The most pressing topic of the meeting was the application by Costco, which sought to add three additional fuel dispensers, removing a raised curved island, and widen a drive aisle to provide a two-way left turn lane. The proposed expansion also included ADA upgrades, such as adding and relocating ADA parking spaces and constructing a new sidewalk connecting to the Ring Road near a bus stop. These changes were aimed at improving accessibility and operational efficiency.

John Marmora, representing Costco, explained that the proposed changes were necessary due to significant traffic backups at the gas station, particularly during peak times like Saturdays. The congestion was exacerbated by the sharp right turn required when entering the gas station, compounded by the presence of a utility structure that hindered efficient traffic flow. Marmora emphasized that the primary motivation for the expansion was to enhance efficiency and reduce waiting times for members, noting that around 30% of gas customers do not enter the warehouse for shopping due to prolonged wait times.

Colleen Mayer, the Planning Administrator, raised concerns about the proposed changes, emphasizing the need for a traffic study six months post-implementation to evaluate traffic conditions. This study would determine if the new plan effectively mitigated traffic flow issues or if additional measures, such as hiring more attendants, were necessary. A board member insisted on having at least three extra attendants present at all times due to the anticipated increase in traffic from the additional pumps.

Traffic engineer Matthew Kunsman provided insights on the projected increase in vehicular traffic, stating that the expansion would increase capacity from approximately 40 vehicles to 48 vehicles before causing backups on the main drive aisle. A stochastic queuing analysis was conducted, projecting a maximum of 42 vehicles at peak times, even with the anticipated increase in service efficiency. Kunsman emphasized that operational efficiencies and a better layout would help accommodate the new traffic flow without significant adverse effects.

The board also discussed potential conflicts of interest among members related to membership affiliations with Costco. It was noted that ensuring no conflicts were present was prudent before proceeding with the discussions.

Another topic was the approval of variances related to parking and traffic flow. The board debated the implications of adding more gas pumps and the potential increase in vehicular traffic. Concerns were raised about the current traffic situation, specifically cars backing up on Ring Road. A proposal emerged to implement a traffic study six months post-implementation of the new plan, with a stipulation that if significant traffic issues persisted, the applicant would be required to either hire more personnel or devise an acceptable plan to mitigate traffic flow. This suggestion garnered mixed responses, with some board members supporting it and others advocating for immediate action in the form of hiring additional gas attendants.

The board ultimately moved toward a vote on the D3 variances, including the condition for a traffic study and the applicant’s obligation to provide a remediation plan if traffic issues persisted. The motion for this conditional approval garnered support from several members, highlighting a willingness to give the new plan a chance to resolve existing traffic issues while ensuring accountability if problems persisted.

Other cases discussed included a proposal from Joseph Snado for a second-floor addition to his residence and the conversion of a detached garage into a pool house. The board noted that the applicant needed to clarify whether the garage had already been converted and whether any work had been done without permits. The application was carried to September 19th to allow for a more comprehensive examination and ensuring that all necessary reports could be prepared.

The board also reviewed an application from Samantha Martinez, who proposed constructing a retaining wall topped with a six-foot fence on Bound Road. The project necessitated variances for changes in grade and combined height exceeding the allowed six feet. The engineer for the project explained the need for the retaining wall to stabilize the property due to significant grading changes and potential soil erosion. The board approved the positive resolution concerning the variances requested, after discussing potential impacts on neighboring properties.

Additionally, the board approved architectural plans and variances for residential properties, including the case of Gerilyn Moff, who sought approval for a second-floor side addition to a remodeled home. The board sought clarification regarding the size of the new laundry room and the interior layout plans. Ultimately, the board appeared satisfied with the explanation that the interior plans were compliant, and the condition regarding the garage was acknowledged.