All right, we're going to get started. >> Wait for that. >> This zoning board of adjustment meeting is being held on August 5th, 2026 at 7 p.m. Statement of adequate notice under the sunshine law. Adequate notice in accordance with the open public meetings act was provided on January 5th, 2026 of
this meeting's date, time, and location. The agenda was mailed to the Cranberry Press and Home News Tribune, posted on the township bulletin board, mailed to those requesting personal notice and filed with the municipal clerk. Roll call, please. Mr. Bono, >> here.
>> Uh, Miss Darmafal is out. Miss Gens, >> here. >> Mr. Cathari, >> here. Miss Parker. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schwarz >> here. >> Mr. Gordon >> here. >> And Mr. Diamond >> here. >> Okay. Thanks. We have a quorum chair.
>> Okay. Um first a quick note. Uh we have uh a vacancy for the uh DRC representative. Uh we need someone on the board to take that over. So we won't discuss it here. Uh I'll take it up on
email during the next week or so. Okay. All right. So, first on the agenda, approval of minutes from last month. Any comments? No comments. So, motion to approve.
>> Motion to approve the minutes from last month. >> Second. Second. >> All right. We'll call for the July 8th minutes. Mr. Bonavalanta, >> yes. >> Mr. Schwarz, >> yes. >> Mr. Gordon, >> yes. >> And Mr. Diamond, >> yes.
>> Okay. Thank you. Motion passed. >> Okay. Next is the approval of the resolution from last month. Um we need a motion to approve. >> Motion to approve last month.
>> Second. >> All right. Roll call for ZBI420-26 resolution. Mr. Bono Volante. >> Yes. >> Miss Kittens. >> Yes. >> Oh, wait. You were out. Hang on one second. Um,
okay. Mr. Schwarz, >> yes. >> Mr. Gordon, >> yes. >> And Mr. Diamond, >> yes. >> Okay, thank you. Motion passed. >> Okay. And finally, uh, the new application for Route 31 Associates.
And, uh, we're ready to go. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board, Salvator, we Good. And a strip center to the rear. The board may be familiar with the site. There's a currently a liquor store on the site. That liquor store will
ultimately be demolished and relocated to the rear strip center as one of the users. there will be an extra 10,000 square feet or so within that building for some other user or users and then the quick check convenience store gas station will be the balance of the of that portion of the property. Um we're
in the highway commercial zone and the proposed use is a conditional use but we do not meet all the conditions and therefore here we're here rather than at the planning board level. Um, we do have reports from your planner dated August 3rd. Your engineer July 29th,
environmental commission July 26th and traffic um Andy August 3rd. We were just giving a shade tree um email which I haven't seen yet, but our engineer is looking at. I'm sure he'll be able to deal with it. We have we intend to call our civil engineer, our architect, um
our traffic engineer, and our planner. We do have a representative of quick check here. If you need operational details, he'll be prepared to do deal with that. And we also have a representative of the applicant itself. Um, in terms of uh I guess two
procedural issues. One is there are two completeness waiverss that we probably should handle up front when our engineer comes up um from your checklist. And then secondly, um there's a reference in your planner's report to a potential D6 variance because of the height of the
tower exceeds 10 feet potentially over the 24 ft that's permitted. Our architect will talk about that. From a noticing point of view, we did not notice for that because we did not believe that variance was necessary. But in our notice to the public, we included
a catch-all freight uh provision that says any and all other variances. And we also identified those variances could be density or use or bulk. So we're we're covered. We believe and council I believe he and I spoke today. I think he agrees. So we're covered in terms of
noticing and that's all I have preliminarily to introduce you to the application. Do you swear each witness in individually as they come up? Okay. So we're going to call our civil engineer if I may. >> Mr. civil engineer.
>> I do. >> Thank you very much. >> Sure. My name is Aaron Chan. Last name is spelled C H A an N. >> Thank you. >> And Aaron, can you place your credentials on the record, please? >> Absolutely. Sure. I graduated with a
bachelor's in civil engineering from the College of New Jersey. I've been practicing in the field for the last 12 years. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. My license is in good standing. I'm also a certified municipal engineer by the NJSME. I've been in front of over 60 land use boards across the state and
provide expert engineering testimony on each of these. We'd request his credentials be accepted, please. Thank you. So, uh, preliminarily, Aaron, you heard me discuss the two, um, completeness waivers that the that we need to request. Would you please
identify what they are and then explain why we're seeking those waivers? >> Sure. Yes. one of the um the completeness waiver. They're both temporary waiverss we're requesting. One was for a pipe profile for the sewer extension that's uh going to be proposed along halfacre road. The reason for the request is the fact that we do not have
a full survey topography stretching out the I believe it was 700 or so linear feet to that nearest existing manhole. So we you know Mr. uh Mr. Horn and I did speak we are we are in agreement to provide that at a later time once we have the opportunity to grab the uh to
grab the topography alongacre road. The second uh completeness item that was requested was for the on andm manuals and the pipe sizing for the uh storm water basins and the storm water conveyance systems on site. In our belief, it's not um it's not a material impact to the to the application as far as what it is we're proposing. It's just
rather pipe sizing calculations and u the maintenance uh records for the for the basins themselves. >> And both of those if the board were to grant those waiverss, both of those would be provided as a condition of approval. Correct. >> Correct. >> So, Mr. Chair, I don't know if um council I don't know if they have to act
on that separately or just keep on going. >> Okay. >> I do. You can introduce yourself. David Hoder Her Associates David Associates.
>> Third time. He's a charm. Uh David Hoder Hoder Associates engineer for the board. And um I don't have a problem with these items. We discussed it today over the phone. Um they're both technical things. Um the other the other item was earthwork
calculations. Did you do that? >> Yes, we prepared some basic earthwork calculations. We'll be ready to provide you with more detail. >> Okay. So so that that's only a temporary waiver. As long as I get it, see what they're you know what they're doing. Uh and u the other two items are needed for
me, not necessarily for the board. Uh because like I said, technical things. I would urge the the board to uh to grant the waiverss. >> Okay. Doesn't bother me. >> So, um if someone makes a motional
motion, so we should do that now or or before we Oh, I guess we have heard what what they for. So, yeah. Uh how about a motion to grant these waivers for this? >> There's no discussion. think we need a discussion. >> Do we need Does any have any objections
or any >> not quite sure what are we voting on here? >> The the waiverss they've requested Yeah, the waivers they've requested are for >> downstream sewer profiles, um drainage calculations for the
individual pipes and earthwork calculations. All three they're going to provide to me after the meeting. >> Just didn't get it done this time. Good. Uh, and I don't have a problem with that because I look at these things routinely and uh, you know, as long as if there is an approval, you put in the uh,
resolution that these have to be in accordance with my needs. >> Cool with that. Okay. Any other questions? So, motion to approve. Motion to approve. >> Any second? >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. >> We need a roll to call. >> Yeah. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> I. >> Thank you. I'm sorry I did it the way some boards ignore it completely. Some boards want to handle it that way. So I figured let's do it the right. Um okay.
So Aaron, would you orient the board as to what where this property is located and what the existing conditions are please? >> Sure. Absolutely. I'll start by introducing an aerial exhibit which is a high quality current image of the of the site. It's a bird's eye view. I'll put on the big board here and uh I'll talk to talk about the property as it exists
today. And we're marking the as A1 now. Is that what we're gonna do? >> Thank you. Is it exhibit A1 as I indicated is um an aerial exhibit high quality aerial image uh of the current site. It's prepared by my firm Stonefield Engineering dated
July 20 uh 21st 2026 and the existing condition of the site it's you know historically been developed in some capacity dating back to the 60s. It is obviously as many know is the buy liquor store at the intersection of Route 130 and Halfacre
Road. It's a signalized intersection and just looking at the historic aerials, the property has been developed, like I said, since the 60s and it was actually expanded to about its current footprint somewhere between 1979 and 1984. Um and then see the right hand side of the site
which is actually the southern portion sandwiched up between the uh the the Pensky truck rental. That wooded area actually historically was used as a farmland for many many years dating back to the 30s and I believe the 90s where the trees and the vegetation actually have taken back over that portion of the
site. So today as it sits it does look wooded. Um historically the use and just like many of the lots in the area historically was a was a farmland. And the current liquor store is approximately an 8,200 foot building. It has at least 54 striped parking spaces.
As far as the actual paved areas actually could go up to 90 parking spaces, so much of it is developed. You know, I I am a local resident. I've been to this roughly many of times. I would categorize that the the parking lot itself in fair to to poor condition as far as the surfaces are concerned. And
generally across the site, much of it is in need of a little bit of a refresh, a little bit of a cleanup across the entire property. The access to the site, there is only one driveway currently in. It's a right in driveway off of divided route 130. It's approximate to the to
the intersection and once you come onto the property, you have a one-way aisle that uh circulates around the the building and then allows you to reach any of the parking spaces. And there's also a full movement driveway on Halfacre Road about halfway back. uh on our property and um that facilitates,
you know, the direct access into the parking areas themselves. And our lot is um actually comprised of two total lots. You know, the liquor store part is the front. That's actually block seven, lot one. Block seven, lot two is a small residential property um on the eastern
side of our site. It's a little bit obscured by the by the trees there. But what's on that particular site is a historic sing single family home approximately a thousand square foot in footprint. has a detached garage, a detached shed, and it's been in existence dating back to, I believe, the 1940s. So, it's been there a long, long
time. Um, but across the entire property, this totals up to 8.9 acres. It is all within the township's highway commercial zone. And, um, I'll kind of go over the few of the uses in the area as well, just to, uh, further orient the
board. So to the east which is plan plan north that is a like industrial uh zone with the with the warehouse development. Then I I dated back to this particular basin. This looks like a lake but it's actually really a man-made basin for
detention of the storm water that's created with the uh the with the warehouse development. And then to the south we have the Pensky truck rental as I already indicated that is also within the um the highway commercial zone. to the west across the divided route 130
that is a all service um garage and then to the north it's a tractor trailer storage yard also vacant vacant lot at the hard corner of the intersection. So generally by and large you know many of the uses in the surrounding area is is similar to the the proposed application
as far as you know highway commercial in nature and then also light industrial um to our to our east the site topography and I'll speak to maybe a little bit of the wooded area as well as far as some of our um methodology as far as assessing the uh the tree inventory and
that was a supplement submission that was provided by by my firm in June July of this year. So the cycography generally drains, you know, north to south and it eventually discharges from the site at this southeastern corner, which all makes sense. It eventually
does drain to the the wooded area and potentially the basin itself. Um, and I'll speak to it in greater detail with the proposed storm water conditions as far as how we're looking to treat our storm water, detain our storm water, and things like of that nature. Um, as far as the wooded area, again, as I
indicated, it's historically been used as a farm fuel for decades and decades. It's been taken back over by by by trees and vegetation and woods. Um, and it last about 30 years or so. When we study this site, we have our licensed landscape architect from our firm actually go out to the site, take a full
inventory of all the individual trees that's within the developed portion of the of the property. And then within the wooded portion of the property, he took a 100 by 100 sample plot. And from there, he's able to delineate the number of trees within the said sample plot and
extrapolate that across the full wooded area. And what he found is generally, you know, there's within that 100 by 100 plot, there's about 34 35 trees. All of the smallest size that the township actually regulates as far as the the um the diameter of the tree trunk itself.
