MINUTES OF THE CRANBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD CRANBURY, NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX COUNTY MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 2013 APPROVED ON MAY 1, 2014

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "MINUTES OF THE CRANBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD CRANBURY, NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX COUNTY MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 2013 APPROVED ON MAY 1, 2014"

Herbert Bradley
5 years ago
Views:

1 MINUTES OF THE CRANBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD CRANBURY, NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX COUNTY MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 2013 APPROVED ON MAY 1, 2014 TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING The regular meeting of the Cranbury Township Planning Board was held at the Cranbury Township Hall Municipal Building, 23-A North Main Street, Cranbury, New Jersey, Middlesex County on December 12, 2013 at 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Allan Kehrt, Chairperson of the Cranbury Township Planning Board, and called the meeting to order and acted as the Chairman thereof. STATEMENT OF ADEQUATE NOTICE Pursuant with the Sunshine Law, adequate notice in accordance with the Open Public Meeting Act was provided of this meeting s date, time, place and agenda was mailed to the news media, posted on the Township bulletin board, mailed to those requesting personal notice, and filed with the Municipal Clerk. MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE David Cook 10:45) Jennifer Cooke James Gallagher Thomas Harvey Arthur Hasselbach Glenn Johnson Brian Schilling Jason Stewart Allan Kehrt PROFESSIONALS IN ATTENDANCE Andrew Feranda, Traffic Consultant David J. Hoder, Board Engineer Edward Schmierer, Esquire, Board Attorney Josette C. Kratz, Secretary

2 Page 2 of 6 Richard Preiss, Township Planner RESOLUTIONS PB Keystone Cranbury, West, LLC Block 2, Lot 4.02, Zone LI 283 Prospect Road Minor Site Plan to add security fence MOTIONED BY: SECONDED BY: Mr. Hasselbach Mr. Gallagher ROLL CALL AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mr. Cook, Mr. Gallagher, Mr. Hasselbach, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Schilling, Mr. Kehrt None None Ms. Cooke, Mr. Stewart MOTION CARRIED INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS NEW LIBRARY - Kirstie Venanzi, President Cranbury Public Library Board of Trustees Ms. Venanzi explained where the new site for the library would be located. It was a shift north from the originally proposed site, to allow for better site circulation and design layout. Ms. Veghte, representing both the Recreation Commission and the Business Association, said both bodies were opposed to the location for various reasons. APPLICATIONS PB Hampton Inn Day Care Center Block 6, Lot 5, Zone RO/LI South River Road & Dey Road Preliminary & Final Major Site Plan REPRESENTATIVES: Kenneth Pape, Esquire Heilbrunn and Pape

3 Page 3 of 6 Yogesh Mistry, Architect Sharif Aly, P.E. Amertech Engineering Timothy Seldin Day Care Expert Frank Miskovich, Traffic Engineer NOTE TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE EXHIBITS A-1 Aerial Photo of Site EXHIBITS A-2 Aerial Photo Existing Conditions EXHIBITS A-3 Layout and Landscaping Sheet EXHIBITS A-4 Detention Basin and Grading Plan EXHIBITS A-5 Lighting Plan EXHIBITS A-6 Circulation Plan EXHIBITS A-7 Standalone Plan Hampton Inn EXHIBITS A-8 Standalone Plan Day Care Mr. Pape introduced himself and explained this was a new application asking for site plan approval for an approximately 15 acre parcel of land located in the RO/LI zone for two uses, both permitted; one a hotel and second a day care facility. Mr. Schmierer found the noticed in order. Mr. Pape listed his witnesses, but mentioned that behind him were Mr. Mehta, Mr. Patel, and Mr. Dhar, principals of the applicant, which he did not intend to call on but where here if there were any questions of the owners. Mr. Aly, sworn, gave his credentials and was sworn. Mr. Aly gave copies of his exhibits (11 x 17 ) to the Board members. Mr. Aly stated an overview of the application, noting the location in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Dey Road and Cranbury South River Road, and frontage along Cranbury South River Road and Dey Road. Site has portion heavily wooded with Cedar Brook running east to west, wetlands and flood plains, along with buffers. The development would be completely out of the flood plain and the buffers. A driveway feeds into the entire facility, where there exist two warehouse buildings currently. The proposed development would consist of a hotel, Hampton Inn, four stories high, 60 feet tall, 62,064 SF. They are required 136 parking spaces to meet the ordinance. The second proposal is the day care facility to the right of the hotel and it is one-story, 19,442 SF, and that will require 52 spaces. Primary access will be off Cranbury South River Road with full movements; right in and right and left out. The two facilities will share their driveway. The hotel will also have one off South River Road. Mr. Aly noted the site is proposing improvements that would cut down on impervious coverage compared to original application was 54 percent impervious and this site would now me 20 percent, which means 17 CFS that will be produced versus 50 CFS. They tried to reduce headlight glare coming out f the parking spaces onto Cranbury South River Road by pushing the site three feet lower that Cranbury South River Road, on an average. There will be berming also.

