|
MONTVILLE TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD
7:30 PM Start
195 Changebridge Road, Montville Municipal Building
Minutes of June 10, 2010
No New Business to be Conducted Past
l0: 00PM
ROLL CALL
Mr.
Maggio - present Mr. Karkowsky - present
Mr.
Sandham - present Ms. Nielson - absent
Mr.
Lipari - present Mr. Lewis - present
Mr.
Hines - present Mr.
Canning - present
Mr. Visco - present Mr. Speciale (alt#1) - present
Mr. Tobias (alt#2) - present
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
Stated
STATEMENT OF
COMPLIANCE
Stated
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION
No discussion
PLANNING
BUSINESS
Soil Movement Ordinance discussion –
referral of ordinance
No comments
offered from Mr. Burgis. Since this is
more related to engineering, Mr. Omland offered his comments, which will be
updated in a report to be submitted to the Township Committee as per their
request.
Mr. Omland indicated: most obvious comment is that the ordinance
numbering system must be addressed.
He suggested
that the fees portion of the ordinance should be reviewed also.
He suggested
applications under 500 cu yds be $25 minimum and that those that are over and
that are at a board level be changed to indicated the ‘initial’ escrow deposit
is $1000 so applicant is put on notice additional fees may be required.
He indicated
the language still relates more to ‘removal and that the language should be
clarified to indicated that it may also involve soil importing.
Chain link or
cyclone fencing is not permitted. This
wording should be consistent with correct code and eliminated as being allowed.
And most
important, based on what we experienced with the Stefanelli application that we
require any soil imported be accompanied by a certified lab testing
demonstrating compliance with NJDEP Residential Direct Contact Soil Cleanup Criteria.
Discussion
ensued on exemption being permitted for any fill (i.e. topsoil) that may be
brought onto a resident site, noting that 50 cu yards would be an
execution. Mr. Sandham did not want to
see any impact created either by cost and/or imposed municipal regulations that
would create hardships.
Motion made
by: Art Maggio
Seconded by: Larry
Hines
Mrs. White was
instructed to forward the report from Mr. Omland incorporating all of the
comments offered as the Planning Board’s official review recommendation
report. Mrs. White noted that other
comments offered were incorporated into this draft and that comments made by
Mr. Carroll were also sent to Mr. Barile.
Reports from Board Liaisons:
a) Board of Adjustment – Gary Lewis -
Mrs. White noted Quick Chek is rescheduled to August
Board of Adjustment agenda
b)
Board of Health – Lawrence
Tobias
c)
Environmental Commission – Vic Canning
d)
Water & Sewer – Arthur Maggio
e) Historic Preservation Commission
– John Visco
f) DRC – Deb Nielson
g) Site Plan/Subdivision Committee –
Russ Lipari Chair, Ladis Karkowsky, Deborah
Nielson, & John Visco (alt)
j)
Economic Development Committee – Tony Speciale
k) Open Space Committee – Ladis Karkowsky, Russ Lipari,
Deb Nielson & Jim Sandham
– Mayor indicated the township applied for and received a $60,000 grant for
trails in open space properties to make trails allowing for more active
recreation
l) Master Plan/COAH 3rd
Round – Ladis Karkowsky, Russ Lipari, Deborah Nielson, Gary Lewis
& John Visco (alt)
m) Cross Acceptance Committee – Lad
is Karkowsky, Russ Lipari
n) Highlands
Legislation Review Committee – Gary Lewis
o)
Appointment to Fire Department Districts – Russ
Lipari –Towaco; Tony Speciale
for Pine Brook, Art Maggio for Montville
WAIVERS
PMISC10-28 Lucien Group
International, LLC – 20 Chapin Rd. Unit
1009 – B: 183, L: 7.2 – Office (1,991 s.f.)/warehouse (3,337 s.f.) real estate
project and construction management services – 20 employees – hours of
operation 8am-5pm M-F – FedEx/UPS/DHL deliveries 1-5 per day – no commercial
vehicles parked overnight – signage to be in compliance with approved them
(First Industrial)
Approved
unanimously in Motion made by: Art
Maggio
Seconded: Larry Hines
Subject to agency findings, use letter
and sign theme.
