Complaint,Petition: Lamar Advertising Of Penn Llc Vs East Brunswick

On January 27, 2023 a Complaint,Petition was filed involving a dispute between Lamar Advertising Ofpenn Llc, and East Brunswick Boardof Adjust, for Actions In Lieu Of Prerogative Writs in the District Court of Middlesex County.

Preview
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 1 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

TRENK ISABEL, SIDDIQUI & SHAHDANIAN, P.C.
Reginald Jenkins, Jr.
Attorney I.D. No. 049611998
290 W. Mt. Pleasant Avenue, Suite 2350
Livingston, NJ 07039
(973) 533-1000
Counsel for Plaintiff
Lamar Advertising of Penn LLC
_____________________________________
LAMAR ADVERTISING OF PENN LLC, : SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY
:
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO. MID-L-_________ -23
:
v. Civil Action
:
EAST BRUNSWICK TOWNSHIP BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENT, COMPLAINT
:
Defendant. (in Lieu of Prerogative Writs)
:
______________________________________

Plaintiff Lamar Advertising of Penn LLC (“Lamar” or “Plaintiff”), having its principal

place of business located at 437 Fifth Avenue, 3rd Floor, New York, New York 10016, by way of

Complaint in Lieu of Prerogative Writs against defendant the East Brunswick Township Board

of Adjustment (the “Board”) says:

THE PARTIES

1. Lamar is a limited liability company of the State of New York with a principal

place of business located at 437 Fifth Avenue, 3rd Floor, New York, New York 10016.

2. Defendant Board is a municipal agency organized pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-

69, and having its principal place of business at 1 Jean Walling Civic Center Drive, East

Brunswick, New Jersey 08816.

1
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 2 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

3. Lamar is a company in the business of constructing and operating outdoor

advertising signs both throughout New Jersey and nationally.

LAMAR’S ADVERTISING BILLBOARD AND APPLICATION

4. Lamar is also a commercial tenant of property in East Brunswick Township

located at N.J.S.H. Route 18 and Main Street, East Brunswick, New Jersey and otherwise known

as Block 150.01, Lot 1.03 on the Township Tax Map (the “Property”).

5. The Property is owned by the rail company Conrail.

6. The Property is located within the Township’s Senior Citizen Mixed Use Planned

Development (“SCMXD”) Zone District.

7. The Property presently consists of Conrail railroad tracks that parallel the

Township’s Main Street.

8. Lamar obtained an Outdoor Advertising Permit from the State of New Jersey,

Department of Transportation, to place a “Back-to-Back – Multimessage” billboard (the

“Proposed Billboard”) on the Property (the “State Permit”).

9. The State Permit evidenced/confirmed compliance with the requirements of both

the Federal Highway Beautification Act, 23 U.S.C. 131 et seq. and the State of New Jersey’s

Roadside Sign Control and Outdoor Advertising Act, N.J.S.A. 27:5-5 et seq. and the regulations

promulgated thereunder.

10. The Proposed Billboard would be a light emitting diode (“LED”) billboard

capable of displaying numerous advertisements and matters of public importance, such as

weather alerts, traffic alerts, municipal events, and other public service messages.

2
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 3 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

11. The location for the Proposed Billboard, and its technology, directs its messages

to vehicles using the adjacent State Route 18.

12. The Proposed Billboard was to be placed between an existing commercial

building and State Route 18.

13. The Proposed Billboard would have a height of 80 feet, particularly to be visible

to the adjacent elevated Route 18 highway.

14. The Proposed Billboard would have no moving parts, no animation, no scrolling,

no story-telling, no flashing, and no fading. The images displayed would display for a minimum

of eight seconds then they would instantly change to a new image.

15. The Proposed Billboard would be an off-premises billboard in an area of the

Township that is commercial.

16. Billboards are not listed as permitted uses within the Township’s SCMXD Zone

District.

17. Pursuant to the Township’s Ordinance §228-245.A, “[u]nless otherwise provided

for, all signs shall be related to the premises on which they are erected.”

18. Pursuant to the Township’s Ordinance §228-253, billboards are permitted within

the Township’s P-1 and C-2 zones.

19. Pursuant to the Township’s Ordinance §228-3, “[o]ne (1) sign painted on both

sides or two signs of the identical size and shape attached to each other back to back. Whenever

there is an angle between the two sign faces, it shall be considered two separate signs.”