4 Page 4 of 6 Mr. Aly explained the hotel would require 136 spaces per the ordinance, 1.2 per room. They propose 101 rooms. They meet the requirement. They meet the front setback requirement. Fifty percent of the parking spaces would be in the front are and the rest along the side and back, which all meet the ordinance. He explained the circulation pattern, the landscaping, the signage, and other improvements. Mr. Hoder went through his report, asking which items the applicant would complete to. He indicated the applicant was saying they would do most of the items listed in the report but there were two regarding landscaping being too dense in the front and something which recently came up with other applications and that was environmentally constrained easements or drainage easements being environmental restricted and setbacks for riparian buffers. He also brought up the topic of deed restriction to the Township in the developer s agreement and Township should give thought to what their positions would be. Mr. Schmierer said his experience was as a policy of the governing body, which is reflected in the ordinance of which must be follow until changed. He recommended the governing body correct the problem either way. At this time the application the applicant has not asked for waiver, and we cannot of our own volition. He added it was a good issue to look at. Normally it would be part of a report the Planning Board would make to the governing body, then it is a matter of how the governing body want to approach that. Mr. Hoder explained he was looking for direction on what the policy should be and how the boards and governing body want him to follow. Mr. Cook said he was willing to do that. Mr. Pape said they know as the applicant, and as the property owner, the storm water basin is for their benefit and it is a private system for their benefit and they have an obligation to maintain it. He believed the discussion was the oversight that the municipality has to make certain that it is maintained and the event of an emergency or dangerous situation for other adjacent properties. In the current language, it creates that oversight and it is a standard procedure. They are not offended by Mr. Hoder s suggestion. They are reluctant to offer it but were comfortable with the current ordinance. Mr. Schmierer said an alternative way could be an affirmative requirement in the developer s agreement that they maintain their detention basin and if they did not, and the municipality became aware of that, upon notice to the applicant and the applicant not following through the Township could make repairs and charge a lien back against that property as they do with taxes. The applicant would have to provide a maintenance protocol for their facility. It was suggestion this also be brought to the attention for the zoning ordinance committee. Mr. Feranda had comments for the traffic consultant. Mr. Preiss agreed with Mr. Hoder s comments on the landscaping. He added leaving space for the trees to grow into. He agreed with Mr. Feranda s comments of widening the driveway. He commented on the

5 Page 5 of 6 arrangement of the cul-de-sac and the chain link fence and the ability in an emergency for circulation around the entire site. He commented on parking for events, security parking in the front yard, and signage. Mr. Hasselbach had is with the compatibility of the two proposed sues and safety concerns. Mr. Schilling said it might warrant discussion. Mr. Gallagher asked questions relating to the environmental impact statement. Mr. Nicholas Pakis, 12 Bean Hill Road, Morganville, New Jersey, sworn was also concerned about the two uses together. Mr. Tim Seldin, sworn and accepted, gave testimony on the how this Montessori schools would operate. Application was carried without further notice to January 30, 2014 as a special meeting. VOUCHERS PUBLIC COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING There being no further business, on motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was thereupon adjourned. CERTIFICATE OF SECRETARY I, the undersigned, do hereby certify; That I am duly elected and acting secretary of the Cranbury Township Planning Board and, that the foregoing minutes of the Planning Board, held on December 12, 2013, consisting of 5 pages, constitute a true and correct copy of the minutes of the said meeting. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name of said Planning Board this May 1, Josette C. Kratz, Secretary

6 Page 6 of 6 /jck

MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CRANBURY TOWNSHIP CRANBURY, NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX COUNTY MINUTES OF JULY 6, 2011 APPROVED ON OCTOBER 5, 2011

MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CRANBURY TOWNSHIP CRANBURY, NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX COUNTY MINUTES OF JULY 6, 2011 APPROVED ON OCTOBER 5, 2011 TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING The regular meeting of the