Weldon Materials, Inc., Etc. v. Planning Board of the Borough of Watchung

── Weldon Materials, Inc., Etc. v. Planning Board of the Borough of Watchung ── Court: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division Date: May 14, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1651-24 WELDON MATERIALS, INC., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PLANNING BOARD OF THE BOROUGH OF WATCHUNG, 100 UNION AVENUE HOLDINGS, LLC, and THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE HOLDING CORP., Defendants-Respondents. ___________________________ Argued April 30, 2026 – Decided May 14, 2026 Before Judges Mawla and Marczyk. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Somerset County, Docket No. L-1419-21. Robert F. Simon argued the cause for appellant (Herold Law, PA, attorneys; Robert F. Simon, of counsel; Christine M. Faustini, on the briefs).  Stephen F. Hehl argued the cause for respondent 100 Union Avenue Holdings, LLC (Javerbaum, Wurgaft, Hicks, Kahn, Wikstrom & Sinins, attorneys; Stephen F. Hehl, of counsel; Trevor J. Endler, on the briefs). Francis P. Linnus argued the cause for respondent Planning Board of the Borough of Watchung (Francis P. Linnus, attorneys; Francis P. Linnus, of counsel; Kristen L. Seibold, on the briefs). PER CURIAM Plaintiff Weldon Materials, Inc. appeals from the December 24, 2024 and February 19, 2025 orders, which dismissed its complaint in lieu of prerogative writs against defendants 100 Union Avenue Holdings, LLC and the Borough of Watchung Planning Board related to the grant of a preliminary site plan application to develop a daycare center. We affirm. Judge Robert A. Ballard, Jr. conducted the prerogative writs trial and rendered an opinion, which recited the salient facts we relate here. Plaintiff owns a rock quarry across the road from 100 Union's property. 100 Union applied to the Board for preliminary and final site plan approval , requesting several variances and waivers under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70(c)(1) and (c)(2), due to its property's irregular lot shape. The property is in the B-B professional and office zone. The zone permits daycare centers and certain non-residential buildings, and it does not require a specific number of parking spaces. A-1651-24 2  The Green Brook and its tributary flow around the property. The brook is regulated and studied by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), while the tributary is only regulated by the NJDEP. The riparian zones of the waterways go through parts of the proposed development, including several of its parking spaces. The NJDEP previously assigned a flood hazard line to the property, which impacted various parts of its development. There is also a recorded conservation easement. As a result, 100 Union sought permits from the NJDEP in exchange for mitigation of the hazards. The development proposed the daycare would be open from 6:30 a.m. until 6:30 p.m. and twenty-two staff members would serve 154 toddlers and preschoolers. The proposed two-story building would have a gross floor area of 10,794 square feet, thirty-one parking spaces, and an outdoor playground area. The Board conducted eleven days of hearings on various dates in 2019, 2020, and 2021. 100 Union presented testimony from six experts: a ci