RESOLUTIONS
PSPP/FC09-10
Trinity Baptist Church – 160 Changebridge Rd. – B: 124, L: 12.3 – Prel/Final Site Plan with variances Roll call: Ladis Karkowsky, John
Visco, Gary Lewis,
Art Maggio, Russ Lipari, Jim Sandham, Larry Hines,
Anthony Speciale, Lawrence Tobias
(Note:
Mr. Visco present)
Frank
Scangarella, Esq.
Applicant’s
attorney requested board to grant variance that was originally sought and then
withdrawn at the meeting. He indicated
although requested, the Board was acting on the supposition that the next door
property would have an objection, and didn’t stating so at the hearing. He indicated that although the granting of
variance was true in minutes, the church indicated this will require a
reconsideration of the design approved. Applicants
are a church/school and they ask the board to allow this variance to stand.
Public notice issue discussed.
Mike
Carroll, Esq. discussed variance with the 20’ setback, and summarized background
and notice provisions. This was
requested by applicant. Board said
action was taken and if new action required, public notice must be made for
changes.
As
to Performance Guarantee based on engineer’s estimate, and this township does
not bond for private improvements, and does not want guarantee or bond for
guarantees for public protection device.
Would be small
Resolution
as drawn stands – no changes
Motion
made by: Gary
Lewis
Seconded: Art Maggio
Roll
call: Ladis
Karkowsky, John Visco,
Gary Lewis, Art Maggio, Russ Lipari, Jim Sandham,
Larry Hines, Anthony Speciale,
Lawrence Tobias
CORRESPONDENCE
MINUTES
INVOICES
Burgis Assoc. – Trust for: $405, $202.50,
$202.50
Uhl Baron – Trust for: $250
Johnson, Murphy – Trust for: $45
Michael Carroll, Esq. – Trust for:
$187.50
Omland Engineering – Trust for: $270,
$1,923.75 (Rails), $187.50, $135
Motion made
by: Larry Hines
Seconded
by: Tony Speciale
Roll
call: Unanimous
LOI/DEP
NOTIFICATIONS
None
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
PSPP/FC10-07 RAILS
STEAKHOUSE - 8 & 10 Whitehall Road – B: 96, L: 3 & 4 -
Site Plan/Variances for development of retail/apartments /restaurant site –
Notice Acceptable ACT
BY: 10/8/10
Professionals
sworn
James
Stathis, applicant
Discussed
location of site
Applicant
will require height variances and variance C bulk setback variances, as well as
a Soil Removal Permit and Sign Variances
Jim
Stathis, Applicant
Credentials
stated and history of desire to develop in community he lives reviewed for
board. He summarized Montville needs a town center and is located
in this zone. 6 SF residential units,
restaurants, retail units. Funding is in
place. The current scale and design is critical
for economic viability. Project will
increase ratables, and will help revitalization of Towaco center.
Anthony
Garrett, Architect & Planner – presenting info as architect.
Exhibits
A1 and A2.
A1
from south – elevations
A2
from north – elevations
Applicant
requested to present exhibits on a document that the Planning Board can
maintain in record and/or smaller copies.
He indicated he has reviewed the master plan and ordinance zone. This project will be complimentary to
creating a center of town, looked at site, environments around site. North side of Main Road shopping center and some
significant massing of buildings on north side of Main Road. Parking field and train shelters to south of
tracts. Site is not an undeveloped site
or pristine site, there was a barn and house there torn down there many years
ago. Site is vacant and examined master
plan and tried to come up with a design for mixed use development, and believe
an anchor element.
Issues
on the site discussed, noting site layout plan exhibit marked in as A3 dated
6-10-10.
Setback
in ordinance would only allow 20 to 25’ deep, explaining need for variances due
to long lineal site. Parking is on west
of site and on east of the site. Covered
porches are integral with design of master plan. The ordinance calls for overhangs, calls for
awnings and canopies.
He
reviewed the walkway along façade which will provide cover and provides a space
for people to experience walking in front of the retail shops. Since parking is on the west side of site,
envision this more as an outdoor walking mall.