it's from six to 13 in um are all trees with he found in that in that area. And speaking with him today, it does make quite a bit of sense given the relatively young age of that particular wooded area that the trees themselves aren't that large in nature. He also categorized that that area with a lot of
undergrowth. Um some of the species were invasive. Some of the tree conditions weren't in the best of health and all of which we fully detailed out in our supplemental submission. um as far as a table outlining each of the trees we studied and the the calculation methodology for that sample plot um that
I just described. That being said, I will jump to the proposed project which is obviously as you have heard the quick check convenience store as well as with the fueling component and then the the buy liquor store being relocated to the rear portion of the site and then also a
10,000 square foot retail um retail building that does not have a specified tenant at current time. I'll introduce my second exhibit. >> Mr. Chairman, they did previously not uh provide that
shade tree information uh and uh I I required it as part of the checklist. So now that is checked off and they did a very good job of actually figuring out what trees are there and submitted it to the Shadri Commission. >> We're going to mark this as A2. Would
you identify it, please? What I have marked as exhibit A2 is titled the site plan rendering and it is prepared by my firm Stonefield Engineering once again dated August 4th, 2026. And what you're seeing is a colorized version of the proposed site
plan which is in your in this middle material. It's simply colorized also has the benefit of the proposed landscaping all over the same sheet. That way the board has a very clean and clear visual as far as the proposed conditions of of the site. And again, as um as I noted
before, the proposal is for a 56 um 5600 square foot uh convenience store for the quick check building as well as a eight fueling kiosk position canopy for the fueling part. And then the liquor store itself is going to be relocated to the
back half of the site tucked in. And then the retail component is going to be closer to halfacre roads, but it's also it's going to account for approximately it will be accounting for 10,000 square foot of that building as well. So on the quick check portion of the
site, which is the the portion of the site closest to the Route 130 frontage, there is going to be a total of 53 standard parking spaces um ranging from 10 by8 to 10x 20 in size, the industry standard sizing, as well as two
oversized parking stalls uh located in behind the building in between the two sets of buildings. The oversized stalls themselves are 12 feet wide by 40 feet in length. And that's not to include some of the the pavement marking areas um that's associated with the fuel
delivery area as well as the pavement marking that's designated for the store the convenience store deliveries. So that's a dedicated two oversized parking spaces and we do acknowledge occasionally you have landscapers with trailers and such visit um such a property and it's designated for them
place for them to park without taking up some of the standard parking spaces. Um that said of that of that batch of parking spaces there are 388 spaces in front of the quick check building itself and the quick check building is as noted is a conditionally permitted use within
and with the convenience store with fueling is a conditionally per permitted use within the highway commercial zone. There are no less I counted no less than 15 different conditions. we do meet the bulk of the conditions um and with the with the deviation from such standards primarily pertaining to the signage that
we're proposing on site. I'll speak to the signage in great detail. Our project architect will also touch on it as he goes through each of the building facade elevations and our planner will also address some of the justifications associated with the the variance relief for the signage and the conditions that
we are meeting is the I'll just go through them in quick and is the minimum fuel pump setback from the rightway and property line. There are at least two driveways being provided with the correct geometric size and the correct spacing from other driveways and also the property line itself. There's no
auto service and auto repair work. There is no overnight parking. Um there's no outdoor storage of merchandise and and goods for display. The curved um the the perimeter around the building and the entire property is curved and landscaped
at least 15 feet wide and that's across the full entire property line. I actually will note that much of the curb landscaped area is actually much larger than 15 feet, typically ranging from 25 to 40 feet. And that was some of the feedback that was given by the township
during the DRC process to increase those buffers, to add pl things, to add some burming for aesthetic enhancements and um some beautifification as far as the curb appeal of the overall site. There's more than sufficient parking for the quick check use itself where a total of
46 spaces is is required between the convenience store component as well as the fueling store fueling component and as I indicated before there's 53 standard parking spaces in addition to the two oversides for a total of 55. So we do meet that parking supply
requirement and the size of the store is also within the permitted allowance of 6,000 square foot. uh we are just a little bit under that. The size and location of the loading space complies with your conditions and also the number of freestanding signs as stipulated by the conditions within your your
conditional use standard for such a use. We do also meet that. So again the the conditions we do not comply with are signage uh mostly and there's one lighting requirement we fall a little bit short of as well and I'll detail that out in the sign in the lighting
component of the testimony. So, switching over to the liquor store and the retail store. Um, the second half of the site, I'll call it the the rear even though it's on it is a corner lot with two frontages. The the building footprint itself in total is uh under
100 ft deep by 200 feet wide for a total of 20,000 square feet. And again, the the buy liquor store is being relocated. It would be a phase construction where the buyer liquor store will take up 10,000 square foot with the unspecified retail tenant taking up the other 10,000
square foot. Similarly, there's parking all along three sides of the building with loading a dedicated loading zone in the rear of the building. And um that loading zone itself is quite large and if I can find it in my notes, the dedicated loading is 15t wide by a
total length of 160. So that's sized very generously to accommodate any and all different types of delivery vehicles that may make deliveries to the to the liquor store as well as the potential retail store. >> Just turn towards
>> Yeah, the people in the audience have to be able to see guys can see it over there. You good? So again the dedicated loading zone that's generously sized is in the back of the uh behind the behind the buildings. Um the parking itself along
all three sides. So this particular portion of the site is 87 shared parking spaces between the two users. Per the standard parking calculation of one space per 200 square foot calculation 100 spaces are required. So we are slightly short of that number by 13 in
in this ad. But I'll give a total parking count um towards the end and also speak to the EV uh spaces that we are adding that you know gives us one space credit for each of the EV stalls we're proposing. There's trash enclosures, dedicated trash enclosures that's going to be proposed as well
that's going to house the trash, recycling, things of that nature for both the the retail strip retail use and as well as the quick check use itself. So that's adequately sized to store all that material within the enclosure itself. Where are they located? >> The trash enclosure for the liquor store is in the back corner tucked away. And
sim similarly, the quick check is uh we'll say in between the two pads, but it's centralized in the site where the visibility of it is going to be screened by the by the walls themselves of the enclosure and then further softened with proposed landscaping. Sure.
>> So, I do want to touch on I do I do know that the township um parking setback requirements has a condition to have the parking spaces at least 10 ft away from the building uh for the quick check use. The prototypical configuration I'm sure many is is familiar with is actually a
six foot uh six and a half foot distance between the building itself and that's protected by ballards before you get to the parking spaces immediately up against the building. However, so we are a little bit short of the 10 foot requirement. However, for the retail component, we are meeting that across
the entire front of the building. And then on the sides of the building, we exceed that requirement with a with a landscape strip closer to to 20 feet along the sides. And I'll speak a little bit more detail in the landscaping um portion of the testimony. We introduce a lot of foundational plantings along the
sides there to to soften the building and to beautify the the base of the building as well. So the access to the site will be provided via a proposed right in right out driveway along Route 130. It's about midb block I I'll call it on centralized
on our property. Again, Route 130 is is a divided highway in this area. And we are proposing a generous and wide um right in movement as well as a right out movement. And that's going to be separated with a about a 10- foot wide landscape um island in between. that's
going to add for some more of a corridor, more of a boulevard feel as you enter the site. That's going to feature various landscaping, shrubbery, trees, and such. So, when you enter the site, it'll be a very welcoming and soft and landscape feel as you traverse onto the property.
And additionally, the two other access points on the into the site is on halfacre road. their full movement driveways and the two pads are interconnected with drive aisles for vehicular movement as well as a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk that provides
pedestrian connectivity between the two between the two portions of the site as well. So as the total count across the entire site, there's a um there is a total of 142 parking spaces being proposed where
the 87 as I shared before is for the retail and liquor store and the remaining 55 is more relegated onto the the quick check portion of the site. I do acknowledge that they are quite close and you know given that there are sidewalks connecting the two paths it is
fairly easy for um the the parking to be shared in between the two portions of the property of which of that uh total 142 mix. There is 28A in front of the retail retail entrance. There's 288 stalls in front of the liquor store uh
portion of the building as well as 38A in front of the quick check uh front entrance itself. There was a comment within one within one of the review letters um that asked for the location of the EV make ready stalls. We can readily comply with those four spaces.
My thought was to put them on the retail portion of the site and maybe in this in the center aisle so that it could be sort of shared between the two different users. Should a maybe a quick check employee have an EV car, they could charge um and vice versa for the resale
portion. Now, the EV ordinance does allow us to take one one space credit for a 1:1 ratio. I believe that our total count by my math brings um brings us up to a compliant number. And I'll read it into the record again. I think the quick check portion requires uh 46
total spaces between the convenience store use and also the the the fueling uh canopy. The buy right and liquor store requires 100 parking spaces in total for a grand total of 146 on site as uh I just testified to there is a uh
55 proposed for quick check and 87 proposed for the buy right liquor store component that that totals up to 142 plus the four EV credit that we would obtain in the in the installation of the EV make ready stalls that brings us up to 146 as far as the credit that we're
given. So all parking spaces, drive out geometry as well as loading areas is designed in accordance with industry standards. And based on my design of this as far as the site configuration, I do anticipate that it on-site circulation and the um on-site
circulation is is going to operate safe and efficiently across the site for both vehicular and pedestrian movements. and and as proposed the much of the site complies with the with the bulk standards. They comply with the minimum lot area, the lot frontage, the sideyard, the rear yard, the F is well
below the bulk requirement of.3. The max building height, as we alluded to, we do feel that we uh do not exceed the township definition as far as the maximum building height. We'll detail that out further in our architecture testimony. The maximum impervious is uh 37.3
is being proposed where um a total of 60 is permitted and the variance really stems from the the quick check and the retail store buildings actually being set back away from the from the front yard greater than the allowable per the township bulk requirements. Now I want
to just jump to maybe speaking about the um the degrading on site as well as the storm water and some of the earth work and things of that nature. So generally it's a it's going to be a fill site you know across the limit of disturbance. We have filling about two to four feet
across that across that limit and it's really due to a high seasonal groundwater. We need to provide separation from our from our basins. uh the static groundwater is about 10 feet below grade, but the seasonal high is generally two to four feet below grade. So much of that that fill is to comply
within the DP standard as far as separating the bottom of our basin from the seasonal high groundwater levels. Um across the site we are also creating the across the frontages rather we're also creating two uh smaller earth berms two feet in height and they will be planted
again that's to that's to add to some of the aesthetic appeal the curb appeal across the frontages as you're you know going onto the property also traveling on door itself and the generally that covers the grading is much of a really is is is a large dose site in nature for
the storm water given that this is a major development in the eyes of the D and many many definitions where we are creating impervious surfaces to house the uh the parking area the impervious surfaces and mature virtual of the proposed buildings and such. We are
proposing a series of storm water basins and I do hope I do don't bore the the boards too much with the with the discussion but there are a series of four above above ground grass bio retention basins. So they're grass basins. They're further planted with various different plantings that will
soak up a little bit more water. At the bottom of said bio retention basin. There's 18 inches of soil media that's going to provide some treatment to the to the uh some of the sediments and some of the suspended solids within the runoff. And then at the bottom of that, there's a sand layer that promotes the
infiltration down to a 3-inch under drain. That's going to allow for any of that remainder residual water to to flow out of the basin itself. And there's also a series of porous pavement systems across the different parking. They're
mostly generally located within the parking spaces themselves. Um, there's essentially four different rows of uh of imperous porous pavement systems, excuse me, and they total up to 12,000 square foot across the entire property. There's
generally the the asphalt layer is is permeable, so storm water runoff does go through that layer. And then uh the stone layer that's underneath the porous pavement systems allow for some attenuation of that storm water. Again, same 3-inch uh diameter pipe under drain at the bottom that allows for the water
to to bypass and move on to to some of the above ground basins that we do have across the entire site. There's a host of storm water basin systems. The D requirements are quite stringent. Unfortunately, given this the the soil
conditions, we do not have favorable infiltration rates that allow for us to recharge that storm water. But the total volume that we're pro providing as far as the storage is 1002,750
cubic foot of uh of volume that allows us to store much of that storm water. And this is to account for future design rainstorms up to the 100redyear design rainstorm projected out the the 100redyear per the D standards. That allows us to meet the peak rate reductions as stipulated again by the D
and the township standards. So they all fully drain within 72 hours. The basins themselves are 2 to three feet in depth. So they aren't very deep basins just again given that sight fill condition, given that there's high ground water, we couldn't keep raising the site just to create a deeper basin. So the footprints
themselves have to be relatively large and again they are planted in nature. So they are heavily planted in my opinion. There's also a specific bio retention C mix that's um installed at the at the floor of these basins that essentially D
requires for for these types. Overall um the water quality as I indicated before you know the suspended solids does get pulled out with the treatment drain uh being within the bio retention as well as the the porous pavement system and uh again you know the the site conditions
are not favorable to infiltration. So we are exempt from the ground groundwater recharge standard itself. So I'll jump to the the lighting component. >> Before you move on drainage, couple comments. Number one is um and we discussed it at the beginning operation
maintenance manual. All the maintenance of the storm water management system including the the porous pavement will be maintained by the property owner. It's not a municipal obligation. Correct. >> That's correct. Uh secondly, the rec the um environmental commission
email dated July 26th asked about um the off-site detention basin was and there's whether there's adequate capacity. >> Sure, that's correct. So essentially the the task that's set out before us for a storm water design is to reduce the peak rate that's exiting the property
comparing the existing condition which is as you recall the the liquor store with you I'll call it a third of the the lot paved out along with the wooded area that peak rate is our is our target to reduce from so essentially what we're proposing here with the help of our
various different bio retention systems the forest pavements and such the peak rate discharge for all the design storms is being reduced. So compared to the existing condition, the runoff leaving the site is actually being reduced. So I actually anticipate, you know, given that system, there's maybe a little bit less loading from a peak rate discharge
standpoint into that particular into that particular basin as as requested by the environmental. >> And then one final question about drainage. Um the system itself, it complies with both the storm water management regulations and the township ordinance. >> That's correct.
>> Okay. Thank you. Go ahead. Continue. landscaping. >> Yes. So, I'll touch on the lighting and the landscaping portion of uh of the of the site. So, lighting is pro provided with modern LED fixtures. The many of the fixtures on site currently are
outdated, so they're all being removed. And those area lights will range from 18 and a half ft in height to up to 20 foot uh 25 ft in height. There's a total of 24 poles. And the mounting height complies with the township standards. The placement of the light poles
themselves is intentional. Also to uh avoid conflict with vehicles turning and things of that nature impacting the foundations of the light poles. We generally try to put them in between parking spaces so if somebody's a little bit too eager with their with their car that doesn't hit the um the pole or the
foundation itself. And um on the quick check pad itself, the light poles are actually also protected by two concrete ballards. We do recognize that the convenience store is a little bit of a higher turnover use. So more people pulling on to the property and pulling out of the property and its parking
spaces. So we added the extra ballards there to to protect those poles. The wall there are a total of uh 22 wall-mounted lights uh on the building itself generally ranging from 7 and 1/2 to 12t in height. So they're not very tall. They're not intended to to project
light across the lot. That's really the job of the light poles. But the area light, the wall mounted lights is really to provide illumination around the door, around the entrances and uh things of that nature. And the lighting itself under the fueling canopy is indeed brighter. The quick check um fueling and
the convenience store is a 24 hours operation. So, it's really a matter of safety. The some of the employees do carry cash u as far as they're doing the transactions. who wanted to make sure that the employees are safe as well as the the drivers and the customers are safe while they're getting gas maybe a
little bit later into the night. Now, the the light spillage um and its design do not exceed the township requirements at the property line. So, we do do not anticipate light spillage across the property line that may be a nuisance to any of our of our neighbors.
