The board’s agenda tackled the proposed redevelopment plan amendments for 1515 Route 10. The proposal featured a mixed-use development encompassing residential and retail components. Key amendments included changes to outdoor dining areas, signage, and the addition of a medical spa. The medical spa would provide aesthetic medical services, excluding emergency or illness care. The amendments also sought to refine permissible restaurant types, including fast casual eateries without drive-thrus. The board’s debate delved into the amendments’ community benefits, zoning impacts, and the need for future township ordinance changes to integrate new definitions for medical use and fast casual restaurants. The board voted in favor of recommending the proposed amendments to the council.

The second major point of deliberation was the preliminary and final major site plan for a warehouse on Jefferson Road. Sir Parip LLC’s application for the warehouse sparked extensive board analysis due to its proximity to a residential zone. Design modifications were considered to lessen the warehouse’s residential impact, such as relocating the building closer to Jefferson Road, which addressed the violation of a 150-foot buffer setback requirement. The board also evaluated the project’s traffic implications and engaged in a detailed examination of the proposed plan, considering the impact on the surrounding area and potential mitigating measures.

The applicant’s representative stressed the extensive adjustments made to mitigate the warehouse’s impact on the residential area. This included a shift in the building’s location, an acoustic sound barrier, and compliance with sound regulations. The board reviewed the revised plans, which outlined changes in building location, parking, circulation, and landscaping. The board’s acoustical engineer, Norman Dy from Russell Acoustics, provided a analysis of the sound impact, emphasizing the effectiveness of the sound barrier. He assured that with the proposed barrier, projected sound levels would be well under the required limits for both ground and second-floor levels.

During the meeting, the board considered the visual and auditory impact on nearby homes, with detailed testimony from the architect about screening mechanisms such as Evergreen trees, a sound wall, and a screen wall to address both separation and sound attenuation. The architect also discussed the variances required for loading space size and the positioning of the sound wall. The board debated the noise impact of trucks backing up, with suggestions such as rotating the building to mitigate sound. Additionally, the board discussed the physical layout and design of the property, including buffer requirements and emergency access roads.

The meeting also included a discussion on parking requirements for the new building, with the board scrutinizing the calculation method. The applicant assured the board of providing ample parking spaces above the projected employee count. Concerns were raised about losing parking spaces due to fire code regulations, but the applicant noted that even with a loss of a few spaces, they would still meet the requirements.

Furthermore, the meeting touched on the geogrid specifications for fire emergency apparatus access and inquiries about steep slopes and soil movement variances. The applicant coordinated with the fire subcode official to signpost the fire access point and ensure firefighters were familiar with the site. The public raised questions about fire subcode requirements, building orientation, and parking calculations, to which the applicant provided detailed explanations.