Board carries Moheed Construction site-plan hearing after questions on drainage, parking and battery storage

The Monroe Township Zoning Board heard a lengthy presentation on March 31 from Moheed Construction & Renovations LLC for a proposed two‑story mixed‑use building at 204 John Warren Way but did not act and carried the application to the board's April 28 meeting pending plan revisions and additional documentation.

Counsel and the applicant described the project as a roughly 18,510‑square‑foot building (about 10,000 square feet on the first floor and roughly 8,500–8,510 on the second floor) designed to accommodate retail uses on the ground floor and offices above. The applicant proposes 73 parking spaces on site (73 hard spaces and two EV/ADA credited), an increase from an earlier approved plan that showed 65 spaces. The applicant said utilities, grading and drainage infrastructure for the larger campus already exist and that the building pads would be dropped into previously rough‑graded locations.

Professional witnesses included traffic expert Scott Kennel (McDonald and Ray Associates), architect Steven Rodosti and planner Mark Rem, all accepted by the board. Kennel testified the proposed parking and on‑site circulation are adequate and that observed overnight parking for adjacent apartments was low, supporting a shared‑parking argument. Rodosti described architectural and signage proposals, and Rem said several variances requested are consistent with prior approvals for the larger campus and justified as flexible "C" variances for better design and sight‑distance safety.

Board professionals and members pressed several technical matters that the applicant agreed to address in revised submissions: documentation of the stormwater management association and operation & maintenance manuals, drainage easements, turning templates for delivery and refuse vehicles, dumpster enclosure clearance (board asked that the 12‑foot clear be increased and a 14‑foot clearance was proposed), and the management of multiple tenants' trash needs. The board also questioned rooftop mechanical equipment and an applicant‑proposed solar+battery scheme. Board members and professionals raised fire‑safety and building‑code concerns about battery storage and asked whether batteries would be visible, enclosed and compliant with fire and construction codes; applicants said batteries were planned for the rooftop area and would comply with building and fire requirements, but specifics were not yet provided.

Because multiple technical items remained unresolved, including confirmed O&M documentation for shared basins, truck turning clearances, dumpster configuration and explicit design details for rooftop equipment and battery storage, one board member said they were not comfortable voting. The applicant requested the submission be carried to the next hearing without renotice; the board agreed and scheduled the carry for April 28, 2026 at 6:30 p.m. The applicant also indicated it will provide updated plans, stormwater association documents, O&M manuals, and tenant/parking analyses as requested by staff and board professionals.