So to to move towards the landscaping that's being proposed again you know we had our landscape architect take a full inventory of the of the existing site and do a complete inventory that was detailed out as discussed and the we wanted to make the landscaping really a
focal point of our of our design. The plantings were concentrated along the perimeter of the development footprint as well as distributed between the the building between the parking lot on the adjacent to the building itself to provide really an aesthetic look to the building. There's some shading for some
of the parking spaces. Um there's some burming along the frontages as I discussed that uplift the curb appeal and really the also the bio basins also as I discussed are heavily planted. They meet the D standards. We intentionally selected native species that will help
with the local uh ecosystem. And the comprehensive plan, it features a mix of native trees, shrubs with contrasting form and texture that adds to some of that that visual appeal as you look uh onto a site. And the we also conformed
with the township recommended planting list. I I did get a chance to briefly look at the letter that was uh just handed over from um the shade tree commission as far as the feedback. So it indicates that the shade tree is satisfied with the plant schedule with
the exception of one one species that's on the cranberry do not plant list. So we remove that and replace it with something that is on the recommended list. So we have no no issue complying with that that comment from them. And across site um there's also a
requirement to enhance further enhance some of the entrance area. So we can agree to work with the board and its professionals to satisfactoryy address that particular component as well. I think maybe some ground cover some perennials things of that nature will really add a little bit more color to to
the entrances across the three three entrance points we have on our property. And overall, you know, given that there's such an intensity in the landscaping, irrigation is needed. So, it will be proposed as part of this application that's going to help with establishing uh these plant materials
and maintaining it just so it becomes uh fully fully it takes to to the soil conditions in the area. So, I want to touch on maybe the signage, you know, that I alluded to it. That's that's really the much of our much of our variance relief. you know,
I'll just go through it in in in general and also speak to some of the deviations from the township standard. So, as far as freestanding signage is concerned, we are proposing what one at each of the of the two main driveways, which is the route 13 driveway and also the first
driveway from the intersection on Halfacre Road. And that's going to be your quick check freestanding signage with your fuel prices. They're 20 feet in height. They're 120 feet in square foot. um that's displaying again the LED uh fuel pricing. It's set back 20 ft
from the rightway. It does not conflict with any of the sight triangles associated with the driveways and um the wall signs across the um quick check building. So on the convenience store building itself, there is a wall sign
obviously over the front entrance and also another wall sign that's facing halfacre road frontage. that sign the full rectangular box and we can show the detail for it but it says quick check with a Q logo. We took the outer extreme limit of set sign which calculates to be
104 square ft. If we were to take two smaller rectangles, one for the quick check text, one for the Q logo actually accounts for uh 69.1 square ft. And on the facade itself again our architect will will show the
elevations that accounts for 5.7% of the facade. And if you were to take that more um tighter calculation method is actually 3.8% of the facade. So I do think it's quite proportional, quite tasteful. Highlights the fact that this is a quick check convenience store.
highlights the fact that you can identify it from from the roadways um for proper and safe wayf finding onto the property and also on site as well. For the broy liquor store as well as the retail um tenant, we have a generic signage that has 42.7
square feet over each of the entrances and also additional sign for the retail tenant that's also facing the halfacre uh frontage. So there's no sign that's on I'll call it the rear and the interior uh of the lot. And just jumping back to quick check for a second. I did
miss this. So on the corner of the fueling canopy, there's a small um small sign that's 22.6 ft in size and the that's mounted on the canopy facade of the of the fueling station. So again, our lot is a corner lot. You
know, we are fronting, you know, the the Route 130 highway as well as Halfacre Road. Route 130 itself is is a divided highway at a signalized intersection. There are multiple driveways to get onto the property. We place a freestanding sign at those locations where it makes sense. Um, and the building themselves
as I indicated before are set back far actually exceeding the township maximum as far as the setback is concerned for the maximum. So, we do feel that a slightly larger sign is going to help with uh the site identification and as I indicated before the the proper and safe wayfinding onto the property and around
the site as well. And I do think they are they're proportional in its nature. It is aesthetic and uh you know I think they they overall complement the the the building elevations and its materials. the uh the tower that was mentioned before. Is that for signage as well?
>> The tower on the building itself. >> Is that on the building? Unclear where that is. >> Yes. Yeah. And the architect will discuss that. >> Okay. All right. Okay. >> Um I have a couple Sure. >> couple follow-ups. First, um there's a comment in one of the reports about you mentioned there are two lots. Will there
be a lot consolidation? >> Yes. >> Okay. And then secondly and more broadly, you had an opportunity to review all of the professional reports that I discussed at the beginning of the meeting. And are there any issues within that report that you believe you cannot address as a condition of approval?
>> I review all the the professional review letters. We have no issue complying with the comments contained with each of the letters. >> Okay. That concludes engineering testimony. They want to hear. >> Yeah. Yeah. Let's uh >> Yes, I did.
Mr. Chairman, do you want me to talk a little bit about the next person? >> Yeah. >> Couple of things rather than him going through my letter. >> I just want to point out. >> Okay. Just I have a couple questions for
I we have a couple questions. Uh so in terms of parking, um as you know, this is a warehouse district uh or adjacent to a warehouse. There's a lot of tractor trailers. Um, so you said there's two spaces that could fit a tractor trailer,
but um those are meant for deliveries and things like that. >> Yes. So the clarification I might want to add is is those oversized parking spaces is intended for let's say your F250 landscaper with a trailer, not not a interstate tractor trailer. Okay. The
site isn't designed for a tractor trailer. The fueling component isn't able to service a tractor trailer. That's for the actual warehouses. what I was speaking to the two oversized spaces is 12 feet wide, 40 feet in length. So that accounts for like I said your landscapers, maybe your RVs, things of
that nature. People actually on the highway traversing, going to work, things like that. Not quite the full tractor trailer. >> So how I mean there there are a lot of tractor trailers around and they're going to want to use it. How how is that going to work? How are you >> Well, they can't get gas there, so it
would just be the convenience store, I guess, potentially, >> right? >> See diesel there. >> Yeah. But you can describe the diesel. >> Sure. Yes, the diesel is a low flow diesel. So, the the fueling itself is so it's going to be so slow for any of these tractor trailers where the time component doesn't make sense for them
where it takes forever for them to to fuel up and they're going to be losing time as and essentially losing time out of their their delivery cycle. It simply doesn't make sense. Um, a quick check of this is not intended for tractor trailer, you know, fueling. This is for more of your, you know, Volkswagen
diesel type of type of vehicle. electric there's no electric charge right I don't see that >> we are proposing four EV yeah four EV >> not for quick check >> not for quick check just given it's very high turnover but we intentionally are going to position them so that they're in between the two pads so let's say
maybe a quick check employee has EV and the other question was there's no no road signage for the retail stores >> correct yes there is no proposed road signage for the retail stores current time and that's why we have the the building uh signage over over the liquor
store component and also the two on the building itself. >> Yeah. >> Um I have an additional question perhaps for uh Mr. Shmeir uh with regards to the surface area of the freestanding signage. Is are you aware of any previous variances that might have been
granted to other similar facilities for for signs that exceeded the regulation size? >> Really have to defer to Dave. I mean, we're talking about signage on Route 130. Dave's been here a long time. So Dave, have you seen others like this?
>> This board has not has Thank you. This board has not uh granted any any signage variances for signs larger. The planning board has granted numerous um sign variances in the uh industrial zone right adjacent where they maybe wanted
100 when it was only you know maybe they wanted 200 feet where 150 is required that type of thing. Not huge differences but enough to uh to have a variance. So um there haven't been enough commercial applications to you know to have that
tested before. But the former BP across the intersection, the 7-Eleven up 130, neither of those had exceeded the the regulated size limit. >> Uh they I don't believe they did. I was here for them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Speaking of that, does the uh without
looking it up, does the internal illumination restriction apply in the HC zone? >> It does. Okay. >> And there are all >> Does the high water on the site force you to lift the elevation of the site in
general higher than it is currently. >> In general, the testimony I offer is that approximately 2 to 4 foot of Phil across the site. Obviously, it's gradual from coming from the roadways up to the finished floor of the building. the intersection um of of 130 and half acre
the the the datam elevation is uh 110 and the finished floor elevation for quick check is 110.5 and then the finished elevation for the retail is uh 111.5. So yes, it's a sight fill given the fact that the site you know slopes back towards the the back corner. Um
know some of it is to make room for the storm water basins to provide vertical separation from the high groundwater and that's the genesis for the for the that's that set the the site fill and then the finished floor elevations. >> Thank you. >> I had a question regarding the
residential part of it at the back. >> Is it being assimilated and uh done with or what >> the the residential home will be demolished as as proposed in part of this application. Any others
take away? >> Yeah. So, if I could, yeah, Dave Hoder, engineer for the board. Just a couple of things. Um, that pond that's in the in the back corner off the site, I was concerned that maybe it was a repairarian property and therefore subject to our ordinance. Uh, we discussed it today and we decided it was
not because it's a detention basin, which are specifically exempt. So they're not within 150 feet even though the D put it on their maps, their GIS mapping as a blue line which is in our ordinance anything that's blue. So luckily they're exempt and that doesn't
bother them at all. Great. >> Uh and I do have no real problem with them running their water back there because the existing runs now to that direction and they're going to be reducing the peaks. There is one section of ordinance that um that requires that pedestrian
crossings within the property uh crosswalks uh have to be different materials or textures meaning like either pavers or something other than the pavement. It's up to the board right now. They don't show that on the plan, but it's up to the board if they want to grant that waiver or want to require
them to provide uh various types of differential crosswalks so that uh they can be a little bit more tactile and uh visual in terms of walking across. >> Yeah. And we're okay with whatever the board's decision is. We'd have to work out the the type of detail, but we have
no issue either way. >> Okay. >> Okay. the um the lighting um the lighting under the canopy is very high. Okay, it's up to 40 40 foot candles and I've seen these kind of applications before and they like to have really bright lighting. The engineer talked
about that. I asked if he could reduce it a little bit even it goes down to 30 35 that might be worthwhile for the neighborhood because you're going to see it like a beacon coming off the site. It's up to the board if they agree with me. Um, I also asked that they reduce
there's a member of the planning board who happens to be an architect who has asked to produce only make sure that all the lighting is less than 30 3,000 Kelvin which is a softer light. Now maybe not under the canopy but everywhere else on site and that they've
agreed to do that. I ask that they uh they look into looping the water line back to the road for a dual feed. And if New Jersey American allows that, I'd like them to do it. Fire company would like that, too.
>> Could you explain that? >> Uh well, on on sites that are halfway decent in size, what I'd like to see is I'd like to see a water line that feeds from two directions. So if there's either a problem on one side or the other of the site, one of them's cut off by mistake or there's a blockage or
something, they have the other site to feed into those into the site both for fire or emergency or for portable use for that matter. >> And and we agreed provided the water utility allows it, we would do it.
asked for them to uh color the hot box uh the color as per the ordinance and heck if I can remember what the color is, but it's a pastel color. >> Thank you. >> Panone panone green. So that sounds and they said they would do that. Uh I'd like
some testimony from someone on on the mechanical equipment on site. don't really show where the mechanical equipment is going to be >> and it should be shielded from the road and shielded from pedestrian site. So either the architect or the >> architect said shielded but yes he'll provide that testimony.
>> Okay. I asked for a couple buffer extensions uh and I think they agreed to that. Uh, for example, behind uh the u uh the retail um uh ret retail uh trash enclosures. I am happy with the drainage that they
did that they they did everything according to the new rigs which were adopted about two years ago and that includes these smaller more numerous detention basins as opposed to the oldfashioned way of doing a single detention basin like that industrial site in the back. almost done.
Otherwise, that's it. I I um they referred to my letter and said that they would take care of the rest of the items. The ones I brought up are the ones that I think the board should know something about. >> Thank you. >> One other question on the on the plans like where the fueling pump is to the
right. Is that is that paved there or is that like um >> is that enclosed area? >> Are you referring to >> Yeah, right there. Right. >> This is a paved to drive file. >> So they could drive right in. >> So they could So somebody entering the
site will come around and make a left. They could make another left and then get into any of these fueling positions. >> This area the lighter gray Yeah. is a concrete pavement >> and the underground the fuel is stored in underground tanks under that area.
>> So right there just going to be painted lines like the circle is basically what it is, right? But because I see it on the plans here just shows >> this this painted gore area you're referring to. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So the hard curve line, the concrete raised curve is going to end I
believe goes approximately 20 feet shy of the intersection. What that's really allowing for is the fuel delivery vehicles to not run over the curb. They're just going to drive over the painted lines. >> Well, there's Is there room for a tractor trailer to park idle and stuff
like that? >> There really isn't room for a tractor trailer to park. The site isn't designed for it, nor do we want to invite it. We do acknowledge that that the surrounding area has a lot of warehouses, but again, you know, the drive by 30 to 35 feet in width. The there's no great way to turn
around. They would have to circulate through the front of the building. I I think the layout this this exiting driveway back onto 130 is going to be too tight for a large tractor trailer. So, it's it won't accommodate it. It's not designed for >> it can't park in the back. I don't think
back here. >> I was signing. I mean, I don't know. >> How do you discourage tractors from entering? >> We could propose we could put signage up. It would only be for our deliveries if there are any. But we could put signage of no tractor trail,
>> but there is other houses there. So I just didn't want people behind the retail place for the night island. >> Sure. >> You know. >> Yeah. >> So something >> we could sign. >> Okay. >> I do. Would you introduce yourself, please? >> Sure. My name is Andrew Feranda. I'm a
traffic engineer uh consultant for the board. Um I'm with Chuck Chire Associates. I do have some comments heard the uh site plan testimony. I understand there's a traffic engineer who will be giving the traffic testimony, but I'll uh look at the site
plan comments. Um Halfacre Road uh is a collector road. Uh the requirement is 60 foot minimum rightway. I believe that exists out there. It's a very wide road. Uh also the minimum uh paved width is 34
ft. Again, it's a wide road out there because of the industrial uh the warehouses to the east. Uh, I did make a recommendation that the roadway be paved half width along the site front because it's in very poor condition and it gives
a lot of use from the trucks and warehouse employees. Um, I think that was agreeable. >> Yes, correct. We would agree to pave up to the center line of the road along our frontage. >> Another recommendation I had is to provide left turn storage lanes. Again,
uh, if it's being paved, then left turn storage lane could go in. This would allow vehicles to store out of the traffic. Uh if there's trucks, if there's cars coming west uh westbound from the uh warehouses, they could wait till they get a gap in the eastbound
traffic. And I think that's the appropriate thing to do. Your traffic engineer can talk about uh what the levels of service, but I think it's just appropriate safety wise uh regardless of uh levels of service. Cool. um
delivery uh trucks. You talked about circulation on site. You'll provide turning analysis uh for the access as well as circulating on site. I know the fuel truck will be likely a larger truck, WB50, maybe even larger. U we'd like to see that and the fire department
will want to see uh their design vehicle. I don't know if it's going to be a ladder truck because you don't have taller buildings, but work that out with the fire department. if they use the ladder truck as their design vehicle, make sure that that can circulate the site. >> Sure.