Review
A100 basement floor plan from bottom up.
The top of sheet is Whitehall
and bottom is Railroad side. Have a
building of 16,500 sq. ft. with covered porches. 16% to west is below grade and is storage for
residential and retail. There are places
in building for building management. In
addition there are building storage areas which will be collection points for
residential refuse. Building
management will be responsible for dealing with this.
There
is a knuckle between the two buildings, slightly bent in middle. There is a 14’ grade change and saw this as a
good design on the east side for deliveries to make it separate from
retail/residential on west.
Bottom
part is somewhat public space, small cellar type bar in basement, depicted with
bar stools, wine cellars, aging rooms where people could look at steaks, chops,
etc. Louvers will be incorporated into
architecture.
Ground
floor plan A101 dated 5/25/10 depicts retail spaces and you can see two entry
doors. Discussion continued on review of
floor plan and layout of sidewalk along Whitehall Road. Heavy timbers look of atrium. Main entrance is on porch seating side of
building. There is a greeter in side
vestibule. Building has sustainable
features, rain infiltration gardens, indigenous plantings, in addition, will
integrate a structural slatted panel to provide a continuous insulation of
thermal barrier, looking at heat off condenser units to hot water, solar
heaters in residential units and will register for Leeds certification, which
is difficult on restaurants.
In
restaurant there is large gathering space, large chair, more like a waiting
room area, with access to main bar; open kitchen, table seating areas,
fireplaces, ability to service floor seating areas. 144 seats required. Realize limitations of occupancy and
seasonable area is not in addition to but is included in total amounts. Egress discussed.
Green
roof discussed explaining possibility of herb garden: strictly passive for residents and is not
another seating area for the restaurant.
Balance of second floor: two one
bedroom, four one bedroom. Last unit to
the east is oriented to a one bedroom facing Whitehall Road side, since it is remote
from restaurant. Building will have
proper sound attenuation between uses and rest of areas. Panels help in mitigation of sound. The knuckle separates where there is lesser
activity which provides segregation between units. Seating areas and catwalk discussed. Kitchen is a one story space.
Area
is a screen wall, metal lattice work screening kitchen area. The building itself is used to screen
mechanical spaces from residential uses across the streets and all of the
outdoor seating areas are on the railroad side of the property. On the design, the design was to respond to
Planning Board concerns.
Demonstrate
compliance with ordinance: allowed 11,
proposing 6; retail shops, gatherings, personal service, small eating and
drinking establishment more like a coffee shop complimentary to Towaco center.
Signs: a number of variances required but they have
been architecturally integrated into the design. These will be more in rhythm with building,
and the other side is restaurant so the signs are larger and mounted higher and
want to identify restaurant for it to be elevated, not illuminated and wooded
and complimentary to the building.
Signs
are externally illuminated. Looking for
signs on both facades and tried to implement the design of freestanding
signs. Heavy timber and are not pylon
signs like on Rt. 46 and these are understated.
Mr.
Schepis: displays freestanding sign
exhibit
Sign
rendering exhibit marked in as A4 – dated 5/25/10 elevations depict sign and
size of sign – dated 6-10-10
The
area for monument sign is approximately 50’ to east of Pine Brook Road over rain infiltration
and berming. Because of this, have a
tall base on north side of road, and although sign will be 8’ which is
ordinance requirement, the rear side which grade was measured was 10’. This is
ot a 10x15’ sign but due to berm area, height higher.
Anticipated
uses of space discussed: no intent to
have concerts on second floor deck.
There will be background internal music with speakers on outside, and
will meet noise ordinance for township
of Montville.
Gary Lewis: elevation A200 exterior,
how a standing seam prefinished roof meshes with rail architecture. Mr. Garrett indicated that it was used in
some of the western areas. Not trying to
create a railroad station but trying to implement by articulation and
modulation.
Stan
Omland: testified that the maximum
occupancy for seating is 144 based on parking variances, and addressed seating,
but space on variance levels, how does seating lay out? A space planning and size of the building and
if you can fit 500 seat, why such a large expansive area. The Board should see seating arrangement for
restaurant, and therefore monitoring of seating can be coordinated. Applicant will provide schematic on a maximum
day seating layout.
