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 January 19, 2006 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 according to 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.




Mr. Dreyling, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Kehrt, Mr. Stannard, Mr. Stout, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey




Ms. Carolyn Cummings, Court Reporter; Josette C. Kratz, Administrative Officer/Planning Secretary; Cathleen Marcelli, Township Engineer, Joseph Stonaker, Esquire, Planning Board Attorney; Richard Preiss, Township Planner; Andrew Feranda, Traffic Consultant



ORDINANCE NO.  01-06-02

An Ordinance of the Township of Cranbury Repealing in its Entirety Chapter 93 if the Code of the Township of Cranbury and Replacing it in Part with New Chapter 21 in Part I of the Code, Entitled “Historic Preservation Commission,” and New Chapter 93 In Part I of the Code, Entitled “Historic Preservation.”



Mr. Harvey asked if he understood that if one have wood on their house and it is irreparable that one have to replace it with wood.  Ms. Waterbury said that it depends on where it was located.  She thought it was only on the siding that was actually visible from the street.  Mr. Harvey said that if he looked under “exterior materials” page 33, has that been changed.  Ms. Waterbury said that was an interesting question because it says on the next page, under “synthetic siding C-3” were it could be used to resurface existing historic structures only if the area is not visible from a public street.  You are right that is creating an ambiguity.  And there are certain conditions that have to meet before it has to be approved.  Mr. Harvey said so it has to be wood but it can be synthetic if it is replacing synthetic only of you can’t see it or something. Ms. Waterbury said that was really unclear, you could certainly read C-3 to say that you can resurface an existing historic building using synthetic material.  The Board asked for Ms. Waterbury to clarify or correct as necessary at HPAC.


James Golubieski motioned for the referral back to HPAC, Sub-Committee or Township Committee as necessary subject to the clarification in the inconsistencies regarding the siding and shutter material and that the Planning Board does not require seeing it again.  Motion was seconded by Allen Kehrt.




                  AYES:      Mr. Dreyling, Mr. Golubieski, Mr. Kehrt, Mr. Stannard, Mr. Stout, Ms. Weidner, Mr. Harvey

                  NAYS:      None

           ABSTAIN:      None

             ABSENT:      Mr. Speer













PB 097-05       Comsleep Properties, LLC (a.k.a. South River Park Trammell Crow)

                        Block 6, Lots 5, 6 & 10, RO-LI Zone

                        South River Road

                        Amended Preliminary & Final Sited Plan, Bulk Variance


REPRESENTATIVES:    Michael Rowland, Esquire

                                          Edwin Caballero, P.E., Schoor DePalma

                                          Karl Pehnke, P.E. Schoor DePalma

                                          Mukhul Bhatt, Applicant

                                          Jerry Young, AIA, Young Wright Architectural

                                          Karen Neighbor, Planner


Mr. Rowland announced that since the last meeting the property had changed ownership to  Samandar LLC.




Memo from Richard Preiss, Phillips Preiss Shapiro Associates, Inc., dated January 18, 2006

Review letter from Andrew Feranda, Shropshire Associates LLC, dated January 16, 2006

Memo from Peter Sibley, Environmental Commission, dated January 18, 2006

Review Letter from Robert Allen, Cranbury Volunteer Fire Company No. 1, dated January 19, 2006

Review Report from Cathleen Marcelli, Hatch Mott McDonald, dated January 19, 2006

Review letter from Scott Levy, Scott Alan Design, dated January 19, 2006


Mr. Stonaker announced that the board had jurisdiction to hear the matter.


Applicants Representatives and the Township Professionals were sworn.


EXHIBIT A-1 Existing Conditions Plan, Sheet 2, prepared by Schoor DePalma

EXHIBIT A-2            Colorized Site Layout & Dimension Plan, prepared by Schoor DePalma

EXHIBIT A-3            Grading & Utility Plan, prepared by Schoor DePalma

EXHIBIT A-4 Architectural Rendering, prepared by Young Wright Architectural


The applicant was before the board for a preliminary & final site plan application on Lot 5 & 6, Block 6.  Total area 14.25 ac.  The proposed Comfort Suites Hotel has a building area of 45,450 SF with 76 guest rooms.  The FAR 0.07, entire GDP would be 0.238%.  Building height 60.5 ft. Maximum impervious coverage 17.6%, entire GDP would be 49.75%.  Numbers of parking spaces allowable are 91 for guest rooms, 23 for meeting area, 23 for coffee shop but they are proposing 142 spaces on-site.  Out of the 142 spaces, 5 are handicapped as required.  The amount of parking spaces are planned to be significantly reduced after the applicant’s presentation.


Mr. Feranda said that the calculations was done at 1 per 40 SF of meeting spaces where actually per ordinance it is 1 per 100 SF so it should actually be 9 spaces.


Mr. Stonaker wanted to see a plan with all these driveways describing it.  He also pointed out to the applicant that there was a growth share ordinance.


Mr. Stout asked if the applicant would consider a conservation easement.  Mr. Rowland said that there was a plan still in the works for further developer.  It is in the mind of the property owner to develop a chain restaurant, banquet facility or similar development.  The property was already severely restraint by wetlands.


Mr. Stonaker repeated that he wanted a final submission of all the plans.


The board wanted to see if there was another location for the freestanding sign due to closeness to the road.


The Board wanted to see a reduction in the wall sign with no illumination internally.  There was question on whether they even wanted it externally illuminated.  They even wanted the applicant to look at the exterior colors also.


Mr. Stonaker a more in depth landscaping review.  Work on conservation easement.


Application would be carried until February 2, 2006.













There being no further business, on motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was thereupon adjourned at 10:20 p.m.




                        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 January 16, 2006, consisting of 5 pages, constitute a true and correct copy of the minutes of the said meeting.


                        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name of said Planning Board this April 6, 2006.




                                                                        Josette C. Kratz, Secretary