Applicant asks to build 7,000 sq. ft. storage building; board delays decision after outdoor-storage questions

The Monroe Township Planning Board on Feb. 27 heard testimony from 700 Highway 33 LLC seeking preliminary and final site-plan approval to build a 7,000-square-foot enclosed storage building at a property that currently houses shipping containers and vehicle storage.

The applicant’s principal, Michael Resciniti, testified that the site supports a motorcycle and all‑terrain-vehicle dealership (Extreme Machines) and that new vehicles and parts arrive in crates and are temporarily stored before assembly and display. “When they come in, we offload them, and we store them in the shipping containers until they're assembled and put on the floor for sale,” Resciniti said. He added the proposed building would replace the existing shipping containers and that outside storage would be limited to short-term parking of large customer vehicles and trailers.

Board members and the board engineer pressed the applicant on whether outdoor storage is allowed in Monroe Township and whether the paved rear area identified for vehicle storage falls on the Monroe side of the municipal boundary with Millstone. Engineer Robert Siv (licensed professional engineer and planner) presented aerial exhibits showing the property’s split jurisdiction: the main showroom and most stormwater infrastructure lie in Millstone while the triangular rear parcel and the proposed storage building sit in Monroe. Siv said the rear paved area has existed for about 15–20 years and that the applicant proposes removing the pavement in some parts and constructing the storage building in the remaining paved area.

Why it matters: Monroe Township’s ordinance restricts outdoor storage of materials; if the current outdoor storage is nonconforming the board must determine whether the use can continue or whether a certificate of nonconformity or a zoning board review is required. Board members said they needed more documentation and clearer testimony before a land-use determination.

Board members raised enforcement and clarity concerns. A planning board member asked for a clear map that shows exactly where vehicles would be stored after the building is constructed and whether long‑term storage would occur. The applicant twice agreed on the record that the goal is to move stored items indoors—either into the new 7,000-square-foot building or into the Millstone portion of the existing building—and not to create a new long-term outdoor storage area. On the record Resciniti said outdoor storage would be temporary and “could be a day, an hour. It could be two weeks. It depends on the workload, parts availability, things like that.”

After discussion, the applicant’s attorney told the board they needed additional research into whether the existing outdoor storage is a nonconforming use and whether a certificate of nonconformity exists under section 68 of the municipal code. The applicant requested—and the board granted—a continuance to allow that research.

Next steps: The board carried the application to Thursday, March 27, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. in the same meeting room. The applicant agreed to provide clearer plan sheets that show the area proposed for any remaining outdoor parking, documentation about the parcel split with Millstone, and evidence (or the absence) of any certificate of nonconformity.

Ending: No vote was taken on the merits. The record shows the board paused action to allow staff and counsel to verify whether existing outdoor storage is lawful in Monroe and whether the matter should remain with the planning board or be referred elsewhere.