>> Uh you had mentioned it's 24hour. I guess that's 247. Uh it'll be 247 in use. Uh and I know it was uh mentioned that um tractor trailers should be discouraged. Providing some kind of signage at the driveways is a good idea because there are a lot of tractor
trailers and they're required to get their sleeping time and break time. We certainly don't want this to be um used for trucks to stop and get their break time. Um diesel fuel uh is provided, but it's not for the trucks. You say it's the
slower uh dispenser. I had a recommendation for some improvements at the intersection of Route 130 and halfacre. Maybe your traffic engineer is going to take that on. But, uh, there are push buttons out there. I don't know if there's
crosswalks. A cabin store typically does draw pedestrians across the roadway. There are, um, residents across 130. And then there's retail. Uh, on the other side, there may be employees, there may be residents. Um,
I don't know if you would discuss that or the traffic engineer. I'm sure that would be part of your uh DOT access application. >> Yes. >> Yes, it was. We had preliminary discussions with DOT as far as our access permit and that one that was one of the items that that did come up and
you know we are in discussions with them as far as any intersection improvement that may be that may be needed >> and it would be required by the DOT if they uh >> if required by that. Yes. Okay. Okay.
Uh I know we talked about a pedestrian path between uh the convenience store and the retail building and you had mentioned that it's available and Mr. Her had mentioned that it should be a textured surface. Can you show the board
where that might go, how that might work? because it's a pedestrian path would go from the front of the liquor store retail building to the rear of the uh convenience store. What is the most appropriate? There's likely to be employees or somebody who
would share um use between the two buildings. >> Yeah. Yes. So the currently the concrete sidewalk connection is between behind floor building. It's a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk. The crosswalks themselves is a painted crosswalk with
two 4-in solid lines. I believe there was a note or a comment to ask for a thermoplastic type of of crosswalk. We can certainly agree to that which we already did. I think to further enhance the visibility and add a little bit
more, you know, significance as far as the pedestrian crossing, you can do maybe a full continental style crosswalk across, you know, all the drive ls that would permit for the pedestrians to move in between the retail component as well as the the quick check component. I
think that's in line with driver expectations as far as seeing that that that style and then it would achieve the goal of making it more visible and safer. >> Okay. And it was mentioned that there
will be a lot consolidation lots one and two will be consolidated. One of my questions that came up uh would there be a need for an easement? But if they're going to be consolidated, it's one lot. So, uh it's not that the convenience store is on one and the liquor store and retails on the other. This is all going
to be one consolidated lot. So the need for an easement goes away. Uh the three driveways will be shared through the internal connection. There's no need for that uh e. So that's correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And then there are other comments in there and you've agreed that you know
addressing the dimensions, the uh details, the other items and the report will take care of that. >> Yes. Correct. >> Thank you. >> Question for Andy. >> Oh, go ahead. No. >> So, if you're coming um if you're coming
east on halfacre, that's a legal turn to turn into the um site, >> the two locations. So, if you're coming towards 130, a truck or car can make a >> left turn left into the site. Yes. And that's where I requested that the left
turn storage lanes be provided so that in the middle of the road there'll be a lane that they can sit in that lane and wait if there's any traffic coming across from uh the other side of 130 and coming east on at least they can sit there and not block the traffic behind them.
>> Yeah, >> it could be a truck, it could be employees, but again their traffic engineer can discuss the levels of service and delay and all that. I think from a safety standpoint, both driveways should have this left turn lane. The roadway is wide enough. It's only
striping. I don't think that the applicant has agreed uh that that would be fine. That would be >> fuel truck would probably have to go in and out the same one through 130 to fuel the tanks. I would imagine that'd be a hard turn to make within. >> It would be a hard turn to go across the
jug hand, you know, southbound on 130 into the jug handle and then make the through movement and then right into the site. >> Yeah, >> that would uh potentially jam up that jug handle, which >> as everyone knows in Cranberry, that's
not a easy jug handle. So, scheduling deliveries, fuel deliveries, and other deliveries from the south coming in the right in right out driveway on 130 that would be beneficial to everybody. Um, it it probably is a management uh issue
for deliveries. >> All right. So, um I know that there are the four pump islands and so presumably that that means there are eight pumps, but I I saw in the zone table you had indicated 12 pumps. And so I was just curious if
that's a typo or um if there are actually 12 pumps. >> Sure. There's actually a total of eight of those islands or a total of 16 fueling positions, one on either side. So it is it is indeed a typo.
>> Okay. Got it. All right. Thank you. The configuration of those underground storage tanks is that a standard product that with the leak detection and all that stuff is that >> Yes, they are. It is a standard and there's multiple sensors. It's you know
double triple wall as far as the the thickness and the section of the the tanks to to monitor and check for any kind of leaks. Are >> those things fiberglass? >> What's that? Are they fiberglass? >> I believe it is a fiberglass construction. Yes. Um
maybe this isn't the right question for now, but um fuel spills, how are they handled in terms of getting so preventing fuel from getting into the waterways? I know there's a creek nearby and how is that handled? >> Yeah, so all the quick check employees
are trained to handle, you know, fuel um fuel spills and things of that nature. Additionally, the way we graded the site actually limits the uh the fueling canopy area that runs to a manufacturer treatment devices actually further help with any kind of contaminants like that.
So the the the the way like the pavement is set up, it doesn't spill onto other paved areas. Actually tries to trap it and then sent into these uh MTD uh treatment device structures um that that I indicated and then pri and then eventually it goes into a treatment
train which is the first bile retention basin and then a second bio retention basin. So it's treated three or four or five times a year, right? >> Multiple. >> Okay, >> no more questions. Thank you. That was great. >> If I may, I'd like to call our
architects. >> Thanks. Yes, I do. >> Sure. Good evening, everyone. My name is Oliver Young. Y O N G. >> Um, and please, we're seeking to have you qualified as a licensed architect.
Would you place your credentials on the record, please? >> Yes, glad. I am a principal at GKNA Architects. Our business address is 36 Ames Avenue located in Rutherford, New Jersey. I hold a bachelor's degree in architecture from Renelier Polytechnic
Institute located in Troy, New York. I have practiced in the field of architecture for over 25 years. I have been licensed in the state of New Jersey since 2006. My license is current and I have appeared at over 75 planning and zoning boards throughout the state and
been accepted at all of them. >> We accept. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um, and your office prepared the renderings that have been submitted in support of the application. >> Yes, that is correct. >> And we're going to be looking at a what I assume we're going to mark as A3. Would you identify that, please?
>> Yes. These are color rendered building elevations and fuel canopy elevations prepared by our firm for quick check dated March 20th, 20.5. So, I'll touch upon the quick check first, then I'll transition to the multi-tenant building at the rear.
The building footprint for quick check is somewhat standard. It's 5,670 ft, 77 ft wide by 68t deep. There is a bumpout at the front of the building and for reference purposes the front is the west elevation facing Route 30. It's at
the top of the page. That bumpout is 52 feet 5 in wide and it's 8'3 in deep. That bumpout contains two entry vestibules to the building uh at the north and south ends and then in the center of the vestibial is where the customer checkout area is. The floor
plan itself is somewhat standard for a typical quick check and a convenience store in general where the customer area is at the center or the core of the building and all the support for the quick check meaning that bathrooms, office, walk-in cooler and freezer storage and food prep is at the perimeter of the building. There will
also be a small accessory seating area in the quick check of 10 seats maximum and that's going to be located in the southwest corner of the building. Transitioning over to the elevation design and the massing of the building. The main overall height of the structure
on all four sides is 23 feet 6 in above the finished floor. At that bumpout portion I mentioned at the front of the building where the entrances are that height steps up to 26 feet 6 in 3ft difference. Both of these heights are to
the parapit not the actual roof structure. The roof structure itself will sit at approximately 20 feet above finished floor. And that's critical to note because upon review of the definition of building height in your ordinance, I believe it recognizes
building height as measured to the top of the roof structure. These pyrofit walls that I mentioned are at minimum 3'6 high up to six and a half ft high at that bumpout. And they're there for a reason and that reason is mechanical screening. Being a convenience store
with food offerings in it, there's a fair amount of mechanical equipment on the roof. We have three HVAC units, walk-in condensers, a makeup air unit, plumbing, flu, and exhaust fans. You'll notice that none of those are visible in these elevations, and that's because the
parapit walls adequately screen all these items from public view. Moving on from the massing to the materials and colors on the building. The prevalent material across all four sid four facades. Here is a red brick veneer.
Above grade, we have a decorative brick coursing. It's called a soldier course that tops off at about 3 feet 4 in above grade. And that lines up with the storefront mullions. You'll see at the front of the building as well as the north and south elevations. The brick continues up to a height of 10 feet uh
transitioning to a green metal standing seam awning around three sides of the building. That awning is 4 foot high and it also projects out from the building by 4 feet. Uh the one exception being east elevation rear of the building where we do not have that awning. That's
the delivery delivery area. Trucks would impact the awning and no awning at that front bumpout. that I keep going back to that awning increases in height up to about 5 foot eight inches while it maintains the 4ft projection above the awning. The brick veneer continues and
we have a secondary decorative course and other soldier course sitting just below the top of the parapit. The parapit itself is capped off with a decorative fiberglass cornice. We have two distinct types. One at the field which is three and a half sides of the building and a slightly more elaborate
one at the bumpout portion of the building. In regards to storefront framing and glazing, it's a dark bronze aluminum finish. It's prevalent at the bumpout on the west facade where the customer entrances are. And it does wrap around the corner at the south
elevation, which is second down on the left. That's where that small accessory seating area will be. And the glazing continues to the ground in that area. We've also added some glazing at the north elevation because that elevation faces Halfacre Road. I will note that
that glazing, although it's real glass, it's not visible glass. It's called spandrel glazing. The reason for that is, as I mentioned in my testimony about the floor plan, is the perimeter of the building is the it's the back of house. So, you're not going to be looking upon the customer area there. So, it's there
for aesthetic purposes for road visibility only. We've also included fuel canopy elevations. They're somewhat standard. So, we've only done two out of the four. They're at the bottom of the sheet. The fuel canopy has a minimum dimension from
grade of 14 foot 6 in. The canopy itself, it's 3 foot high. There's an 8 inch light green band across the bottom. It might be a little bit hard to see here. And then we have a darker green at the rest of the field. Both of these greens are the same exact greens you see on the building. The canopy is supported
by two foot by twoft foot brick columns and it's the same brick veneer that's used on the building that we see on the canopy creating a nice synergy between the two elements. Um I will be succinct with signage since Mr. Chan covered in detail in terms of square footages and
dimensions. I will point out that if you look at the signage in regards to the building, it's well proportioned. It's not too big. It's not too small. This building does not sit right on the road. It sits a fair distance from the road. So, we feel the signage is important in
size for visibility and it's well proportioned to the architecture of the building. I'm going to transition now. >> Before you move off that, there's a comment in the planner report about the massing of of at least the rear elevation of the quick check building
>> and is there anything we could do to soften that? Yes, the rear elevation is the east elevation, which you'll see just above the fuel canopy elevations. That's the one elevation that does not have that standing seam awning due to conflicts with delivery trucks. There's a lot going on back there. It might not
appear to be, but that's where we have all of our roof drainage. That's where we have all of our utilities, but we have the delivery door. And we also have a roof ladder, which is required by code. We place that outside the building. We can work with that comment. we can relocate
the roof ladder. We prefer not to relocate those two leaders somewhat because the roof drainage should be somewhat distant from each other on the building and we can't really touch the utilities on the the right side which is um where the electric and gas come in.
However, where that delivery door is, we could move that around. We can move the roof ladder around and we could come up with a treatment there, possibly some additional spandro glazing in the back. Um, for starters, just to add some aesthetic interest because looking at the site plan, we do realize that that
is highly visible from the parking area, right? >> Okay. Sorry. And then you're going to and we'll take questions, I guess, on everything, but let's talk about the um >> Sure. >> retail building. >> I'll transition over to the retail. four.
Exactly. These are color rendered building elevations. She R1 prepared for the by right and adjacent tenant space prepared by our firm dated January 28th, 2026. This building footprint is 20,000 square
feet. It's exactly 200 foot wide by 100 foot deep. We have two tenant spaces here. Each one is exactly 10,000 square feet. So we're splitting the building right in half. The northern tenant which is will which will be facing Halfacre Road is to be determined and the southernmost tenant will be the newly
relocated byite liquor store. We did provide a schematic floor plan for the byite. The sales area will be towards the front of the building facing the quick check. And then at the rear of the building we'll have storage and a walk-in cooler. And we're also going to provide a mezzanine in that structure
sitting directly above the storage area and the walk-in for additional storage plus some offices. That mezzanine is going to be approximately 24 ft deep and it's going to run the entire length of that tenant space. In regards to massing here, the main overall height of this
building is 26 ft above finish floor. There's a gabled element centered on each tenant space entrance at that front elevation at the top of the page. I'll call it a portico for lack of a better term. That ridge, the highest element,
tops off at 29 feet above finish floor. The roof line itself for this building, meaning the top of the roof structure will sit at approximately 24 feet at the front of the building and will become less as it slopes from front to back
with the roof drainage. So again, we don't show rooftop equipment here. We will be placing rooftop equipment towards the rear of the building where the power walls are higher and provide better opportunity for screening from public view. Given the retail nature of
this building, there will not be nearly as much rooftop equipment as you see on the quick check. However, it will be adequately screened from public view. Moving on to materials and colors. Prevalent materials across this building on all four facades, we have a board and
fatten finish. It's a faux wood finish. We also have some horizontal wood paneling. And then we have a stone veneer. Stone veneer is the base of the building on all four sides. And it tops off at about 3 feet. At the front elevation, which is the west elevation, we have a storefront glazing, which
continues up to a height of 10 feet. Very similar to the quick check. And then above that, we have the board and batten siding continuing at those entry areas where we have that portico. The portico projects out and has two support columns. That storefront glazing does
continue to the ground. Additionally, that stone veneer is carried across to those support columns, full height columns at that portico element. The porticos themselves, they're open trust design, so you can see through them to
the building facade behind it. Above the board and batten sighting, we have the slightly enhanced corners to top off the building. And then at all four corners of the building, we have faux columns where we utilize horizontal wood paneling, not real wood, but simulated wood to accentuate the design.