With
respect to which is front to retail, should you design it, and you don’t know,
and one wants entrance, there is confusion as to which a patron would shop, and
would walk in wrong store. Both doors
will have access, and can function as a service door, but won’t look like a
back building. Mr. Burgis: building along waterfront similar to this in
another area some storefronts have access from both sides, some only have on
north and some on south side, and it does lead to some confusion, and concur,
it would be beneficial to have access from both sides. Efficient retail space doesn’t want two front
doors. Like design and flexibility,
think having two entrances breed confusion and operation difficulty, and this
needs to be addressed, and decide which is front door and design around it.
On
east side, will there be noise testimony on louvers, noise testimony and
uses? Mr. Garrett will testify to this
noting there will be sound attenuation around equipment, and louvers are facing
parking lot and not facing to south of residential and outdoor spaces and
potential noise is shielded from residential areas is based upon mass of
building. To the north not as concerned,
and will adhere to ordinance but does not believe this area will travel beyond
parking lot: they are talking low level
music. No concert but there may be live
entertainment in enclosed area (guitar/piano).
There won’t be bands on balcony.
Concerns: Will music from
facility be constant background to the north?
Applicant’s testimony is that the parking lot will dissipate the noise
and there will be no impact to the residents on the north. If there is an issue of this after this fact,
the goal of the Planning Board is to have controls in place. These open seating areas are roofed over and
fenced area. These are no balconies
projecting out, and can work with noise directed back to restaurant vs.
out. When the board adopted ordinance, a
lot of thought went into this at that time.
We do not want the public adversely affected.
Basement
plan, tenants: do they have access to
this area? Tenants have access to this
lobby, but there are doors that service restaurant. There will be an access control within
building, and there is a low voltage level design for this project. Basement has no outside dining. Seating plan will depict seating and bar in
basement with large seats in alcoves. To
the south of the dotted line, anticipate seating for four people around a table
and this seating plan will be given. The
other sustainable feature was able to salvage wood timber from a building, and these
series of arches will support timber.
Sheet
A101 sheet discussed. Applicant must add
to this plan showing there is a limitation to the seating, and board does not
want to think there would be seating in aisle in that area and only should
allow seating near restaurant. Applicant
will revise.
The
main entrance to residential southwest corner discussed. Discussion ensued on the entrance to
residential units. A101 sheet
discussed: this is the knuckle
connection, and is one of the access point.
Rooftop area discussed. This will
never be used for restaurants, parties. Asked of applicant: Can residents use this as passive
recreation: only passive
recreation? Applicant is not taking
benefit for grassed area. If it is
green roof, is this going to be LEEDs cortication
vs. having it a lounge area?
Discussed: Green roof is not only
issues, there other areas to look at.
Surfaces over residential created kind of vessel in space concealed by
attic, and will make solar reflected influx to create Leeds
credit. From a township standpoint, did
not feel it appropriate for impervious coverage reduction. Not sure if it is open, can see it as an area
of open for residential use. It is an
operational issue, and Mr. Stathis does manage other areas and knows the proper
structure to put in lease. He is local
and will be present to police.
Russ Lipari: testify as to noise? Are you qualified? There will be no noise experts. Music:
operational times? Noise
ordinance is 10PM. There is a
sophisticated sound system put in place.
Victor
Canning: what is exact square footage of
restaurant are? The gross square footage
of restaurant is 12,800 sq. of public space, with 4,000 sq. ft. of storage
space, and approximately 3500 sq. of outside lounge area.
Parking: concerned with the valet parking. Cars will be parked in the grassed area. Mr. Garrett indicated this will be covered as
part of parking with engineer and planner/architect.
Jim Sandham: during EDC meeting, you
indicated picking up some of the design from Towaco train station? How was this done? Mr. Garrett:
With the choice of colors and materials, he did not want to stucco new
building but he tried to create similar rooflines of train station. Did not try to imitate but he relate this
structure to the train station as a distant cousin? The rendering is darker because of the
shadows, it doesn’t depict the brick surfaces, and you look at flat elevations,
wherever there are horizontal lines, there is brick clay.
