three onsite employees, and a garage to hold relevant machinery and supplies.

Board Member William Nierstedt stated that the applicant did not have specific evidence to provide that there was previous commercial usage on the site.

“You’re in a situation where there are no personal records or municipal records, other than what you know exactly,” Nierstedt stated. “And if you and I would put on our planner’s hat, Mr. Ricci,Ibelievewewouldbothsay,wow, this is a tough one because I can’t prove anything.” Nierstedt continued, explaining his inquiries were motivated so the Board “can go on the record” as the Planner’s claims couldn’t be proved with “moral certainty” due to the lack of documents. Planning Board Attorney Donald Fraser stated that he would work with Munz’s team to “clean up their dialogue.” Fraser continued, stating that he will help draw up an appropriate Resolution that could be memorialized on the fly if it were to be approved at the next meeting.

The Board passed a motion to carry the application to the next meeting, which is on July 22.

The Board also discussed its collective opposition to two proposed Senate bills related to affordable housing last week. The first (S-1786) would permit accessory dwelling units in municipalities with a population under 9,000. This impacts Garwood as the 2020 census stated that the borough has a population of 4,545. The Bill is being proposed as a potential solution to significant housing shortages in New Jersey.ADUs are defined in the Bills as “underused housing options” that can serve as a source of income for homeowners to provide more opportunities for housing at a lower-cost price. It is sponsored by Senator Troy Singleton of District 7, Senator Benjie E. Wimberly of District 35and Senator Britnee Timberlake of District 34.

The other Bill, S-1836 named “Yes In God’s Backyard,” allows affordable housing to be built on already owned land by religious and nonprofit organizations. It is primarily sponsored by Singleton and Wimberly.

The Board all felt similarly toward the Bills.

“While I fully believe New Jersey needs affordable housing, these mandates are harmful to small towns like ours,” Blumenstock stated, adding that she plans to work with neighboring municipalities and other elected representatives to oppose the bills.

Clark voted to formally oppose S1786thispastMay.ClarkPlanningBoard members agreed that the state mandate would reduce local zoning authority. ManyNJtownsallowADUsundertheir local laws. One of these towns includes Union.

Union’s Ordinance Number 5739 strictly regulates ADUs. The ordinance states that the ADUs are permitted in R-A and R-B zones, must be at least 5,000 square feet, and must have a kitchen and bath. Union Planning Board discussed this at a meeting in August 2022. Union’s Board is in support as it “creates more affordable housing opportunities.”

The Garwood Planning Board felt differently. One board member described the bill as “powerless” and worried that it will “create disaster.”

As for S-1836, towns like Scotch Plains and Watchung have opposed the bill. This past April, Scotch Plains Mayor Josh Losardo posted a message in regards to the bill.

“Earlier this month, the Township Council adopted a resolution opposing New Jersey Senate Bill S1836, proposed legislation that would significantly undermine the local planning authority by allowing religious and nonprofit organizations to convert their properties into high-density housing developments,” Losardo wrote. He went into detail on how the bill would increase density in Scotch Plains and goes against what the “Master Plan and zoning district permits.” Currently no NJ towns have shown support for the bill as it “explicitly overrides local zoning authority,” Losardo stated.

Garwood Planning Board Vice Chair Kathleen Villaggio spoke on the harm the bills would have towards Garwood. She stated that it would “circumvent our authority,” and that representatives should “think about what these towns represent and not in Trenton.”

The board carried a motion for Planning Board Secretary Adele Lewis to make a recommendation to oppose the two Senate bills.