20. The Township’s zoning ordinance does not permit any signs with a height greater

than eight(8) feet in the SCMXD Zone District.

3
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 4 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

21. Lamar applied to the Board seeking preliminary and final site plan approval to

permit its Proposed Billboard, as well as for use and height variance relief pursuant to N.J.S.A.

40:55D-70(d)(1) and (6) respectively, with the (d)(6) height variance for the proposed sign

height, and bulk variance relief pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55-70(c) from the requirements limited

sign face size (for two signs)(§228-255.3.B); maximum rear yard setback (§228-217.46C), and

tract size (§228-217.44B)(the “Application”).

22. Lamar’s Application was heard by the Board at meetings held on April 7, 2022,

July 21, 2022, September 1, 2022 and November 3, 2022.

23. Substantial testimony, including the testimony of various experts, was presented

by Lamar to the Board. During these hearings, Lamar’s representatives, consultants, and experts

provided satisfactory answers to all of the questions and/or concerns raised by the Board and its

representatives.

24. According to the Board’s Resolution, the Application package included, among

other things:

(a) One (1) copy of a Survey of Property, prepared by Lakeland Surveying, signed
and sealed by Marc J. Cifone, PLS, dated 1/15/20, three sheets;

(b) One (1) set of Site Plans consisting of five (5) sheets entitled “Proposed Digital
Billboard, NJSH Route 18 & Main Street (Conrail Property), Township of East
Brunswick, Middlesex County, New Jersey, Block 150.01, Lot 1.03, Tax Map:
27 & 27.04, Zone SCMXD (Senior Citizen Mixed Use Planned Development”,
prepared by L2A Land Design, LLC, signed and sealed by William R. Vogt, Jr.
P.E., dated 5/14/21 with most recent revisions dated 1/19/22;

(c) One (1) copy of a Traffic Engineering and Safety assessment, prepared by
Dynamic Traffic, signed and sealed by Joseph J. Staigar, P.E., and Justin
Taylor, PE dated 10/22/21 with most recent revisions dated 5/21/22;

4
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 5 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

(d) One (1) copy of a Sight Visibility Study Plans, prepared by Dynamic Traffic,
signed and sealed by Joseph J. Staigar, P.E., and Justin Taylor, PE dated
10/22/21 with most recent revisions dated 4/20/22, two sheets;

(e). One (1) copy of a Supplemental traffic Analysis, prepared by Dynamic Traffic,
signed and sealed by Joseph J. Staigar, P.E., and Justin Taylor, PE dated 7/8/22
(f) One (1) copy of an NJDOT Notice of Approval, Application #76842, dated
9/19/19;

(g) One (1) copy of a Lighting Analysis and Optical Measurements and
Calculations, prepared by media resources, signed by Cheng Qian, undated;

(h) Zoning Board application with Addendum, dated 5/25/21.

25. Other documents were submitted as part of the Application, including without

limitation:

(a) A-1 - State DOT Approval Letter (March 31, 2022)
(b) A-2 – Video Taken from Drone from E. Rutherford taken by Mr. Blatt
(c) A-3 – Video Taken from Drone in Bluffdale, Utah in 2019
(d) A-4 - Colorized Site Plan, Sheet C-03 in Color
(e) A-5 - Media Resources Report (revised 3/1/22)
(f) A-6 – Figure 6 on Page 5 of Revised Media Resources Document
(g) A-7 - LED Module of Proposed SITELINE Digital Sign
(h) A-8 - Slide with South-Facing Sign Images
(i) A-9 - Slide with Single South-Facing Image
(j) A-10 - Slide with North-Facing Sign Images
(k) A-11 - Slide with Single North-Facing Sign Image
(l) A-12 - Light Cone with Light Pinpointing Residences South Facing Slide
(m) A-13 - South-Facing Multiple Pinpoint Slide
(n) A-14 – North-Facing Multiple Pinpoint Slide
(o) A-15 - Pinpoint of Residences and Buildings North-Facing Slide
(p) A-16 - Media Resources 6 Page Hand-Out of Cheng Qian, Chief Product
Architect
(q) A-17 - Review of Lighting Considerations for Digital Billboard, 10 slides
(r) A-18 - NJ Rt. 18 Milepost 38.83 Billboard Location Exhibit
(s) A-19 - NJ Rt. 4 Milepost 8.84 Billboard Location Exhibit
(t) A-20 - Storybook Exhibit of 13 Image

5
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 6 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

