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 October 18, 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 Meetings 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, Allen Kehrt, Thomas Panconi, Eugene Speer, Richard Stannard, Dietrich Wahlers, Joan Weidner, Thomas B. Harvey




Josette, C. Kratz, Planning Board Secretary/Land Use Administrator; Valerie Kimson, Esquire, Planning Board Attorney; Richard Preiss, Township Planner; Andrew A. Feranda, Traffic Consultant; Cathleen Marcelli, P.E.




PB 137-07 Teddy Nikitiades – Teddy’s Luncheonette, Block 23, Lot 52, 49 North Main Street, Outdoor Dining


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




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

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      Mr. Kehrt

         ABSENT:      Mr. Panconi





PB 138-07 The Blue Rooster Bakery, Block 23, Lot 109, Zone VC, 17 North Main Street, Minor Site Plan w/Variance


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




              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Speer, Mr. Stannard, Mr. Wahlers, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      Mr. Kehrt, Ms. Weidner

         ABSENT:      Mr. Panconi





Proposed Amendment to the Land Use Plan of the Master Plan Involving the Open Space and Recreation Plan Element


Mr. Golubieski motioned for the approval of the resolution for the Master Plan amendment.  Mr. Wahlers seconded the motion.




              AYES:      Mr. Dulin, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Speer, Mr. Stannard, Mr. Wahlers, Mr. Harvey

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      Mr. Kehrt, Ms. Weidner

         ABSENT:      Mr. Panconi







Appointment of Valerie J. Kimson, Esquire of Purcell, Ries, Shannon, Mulcahy & O’Neill as the attorney for the Planning Board


Mr. Speer motioned for the approval of the resolution.  Ms. Weidner seconded the motion.




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

             NAYS:      None

       ABSTAIN:      None

         ABSENT:      Mr. Panconi









Informal discussion regarding introducing a Residential-Mt. Laurel III (R-MC

III) Zone; proposed zoning amendments to permit the construction of affordable housing on the "Route 130D” (Block 26, Lot 3) site as per the Township's Third Round affordable housing plan.




PB 005-01               Chinmaya Mission

                                Block 22, Lot 16 & 18

                                96 Cranbury Neck Road

                                Amended Preliminary & Final Site Plan w/Bulk Variances & Design Waivers



REPRESENTATIVES: Sivaprasad Pandyaran, Chinmaya

                                    Bruce Samuels, Esquire

                                    Peter Strong, P.E., Crest Engineering

                                    Jay Sankpal, Architect



Mr. Samuels explained that the approval they were seeking was for an amended preliminary and final major site plan approval.  In addition, there were “C” variances associated with the project and design waivers.


On the property was located a two and one half story single family dwelling, a block barn and another out building in the rear with a circular driveway with two curb cuts on Old Cranbury Neck Road.


In April 2002, the board adopted a resolution approving site plan for this property.  The approval was for a two-phase proposal.  Phase One they were to add onto the barn and Phase two was more extensive.  Phase One received preliminary and final site plan approval and Phase Two only received Preliminary at that time.  The barn will be demolished along with another out building.  A new building will be built in a relatively the same location.


EXHIBITS A-1             Color Site Plan site display of a color rendering of the landscaping plan

                                    By Richard P. Wiener of Crest Engineering Associates Inc.

                                    Dated October 18, 2007

EXHIBITS A-2             Landscape Plan with overlay, Sheet 5 of 9

                                    By Richard P. Wiener of Crest Engineering Associates Inc.

                                    Last rev date 8/3/07

EXHIBITS A-3             Handout “What was Chinmaya Misson?”

EXHIBITS A-4             Floor Plan by Jay Sankpal, Dwg. No A1.0

EXHIBITS A-5             Colorized elevations

EXHIBITS A-6             Artists color rendering


Mr. Strong gave his credentials to the board and was accepted as a professional in his field of expertise.


Mr. Strong described the property being 7.01 acres.  Currently occupied by a resident in the southwest corner of the site, a barn, and small office.  The property was accessed by a “U” shaped driveway and the area between the barn and surrounding the office in the southeast corner was currently paved. 


