The regular meeting of the Cranbury Township Planning Board was held at the Cranbury Town Hall Municipal Building, Old School Building, 23-A North Main Street, Cranbury, New Jersey, Middlesex County, on April 26, 2007 at 7:30 p.m




Thomas Harvey, Chairperson, of the Cranbury Township Planning Board, called the meeting to order and acted as the Chairman thereof.




            Pursuant with the Sunshine Law adequate notice in accordance with the open public meeting act was provided of this meeting’s date, time, place and agenda was mailed to the news media, posted on the Township bulletin board, mailed to those requesting personal notice, and filed with the municipal clerk.




Michael Dulin, James, Golubieski, Thomas Panconi, Eugene Speer, Richard Stannard, Dietrich Wahlers, Joan Weidner, Thomas Harvey




Carolyn Cummings, Court Reporter; Josette C. Kratz, Secretary; Cathleen Marcelli, P.E.; Joseph Stonaker, Esquire; Richard Preiss, P.P.




PB 121-06       Xenogen Biosciences

                        Block 1, Lot 5 & 7.03

                        5 Cedar Brook Drive

                        Minor Site Plan to Install Liquid Nitrogen Tank


Mr. Golubieski motioned for the approval of the resolution.  Mr. Speer seconded the motion.




              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Panconi, Mr. Speer, Mr. Stannard,  Mr. Wahlers, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Kehrt





PB 091-05       Jen-Dar Realty, LLC

Block 2, Lot 10

1246 South River Road

Preliminary and Final Site Plan


Mr. Golubieski motioned for the approval of the resolution.  Mr. Speer seconded the motion.




              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Panconi, Mr. Speer, Mr. Stannard,  Mr. Wahlers, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Kehrt







PB 099-05       Matthew & Patricia Long

Block 21, Lot 3, Zone A-100

39 Cranbury Neck Road

Minor Subdivision



REPRESENTATIVES:             Robert Casey, Esquire

                                                Renee Anstiss, Landscape Architect

                                                Matthew Long, Owner/Applicant


All professionals for Township and Applicant continued to be sworn.


Ms. Marcelli said that she had spoke with the applicant’s engineer, Julia Algero, and asked if they were going to submit a revised engineering plan.  Her understanding after speaking with Ms. Algero was they were first going to submit the Harris Plans showing the exact lines of subdivision and wait to get the approval of the board and then submit an engineering plan.  She had not received nor submitted a review on the engineering.


Mr. Harvey said that this was an earlier plan.  Mr. Stonaker asked if this was the grading plan, he had the grading plan with the last revision date as February 22, 2007.  Those were the plans for the record.


EXHIBIT A-8   Grading Plan of February 22, 2007


Ms. Marcelli said there was a letter from New Jersey DEP, dated April 19, 2007.  Stream encroachment jurisdictional and does not indicate whether a storm water permit is required.  It is very close on the calculations, which would trigger compliance with the Township requirements for storm water management.  It would not necessarily require DEP requirements for stream encroachment.


Ms. Marcelli disagreed with the second page of the report indicating it is not applicable.  She felt it was an issue that could be conditioned if the application is approved she felt they would still need to comply with storm water management plans.  She calculated the area of disturbance, based on the older plans.


Mr. Casey said that he had spoke with the engineer and faxed the letter from NJDEP.  He understood her position.  There maybe ways to treat some of the potential areas.


There was a garage on the front lot in the rear yard lot line.  They asked for a rear yard setback variance for the garage on the front lot and ask for a rear yard setback variance for the shed that was closest to the peony garden and the side yard in addition to those already mentioned in reports.


The Fire Company commented on plantings on the sides of the driveway be planted in a manner so as they grow they do not influence the driveway.


EXHIBIT A-9   Letter from Fire Company


Ms. Marcelli wanted, prior to release of a building permit for a new structure, for the applicant to submit a complete detailed grading plan which then they could verify the area of disturbances and whether they would comply with the storm water management plan.  This is not a hardship that would be imposed on the property owner; it would be providing some type of drywell to take the runoff from the structure. She had not seen the information in order to comment on it.


Mr. Preiss said that they had changed the building envelope on Lot B.  Clarification on the access easement needed.


Mr. Speer mentioned that all the plans should be updated.


Mr. Dulin commented that he did visit the property after the last meeting.  After looking at it, seeing the location of the two properties was very valuable.  The way the property is configured Lot A embodies some of the things we find important to Cranbury.  As a stand-alone unit was attractive and added to the town.  When combined with Lot B and look as one actually takes away and think that Lot A should be something we try to persevere all by itself.  Lot B as a stand-alone has value as its self with what the Longs propose.  Property B is pretty much contained with trees and shrubs all the way around it.  Even at the property line a new building really won’t obstruct.  He liked the idea.


Mr. Wahlers motioned for the approval of the subdivision with variances conditioned upon the Township Engineers reports, standard conditions always sited, and outside agency approvals.  Mr. Stannard seconded the motion.


Mr. Golubieski said that he wasn’t convinced that the applicant needed the subdivision to carry out his plan but he mentioned that the applicant was a great steward of the property and they will do a terrific job.