26. The Board further relied upon the reports, memoranda, and comments, of the

appropriate Township officials, consulting professionals, and agencies as follows:

A. Reports of Terence M. Vogt, PE, PP, CME, Principal, Regional Manager,
Remington & Vernick Engineers, dated February 26, 2022, April 4, 2022,
and July 14, 2022;
B. East Brunswick Police Department Inter-Office Memorandum of October
29, 2021, February 22, 2022, July 15, 2022 and October 11, 2022;
C. Report of Township of East Brunswick Department of Public Works –
Water & Sewer Utility Division dated February 14, 2022;
D. February 28, 2022 Memorandum of Jill Veit, Code Enforcement Officer,
Township of East Brunswick;
E. September 20, 2021 Memorandum of Joe Setticase, Code Enforcement
Officer, Township of East Brunswick;
F. October 29, 2021 and August 19, 2021 Memorandum of Richard A.
Vigliotti, Construction Official, Township of East Brunswick; and
G. February 25, 2022 Memorandum of John Talbot, Fire Marshall, Fire
Districts #1& #3.

27. During the public hearings, Plaintiff presented extensive testimony from:

(a) Derick Blatt, Operations Manager for Lamar, who was accepted by the Board

as a lay witness;

(b) William R. Vogt, P.E. of L2A Land Design LLC in the field of civil

engineering;

area of lighting, who was accepted by the Board as a lay witness;

(d) Chen Qian, Lighting Sciences, Chief Product Architect and Head of

Engineering for Media Resources, who was accepted by the Board as an

expert witness in the area of lighting;

(e) Kevin Savage, P.E. of Dynamic Traffic, who was accepted by the Board as an

expert witness in the field of traffic safety;
6
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 7 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

(f) Justin Taylor, P.E. of Dynamic Traffic, who was accepted by the Board as an

expert witness in the field of traffic safety; and

(g) George Wheatle Williams, P.P., A.I. C.P. of the Nishuane who was accepted

by the Board as an expert witness in the field of professional planning.

28. Lamar also presented sample LED cells and explained at length the technical

operation of such cells and the proposed Billboard as a whole.

29. Testimony presented by the witnesses established all of the criteria necessary to

obtain approval for the Application pursuant to the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law,

N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq. These included, but were not limited to, various specific exhibits

concerning the operation of digital billboards; digital billboard light-mitigation technology; color

photographs, traffic safety studies, and sight visibility studies, again from both directions of State

Route 18 and elsewhere.

30. No member of the East Brunswick Police Department appeared in person during

the course of the hearings on the Application.

31. During the April 7, 2022 hearing, Lawrence Goldsmith, President of the East

Brunswick Museum appeared before the Board to ask certain questions. He did not offer

testimony. He did not appear at or attend any subsequent hearing and did not voice opposition to

the Application.

32. Rutgers University students Sophia Malinsky and Sid Srivastava each appeared

before the Board at the November 3, 2022 hearing in apparent connection with their classroom

studies relating to civics and/or local government. Each asked certain questions but presented no

testimony.

7
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 8 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

33. No other members of the public spoke with respect to the Application.

34. The Board suggested various conditions, such as hours of operation, which

Lamar, through counsel, accepted.

35. Lamar’s extensive testimony demonstrated that the Proposed Billboard was well

suited to its proposed location and the billboard’s proposed use.

36. Lamar’s extensive testimony demonstrated that the Proposed Billboard could be

operated without any substantial detriment to the surrounding area or to the Township’s Master

Plan.

37. The Board’s engineer and planner, Terence M. Vogt, P.E., P.P. CME, is not a

traffic engineer, and is admittedly not an expert in the area of professional traffic safety. Mr.

Vogt offered no professional studies or literature in support of his conclusions or opinions

regarding traffic safety.

38. The East Brunswick Police Department Inter-Office Memoranda were authored

by officers who are not traffic engineers.

39. The Police Department offered no professional studies or literature in support of

its “reservations” regarding the Proposed Billboard’s potential impact on traffic safety.

The Board Denies the Application

40. Over the course of multiple separate hearings, Lamar made an extensive

presentation on the Project, demonstrating that the Application met all requirements for the

needed site plan approvals and variance relief. Along the way, Lamar addressed every issue

raised by the Board.