Joe Burgis: The architects took to
heart the elements of the Towaco Master Plan and incorporated this into this
design. There are a few issues with
signage that variances will be required, and some comments in reports, which
will be a better design than what the ordinance calls for given specifics of
building design. There are other areas
when planner testifies: there is an affordable
housing requirement in this site, and this obligation must be addressed. The Senate passed Senate Bill and it appears
that there will be modifications so we should hold off these discussions until
our next meeting. Second issue: unknown tenants. Built into the plan, there is a requirement
for bicycle racks. Suggest that if you
are going to do this, have a provision that the bicycle rack would be addressed
when new tenants are coming into the unit.
Stan
Omland: where is residential waste
collected? Waste will be collected in
the basement, designating area known as building storage and will be to the
east of the stairs convenient to the internal stair. It is one of the few areas that have walls
around it to control trash. The plan
needs to have this depicted. There will
be no contracting and open storage. Building
management will deal with this.
Ordinance
did not contemplate a strip mall, and design standards are different that that
for a strip mall. Applicant indicated
plan elevates more than the master plan Towaco ordinance.
Vince
Dotzerwerch – comments on the plan and is a beautiful concept, and is excited
about it.
Keith
Glad - 7 Howell Terrace – Front door and fire access and have something, and he
noted that their stockroom was under the basement area, and was worthwhile to
have stores to have two entrances and flow happened a lot more and offered
personal experiences.
Ed
Ahmad Matari - 7 Old Lane
– beautiful and excited about this and would like to see this happen
Jerry
Fragetti - 8 Oakwood Court
–impressed with level of detail and compliments from laymen’s perspective and
impressed and on behalf of is neighbors may have an opportunity to finally have
a town center, and this is something township has been clamoring for.
Georg
Yost – Virginia Road
– architect fits in with entire area and would like to see this
Florence Stathis – applicant’s
mother spoke on his behalf
Ed
Lisi - 8 Abbott Road
– design fantastic – this project is a catalyst to start to realize that
vision. Folks and neighbors who live
within a mile who will be managing it and this is a lot of value in this rather
than someone outside, which is a nice compliment inn this project.
Robert
Fass - Stoneybrook –is supportive of this project if the board didn’t approve
this. Township is lucky to have this
group to have this investment in this town when there aren’t too many people
making that investment.
Steve
Tone - 28 Nathan Drive – train station, lighting architect, and this is a
wonderful compliment and echo that it is a successful business man in our town
sought a piece of property in our town to enhance a town he lives in. Wonderful project and will significant add to
qualify of the town.
Edward
Russnow - 7 Evergreen – compliments the area significantly and be nice not to
see empty lots anymore and it is important for the future of the town for
Towaco.
Shelly
Skelles – vet next door – variance for Whitehall
road must be corrected as to lot numbers.
The property is vacant and designated as block and lot, and ntoed that
the project is in the area of six and eight and proposes intersection in this
area so the notice was expanded to incorporate this.
Shorouq
Mataki – 7 old lane – resident for 20 years and work in town and work with a
lot of buyers if there was a mina street, and have something like this would be
an area that would make her proud of how great this township is. It is great and beautiful and compliments the
area.
Don
Rothrock – 44 Maclay road – it will be a great start to have something in this
project and drawings look beautiful.
Sue
Olympio – Patrick Court
- his would add much to the area, and this will add to the community.
Motion
to close to public made by: Gary Lewis
Seconded: Larry Hines
Roll
call: unanimous
Several
meetings were held on this project, and this is only the beginning. There will be engineers, planners, and will
make sure it is within all of the ordinances and master plan, and everyone is
excited, and it is a long way from being approved, and come to all of the
meetings.
Stan
Omland: represent that the project will
be built out as the ultimate project.
This is 100% funded, and there are no budgetary problems involved in this.
Mrs.
White: DRC info and samples and
specifications
Gary Lewis: references were made to
testimony as to testimony and Towaco master plan. There were as many in audience when this plan
was designed to look at this corridor from Whitehall side bridging across the tracts to
develop just this center.