              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, , Mr. Panconi, Mr. Stannard,  Mr. Wahlers, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Speer

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Kehrt






PB 084-05       Gentle Healing Wellness Spa

Block 5, Lot 6.01

1274 South River Road

Final Site Plan



PB 026-07(am)            Staybridge/Gentle Healing

                        Block 5, Lot 16.02

                        1272 South Rive Road

                        Final Site Plan for Detention/Drainage with conjunction to PB 084-05



REPRESENTATIVES:             Michael Balint, Esquire

                                                Donda Sternberg, Owner/Applicant

                                                Robert Korkuch, Architect




Mr. Stonaker suggested presenting the applications together but would vote on them separately with separate resolutions.


All witnesses and Township professionals were sworn.  Mr. Stonaker reviewed the affidavit of service and publication and conferred jurisdiction on the board to hear the matter. 


The applicant was seeking final approval for the training facility and detention basin. 


EXHIBIT A-1   Rendered Site Plan, 4/26/07


There is a detention basin that wrapped around this property and storm water management for addition of this property have been incorporated in the design of the basin and minor modifications are proposed.  Extension of the basin, making it a little bit larger.


Public sewer would service property and that permitting process is already underway.


EXHIBIT A-2   Amended Site Plan for Detention Basin Modification of Staybridge Suites, Act Eng., 11/28/06


They are disturbing a small portion of the site. They have submitted as-builts of the basin and were the basis of the new design. 


Since all the square footage will be utilized there was a need for all of the parking area.  The geometry and layout is the same as previously presented but it would not be phased and all be constructed.  Applicant request that all parking be stoned.


Ms. Marcelli mentioned there was a note on the plan about fill material, she wondered if it was a carry over from the old Staybridge plan but that if the applicant proposed to bring any import or export of fill material a waiver must be requested.


There would be fill taken off the site but they do not know the volume.  Mr. Harvey suggested that they calculate a volume, possible higher then expected.


They accepted the conditions of Ms. Marcelli’s report.


The back parking lot, not visible from the road, would be for students attending classes.  There were 40 parking spaces provided proposed gravel, stone.


Ms. Marcelli recommended paving the parking lot.


Classes have generally eight to ten students, eventually Ms. Sternburg indicated she would like to get classes up to twenty students, both day and evening classes.


Mr. Harvey said, assuming we don’t modify the original resolution the 40 spaces in the back would be paved and the 16 of the south side would be paved and 8 would remain gravel.  He indicated that he had an enormous respect for the Board’s professionals but this in an issue where he is on the other side.


Mr. Speer said that he could agree with the comment but the time we should have made those comments was at the time the ordinance was approved.  There has been no strong reason given on why we should ignore this ordinance.   If that is what the board wants to do then we should amend the ordinance.


Mr. Golubieski said he felt it was an important ordinance but believed this was an historic structure and we lose something because of the macadam. It was also the type of clientele.


Mr. Speer said that he felt board members made the case that the applicant didn’t and that the motion should clearly state some of these findings of fact.


Mr. Stannard asked if they could state in the resolution specifically that no one should take any precedent value and taken on the peculiar facts of this property.


Ms. Marcelli said that Ms. Sternberg does do a great job up keeping her property and a gravel driveway is not inexpensive to maintain.  A gravel parking lot is more expensive to maintain. She has done a wonderful job to keep the site visually attractive and have no doubt that she would do the same for the back gravel lot.  Her concern was the precedent and the Township has no property maintenance code and this property was sold to another owner who was not as diligent as she may be in maintaining the gravel area it become an unsightly issues.  But she commended her on the pride and care she takes on her property.


Fill would be 3,000 CY.


Mr. Golubieski motioned to approve the amended major site plan preliminary and final with the following conditions: 


1.                   Requesting to amend the requirement of the resolution to pave the parking spaces to the rear of the property.  The original would remain gravel throughout.

2.                   Subject to the conditions in the engineers report.

3.                   Any outside agency approval.


Ms. Weidner seconded the motion.





              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Panconi, Mr. Stannard,  Mr. Wahlers, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      Mr. Speer

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Kehrt




Mr. Golubieski motioned for the approval final amended major site plan that would allow for modification the storm water detention basin to accommodate the post storm water run off of the adjacent site with a waiver for the removal of fill up to 3,000 CY.  Subject to the conditions that the Township Engineer will review and approve the route and any other conditions in her reports.


Ms. Weidner seconded the motion.




              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Panconi, Mr. Speer, Mr. Stannard,  Mr. Wahlers, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Kehrt




Mr. Harvey announced that Mr. Stonaker was leaving and hopes to leave by the end of June.  Mr. Stonaker mentioned the options the board would have to select another attorney.






There being no further business, on motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was thereupon adjourned.




                        I, Undersigned, do hereby certify;


                        That I am duly elected and acting secretary of the Cranbury Township Planning Board and, that the foregoing minutes of the Planning Board, held on April 26, 2007, consisting of 7 pages, constitute a true and correct copy of the minutes of the said meeting.


                        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name of said Planning Board this August 2, 2007.




                                                                        Josette C. Kratz, Secretary