8
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 9 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

41. Despite Lamar having satisfied all requirements for the Application to receive the

requested relief, the Board denied the Application on November 3, 2022, memorializing that

denial in its Resolution dated December 15, 2022 (the “Resolution”). A true copy of the

Resolution is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

42. To the extent the Board gave reasons for the denial, they seemed based either on

unsupported lay opinion or feelings, or a desire not to grant the approval.

43. Furthermore, the Board’s lay opinions and feelings were directly contradicted by

the sworn expert testimony.

44. The Board’s denial was not based on competent expert or testimonial evidence

supported by the record.

45. The Board’s stated reasons for its denial were contradicted by the thorough and

substantial lay and expert testimony provided by Lamar.

46. The Board’s stated reasons were also improper insofar as they did not reflect a

proper legal basis to deny the Application, such as those having to do with off-site conditions or

other improper considerations.

47. The Board did not support its conclusions with competent, credible evidence, let

alone expert opinion.

48. Notice of Decision of the Resolution was published December 22, 2022.

49. This appeal timely followed.

9
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 10 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

CAUSES OF ACTION

FIRST COUNT
(Arbitrary, Capricious and/or Unreasonable – against the Board)

50. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth above as if same were set

forth at length herein.

51. The Board’s denial of the Application and relief sought thereby was arbitrary,

capricious and/or unreasonable because said denial was not supported by sufficient and

substantial evidence that was presented at the various hearings on the Application, and because

the record before the Board clearly established that the Applicant met the various legal criterion

to be granted.

52. The Board’s denial of the relief sought was arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because Plaintiff did satisfy and establish the appropriate legal criteria required for

the granting of the relief requested.

53. The Board’s denial of the relief sought was arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because Plaintiff did set forth substantial facts which established a legal basis for

the granting of the relief sought.

54. The Board’s denial of the relief sought was arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because the Board did not weigh the statutorily required positive and negative

criteria.

55. The Board’s denial of the relief sought was arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because the Board failed to properly evaluate the required criteria under N.J.S.A.

40:55D-70(d)(1), N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(d)(6), and/or N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(c).

10
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 11 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

56. The reasons (or lack thereof) for the Board’s denial of the Application and the

conclusions based thereon, as set forth in the Resolution, were arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because they are unsupported by the record.

57. The reasons (or lack thereof) for the Board’s denial of the Application and the

conclusions based thereon, as set forth in the Resolution, were arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because they purported to “override” expert opinion with incompetent lay opinions,

feelings and beliefs.

58. Since Plaintiff did establish through credible evidence the facts necessary to meet

the criteria for granting the relief requested, the action of the Board in denying the Application

was arbitrary, capricious and/or unreasonable without basis in law or fact, and was otherwise

improper.

59. The Board misapplied the legal standards and/or ordinances in denying the relief

sought and, therefore, its decision is arbitrary, capricious and/or unreasonable.

60. The arbitrary, capricious and/or unreasonable action of the Board is otherwise in

violation of the MLUL.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Lamar Advertising of Penn, LLC. demands judgment against

the Township of East Brunswick and the East Brunswick Township Board of Adjustment as

follows:

a. Declaring that the Board’s December 15, 2022 denial of the Application

was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and contrary to the Municipal Land Use

Law, the Land Use and Development Regulations of the Township, and the lawful

rights of Lamar;

11
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 12 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

b. Reversing the Board’s December 15, 2022;

c. Granting approval of the Application, determining that all necessary

variances and related relief for the plans and Application before the Board are

approved, and ordering the issuance of a building permit for construction pursuant

to same;

d. Awarding such other and further relief as the Court may deem equitable

and just in the circumstance including attorney’s fees and costs of suit.

SECOND COUNT
(Abuse of Discretion)

61. Lamar repeats each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of

this Complaint as if the same were set forth herein at length.

62. The Board’s denial of the relief sought was arbitrary, capricious and/or

unreasonable because Plaintiff did set forth substantial facts which established a legal basis for

the granting of the relief sought.

63. The Board’s adverse actions relative to the Application were contrary to the

fundamental principles of sound zoning, violate the spirit and intent of the Municipal Land Use

Law, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq. and the relevant jurisprudence interpreting same.