In terms of materials, material colors that stone veneer, it's going to be a brownish gray finish. We don't have the exact manufacturer selected. The board and batton will be a light gray and the corners topper will be a darker gray. The storefront glazing here will also be
a dark gray. And the the gable element, the roof of that will be a a gray standing seam metal roof. And the horizontal wood faux wood columns of the corners that's a dark brown material and
that will be the same dark brown as the wood at the portico element. In regards to signage for this building, this the first tenant is to be determined. So we haven't shown that. However, we have shown the byite signage representationally. I don't have the
exact dimensions here, but Mr. Chan mentioned it was 42.7 square feet and that will be the square footage for the two tenant signs on the north and south elevations. And that height is somewhat limited because that sits on that vertical element which is a three-foot
band. And that concludes my testimony for >> there was a similar comment in the planners report about the massing of the elevations where there are no windows if you will. >> Yes. And sorry I did not touch upon that on the north elevation facing halfacre
road similar to the quick check we did add spandre glazing there. Sorry that's actual glazing not spandre glazing because the retail design's not determined yet. And we do have an additional portical element there. Plus the glazing along the front elevation, the west elevation is significant. We
have wrapped that around both the north and south elevations. Recognizing that there is no glazing on the east elevation. Again, for the buy, right? That's going to be the storage area and back of house. We don't want actual glazing there. And although the retail tenants not determined that will same
scenario will likely play out. So we would not propose actual glazing there. Maybe we could consider some spinal glazing or some other element. We could speak with the client. However, I would suggest that this elevation is not nearly as visible as the rear of the
quick check. We know the rear of the quick check based on how it sits on the site has visibility. I feel there's very limited visibility here. However, we're open to discussions with the client if the board strongly feels some additional treatments need to occur at that east elevation.
>> That concludes the architecture test. Any questions? >> So the proposed elevation on the >> You still don't have a tenant on that for the south side. >> The north side. >> The north side. Sorry. >> Correct. >> So the signage, are you going to put a
signage on the Cranberry half road too once you have a tenant? Yes, we are proposing signage at the at the north elevation there on that horizontal wood portion of the port >> similar to by >> correct
question. Maybe I understood you wrong. You said there was going to be a canopy with offices a 24. Where is that? >> A mezzanine. >> A mezzanine. Okay. >> Correct. Liquor store. Inside the liquor store >> inside the liquor store. Okay. Yeah. I
didn't see that on here. I'm like, maybe I heard. Okay. All right. Yeah, looks good. I mean, uh be nice to brighten up the back of the quick check because you're going to see it from Halfacre Road, but like you said, I guess it's hard to um do
something like that, you know, ladder around the see come down. But >> any other questions? Just to confirm the fuel canopy that's not lit, just the signs, right?
>> The only lighting on the fuel canopy, correct? Is the fuel canopy signs that are internally illuminated and then there's the lighting Mr. Chan testified to the underside of course and that's it. >> Liz, you test you're about to give the truth. >> I do.
>> I'm Liz Laney, the board's planner. Um, a couple of questions. Are is it so is it your testimony that you don't think you need variances for height? >> Based upon what I reviewed as the definition of building height in the ordinance, I I don't believe so. However, I' be more than happy to hear
your >> I mean I think but but I mean partly I think particularly on the right building because you have that sort of decorative which is a nice feature. I'm not trying to to I think it's very nice, but it that does I think you can't make an
argument there that that's being used to shield um >> mechanicals. >> 100% correct. >> Right. So I I I do think for for certain I I understand the um the issue which he what what he's saying and I was looking at the ordinance while he was speaking
that he's saying the roof line is like this and then you have a parapit and our definition from height is it's actually a little ambiguous but it it you know and so it's hard to say is that really to the upper most point and when I was looking at at your drawings with the
quick check you know it's very nice I like the that sort of tower element the bump out but I think it's hard to make the argument that that is needed to be that high for to shield mechanicals when the rest of the parapit is much lower
>> in in regards to that bumped out portion um >> yes in there I mentioned three rooftop units one of them two of them are placed towards the rear of the building we typically place the third one actually
front center behind that the the height of approximately 6'6 is higher than it needs to be. That that differentiation >> is of three feet between the main parapit and that we feel is just a nice proportion. Honestly,
>> I don't I don't disagree but I I but I think that >> our planner will cover. >> Yes. But that's fine. I just I would say that Yeah. Okay. >> Huh? >> Okay. Sorry. Then the only other question I just wanted some clarific I
will provide clarification I think of my comments and one is that I actually agree with you with the byite building the east side is going to be really I mean the only people who only people going to see that are moving it's very close to the lot line and I don't
necessarily think doing any architectural differentiation on that facade is all that important to be honest I I do think perhaps there's on the south side of um of the byite building there's you know parking maybe
you could do some differentiation along there in some in some respect >> you want to bring that >> oh on the side you're saying >> just on the Oh no it's the other one >> the >> it's the by right it's that one
>> yeah the south side it's not as highly visible certainly as the other facads are in quick check but I think you know that you could probably just do something. >> Understood. We could definitely dress that up a little. >> Okay. And then to go to just um clarify
with the quick check with the um the east side elevation which you were saying is you know for loading and I I understand that completely. I think what my comment was talking about was referencing one of the design guidelines where we have um language about using
certain materials that are sort of heavier at the base and then you've got the main materials and then he you know then the cornice and so I was was going to suggest that if you did that if there was maybe a different material at the base um that just on that facade just to
sort of break it up in that horizontal way because that that is sort of what our design guidelines speak to. >> You know, I I I understand your comment and I agree with it. I think if we had a 3D rendering, I wouldn't say that we
would want a different material at the base. I think the brick with the soldier course wrapping around all four sides at the same height, >> okay, >> is a strong identification for the quick check. What I would say is maybe at the the height of the awning, which doesn't continue to wrap around, we could look at something there. We could even look
at a flat awning there and maybe add it. If we have that plus the the spandrel glazing there and create that as a faux storefront, I would offer that up instead. >> I think that that would be nice and and hope and I think it's the board's
intention and certainly my intention to not impede the operations of the store, but we understand or we we all anticipate it being visible. >> Yeah, we I mean we could come out a little maybe six or eight inches. So it's relatively flat but it has some projection and work with you on that
design. >> So yeah, we would agree if the board would approve the application to work with the board planner on those elevations that we just discussed. >> Those are my only comments. If the canopies were lower from the
building and there were mechanical screens around the equipment, would those screens play into the height or just the canopy? >> Well, I think the Are you talking about the parapit? The parapit
>> the parapit of the building is right now higher. If that was five feet lower and you could see the equipment, but then they put mechanical screens just around the equipment, does would it would you measure only to the to the lower
parapit? >> Probably. Yes, I would typically do that. I think what the architect's testimony, I don't want to speak for him, but was that there aesthetic reasons for wanting to to, you know, have that a little bit right higher.
Anyway, okay, that's my >> Thank you. We're going to call our traffic engineer. >> I do. >> It's John Cororak. last name spelled C O R A K. And John, we're seeking to have you
qualified as a traffic expert. Would you place your credentials on the record, please? >> Sure. So, I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey, hold a bachelor of science and civil engineering from the College of New Jersey. I'm an expert in the field of traffic and transportation engineering.
I've prepared over 250 traffic studies for land development applications. I've testified in front of uh over 100 land use boards in the state of New Jersey. Um I also serve as uh board reviewing expert for a handful of municipalities
as well. Um my license is current and in good standing. >> Thank you. And we've worked on other quick checks together. You I know last one we did was in Howl. Correct. >> Correct. You you and I have worked on on multiple quick checks together and I've
probably worked on over 50 quick check projects. um in my career it's probably lowballing it just from from due diligence all the way through construction opening. >> So you prepared a traffic impact study in support of this application correct? >> Yes. >> Can you describe for the board the
methodology you used and the conclusion you reached um as it relates to traffic? >> Yeah, of course. So with any traffic study, it starts with the visit to the subject site, an understanding of the roadway network. Uh, of course we're here at the southeast quadrant of Route
130 and Halfacre Road. Route 130 being a DOT state highway. Uh, carries in this area about 35,000 to 40,000 vehicles per day. Two-way directional flow. And then Halfacre Road is a township controlled roadway. Carries about 8 to 10,000
vehicles uh over the course of a day. Of course, being on DOT State Highway, modifying driveway access as we are, um it does require uh an access permit from the New Jersey Department of Transportation. Uh it requires a major
access permit with planning review. Uh this is the essentially the highest level of permit that you can try to go get from the DOT. So, it has the most scrutiny, the most reviewers, um most most layers of review, if you will, associated with it.
And so as part of that application, we submitted a traffic impact study to the DOT. And then as part of this application, we submitted the same study to the township. So what we submit to DOT is the same thing that I have here before um you know before you today. As
part of that study, we do traffic counts. We we collect those um for development of this size at the adjacent signalized intersection. Uh we also counted the existing driveways for uh byite liquors. We take those counts during uh what are the typical peak
periods. You have the morning peak period from 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. You have the evening peak period from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. And then we look at a Saturday midday peak from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Within those peak periods, we identify a peak hour. And that is the analysis
period, the busiest hour uh within each of those periods that we ultimately analyze for a what we call a level of service analysis. So the DOT has requirements related to levels of service. Levels of service is graded on a scale from A to F. But unlike say a
school report card when you have with levels of service, you're not striving for all A's um or A's and B's necessarily because if you were to make every single movement, every single approach a level of service A, you would
be grossly overdesigning intersections. Uh, and that has other detrimental effects like additional storm water runoff or you may need to just if you were going for level service A, you're probably making every single traffic light in the state an interchange. So, it's it's not really practical and
certainly not needed. What we target in the traffic engineering industry is level service C or D um, as a as a benchmark. We try to make the the main lines run a little bit smoother than that. Um and that the DOT accepts up to level service E for site driveways on
their state highways. So uh a lot of letters there, a lot of things at play, but all of that encompassed within the traffic study in terms of the analysis done and um you know how how the site impacts this intersection and how the site driveways function. So once we have
that level ser once we have that existing condition counts, we do conduct that level of service analysis. um existing condition today what we see on route 130 at this site we are getting those A's and B's because of course the state prioritizes their own highway they
want to maintain the travel flow on route 130 and then the the side street approaches of halfacre road tend to fall into local service D to E range with the exception of in the evening peak hour
what we observed was the left turn headed eastbound so um you know, basically past our site and then making a left turn on to 1:30 south. Um you do get uh some longer delays, especially in that 5 to 5:15
window and 5:30 to 5:45 window. Um you know, it's just a function of some of these warehouses letting out uh you know, shift change and you know that that's it kind of is what it is, if you will. But we do note that
that is a a level of service F condition that within this traffic study um you know we do look to mitigate. So from there we forecast out to future growth here. We add background volume traffic to account for area developments. We
also add traffic specific to um approved developments that were not open and operating at the time of our traffic counts. And then we conduct another level of service analysis on that buildout year without the site. It remains generally unchanged from today's
existing condition. Then it's all about adding the traffic associated with the quick check with the shopping center component and routing that traffic to and from the site driveways um you know at the site. So access wise changing
from today's condition of a rightin only on route 130 and a full movement on um Halfacre Road. So now now we're changing that from a right in right out uh on 130 and two full movement driveways on Halfacre Road. Um
next we forecast the actual traffic generated by the site in in the morning and evening peak hours. um what we expect to come to and from the site is about 240 to 250 vehicles
over the course of that hour. So it's a lot of traffic coming in and out of the site. But with retail uses and and maybe more particularly with the quick check use, the majority of that traffic for quick check it's about 76%
is actually comprised of traffic that's already on the roadway. So these are not new trips that are added to the roadway. It's people who are already on their morning commute, evening commute, stop in for a cup of coffee, stop in for gas, for a sandwich, whatever it might be, and then continue on their way. So these
trips, while they are using the driveways, and we have to be aware of their impact at the driveways, they don't contribute to additional traffic on the roadway network. In the in the industry, we call these pass trips. um shopping center retailers, they also
generate pass by trips. Not at the rate the Quick Check does, but generally the 25 to 35% uh rate for for a typical retail use. So from there, we've we've essentially routed a gravity model that um this
basically is using census data to to route where we think the traffic's going to come from that's not the pass by trips. And then the pass by trips are of course based on roadway volumes on the road itself. We route them in and out of the site driveways and then conduct level of service analysis um in the
future buildout condition with everything fully built. And so unsurprisingly when we add in all the you know the 240 250 vehicles and some of them do need to
return back to Route 130 South. um you do see some delay increase especially in that evening peak hour trying to make that left turn onto 130 south. So as part of our DOT application what we've proposed is a little bit of a signal
timing adjustment. The intent is to take a few seconds from route 130 give them to the halfacre road approaches. Keep the progression of traffic on 130 the same. Keep the you know the coordination amongst the traffic signals the same. Uh
but just give a few more seconds each time you run through to get a handful more vehicles through the light. And and what that does is it helps bring back our levels of service for that movement back pretty much in line with the existing condition today after
accounting for the added traffic from quick check and uh by right in the uh you know the shopping center as a whole. So that that is essentially what is required in the DOT study in terms of our mitigation that we would need to
propose. Um in terms of the driveway movements, levels of service, all of those movements comply with the DOT's regulations. the remaining um movements at the intersection all meet the DOT's degradation standards and would not
result in any significant traffic impact um you know to the traffic signal to the driveways as a result of uh this application that of course is with the timing change that we're working through with DOT as part of our application
um getting a little bit more into access I think the route 130 part is pretty self-explanatory. It's median divided, right in, right out. Um on the halfacre roadside, we do have the large cartway width. Um Mr. Fanda uh in his review
letter mentioned basically striping out uh the center of of Halfacre Road for left turn lanes. Um which we're we're absolutely agreeable to do. I think it's a good idea, especially with amount of truck traffic through here. We don't
need trucks weaving, you know, left and right through halfacre road trying to get around vehicles. Let's keep them in a focused lane. Keep the left turning vehicles um you know in their own lane and you know the the prologus site um
just to well that'd be just to the east. They have their own left turn bays as well. It's pretty consistent with the corridor. So um you know happy to agree to that. uh in terms of level of service impact there, it's going to be marginally better than what we analyzed
in our report, but but still very much compliant and efficient levels of service. Um I think last thing just want to touch on is the parking. Uh we are a little bit overparked on the quick check side, a little bit
underparked on the retail side. that retail requirement is um sort of the the old school standard of you know one per 200 or five per thousand. You can see that number if you look at ordinances across the state you can see that number
sometimes go down to four per thousand or one per 250. We're we're kind of striking a balance in the middle there. Um, and once you account for the the state's EV parking requirements, which do give you a little bit of a bonus on
on your parking, we could add enough EV spaces, be six or seven to actually just outright comply with the parking and not require variance. And but we don't we comply if you take the site as a whole but you're talking about if you segregate the uses as was discussed we
if you did the math we would comply with just the four EVs I believe. >> Okay. >> I have a followup question. Sure. >> There was um um Andrew Andy asked about the intersection improvements and and
walkways etc. Can you discuss with the board what the DO what you've done with the DOT and what's being proposed? >> Yeah, so with the DOT, our discussion on it uh was last had at a pre-application meeting um last year and they did talk
about basically pedestrian improvements at the intersection. We didn't get too far into specifics and I I do expect with their first review letter we will have a lot more feedback from the DOT on that. Um but out there right now you have push buttons to cross 130. Um you
have some ramps. There's no crosswalk to cross 130 and there's no pedestrian signals, right? The the the flashing hand or the the white walkman as as I call it. Um so you know, you just have like a traffic light and when that turns
yellow, you better hope you're almost done. So, I think that there's certainly opportunity for improvement there, especially with the convenience store use that um you know, as Mr. Fanda mentioned, that does generate pedestrian traffic. >> Would you agree as a condition of
approval to include Mr. Fanda in your communications with DOT so he has some input? >> Absolutely. I can get him uh we had to we had to submit to the township a courtesy copy but I can provide him our application and then when we get comments uh keep him CCD on you know our
active correspondence with the DOT that's all we have from traffic Mr. Okay. >> Thank you. Um I I have um a concern that I don't think was addressed. U you said that this
isn't going to add additional trips in general. I agree, but uh I I do see this adding quite a lot of traffic to um Tacre Road and and the Tug handle. Uh southbound 130 traffic. We'll see. put
check and say I want to go there. Um that's additional load on the on the jug handle and then to return to southbound 130 that's going to put extra load on >> on road. So
um I I'll ask you is how how bad is this? >> I absolutely agree and it's a good point and I was going to bring it up but you brought it up first. That jug handle tends to fill up. It's it backs up uh during peak periods, especially in the morning time. I think you recognize it
with the levels of service D and E. The DOT will also understand this. They're very uh cautious of uh these type of situations where you have short jug handles and you have the movements coming across with the trucks as well that do that movement. So that that jug
handle does back up and it will have to be uh looked at very carefully. Um levels of service sometimes can be deceiving too if cars can't pass through. You're counting cars through the intersection. But if they're waiting in the jug handle backing up the road, sitting on the road, they didn't pass through. You're counting at the
intersection, but they're still waiting a couple cycles on the road. >> It's definitely something that has to be uh looked at because that jug handle >> has been an issue for quite a while. has a short little jug handle for what it's servicing, which is all the warehouse
space to the other side. >> That being said, there is the opportunity for vehicles heading southbound to use South River Road and then there's Liberty Way that kind of allows traffic to come in the back way and not have some of those employees or
trucks use the shorter jug handle. I think trucks have learned that uh it's not the appropriate way to go and they can come in off South River uh more easily and appropriately, but it does happen. And that jug handle, anybody who's driven it knows that you're
waiting uh for traffic to move and get across the road. You you're stopped at, you know, waiting to get in that short section uh at to get to the light. You're looking up the road and then you have to turn to the left to get in that section. So, it's definitely a concern,
something that I would be uh happy to uh be involved in the DOT core discussions uh as they go forward. >> They are likely very aware of this too and uh would be looking as uh Mr. Steckler had mentioned uh this is a
major with planning one of the highest uh access permits. uh it'll undergo a lot of scrutiny >> and unfortunately these days it'll under go a lot of time to get approved. It you I'm not telling you anything.