Meeting
continued
Sworn
Jack
Constantino – experience in building industry and panels. Live in Morris County,
in building business since l959. l974
built first passive solar earth shelter building and switched to sustainable
design due to gas prices at that time, and that it would be a good idea to
offer good energy homes. Now is to go to
highly sustainable very sustainable timber frame homes and commercial
structures. Why timber frame? Why sip panels. Mr. Constantino elaborated on the importance
of this type of design. If we dedicate
ourselves to the future we must address issues of energy efficiency in every
aspect of our homes, particularly with an urgency not yet constructed. He explained technology.
Exhibit
A5 – sip frame
Exhibit
A6 – sip panel
Sustainability
discussed. Something sustainable is what
it means is that the material being used is cultivating more of than harvested,
and this is real definition of sustainability.
He gave history of timber construction and his background history. He explained:
Benefit of sip panels is that it avoids thermal bridging in
construction. What it means is that
every sixteen inches, you are bridging insulating space with a solid piece of
wood, so if allowed to build 13 walls that go into conventional construction
which we have homes built like this, and look at type of wood and what happens
with regular construction. The sip panel
has same thickness and when panels are fastened together, foamed in between and
when set, there is a continuous envelope of a true E26 with no thermal
bridging. Roof panels are R40 and the
real indication of the success of this type of construction is that in
mechanical system design you must design in the amount of air exchange that
serves the purpose of the air quality inside the building. You decide on how many times the internal air
is exchanged. Standard construction
happens on a random basis but in a building envelope using sif enclosure, you
get to determine the level of inefficiency of that building, now it becomes
your control. The building is so sealed
up and doesn’t breathe on its own, and it has to be controlled by a mechanical
system. You have to ask this question
which is why aren’t all building built this way, and it can be and there is no
great cost differential and is growing but relative unknown, although 4,000
years old, it is unusual to have one or knows of one. It is an exciting process and agreed to work
on it due to sustainable aspect. It is
also beautiful.
Stan
Omland: Leeds certification - will this
building going to seek Leeds because of this
product? Mr. Constantino indicated
requirements of Leeds will be met a piece at a
time. Here is no way to say this is
appropriate for a complete Leeds certification. This is not the only guideline and doesn’t
even relate to the residential construction because it increases costs. There are many kinds of rating systems. Can build as a Leeds
construction, it has to more with not only energy efficiency. Intent and goal to do so: question is seeking: will this be submitted to
Leeds certification. It would have to be deferral to the
client.
Mr.
Tobias: relationship of post and rail
and sip? Is there a relationship between
the two? Analogy is that both of them
can be independent of each other. Timber
frame supplies it, but what is enclosing it is with sip panels. If no timber frame, can be entirely sip
panels.
Larry
Hines: timber frames attachment? No nails, no hardware, trunnels are used to
hold mortice swab and insulation inside is polyurethane foam.
Gary Lewis: white pine and is local
Insulation
material discussed and applicant indicated they do not flame, will melt, and
they do outgas.
Opened
to public
Gary Lewis closed
Larry
Hines
Roll
call unanimous
Marc
Walker – sworn
Reviewed
existing conditions on property.
A7 – Aerial
photograph exhibit with project superimposed
He reviewed
the area of proposed property. Grade of
property discussed, and from proposed center access to the site and rear of the
site, there is a 12’ drop in elevation.
Project backs up to NJ Transit to the north and to the north of the
railroad tracks is commuter parking area and Rt. 202, existing Towaco parking
area. From Waughaw Road east, TC1 zone,
small area of R27, and there are no houses that front on this area. Adjacent to property is animal hospital and
as mentioned Whitehall
road and Morris canal that runs parallel to the south of this. There are some residential dwellings that are
on south side of Whitehall.
He explained
the area from Firehouse Lane
and also Whitehall Road
to the intersection of Rt. 202. The
building as mentioned is on the easterly side of the property which is related
to train station and Towaco.