64. Lamar’s interests and rights have been adversely affected by the Board’s arbitrary

and irrational application of its zoning and land use powers, which have been exercised in

violation and contravention of the Board’s statutory mandate. The township’s zoning ordinance.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Lamar Advertising of Penn, LLC. demands judgment the East

Brunswick Township Board of Adjustment as follows:

12
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 13 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

a. Declaring that the Board’s December 15, 2022 denial of the Application

was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and contrary to the Municipal Land Use

Law, the Land Use and Development Regulations of the Township, and the lawful

rights of Lamar;

b. Reversing the Board’s December 15, 2022;

c. Granting approval of the Application, determining that all necessary

variances and related relief for the plans and Application before the Board are

approved, and ordering the issuance of a building permit for construction pursuant

to same;

d. Awarding such other and further relief as the Court may deem equitable

and just in the circumstance including attorney’s fees and costs of suit.

TRENK ISABEL, SIDDIQUI & SHAHDANIAN, P.C.
Counsel for Plaintiff
Lamar Outdoor Advertising of Penn, LLC

By: /s/ Reginald Jenkins, Jr.
Reginald Jenkins, Jr., Esq.

DATED: January 27, 2023

13
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 14 of 14 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

R. 4:5-1 CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify pursuant to R. 4:5-1 that this matter is not the subject of any other

action pending in any court or of a pending arbitration proceeding, nor is any other action or

arbitration proceeding contemplated. We further certify that we are unaware of any non-party

who should be joined in this action pursuant to R. 4:28 or who is subject to joinder pursuant to R.

4:29-1(b) because of potential liability to any party based on the same transactional facts.

TRENK ISABEL, SIDDIQUI & SHAHDANIAN, P.C.
Counsel for Plaintiff
Lamar Outdoor Advertising of Penn, LLC

By: /s/ Reginald Jenkins, Jr.
Reginald Jenkins, Jr., Esq.

DATED: January 27, 2023

R. 4:69-4 CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify pursuant to R. 4:69-4, that copies of the transcripts of the Board

hearings referenced above have been ordered and will be provided to defendant and the Court.

TRENK ISABEL, SIDDIQUI & SHAHDANIAN, P.C.
Counsel for Plaintiff
Lamar Outdoor Advertising of Penn, LLC

By: /s/ Reginald Jenkins, Jr.
Reginald Jenkins, Jr., Esq.

DATED: January 27, 2023

14
111495421
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 1 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

EXHIBIT A
(Part 1 of 2)
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 2 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

RESOLUTION OF THE
EAST BRUNSWICK TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MIDDLESEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
LAMAR ADEVERTISING OF PENN LLC
Block 150.01, Lot 1.03

Application #Z-21-19

WHEREAS, Lamar Advertising of Penn LLC (hereinafter referred to as the

"Applicant") has applied to the East Brunswick Township Board of Adjustment for

a d(1) Use Variance to permit the erecting and operation of a two-sided, V-shaped

digital billboard upon a portion of railroad property owned by Conrail identified as

Conrail, N.J.S.H. Route 18 & Main Street, East Brunswick, New Jersey with a

maximum height of eighty (80) feet at the subject site, together with a d(6) Height

Variance for Maximum Sign Height (228-255.3.B.) and Bulk Variances for

Maximum Sign Area (for two signs) (228-255.3.B.); Minimum Rear Yard Set Back

(228-217.46C.), and Tract Size (228-217.44B.); and Preliminary and Final Site

Plan Approval; at Block 150.01, Lot 1.03, N.J.S.H. Route 18 & Main Street, in the

SCMXD Zone on the East Brunswick Township Tax Map (hereinafter referred to

as the “Application") and

WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment acknowledged jurisdiction over this

application on April 7, 2022 and public hearings were held on said Application by

the Board of Adjustment on April 7, 2022; July 21, 2022; September 1, 2022; and,

November 3, 2022; and the public was given the opportunity to be heard; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant published a proper newspaper hearing notice of

the hearing and notified the property owners within 200 feet of the subject
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 3 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

Property of the Board of Adjustment's scheduled hearing pursuant to N.J.S.A.