>> No, they they outright told us in the pre-application meeting that they were not going to hit their required 90-day review period without even having the application. So we we know that we know that the reviews will take time. >> Okay. >> You know, it's it's the way it is. >> I'm glad it's being addressed.
>> If I could just add one >> one point here. Um, with the quick check use in particular, if it is uh difficult, and we know that it it very well can be at at certain peak points,
but if it's difficult to get from southbound 130 over to Quick Check and then back, >> yeah, >> it is ultimately it's a convenience-driven use. And if the route's not convenient and it it's taking up and just driving through it, it's taking up 10 15 extra minutes on
your commute, >> you're going to pass it and and use something else. It's it's human nature and that's what we >> that's what we see a lot of on, you know, other quick checks that we've worked on is that they they do oftentimes draw from mostly their side of the roadway, especially when you have
divided highways, jug handles that that add time. >> Right. And there was another point in there that you had made and testimony was provided regarding the number of trips to the site. There's new trips uh which would be new trips added to the roadway
uh for convenience. It's very low new trips because of the high pass by 75%. They're on the roadway, but at the driveways you get all those trips. the driveway still have to take in uh and let out all of the trips because even
though they're on the roadway, they still will enter and exit the site. And you've analyzed that the driveways are not the concern in this case per se. The one question I would have is the uh halfacre road driveways weren't analyzed
with a left turn lane. How would that impact uh the analysis? Should you redo the analysis with those left turn storage lanes and actually one second question I was ask the driveway on the state highway is a
right in right out that's >> right I'm saying the other two >> the other two are under control of cranberry that's a cranberry road so you have this board has the ability to say we require that for those >> I thought the state had to say too >> I don't think the jurisdiction and I
know I requested the distances be marked on the plans but I don't think the DOT's jurisdiction backs up to these driveways on halfacre. >> No, it ends pretty much right at the intersection. >> That's what I was asking. I didn't know where it ended. >> No, they'll Yeah, they they won't have
any say in it essentially. Um but you know level of service-wise uh it's going to be very consistent with this analysis essentially adding The left turn is going to create it's going to set the delay of any through movement that would
have been blocked by the left turn. It's going to essentially take that delay away. Um and then really if you're someone leaving the site waiting for someone to enter from the left turn lane, you were waiting for them anyway in that scenario. So, you know, marginal
changes in the levels of service, but just with the the pacing at the light as well, there are a lot of gaps in traffic to make those turns out. So, you know, no concern in my opinion of backups into the site or or on a Halfacre Road.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh just one other comment uh regarding the uh crosswalk over 130. Um, I remember a really long time ago, like 15, 20 years ago, there was a proposal, I don't think it was before the zoning
board, but there was a proposal for a uh convenience store where the Dunkin Donuts ended up there and and um it didn't go through. There was concern about kids being attracted, you know, but there was there's no crosswalk
there. So, um, you know, I that is a concern and, uh, you know, I think that's something that should be >> addressed that, you know, it's great that there's a crosswalk, but it it needs to be performed correctly, right? So, all right. I I did have some more
comments. Um, you had mentioned that to improve the signalized intersection, you would be looking to maybe change the uh green time >> uh for Halfacre Road. >> Yes. What's the likelihood that the DOT will give that green time? And again, this is DOT's jurisdiction. So, there's
nothing that you can do. We maybe the board could request that this be made uh this uh improvement be made. But without that extra green time, then what would happen to Halfacre Road? Since the DOT
is usually reluctant to take green time away from one uh the state highway because during peak periods, the state highway also needs that time. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I think what I'm expecting to come out of the first comment letter from DOT is a request for a progression
analysis. And this is a a detailed study that's usually goes two or three intersections north of the interse of this this intersection and two or three signals south of the intersection where we're essentially tracking how the flow of traffic goes how it progresses
through each of the intersections in the in the peak direction. um with that if there is additional band area um to be able to slide a few seconds, that's when they allow that that level of of moving green time, if you will. um
and they, you know, they're they're obviously uh cognizant of their own state highway and trying to to keep that moving as efficient as possible, but when you start seeing uh significant side street delays, they they want to
address those, especially when we can address them at an impact of the state highway that's, you know, on average only a a couple seconds per vehicle, right? So it seems like a pretty dimminimous um reduction on the state highway traffic for a big improvement to the
side street. So that's that's the first step I believe. Um from there, right, the depending on what the DOT will allow, not allow I don't want to get into the idea of widening or changing lane
configurations, going to split phase. These are all different things that could be explored with the DOT um you know for the traffic signal, but it's it's not something that we're looking to do at this time, but we know that the possibilities out there
>> to support the case for more green time to the side streets. Would you be willing to do a Q study to see what the Q length is on either side u on Halfacre? should it start backing up past the driveways uh on Halfacre Road or uh even on the other side where you
have the jug handle that starts backing up on to the state highway that might give you some ammunition to the DOT to say hey look there's there's issues out there our Q study says we need that green time uh and that becomes a safety issue especially if that traffic is
backing out of the jug handle onto the state highway the state highway will recognize that that is an issue And that might help your cause to get some green time just um by providing that queueing analysis to the DOT that
might support your request. >> Yeah, that's something we can can certainly work toward. >> Okay. >> Any questions? >> Also, uh in reducing the trips to the site, I know you mentioned internal capture. Can you just mention what that
is to the board and how that reduces the site trips? Again, it doesn't reduce the site trips at the driveway. They still have to come and go from the site, enter and exit. Um, but explain what internal capture. >> Yeah. So, when we do our trip generation
forecasts, we forecast for each individual use that's on the site. Um but given the interconnections between the different uses and the fact that there are going to be some people who stop at quick check and stop at buy right or stop at buy right and the
future retail use um there's a little bit of a double counting that can occur and so internal capture is basically an adjustment so that we're not double counting those trips. That's really what it comes down to. Exactly. >> So someone comes to the liquor store and
wants to get packaged goods and then gets gas as well. It's not >> four four trips, one in, one out, one in, one out. It's only two trips. And >> there is permitted reduction in traffic for that combination of uses on site.
>> Okay. >> Thanks. >> Hi. Couple of questions. I think um Robert kind of picking up on your question heading northbound on 130 um especially considering that leaving
Cranberry that's on that side that's technically that would be the first gas station unless you go across to the BP if you're heading towards um the turnpike. There are certain times when there are long lines making the right.
Most of them are the tractor trailer trucks that are heading in onto half of the road. So I'm looking at you talked a little bit about queuing. What's the expectation for the right in right out during those high-end periods when you
have the volume of traffic coming in or waiting to turn on to that and that picks up for a while and what you're going to end up having queuing considering the additional 250 or whatever cards that you're counting
inside your area waiting to get out. Have Have you made any considerations for that? So, if I'm understanding correctly, we're headed northbound on 130. We're making a right turn on Halfacre Road and that we're talking queuing there. >> We go to gas.
>> That's the only gas pump, >> right? >> Yeah. >> I guess I'm asking, are you talking about queuing coming into the site or queuing at the signal for Halfacre? >> Both or both? Um, because it's right in and right out. So, you'll probably have some queuing coming out trying to get
out to get back on north on 130, right? Um, plus you've got the cues particularly for the tractor trailers that are waiting to make the right onto Halfacre Road, >> right? So, you know, with that right in right out driveway, if you're if you're trying to leave the site, get back on
130 north, you do have to wait for cues to clear or for a, you know, a courtesy gap, if you will, someone letting you in to when to the to the flow of traffic when the cues are backed up in that way. Um, one of the benefits is of course
that we do have the halfacre road driveways. So you can make the left and then the right at the signal. Um, sort of as a as an alternate route. Um, and then, you know, coming into the site, you're there's there's no activity on site
that's going to back the site out onto Route 130. So, it's just, you know, if you're caught at the wrong time, it's just the progression of getting to the driveway. And that's really a function of any any site that comes here, any project. >> Yeah. Um do you have intentions of
providing traffic flow um instructions within the site to help alleviate any of that >> like wayfinding signage? >> Yeah. You know, that's something I don't think there's any on the plans right now, but that is something that we've done on other sites where we essentially
provide signage on site that says, you know, alternate to 130 north, you know, and and an arrow pointing toward the Cranberry Road driveways or that, sorry, the Halfacre Road driveways. We'd be happy to do that. Absolutely. >> Okay. Anyone else?
professionals. Thank you. >> You have one more witness, our planner. >> Do we want to take a short break? Anyone or we good to go? >> Okay. >> All right. Let's power through.
>> Yeah. Thanks. Oh, you're welcome. >> Wait, I got to stand up. >> I do. >> Introduce yourself. Spell your last name. >> Hi. Uh, my name is John Tyena. T is in Thomas. A I K is in Kelly. I and is a
Nicholas A. I'm a licensed planner in the state of New Jersey and I have been since I completed my studies at Renelier Polytechnic Institute and Ruckers University in 1992. Um I have uh spent the last 35 years 33
years excuse me doing this. Been married 35 years. Um last 33 years doing this testifying before planning and zoning boards around the state and across the country on behalf of applicants just like Quick Check. Uh I've been before more than 210 uh different boards in the
state of New Jersey. I was last here in 1999. >> Uh nice to be back. My license is current and good standing. >> Accept. Thank you. >> Thank you. So I am here to talk about the applica. Can I go?
>> Please. Thank you. Uh I am here to talk about the application from a planning standpoint. Um we uh do require a couple of different types of relief. Um, and as usual, Miss Laney's uh memo did a really nice job of laying out kind
of what we need to talk about. Um, I uh I would and in the 11 or 12 years that I've known Miss Laney, we worked together. I I don't think we've actually disagreed and I actually disagree with it here uh on the hype for the quick check. Um, but I don't disagree with her
on the hype for the uh retail building. So, according I'm not going to fight about the quick check. We'll just deal with height as well kind of across the board. Um so we require four different types of relief. We will have a D3 variance, a conditional use variance uh
for a conditional use that does not meet all of the conditions. Uh we will likewise have a what is called a D6 variance for height that exceeds the uh height limitation by more than 10%.
