Board kills proposal for recycling center
Application cited as too similar to one rejected in '96
BY VINCENT TODARO
Staff Writer

Once was enough.That's what the Zoning Board of Adjustment told members of the Fino family last week about a second attempt to get approval for a recycling center on Edgeboro Road, East Brunswick. Family members were among the principals behind a recycling plant application rejected by the township Planning Board in 1996, and they are also the owners of the latest plan, which is under a different name but is proposed for the same site.

At its meeting last Thursday night, the board unanimously voted that the legal doctrine known as "res judicata" applied to the plan, and therefore the board could not legally hear the case. The concept precludes municipal boards from hearing applications that have already been voted on.

Many residents had opposed the recycling center plans in both 1996 and this year. Residents of the Pine Ridge neighborhood in particular had been gearing up to battle the application since earlier this year, saying it would simply be another noisy and odoriferous operation that would generate unwanted truck traffic on already congested roadways.

The first hearing on the Triple M Sanitation Services Inc. application was to take place at last week's meeting.

Residents rejoiced after the board's decision was rendered.

"I was very thrilled to hear about it," said Denise Contrino, president of the Pine Ridge Neighborhood Association, noting that she couldn't attend the meeting due to an emergency. "Two members of the association called me at 9:38 - I was waiting for their call. They were ecstatic, as was I."

Contrino noted, however, that she doubts this is the end of the matter, since she believes the applicant will probably appeal.

"But it is a victory, and it goes to show that when the people come out, whether in support of or against a proposal, their message is heard," she said. Residents, she noted, spent a lot of time spreading the word about the recycling center, and she said it's possible their presence prompted the board to take a harder look at the similarities between the two applications.

After Thursday's meeting, a visibly upset Steven Fino told the Sentinel he was unsure whether he would appeal the board's decision.

The doctrine of "res judicata" states that if an application is substantially similar to a previous plan, and if the previous one was decided based on its merits; if the owners or their privies are the same; and if the site is substantially the same, the board can refuse to hear the "new" application.

That spared the board what would likely have become a contentious and lengthy series of hearings regarding the merits of the application. Residents, who nearly packed the council meeting chambers last week, felt the application would be detrimental to the quality of life in the area for a number of reasons.

Board member Florence Lotrowski said she saw a quantitative difference between the new and old applications, but not a qualitative difference.

Joel Henkin, also a board member, said he saw only a capacity reduction in the new application.

Fino and his attorney, Harry Starrett, disagreed with the ruling, saying the application they brought before the board differed substantially from the one voted down in 1996. Fino and his brothers Kenneth and Thomas own Triple M Sanitation. Two of the brothers were also partners in Universal Processing Services (UPS) Inc., which brought the 1996 application for a recycling center.

Both applications called for a Class A recycling center at the site, where a solid waste transporter plant already operates. Representatives said the latest plan called for a lighter use. UPS had sought permission for a capacity of 700 tons per day. That was in contrast to the new application, which sought 200 tons per day, representatives said during testimony.

Another difference between the two applications, Starrett said, was that the first called for more equipment layout and multiple conveyor belts. The new one would have far less equipment because it would handle only newspapers and corrugated commodities - nothing that is co-mingled, Fino said. The sources would already be separated.

Fino's solid waste transporter business at 21 Edgeboro Road currently takes paper to other facilities. His business stacks the materials and sells them to a mill.

"We're really not processing," he said.

Starrett also said the 1996 UPS application called for a 24-hour operation - about twice the number of hours as the newer plan. Some board members did not buy that statement, however, asking Fino to tell them the hours of other similar recycling centers. All the centers he mentioned had far more operational hours than what he claimed his would.

Fino also said the amount of truck traffic generated by the latest application would be much less than the first.

Starrett concluded by telling the board there were "very substantial differences" between the applications. He compared it to the difference between a developer first asking the zoning board for permission to build three-family homes, then settling for two-family homes.

But the board was adamant that the two applications were not fundamentally different. Board member Richard Klein said he did not see a lot of "significant changes" from the first to the second.

Fino had said UPS is no longer operating, and that its lead partners had been Richard and George Mayo.

Fino needed a use variance and conditional use permit to operate the class A recycling center. The variance was needed because under a township ordinance adopted after the first application, the recycling plant could not be located within 1,500 feet of a residence. This plant would be approximately 700 feet to the nearest home, and many other houses would also fall within the threshold.

Board members also voiced doubts about how the recycling center would be monitored. Fino said that although it would not be regulated by the state, it would have to be in the county's solid waste management plan, to which he applied for inclusion.

But the board was still skeptical about how it would know for sure how much tonnage, for instance, was going through the center on a daily basis.