40:55D-12; and

WHEREAS, on November 3, 2022, the Board DENIED the requested Use

Variance, d(6) Height Variance, Bulk Variances, and Preliminary and Final Site

Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Board, after carefully considering the evidence presented

to it by the Applicant, the Applicant's witness testimony, the documents filed by

the Applicant, and the reports, memoranda, comments, and testimony of the

appropriate township officials, consulting professionals, and agencies, has made

the following findings of fact:

Findings and Conclusions

1. The Property is located at Route 18 and Main Street (on the Conrail

Property), on Lot 1.03 in Block 150.01 on the Tax Map of the Township of East

Brunswick. The Property is a 5.281 acres railroad right-of-way running east-

west within the Township with a width of approximately 90-100 feet throughout

and is located in the SCMXD (Senior Citizen Mixed Use Planned Development)

Zone District. The Property presently consists of Conrail railroad tracks that

parallel Main Street. The subject Application is seeking relief to allow the

erecting and operation of a two-sided, V-shaped digital billboard afong Route 18

proposed to be eighty feet (80’) from the foundation to the top of the sign and

twenty-five feet (25’) high above Route 18’s road surface. Billboards are only
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 4 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

permitted as conditional uses in two zoning districts within the Township: the P-|

(Planned Industrial Park), and C-2 (Neighborhood Business District). They are

not a permitted use in other zones. The location of the proposed two-sided, V-

shaped digital billboard falls within the SCMXD Senior Citizen Mixed Use Planned

Development Zone which does not list billboards as a permitted use and,

therefore, a d(1) Use Variance is necessary. Pursuant to East Brunswick

Ordinance §228-245.A, “Unless otherwise provided for, all signs shall relate

to the premises on which they are erected.” Additionally, East Brunswick

Ordinance §228-253 PROHIBITED SIGNS, subsection H also indicates:

“Except where specfically permitted, signs advertising a product or service

not sold on the premises, signs advertising or directing attention to another

premises and any other signs unrelated to the premises on which the sign is

erected, except for billboards as a conditional use in the in the P-I and C-2

zones.” Furthermore, East Brunswick Ordinance §228-3 provides, “SIGNS,

DOUBLE FACED — One (1) sign painted on both sides or two signs of

identical! size shape attached to each other back to back. Whenever there is

an angle between the two sign faces, it shall be considered as two separate

signs.”

9 The Applicant was represented by Reginald Jenkins, Jr., Esq. of the

Firm of Trenk Isabel Siddiqi & Shahdanian, P.C. The following individuals testified

and presented testimony in support of the Application; to wit:

a) Derick Blatt, Operations Manager for Lamar Advertising of

New York and New Jersey; and Ilidio Vincente, Director of
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 5 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

Business Development for Media Resources, as lay

witnesses.

b) William R. Vogt, P.E., Engineer, of L2A Land Design; Kevin

Savage, P.E., Traffic Engineer, of Dynamic Traffic; Chen

Qian, Lighting Sciences, Chief Product Architect and Head

of Engineering for Media Resources; Justin Taylor, P.E.,

Traffic Engineer, of Dynamic Traffic; George Wheattle

Williams, P.P., AICP, of the Nishuane Group, all of whom

were accepted as experts in their respective fields.

3: The Applicant has submitted, and the Board has relied upon:

A. One (1) copy of a Survey of Property, prepared by Lakeland

Surveying, signed and sealed by Marc J. Cifone, PLS, dated

1/15/20, three sheets.

B. One (Il) set of Site Plans consisting of five (5) sheets entitled

"Proposed Digital Billboard, NJSH Route 18 & Main Street

(Conrail Property), Township of East Brunswick, Middlesex

County, New Jersey, Block 150.01, Lot 1.03, Tax Map: 27 &

27.04, Zone SCMXD (Senior Citizen Mixed Use Planned

Development", prepared by L2A Land Design, LLC, signed and

sealed by William R. Vogt, Jr., P.E., dated 5/14/21 with most

recent revisions dated 1/19/22.

C. One (1) copy of a Traffic Engineering and Safety assessment,

prepared by Dynamic Traffic, signed and sealed by Joseph J.
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 6 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

Staigar, P.E., and Justin Taylor, PE dated 10/22/21 with most

recent revisions dated 5/21/22.

. One (1) copy of a Sight Visibility Study Plans, prepared by

Dynamic Traffic, signed and sealed by Joseph J. Staigar, P.E.,

and Justin Taylor, PE dated 10/22/21 with most recent revisions

dated 4/20/22, two sheets.

. One (1) copy of a Supplemental Traffic Analysis, prepared by

Dynamic Traffic, signed and sealed by Joseph J. Staigar, P.E.,

and Justin Taylor, PE dated 7/8/22.

One (1) copy of an NJDOT Notice of Approval, Application

#76842, dated 9/19/19.

. One (1) copy of a Lighting Analysis and Optical Measurements

and Calculations, prepared by media resources, signed by

Cheng Qian, undated.