Um, and that limitation is 24 feet. So 2.4 feet would be uh 10% and we're at 2.5 ft for the quick check and I guess we're at about five feet for the retail building. Um,
and those two uh forms of relief have similar uh types of of uh standards. And the standard there is uh does the site and the use remain appropriate even though we don't I guess they're
they're different for the conditional uses. Does the site and the use remain appropriate even though we don't meet all the conditions? And we actually go down and and look at each specific condition and say hey is it still okay even though we have two canopy signs instead of one. is it's still okay even
though our our uh wall signs are 104 square feet instead of 40 square feet. And that's literally, you know, the measure that we have to go through. Um and then for the height, it's um does the site remain appropriate even though the the building's taller and do you
accommodate the issues that might come from uh the height that's that's requested. Um and then the balance of our relief uh is we have uh kind of some C variances um which likewise kind of
pile on each other. So we we have signage relief in the conditional use and then we're also getting signage relief again uh from the sign ordinance. I think we're kind of double dipping here. Um so we also have those C variances. Uh and then we finally have
uh some design waiverss and uh for the variances the standard is does it is it better planning alternative that we have these variances result in a better plan does it advanced purposes zoning and uh and then in terms of our design waivers
uh are they reasonable? Are they within your purview from a site plan standpoint and uh would not granting them be somewhat impractical uh for the applicant? And then finally, all of these things uh are you need to make a finding about the negative criteria so
that it doesn't have a negative impact on the public good and it doesn't have a substantial impairment to the zone plan and the master plan and all the variances need that negative criteria relief. Um the only deal I'll make with you is we'll only do everything once.
Okay, so here we go. Um so, uh Mr. Chan did a nice job of going through our conditional uses that comply. Uh and and I'm not going to go through them again. Uh the ones that um that we don't comply with again is does the site remain
appropriate because we have a canopy that has two signs on it instead of one. I would submit to you that we do. Um we have a a sign that faces forward and we have a sign that faces down Route 130. I think it's entirely appropriate for someone appropriate approach approaching
the site up on 130 to be able to have it uh have the canopy uh be uh have a sign on it. Our canopy illumination is it appropriate that we're more than five foot candles? Um now again five foot candles is extraordinarily it's
extraordinarily low for retail let alone being extraordinarily low for a uh for what would be typical industry standard for a gasoline canopy. Um, Mr. Hoder talked about maybe not being 40 foot candles. Maybe we're 35 or 30 and and I think we're perfectly happy to work with
that. But, um, again, particularly for a 24-hour operation, which is permitted here, uh, it's appropriate to be well lit, and I think we're all kind of used to underneath a modern gas canopy that, uh, yes, it's lit up like that. We acknowledge, but most importantly, we don't spill out and we don't go beyond
our property lines. We don't come close. So, uh, again, do remain appropriate for that? I I believe we do. Um for the freestanding signs, two are permitted. Of course, we are somewhat larger. We're 20 feet tall instead of 15 and we are
120 square ft in area instead of uh being 60 square feet in area. Um so again, 60 square feet for identification and price is uh is a little tight certainly. Um, I
think the uh gas retailers have done a nice job of recognizing they don't need to put up all four grades. We only care about price for the cheap one. If you're going to buy premium, we don't care it costs. Um, and they're going to charge you whatever it is you're going to pay it. Uh, so again, we're limited to just
the two. Um, and again, I think the 120 feet do remain appropriate that we're a little bit bigger. I think we do uh given our setbacks and given uh the prominent location on this prominent corner. Uh our wall signs are 104 square feet instead of 40 square feet. Again, I
think it's appropriate. As Mr. uh Chan testified, uh we are only uh about five square 5% of the wall area. Typical uh ordinance would be 10% of wall area. We're we're less we're at 5%. So again, I think they're the right size and shape
for the building uh in question. They're not overly big. Uh they're not overpowering it in any way, shape, or form. Um they're not uh white light boxes, etc. Again, they're just letters. Um bless you.
>> Um again, we're over the height uh at uh 20 ft plus our 6 and 12t parapit. Uh again, I think we remain appropriate as a gas station convenience store even though we have a parapit that we went higher to
make sure we screened all the stuff on the roof recognizing we have a lot of stuff on the roof. Um and again, we think that it's uh remain we remain appropriate even though we're a little bit taller specifically because we're doing it to make sure that we screen everything that's there because we are a
need. Um, and then finally, uh, stand standalone convenience. We're not a standalone convenience store, so that doesn't matter. Um, so again, I think in all >> we have also the height for the rear building, too, or the retail building. >> That's not our conditional use, though.
That's unconditional. I'm still I'm on a conditional use. >> I'm going to go to height next. You're right. >> But there there are conditional use standards that don't meet. So again, they're all relatively dimminimous. um we can talk about you know 20 20 and 15 etc. everybody and we do do remain appropriate even though we don't meet
those individual standards and I think you'll be able to find we do none of them are unreasonable none of them are extreme uh and again when you look at this quick check it looks like a normal quick check nothing about it is extreme nothing about it is superersized
um second type of relief is height uh so again we have two height variances 26 and 1/2 ft where 24 feet is permitted on front on the quick check and 29 9 ft where 24 feet is permitted uh to the rear. Again, we think these additional
heights are appropriate given uh on the quick check that we're making sure we're screening our our uh facilities. We're also 100 ft back from the from the front yard. Uh so again, we're making sure because of the substantial setbacks and the substantial landscaping, we think
that uh having a 24 26 and 1/2 ft building or 29T building isn't inappropriate. Um, in terms of the rear building, uh, again, as a as a st as a retail building, as a singlestory building, it's limited to 24 feet. Uh, if it's a multi-story building, it's
allowed to be 40 feet. Uh, so I actually my ears perked up when I heard the mezzanine. I'm like, can we just call this the second floor and then we're allowed to be 40t high and the height variance goes away? We're not doing that. Um, but it uh again, so it's not on toward. not like the zone doesn't
doesn't envision a tall building. It just doesn't envision a tall single story building. And again, I think the architectural treatment is such um that it it's appropriate and the site remains appropriate. We looked at making it lower um which is the second standard on
grasso uh is did you did you try to lower it and we did and it kind of looks funny. You know, it's like when you you take something, you start to squish it down. Uh it it just doesn't look appropriate and we think that the as proposed is the best. Uh and I'll talk
about negative criteria at the end. Um then we have all of our C variances. Again, each of these C variances I believe are C2 variants where they represent a better planning alternative by providing for that uh variance uh because the different elements
associated with it. uh we actually exceed our permitted front setback. So your ordinance requires you to be between 75 feet and 100 feet and we are beyond that. Uh we're at 116 and 134 feet on Halfacre Road. Um and 372 feet
for the retail building on Route 13, though I'd submit to you that's not a front yard, but um because the quick check sets the front yard. Uh but regardless, I think our setbacks are appropriate. I think they're appropriate for a multi-building uh arrangement and
I think they're appropriate to be able to provide for that substantial landscaping that was desired by the TRC adjacent to our roadways. Uh we have the same relief in terms of signage. We have a maximum number of freestanding signs limited at one. We're proposing two. Uh
we have maximum freestanding size sign uh is 50 square feet in your regular ordinance. It's 60 square feet in your conditional use. Uh we're proposing 120 square feet. uh freestanding sign height is the same 15 permitted 20 proposed again we think being 20 feet back from
the road for the freestanding signs are substantial landscaping that providing we think and the distances that we're talking about on route 130 we think it's appropriate uh to be 20 ft tall uh external illumination as opposed to internal illumination is proposed uh we
think internally illuminated is more efficient we think it's a better uh way to light them we think it's light that we can better control uh and that provides us with a better planning alternative. I am actually familiar with a quick check that is externally illuminated on route 31 in uh east
westwell, excuse me. And uh it looks silly. These they have these goose they have a regular pylons on these gooseeneck lights on it. It like you look kind of silly and there's light spilling all over the place whereas the typical uh internally illuminated is is
fairly elegant and controlled. Our maximum wall size sign 100 square feet is permitted. We're proposing 128.1 on our retail building with our three signs on our two frontages. Uh our wall sign height at 15 ft permitted. We're proposing 20 ft. Again, it's where it
fits uh in the architecture of the building uh in those uh in those portico areas. Um again, I think that Mr. Young did a nice job of providing for a nice defined sign area uh within those areas. Uh, our freestanding sign area, again,
60 square feet permitted, 120 square feet proposed. Wall signs per frontage, one permitted. Uh, we have a sign facing a sideyard on our canopy, which was called out of the seariance. Again, these are things that were set forth in
our in our gas station ordinance that were also being uh tripped up on on our regular sign ordinance as opposed to only having one location. Uh likewise, canopy signs, two proposed, one permitted. Canopy sign areas, 12 square feet is permitted. We're proposing 22.6
square feet to provide for both quick check and a logo. Uh and then finally to last is the external illumination versus internal illumination again within the uh it's twice within our uh within your sign regulations at 37K7
uh and at 37 I1F. Uh so it's there twice. Um and then the last one is our parking setback. We have 10 feet required where six feet is proposed for the quick check. Again, quick check has a fairly
uh typical standard uh for their uh parking adjacent to their building uh where they like to have it all flush. There's nothing to trip over, there's no curb to trip over, there's no uh they use ballard so there's no parking stop to trip over. uh it's all nice and and
flush and neat and clean. They provide for the six-foot sidewalk to be able to have the awnings extend over and provide some uh cover from the weather, etc. for people that are going to park around the uh three sides of the um in each of those instances. Uh again,
we believe it represents a better planning alternative uh to provide for um to provide for that standard uh as opposed to uh having a compliant plan. Um the second piece that we need to talk
about there is um our um positive criteria, if you will. Uh it's Smith to you that uh that there are um there are three uh purpose G to provide for sufficient
space and appropriate locations uh for a variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial uses and open space according to their respective environmental requirements to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens. Again, the applicant is proposing uh all conforming
permitted uses at a prominent location on 130. Mr. Chan uh provided outstanding testimony on how we're meeting all the environmental requirements, whether they're environmental requirements related to fuel, whether they're environmental requirements related to storm water, uh something that's very
important to the township and uh our aesthetic and environmental requirements that relate to landscaping uh that we worked with uh purpose I to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement. Again, we I think we proposed a facility that's
well set back in sufficient landscape. uh on Route 130 and Halfacre Road. Uh the landscaping is proposed along the roadways to provide buffering and enhancements and the applicant is proposing two attractive buildings that are going to fit within the landscape uh
and enhance the uh appearance of that uh area of that corner um that is in need of uh of a little ref a little refreshing. Uh I guess the the old uh the old restaurant that was there had a very distinctive look to it. Um, and it
would be nice to have something that has a distinctive look in the 21st century. Uh, I recognize that west of 130, we're still in the 1700s and 1800s, but east of 130, we can we can come to the 21st century. Um, purpose M is to encourage
coordination of the various public and private procedures of vecting land development with a view towards lessening the cost of that development, the efficient use of the land. The applicant is balancing all the various agencies, most importantly DOT, um to uh provide for an attractive site with good
and safe access and hopefully be able to provide some improvements uh to the halfacre road intersection on Route 130. Again, you heard about level of service A's and B's along 130 and E's and Fs along Halfacre Road. And as you said,
you need to give the DOT a reason to uh to look at it and provide relief for the local community. And and fortunately, I have an applicant here that's going to go make that case uh to be able to provide that uh benefit for the community. And we are proposing a redevelopment rather than a greenfield site, lessening the cost and building
efficiently. In terms of our waivers, um we require uh two waivers that relate to our parking bays along the road. Uh your ordinance limits them to 60 feet in depth. Uh and we are about 67 feet in depth. Our drive aisles are wider than
24 feet. They're about 31 ft. Um so again, that that parking bay gets a little wider. Again, it's necessary because mainly because the fuel truck that needs to circulate through the site. Um and uh again, we provide for some additional uh area there. We think
with the substantial landscaping that's up in our front yard uh that that additional seven uh feet is a reasonable request. Uh strict requirement is a little impractical again given the users on our site. Um we're requesting a waiver from providing
the pedestrian walkways of different materials between the buildings. Um I think we might have said >> I think we agreed we agree we'll we'll work with them to do that one. So pick that one out. Uh I thought it was originally we didn't provide them at all and then I looked at the plans and it kind of got lost in the setback line but
um we have a walkway that goes between the two buildings. We'll just have to enhance it to make sure we comply with that standard. And then uh we talked about the hor horizontal delineation on all building facades um and uh again providing uh for additional spans glass
uh to the north and uh we'll work with the east facade recognizing that is kind of the uh business and utility end of the site of the quick check building. It's a little tougher to to dress that up but uh again we have brick on all four sides. We do dress the building on all four sides just we're not quite as
pretty on the on the east facade as we could be. And we have parking areas that again 10 feet from the building and the quick check is six as I talked about it uh in the variance section is also uh here in the waiver section. Each of these exceptions as requested is consistent with the use and the
operation that's necessary for quick check uh and the range of users who are going to use the site. We think their requests are reasonable. They're within your site plan perview. and sure compliance is somewhat impractical uh for quick check in its specific operations. Uh in terms of our negative
criteria, um there's several. First is that we're not going to have any substantial detriments public good. The development is largely compliant with our bulk regulations. 17 bulk variances notwithstanding. Again, most of them relate to signage. Um and our our bulk
variances in terms of setbacks, we're exceeding them. We're providing more of a front yard setback again to provide for that additional landscaping was talked about with the TRC. Um that substantial setback uh and the presence of power lines and landscaping in
vanding area mitigates any possible viewshed impacts from any of the added height on the buildings. Again, we're 100 feet back with each of the building 100 plus feet back. uh having an additional uh two feet or two and a half feet or six feet in the back uh isn't
going to be substantial uh on the public good. The proposed use is compatible with the uses in the immediate area. Um and the super byite has has been a member of the community for some time now. The development is set back from each roadway and landscape so not be an
isore and impact the surrounding neighborhood. develop will provide the community with valuable resource uh with gas on that corner to be able to uh enhance economic development and provide for a substantial retail uh addition uh
to uh to the property as well. Again, enhancing economic development in the area. Um your second prong there is you're not going to impair the intent purpose of the plan. So, uh, the highway commercial zone provides for each of the these uses
that have traditionally been located in these types of areas. The regulations just do not anticipate, uh, the practical signage needs of a modern quick check. Uh, the requested sign, the proposed height is appropriate for the use, uh, in the 8.9 acre site, uh, with the substantial setbacks that are
provided. Uh, the requested signage is modest, consistent with the existing locations, and appropriate to provide information uh, to the traveling public. Um there was a there was actually discussion in your master plan about the Valero 7-Eleven
uh redevelopment that was done down at the Circle um which just barely squeaks into Cranberry. I guess it's like the first pro first or the last property depending which way you're going. Uh and that sign is certainly up there at 20 ft. Uh, I guess that was a pre-existing one or or whatever it was, but um that
sign is is certainly uh full size as they say for uh for a gas station convenience store. Um we think the bulk variances represent a better plan alternative and uh they are largely as we say interior to the site. They're not uh imposing on our neighbors
in any way. They're really predominantly signage uh signage related. In terms of the master plan, your 2019 re-examination continued the implementation of your 2010 master plan recognizing the highway commercial district uh in that in the 2010 master plan. It also reinforced the goals and
objectives uh in your 2010 master plan again in 2019 um in terms of land use revitalization of the Route 130 Carter, especially on the east side. uh to capitalize on economic opportunities from pass by traffic on Route 130 and to
encourage redevelopment along Route 130 to strengthen its viability and generate additional tax revenue. Your master plan uh very much and and actually I like that it's very honest with itself. It it recognizes that that west of 130 is
yeah, we're in the 1800s and east of 130, yeah, you're going to pay for it. and and that's how the how it's set up is that our tax base and our ratables are going to be on the east side and the west side is we're going to look to to stick with 1800s. So, um we're on the
east side and I think we're uh ready, willing, and able to bring this into the 21st century on this predominant corner. hopefully provide some uh improvements at that intersection and provide for uh the continuation of a longtime township uh business and uh to welcome quick
check-in uh with with all of its intended benefits. So again, I believe the board has the ability to make the requisite findings. I'll questions. >> I I don't actually have any questions for Mr. Tahin. He or Tyina he um there
as he categorized it and correctly there are three types of variances they need. They need a D3 for the conditional use that don't meet all the standards they need. Apparently there's some disagreement but the D6 with for the height and then they need C variances. I
would say the wide majority of the variances even as they relate to the the D3 are related to signage. And so I think it's really, you know, uh, Mr. Sina and, uh, earlier witnesses put testimony on it, but it's really up for
the board to sort of make the, uh, determination if the proposed signage is appropriate. You know, is it in proportion to the site? Is, is it going to have any negative impacts on Route 130 or any other surrounding neighbors? Um, or, you know, will there be any
detriments to the surrounding properties? and you know or is it as I said in proportion does it aesthetically make sense here um given the use and given circumstances so I think that's yeah >> question
uh I had this for the pylon signs I guess with the gas prices on each entrance uh so we the number that the the the 60 square foot number that we have is Is that for just general signage or for for
fuel station signage? >> Fuel station signage. >> It's specifically for fuel station. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Interesting. Okay. >> And all right. And I understand the uh internally lit
argument that you mentioned that that's uh makes sense. Um okay. And I do agree that the the site itself is like that area it's been referred to as is as as the gateway to the village. It
it's a um you know an an area for for retail and commercial use that doesn't quite fit in the village. This is the right place for it. This development certainly meets that. So so it's a good area for this and uh I'm in favor of it.
