Morris Township board approves South Street Gardens with conditions after dispute over noise and wetlands

Morris Township, N.J. ' The Morris Township Board of Adjustment voted May 18 to approve the application by 383 South Street LLC, the operator of South Street Gardens, subject to a package of conditions meant to limit neighborhood impacts, especially noise and runoff concerns.

The board's decision follows months of testimony and a lengthy hearing that revisited whether work already done on the property should be treated as part of an existing lawful use or instead be subject to a D1 use variance and stricter review. Objectors argued the site has been substantially altered, that disturbances to regulated wetlands have occurred and that some areas of the property behave as impervious surface despite being gravel or compacted soil. Philip Rosenbach, counsel for nearby residents, told the board his legal brief and appellate authority require the board to treat "impervious surface" as a covered material and not to rely solely on soil compaction tests: "A surface that has been covered with a layer of material so that it is highly resistant to infiltration by water," Rosenbach said, reading from his brief.

The applicant disputed that characterization and urged the board to rely on the record of sworn engineering testimony. Larry Calley, representing the applicant, said the application had been thoroughly vetted and that applicant experts had shown the net change in impervious coverage and disturbance is consistent with a minor development determination at the local level.

Why it matters: The proposal repurposes a long‑vacant florist property into a garden center with retail, a coffee service and a modest event space. Neighbors said events and past operations had already generated noise, light and traffic; others praised the reuse of a blighted site and the local jobs it created.

Public comment was sharply divided. Neighbor John Peel, who also testified he is a licensed planner, told the board the site "is already built and operational" and described what he said were loud event incidents; Peel said he understood the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection had an enforcement inquiry under way. Several nearby residents voiced support for the business, including Jocelyn Grazetti, who said the operator had pledged earlier to limit event hours and fireworks-type amplification. Another neighbor, Guy Benaharon, said he wants to retain peace and quiet at home and urged strict limits on events.

Board discussion focused on two linked questions: whether the application in front of the board should be treated as a major development for stormwater purposes, and how to limit neighborhood impacts if the board approved the use. The board engineer reviewed federal and state thresholds (EPA phase rules and state guidance) and flagged that the site contains areas of prior disturbance and gravel cover; his testimony favored treating the record as showing a largely restorative or neutral net change.

Conditions the board imposed (summary): the board's approval includes detailed operational limits, which will be reflected in the written resolution. Key restrictions discussed and adopted include: limiting outdoor events to the central courtyard/greenhouse area rather than the front yard; retail/coffee hours generally restricted to daytime (retail and garden center roughly 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.; coffee shop hours narrower as conditioned); outdoor amplified events restricted (the board imposed a prohibition on routine amplified music outdoors and allowed the applicant to seek a limited number of outdoor amplified events only by separate special-event approvals from the governing body); outdoor events to end by 9 p.m. (indoor events by 10 p.m.); event staffing/monitoring by the site operator; a maximum occupancy for the interior event space consistent with building and fire code (the applicant presented 48 as the design target); limitations on bulk landscape sales and on where materials are staged; dark‑sky compliant and down‑shielded lighting; staged delivery hours (daytime window); and requirement to work with township officials to resolve Pear Street right‑of‑way, parking and any vacation or licensing needed for on‑street parking.

Counsel for the applicant said the owner is willing to accept a compliance program and the site operator will staff permitted events. Counsel also proposed technical controls on any sound equipment (governors and speaker placement) and suggested an annual ceiling for special amplified events; several board members instead favored restricting amplified outdoor music to rare, specially approved events to reduce enforcement burdens.

Vote and next steps: A board member moved to approve the application with the conditions discussed; the motion passed in a roll‑call vote recorded as unanimous. The chair said a written resolution reflecting the conditions would be drafted and circulated for a future meeting. The board also noted that any DEP enforcement findings or required permits could affect implementation and that permit conditions will require follow‑up inspections.

What the board did not do: The board did not grant open permission for unlimited amplified outdoor music or unbounded special events; approval rests on the specified conditions and, in some instances, coordination with the township committee for licenses or vacations of the adjacent paper street.

Context and authorities: The hearing record contained references to the New Jersey Administrative Code, the Appellate Division decision cited by objector counsel (Save Hamilton Open Space), testimony by civil and acoustical engineers, and an ongoing DEP inquiry mentioned by witnesses. The board relied on its professionals and the hearing record in reaching its determination.

The board adjourned after the vote; the chair said the resolution and detailed conditions would be distributed in writing at a subsequent meeting.