H. Zoning Board application with Addendum, dated 5/25/21.

And the following Exhibits:

A-1 — State DOT Approval Letter (March 31, 2022)

A-2 — Video Taken From Drone From E. Rutherford Taken By Mr. Blatt

A-3 — Video Taken From Drone In Bluffdale, Utah in 2019

A-4 — Colorized Site Plan, Sheet C-03 in Color

A-5 — Media Resources Report (revised 3/1/22)

A-6 — Figure 6 on Page 5 of Revised Media Resources Document

A-7 — LED Module of Proposed SITELINE Digital Sign
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 7 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

A-8 — Slide With South-Facing Sign Images

A-9 — Slide With Single South-Facing Sign Image

A-10 — Slide With North-Facing Sign Images

A-11 — Slide With Single North-Facing Sign Image

A-12 — Light Cone With Light Pinpointing Residences South Facing

Slide

A-13 — South-Facing Multiple Pinpoint Slide

A-14 — North-Facing Multiple Pinpoint Slide

A-15 — Pinpoint of Residences and Buildings North-Facing Slide

A-16 — Media Resources 6 Page Hand-Out of Cheng Qian, Chief

Product Architect

A-17 - Review of Lighting Considerations for Digital Billboard, 10 slides

A-18- NJ Rt. 18 Milepost 38.83 Billboard Location Exhibit

A-19 —NJ Rt. 4 Milepost 8.84 Billboard Location Exhibit

A-20 — Storybook Exhibit of 13 Images

4. The Board further relied upon the reports, memoranda, and

comments, of the appropriate township officials, consulting professionals, and

agencies as follows:

A. Reports of Terence M. Vogt, PE, PP, CME, Principal, Regional

Manager, Remington & Vernick Engineers, dated February 26, 2022,

April 4, 2022, and July 14, 2022;
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 8 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

B. East Brunswick Police Department Inter-Office Memoranda of

October 29, 2021, February 22, 2022, July 15, 2022, and October 11,

2022;

C. Report of Township of East Brunswick Department of Public Works

— Water & Sewer Utility Division dated February 14, 2022:

D. February 28, 2022 Memorandum of Jill Veit, Code Enforcement

Officer, Township of East Brunswick;

E. September 20, 2021 Memorandum of Joe Setticase, Code

Enforcement Officer, Township of East Brunswick;

F. October 28, 2021 and August 19, 2021 Memoranda of Richard A.

Vigliotti, Construction Official, Township of East Brunswick; and

G. February 15, 2022 Memorandum of John Talbot, Fire Marshall, Fire

Districts #1 & #3,

5. The following Use and Height Variances pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-

70(d)(1) and (6), respectively, from the requirements of the SCMXD Zone District

is required. The Property is located in the SCMXD Zone District. Township

ordinances do not permit the use of a two-sided, V-shaped digital billboard in

the SCMXD Zone. Township ordinances do not permit any signs with greater

than a maximum height of eight (8) feet in the SCMXD Zone.

6. The Applicant seeks to permit the erecting and operation of a two-

sided, V-shaped digital billboard upon a portion of railroad property owned by

Conrail identified as Conrail, N.J.S.H. Route 18 & Main Street, East Brunswick,

New Jersey with a maximum height of eighty (80) feet at the subject site, together
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 9 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

with a d(6) Height Variance for Maximum Sign Height (228-255.3.B.) and Bulk

Variances for Maximum Sign Area (for two signs) (228-255.3.B.); Minimum Rear

Yard Set Back (228-217.46C.), and Tract Size (228-217.44B.); and Preliminary

and Final Site Plan Approval; at Block 150.01, Lot 1.03, N.J.S.H. Route 18 &

Main Street, in the SCMXD Zone on the East Brunswick Township Tax Map.

7. Derick Blatt, Operations Manager for Lamar Advertising of New York

and New Jersey, provided lay testimony on behalf of the Applicant as to

operations. Mr. Blatt testified, inter alia, that the Applicant was proposing an

eighty (80) feet tall structure with back-to-back, V-shaped billboards that are

each fourteen (14) feet tall, forty-eight (48) feet wide, and that it's directed

towards the motoring public. The billboards would be digital LED (light-

emitting diodes). The signs would display multiple messages and have eight

second flips. The signs would be available for commercial, private, and

political speech and also would include an Emergency Alert System (EAS)