Site was serviced by septic systems and wells.  The barn and out building would be removed.  Circular driveway would be retained.  The improvements to the drive would be at the existing drive on the northwest corner.  A second lane would be added to allow for left and right turnouts.  The main parking area would be in the southeast corner, east of the proposed building.


Total parking would be 99 spaces.  They also have an obligation to provide 157 parking spaces, of which 58 would be banked between the two driveways.  The previous application had a similar arrangement, only more banked spaces. 


The driveway was intended to be one-way access in from the easterly side and out on the westerly side.  The easterly side was approximately 18 to 20 feet wide.  The exit loop driveway would be about 10 to 11 feet wide until where it widened out.  They were proposing to widen the frontage on Cranbury Neck Road according to the County standards of 26 feet from the centerline, providing curbing along that area.  In addition, they would be taking the existing trees along the road and moving them back onto the site since they would interfere with the widening.


The driveways were intended to be lighted in accordance with the Township ordinances. 


They were providing a shoebox type of light fixture with 135-watt bulbs, 16-foot highlights (originally approved at 12 feet) and were amenable to going back to the 12 foot height if requested by the board.  Lighting would be provided from dusk to some point in the evening.  They were not intended to be lit all night.


Ms. Marcelli thought until 10 p.m., when activities would not be going on.


Mr. Strong said the site splits in two.  The area that drains to the northwest, including some of the driveways and building, would be piped to a storm water detention facility in the front yard with a discharge pipe that goes toward the northwest.  He felt it complied with DEP regulations.


Mr. Wahlers pointed out that there was some water issues in the area of the site on Old Cranbury Neck Road.


Currently, there were underground tanks that were not being used and they would be removing them.


There were some areas of asphalt that needed to be replaced or patched.  Mr. Golubieski asked if stone instead of asphalt was okay.  Mr. Strong felt they did not have a problem with that.


Mr. Speer said that he did not object to the use of stone but there was an ordinance that required otherwise.  He felt that every time that they come to a parking lot and change it to blue face stone we should change the ordinance.  Mr. Harvey said that perhaps Mr. Preiss could consider an ordinance reflecting these changes.  Clearly, on a piece of land, which was in the middle of the A-100 zone this makes sense.


Mr. Feranda said that it was hard to delineate how many parking spaces will be used on stone.


Mr. Kehrt felt the foot-candles could be reduced.  Ms. Marcelli suggested removing some of the lights along the driveway.


Mr. Strong said the septic would be an at grade system.  The water table was deep in the area.


Mr. Samuels said they went through Ms. Marcelli’s report and he represented that they would address and implement all her suggestions.


Mr. Preiss said that his comments mostly related to the lighting and the fence. 


Mr. Golubieski said there was mention that one variance was excluded by the new plan.  He asked if there were any other changes.  Mr. Samuels said he would have to double check, but for now all of the variances were the same.


Mr. Feranda said that curb was on the inside radius and connecting, but not on the outside.  He asked if there was any reason they were not connecting.  The other side was less than five feet and the ordinance calls for more than five feet.  He did not necessarily mean to do a new driveway but the request was to bring the driveway in, away from the property line and add curb.


Mr. Harvey said he was not concerned with the five feet because it was next to a field.  Mr. Feranda said the curb would also protect the utility pole.


There was an active discussion regarding the curbing and deceleration/acceleration on Old Cranbury Neck Road.  This property would be the only property in the area with curbing. 


Mr. Feranda said that there was no way for vehicles to pass by an other vehicle and make a left turn movement.  Mr. Harvey said that he drove on the road all the time and had never seen a delay.


Testimony was given regarding the use of the facility and the holiday use.  Generally, unlike the Christian religion, people come in and out throughout the day in a staggered schedule rather than a set service time for an hour or so and then everyone leaves. 


There was no public comment when opened to the floor.


The application was carried until November 1, 2007 without any further notice.





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 October 18, 2007, consisting of 6 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 February 7, 2008.




                                                                        Josette C. Kratz, Secretary