I'm just a little concerned about the amount of signage that the the lighting issue you mentioned with the canopy lighting is is an issue that I have. So, >> they did say they would reduce it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Right. >> Is is there any specific signage they
>> Yeah. I don't you know it it's >> um Do you I'm trying to remember what we did for 7-Eleven. um a couple years ago. I don't think you were here then. >> No, I was >> because it was the same problem, but I don't remember what the result was. >> Right.
>> Yeah. >> You know, um what what is the dimensions of the sign? Actually, I know it's 120 square feet, but >> hey, you want who has those? >> We'll bring our engineer back up. while he's looking. The one thing I neglected to mention at the beginning I didn't
refer to there's a cranberry volunteer fire company report dated July 31st >> um that we have and we're going to we agree to comply with. I didn't mention that at the beginning so just wanted to get the record clear. >> Aaron will come up and describe those freestanding signs. And don't forget there's there's the height of the
freestanding signs and then the size of the sign itself. So there's two areas to look at. they're getting all the other houses on the other side, right? None of this drainage would lifting up the elevation. That's their septics or anything like that.
>> Nothing will run to the Nothing's going to run to the west. No, you got the highway in between which is 10 and something feet. >> The other question is how the back burn. Yeah, >> that's the item that you already
>> Well, it's it's four feet above um existing grade. >> Okay. And then just slopes down to the to what's what's down there. >> Yeah. But but none of the drainage is going that way. It's all going to be going into inlets into the bio basins then running out to that pond.
>> So there's no it's you're concerned with the houses that are down a half acre. No water's getting there. You know, they're going to have some disruption for traffic and for construction activity and there'll be complaints, but not for drainage.
>> Oh, okay. Did he leave? >> So, the the question was related to the freestanding sign which is on sheet C, what is it? >> C27, which is the last page of the site plan. The freestanding pylon sign is again at the two driveways closest to
the intersection. It's 20 feet in height and it's 12 feet wide as far as the the outer brick column. And then the messaging panel for the quick check logo, the green as well as the LED pricing for the the fuel prices that's
12 feet in height and then 10 feet wide. So that totals to 120 >> square feet. And I think the the the testimony that we offered before again is you know they limit it to the LED pricing for the for the regular and then also the diesel the two required um you
know prices to be shown. The quick check messaging as far as like the the branded logos approximately was say I would say is about that 60 square feet. It's about half of the sign. So obviously recognizing that route 30 route 130 is
is at speed. There's also divided highway situation where people need to recognize the driveways and be able to turn onto the site. That's kind of the genesis for the for the sizing. It's it's a mix between pricing and also identifying the fact that it is indeed a quick check and then having the time to
properly find yourself into the right lanes into to turn onto the site. >> Yeah. Yeah. Right. Okay. All right. All right. So we And then the other issue was the lighting under the canopy. We would agree to reduce that.
Um I don't know what is there. >> Sure. The I think the suggestion that was offered was to reduce it from about 40 for candles down to 30 to 35 for candles of which we would certainly be happy to take a look and reduce it to to that to that metric. >> Okay. Great. And there was a a
suggestion of uh the uh color temperature >> color temperature of 3,00 Kelvin which is a little bit warmer of a light. It'll be a softer warmer tone. We can agree to to do that as well. >> All right. And uh yeah, I think that's all I had
question. I have a question and it was brought up in the planner's testimony, but it might be appropriate for the engineer or even the architect, but it's shown on this plan. That's why I'm bringing it up now. The ballards around the convenience
store um are put there uh so that there wouldn't be curve there. It's flush. And that makes sense. Convenience stores, people are doing a lot of things. There's a lot of coming and going. So, there's convenience stores use the ballards, but there will be a lot of them around the building. And the board
might want to get an idea of what they look like, the spacing of them, just to uh get a feel for are they going to be green for the color of the building? Are they going to be bright yellow? Are they going to be black? Uh this is something that maybe the board would want to know before many of these come and be placed
and you find out they're orange or >> I know I've seen them. I I think they're green, right? >> They are green in color. Typical spacing is six foot uh on center just to allow for you know pedestrians to walk through without for while blocking vehicles from from shooting past.
>> And I agree that you know you don't want to put curb stops. The curb tends to be a tripping hazard. This is a known fact for convenience stores. People are holding their coffee or carrying their whatever. And >> right >> from a structural s standpoint the ballards are going to be steel right
with green covers. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Yeah. Pour concrete in it. Steel steel. >> Just trying to be an engineer about it. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, why don't we open it for any public questions? Anyone for the public? Want to say anything?
>> Nope. Okay. recommendations about the sign or that's >> well you can request you know I mean is there any way you can come down on the the size of any of the signs particularly the ones on the street I think >> well we my only I mean
a 20 foot high sign I mean I I understand the square footage um by the way is this this is internally lit except for LED plus internal. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But but uh the gas price so that's
kind of >> we're asking quick check height. >> Yeah. The height is Yeah, we make all the work. Just show it. >> Yeah, we've left it alone. Yeah,
>> they're nothing compared to what they're >> say. So we get 20 >> maybe 16 15 >> right. So we we talked to quick check rep. What what did I don't know what he said. >> Yes. The agreement would be to lower the
pylon sign to 15 ft complying with the ordinances. >> What's that? >> Um, >> what do you mean it's going to block a view? You're saying >> 15t will be ceiling height.
I have a question. I've seen some gas stations uh will have one freestanding and one monument that basically shows the same materials, but the monument is obviously much lower to the ground. Is that possible to change one of these freestanding to a monument? I mean, I
understand probably maybe not on Route 130, but perhaps on Happy >> Meaning Meaning there's no uh it's just >> it's much lower ground. Yeah, because it's not right. >> I mean, I don't know if it's four feet,
but it would it would Yeah, it would be it would be it would be it wouldn't be on pylons, >> right? Yeah. I think in this instance, the given the fact that we did the the twoft burming all the way around the front of the site, the the the the selection was to go with a sign that was
actually lifted. Otherwise, the burming would actually with this landscaping on top would actually block much of the monument signage. Um, but that's kind of the the detention the the design thought was to have the burming down low, have it very aesthetic, have it kind of
screen the entire perimeter of the building, but obviously sight identification is is paramount for for a commercial facility like this. >> And I have to correct the record on the fire letter. Um, we were going to comply with everything except he does reference
the fact that the building should be sprinkled sprinklers. Um, if it's required by the building code, we will. If it's not, we won't because they really a building in this size typically is not sprinkling. So, whatever the building code does requires, we'll do for sprinklers. But otherwise, the
letter is fully we could address everything else. Okay. >> Um, any other requests, comments? >> So, we'll defer to the board on the signage. We'll work with you however you think is reasonable. Um but we think
otherwise we've met our burdens and um great use for the corner. It's exactly what the town had contemplated. The if the just by way of perspective um if we changed all the signs and moved the the facades of the building down a little
bit, we'd be at the planning board and not here. Um but we're here because we think this is a far better design and that's why we are here for that relief. Uh Edwin, I have a question about the uh unassigned tenant space.
>> The landlord can only lease that to zoned uses listed in the zone >> and if they are not in the zone, they have to come back to us to ask for approval. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> So, Mr. Mr. Chairman, we have on the table a an offer to to make both signs 15 ft max >> if that's what the board >> but the same sign. So, it's still 120 square feet. >> Well, I think it's an improvement. I'd
like personally a smaller sign. Uh but what can we do with the size of the sign itself? Yeah, I mean to to do to to get the sign smaller, we would either eliminate we can't get rid of the number the prices because that's mandated. So, we'd have to get rid of quick check
completely. And I'm not sure that's >> I guess we can make it we can make it a little smaller. >> I mean, the logo is about half half the >> half. Yeah, I think it's quite proportional given that I think maybe you start to narrow things up. I think
that the quick check and the text might start to fall to look small, but if it's >> I mean remember you have the big giant illuminated signs on the building. >> Sure. Yeah. >> I mean, yeah, it's obvious it's a quick check. >> So,
>> is there any way to consolidate the the freestanding signs to one on the corner? Don't say no, John. You're the planner. >> Yeah. Could we take a fivem minute break so we could talk to quick check about >> this signage? Sure. Go ahead. >> It's hard to go.
>> Yeah. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. I feel I feel If they wanted an approval, they should >> they should do it. >> They should just do it. >> Yeah. >> First of all, everybody uses GPS
nowadays anyway. It's like you put in gas station >> and it's there and you don't have to worry about where the signage is. >> Yeah. The definition of pass is you typically pass by it. You don't need to see all that because you're passing by basis. >> Yeah. 76% of their customers would be just
pass traffic. >> Well, I'm going to use the men's room and maybe uh sneak sneak on them and see if I can figure out what they're saying. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Oh god. >> Do you have problems with the size? >> Oh, sorry.
Yeah. >> Russian day. There is that I'm just saw I don't care about them. >> All right. better. >> So, we had an opportunity to speak to quick check and I'm going to turn it
over to our engineer. >> Sure. I think I think the um the revised smaller sign would actually be best given the the the ratios of height relative to the width. I think the most aesthetic while being a smaller option would be actually an 80 square foot
sign. So the overall message panel will be approximately 10 feet I'm sorry 8t wide and then the the messaging board of it would be about approximately 10 ft tall but the overall height we we feel that the 20 foot height actually would be the
best as far as visibility is concerned but the size would be d reduced from 120 square feet down to 80 square feet. >> Okay. >> And the ordinance says 60 right? >> Correct. >> Right. Right.
That's That's not >> the one in South Brunswick. A quick check down the road. Would you know off hand what size it is? I got the picture, but I was like >> they have four prices on it. So I don't know. You have two on this one. >> We have two.
Yeah, actually it's just >> all right. >> But 80 80 square feet. That sounds a little more reasonable. Okay. Um board um they're proposing an 80 square foot
sign uh 20 ft high. It's still a pylon sign. Does that sound okay? >> Two of them, right? >> Two of them. >> Yeah. And we need we need the two because the two intersections. >> All right. >> That's what they're asking for. Um
>> but 80 80 instead of 120 >> smaller side dimensionally smaller 20 foot height. We feel that better identification from the roadways safer >> the outside dimensions and the messaging board. The total message is 80 square feet. Correct.
>> Okay. Sound good? All right, we'll take that. All right. Should we vote? Motion to approve. >> Want to make clear >> with all this stuff.
>> I think >> well I mean all this stuff. >> Uliminary >> final site plan approval. the two use variances, all the bulk variances, mostly the signed stuff and the waiverss
subject to all the conditions that the applicant has indicated on the record that he accepts. And we'll write it all up. >> That's your motion. >> Okay. So, you made a motion. We have a second. Uh second the motion for quick
check. >> All right. Roll call for ZBA 389-24. Mr. Bonavalanta. >> Yes. >> Miss Gens. >> Yes. >> Mr. Cathari. >> Yes. >> Miss Parker. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schwarz. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gordon?
>> Yes. >> And Mr. Diamond? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Motion pass. >> Thank you. >> Motion to adjurnn if you want. >> Oh. Motion to adjurnn. Anyone? Please. >> All those in favor say I.
>> Thank you.