slot. However, Mr. Blatt could not provide specific time frequencies as to how

often EAS alerts occur, and further indicated that some advertisements he

was Classifying as public service notices were actually sold ads to agencies

such as the FBI and U.S. Marshal's Service, and that if the space wasn’t sold

then they would not be so used and those such public service notices may

never be seen. Additionally, when the sign would be used for an EAS

message, the EAS message would only be placed into an eight second slot

within the advertisement rotation; it would not remain displayed continuously,
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 10 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

hence, greatly reducing the opportunity for it to be seen by motorists driving

through the area. Mr. Blatt presented two videos (Exhibits A-2 and A-3

respectively) demonstrating drone video of digital billboards in East

Rutherford, NJ (A-2) and Bluffdale, Utah (A-3), respectively. However, he

testified that only the technology exemplified in the Bluffdale, Utah video was

the same as what the Applicant proposed in this Application. Furthermore, he

testified that the height of the billboard in Exhibit A-3 was only approximately

forty (40) feet in height. He further testified that the material advertising

alcohol, sports books, and gambling are ail allowed by the Applicant.

8. William R. Vogt, Jr., P.E., provided professional engineering

testimony in regard to the civil site plans prepared for the Application, on

behalf of the Applicant. He testified, inter alia, that the site is located in the

SCMXD Zone, that the proposed billboard faces at a 90 degree angle to Route

18, it's a V-shaped, two-sided, digital billboard; each panel is 14 by 48 feet

and in a V-shape so that each panel of the V is at the optimum angle to Route

18 where it’s intended to be viewed. He further provided that the billboard will

be, at its closest point, 25 feet above Route 18; and it is to be situated 14.47

feet from the northern property line. He further testified that the billboard will

be a maximum height of 80 feet and that the sign will appear to be

approximately a 43 to 45 foot sign off the elevation of Route 18. He further

testified that the maximum sign height permitted in the zone is 8 feet and the

Applicant proposes 80 feet. Likewise, he further testified that the maximum
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 11 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

sign area permitted in the zone is 25 square feet and the Applicant proposes

two signs each at 672 square feet. He further testified, incorrectly, that in the

C-2 Zone billboards are permitted, whereas they are only permitted as a

conditional use in the C-2 Zone, and he further did acknowledge that the C-2

Zone is along the New Jersey Turnpike. Additionally, he testified that the

minimum rear and side yard setback requirement is 50 feet and that Applicant

is only providing 14.77 feet. He further testified that a portion of the nearby

elementary school is in a location where you can see the proposed sign and

read the messages thereon. He also provided that the intention is to make

sure the sign is visible at 1,250 feet distance.

9. Illidio Vincente, Director of Business Development for Media

Resources, provided lay testimony of behalf of the Applicant, inter alia, as to

the operations of the proposed digital billboard of the Application. Mr. Vincente

testified that Media Resources is the manufacturer of the proposed digital

billboard and the SITELINE technology is the patented product of Media

Resources. He presented (Exhibit A-7) an LED module that was one of the

many to be used to comprise the proposed digital billboard and that the

proposed digital billboard would utilize about 400 modules; the single LED

module consists of a 400 by 400 pixel radius; and it is designed to target the

traffic or area where you want to present the light to. Further, he testified that

the V-Shaped billboard is double sided with each side having a respective

right-hand block or left-hand block. He also testified that the visibility area for
MID-L-000512-23 01/27/2023 2:19:25 PM Pg 12 of 19 Trans ID: LCV2023380572

each sign face is 70 to 80 degrees, respectively. Additionally, he testified that

the distance where it is intended for the sign to begin to be visible is at 1,290

feet; any visual mitigation based on the right-hand or left-hand block would

only serve as light mitigation and not mitigating the view of the actual structure.

In reference to houses in the Historic District at around 1,000 feet distance,

he testified that you will be able to see the billboard, but you just won’t be able

to read or identify the image; further, when questioned about whether at that

distance one could see brightness or light, he responded only that the light

would have no impact without further definition of “impact.” Furthermore,

although Mr. Vincente provided lengthy testimony as to the light mitigation

effects of the SITELINE proprietary technology, his testimony failed to address

any light mitigation to the target of Route 18; rather, any light mitigation effects,

according to his testimony, were directed to non-targeted areas only and not

the intended target area of Route 18, and his testimony did not eliminate, nor

even attenuate, the safety risks found

Case Info

Judge

Aravind Aithal Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

January 27, 2023

Case Filing Date

January 27, 2023

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.