Exhibit A3
reviewed as to three main means of egress/ingress. One is at the high point of the hump looking both
ways. County asked that there be a
yellow blinking light on their side of parking lot: Center access has the right turn only
out. There isn’t enough distance. This exhibit is different in that parking access
aisle was switched but now put the parking adjacent to the building and shifts
our access driver further east and allows 525’ for a 45mph speed limit. Discussion continued on request for a County
letter on reduction of speed limit to 25mph.
They indicated they would not put this into writing, and will do a study
to see reduction of speed limit in this area, but their intent is to do
so. There is a yellow speed omit sign
that is east of site. County will be
studying this once project moves along. Because they can’t say specifically speed
limit has to be design for 45 mph. Other
modifications reflect to traffic flow, there will be a dedication left hand
turn into site for center and have other entrance. He talked to County on Whitehall road extensively.
Their plan is
to restripe Whitehall
and is now a dragstrip, and is looking for traffic calming measures in this
area and a re desirous of parallel parking on this roadway and will slow
traffic down, and shown 11 parking spaces related to the building and showed 14
parking spaces on his plan. As a result
of this application modifying Whitehall
road and providing these traffic calming measures for the entire center and
goes towards intent of master plan.
Mr. Shepis:
how many on street parking spaces - 18 spaces
Parking plan
shows a green parking area which is valet parking. Applicant proposed a grass
parking paver area. Intent of this
parking area is that it won’t be used that much, so decided to make changes to
parking area so will be gravel parking area (decorative stone). Discussion ensued. Increased impervious coverage to address
concerns of board professionals to extend the proposed sidewalk along Whitehall
into the site for handicap for access that meet ADA, and also in addition to
requirement of open space, dedicated the front area and retail area with
sidewalk and bench areas, 9 more added so additional coverage added, we went
from 53% to 55.1%.
Ladis
Karkowsky: impervious concrete some type of filtration
system vs gravel? Gravel per Mr. Omland
will provide same absorption.
44 valet
parking spaces proposed
Main parking
lot area to west there are 36 spaces
Have 6 parking
spaces to east of building
Other
changes: employee parking spaces will
now be dedicated residential parking spaces, and under RSIS, need 12. These parking spaces will be outside where the
public will park, and will be dedicated residential parking spaces. Concern in parking dedicated, if it was a
busy night in restaurant, this would create an issue, so relocated parking
spaces this area for residents.
Provided for
when there is no valet parking, provided for 18 spaces, so there won’t be
people parking, will be employee parking only.
Off the property, there are 11 parking spaces directly to site parallel
Require 95,
with valet, parallel, meet the 95 spaces, but need a variance since they are
only provided 58 parking spaces on site without valet, leaving 18 parking
spaces for employees, but on Friday night and Saturday night, the valet will be
in operation, and will have ability to park 95 on site or immediate to
site. Worry about parallel site on Whitehall, applicant is
creating them, and there are no other commercial uses that can use these
spaces, and felt it permissible to use these spaces for this site.
Mr. Burgis: technically they cannot, but as part of their
variance request, they offered info as to planning testimony.
Art Maggio: asked
for clarification about total parking spaces with valet are 95? Residential is six and is sight distance
adequate for the turning based on parallel parking spaces. Traffic engineer will respond to these
issues.
Is there a sign that will say residential parking only? Yes
Russ
Lipari: parallel parking is similar to what Boonton
has so this would be helpful to flow. Stacked
parallel parking and is easier.
Mr.
Tobias: railroad station area being
used? He noted some concerns on commuter
parking.
Victor Canning: fire hydrants will be on road, and there are
some modifications.
Russ
Lipari: revised report from fire department was
received today, and the applicant will comply with the fire department and
applicant will agree.
Gary
Lewis: indicated that the parking on east end was
revised to address parking for residents.
Exhibit A3 is only plan that reflects this. Also moved dumpster away from building so no
longer need sprinkler relative to dumpster and created more space. Supply revisions prior to next meeting.
Motion made to
carry to the June 24th – Application carried with notice in Motion
made by: Larry Hines seconded: Jim Sandham
CONCEPTS
None
Meeting
adjourned unanimously in a Motion made by:
Art Maggio, seconded by Gary Lewis.
Respectfully
submitted,
Linda White
|
