By:Marianne Hooker
At a special meeting July 5, the Pennington Planning Board approved several variances – with conditions – that will allow Commerce Bank to redevelop the former Rosedale Mills site on Route 31.
A new bank facility will be built on the site, with four drive-through lanes to the rear of the building. In addition to granting the variances, the board also gave the bank preliminary and final site plan approval.
Commerce Bank still must secure approval from the state Department of Transportation in order to gain access to Route 31.
Initial testimony on this application was heard June 14. Attorney Daniel Haggerty presented the case on the applicant’s behalf. The meeting began with discussion of some drainage issues.
Detention basin -Engineer John Palus presented a revised site plan showing the proposed stormwater detention basin to the rear of the site, near Lewis Brook. He said that runoff from the site itself would take up only 15 percent of the basin’s 20,000 cubic foot capacity. It will be able to accommodate runoff from another three acres of impervious surface in the future, if the need arises and other drainage channels can be tied in. Mr. Palus said that in view of the size of the proposed parking lot, he did not think a gas and oil interceptor would be necessary.
The proposed drainage basin is a relatively recent addition to the plan. Mr. Palus said that the site plan for the bank had been reviewed by the Pennington Environmental Commission, but the version of the plan they reviewed did not include the basin. The Commission recommended a few low-cost actions to mitigate the effect of the project on Lewis Brook. However Mr. Palus felt that the proposed drainage basin would have a much greater positive impact than any of the alternatives the Commission had suggested.
Mark Godfrey, a member of the Environmental Commission, testified in the absence of Jim Gaffney. He said that Mr. Gaffney’s written report on this project would be submitted to the board as expert testimony. Mr. Godfrey said the area in question is an especially sensitive one, located at the headwaters of Lewis Brook. He also said cars idling in the proposed drive-through bays can be expected to produce some hydrocarbon emissions. Mr. Godfrey commended the bank on its design and plans for the basin, but said there were two additional features that the Commission would like to suggest.
First, they recommend that the basin include a low flow channel. In connection with this, Mr. Godfrey said that the soil in the area of the basin should be tested for permeability. Second, the Commission recommended that the basin be planted not with turf grass, as the bank proposed, but with some kind of coarse, woody vegetation that will provide bio-uptake of hydrocarbons and heavy metals.
Mr. Haggerty said that the applicant probably would be amenable to these suggestions. He also said that the bank intends to give an easement for the detention basin to the borough. The bank will continue to maintain the basin, but the easement will make access available to other users in the future.
Traffic issues – Mr. Haggerty reported on the progress of negotiations with the two neighboring property owners regarding cross-access easements. A cross-access easement allows traffic from one property to come directly onto a neighboring lot. At last month’s meeting, Mr. Haggerty said the applicant was willing to provide such easements to both the north and the south, but they had not yet secured agreement from their would-be neighbors.
Since that time, Mr. Haggerty said the bank had received a definite "no" from the Pennington Square Shopping Center, which is the neighbor to the north. Discussions still are under way with the neighbor to the south, who owns the Old Mill Shopping Center. An unofficial cross-access arrangement has been in effect between these two properties for years, but the center’s owner is not sure that he wants to make it official. There has been talk of setting up some kind of a licensing arrangement that could be revoked if need be. In any case, Mr. Haggerty said the bank would agree to make cross-access easements available on both sides, and he said he was very hopeful that the parties would reach an agreement on the interconnection to the south.
John Harter, a traffic engineer, said that since there is no agreement as yet on any cross-access easement, he would focus on the worst-case scenario from a traffic standpoint, which is a single point of access to the property from Route 31. The main safety issue concerns left-hand turns into and out of this driveway. Mr. Harter noted that DOT allowed left-turn access to and from the new Hopewell Valley Bank, which is situated in a similar position on the other side of the nearby intersection.
According to Mr. Harter, the peak-hour volumes at the intersection of Route 31 and West Delaware are about 2,000 vehicles. However the heavy volumes do not create a major safety problem, because the speed limit here is only 35 miles per hour. He also noted that the traffic signal at the intersection provides "gapping," or periodic interruptions in the flow, especially for northbound traffic. Mr. Harter said that during peak commuter periods, there are many southbound vehicles queued up to make a left-hand turn at the intersection. At other times of day, however, the intersection functions fairly efficiently. The proposed driveway would be about 200 feet from the corner, which exceeds the 100-foot minimum distance required by the DOT.
One reason Mr. Harter thought it would be desirable to permit left turns out of the bank is that there is no reasonable place nearby where vehicles wishing to go south could make a U-turn after exiting to the north. He said he thought the left-turn lane for the intersection would function better than shown in his company’s analysis. When asked what would happen if Route 31 were to be widened and dualized, he said that in such a case only right turns would be allowed. However periodic jug handles for U-turns would be required.
Mr. Harter said he expected that the DOT would approve a full-movement driveway for the proposed bank facility. However the initial application to DOT was predicated on the availability of a cross-access easement. In the absence of an agreement for this, the bank will have to reapply for an access permit.
Traffic engineer Richard Orth, of the firm of Orth Rogers, was engaged by the board to make an independent review of the traffic situation, and he submitted a report on June 28. He said that it would be very desirable to obtain the cross-access easements, particularly the one to the south. If no such interconnection is allowed, he said there is bound to be some congestion at peak periods.
Like Mr. Harter, Mr. Orth said the Route 31 southbound left-turn lane probably would not be as backed up as his model predicted; however he said he had occasionally seen it backed up as far as the Rosedale Mills site. Overall, he thought it would be better if exiting traffic were allowed to make a right turn only. He contested Mr. Harter’s claim that the striped area before the left hand turn lane on Route 31 provides a safe place for cars to wait until they can get into the right lane.
Mr. Orth said the driveway allows room for three vehicles to wait behind one another to exit the property. If the queue becomes any longer, cars will be stacked up in the parking lot. In his opinion, however, this might be a problem only about 5 percent of the time. Mr. Orth also suggested that the front traffic aisle on the site be reduced from 30 to 25 feet wide. He also said that the nine parking spaces at the rear of the site should be set aside for employees, so as to minimize the traffic crossing over the drive-through lanes.
There was some discussion among the group about providing markings on the site for pedestrians. Mr. Haggerty said that this has been planned for pedestrians coming from the north, but not from the south. The bank is willing to install striping, islands, traffic humps, or other such measures that may contribute to "traffic calming". Tamara Lee, the borough’s planning consultant, said that it might be possible to continue the sidewalk in front of Jann’s Sweet Shoppe around the side of the building, and then have a combination traffic hump and crosswalk.
Mr. Haggerty said that if the bank can secure the southerly cross-access easement, they will voluntarily restrict their exit driveway to right turns only. Otherwise, however, they will need to have the left turn access.
Mayor Susan Riley said that another potential traffic problem could be southbound vehicles on Route 31 making a left turn to get to the bank. These could block the traffic wishing to exit. Looking at the situation over the long term, she said that the best solution for all these businesses would be to provide some kind of access to the rear, possibly from the municipal landfill site. If this could be done, it would solve a great many problems.
Planner’s report -Anthony Soriano, the applicant’s planner, reviewed the variances being requested. He noted that the proposed improvements would bring the site into better compliance with the zoning ordinance overall, because they would eliminate existing non-conformities in the rear yard setback and the amount of impervious surface covering the lot. Several other areas of non-conformity would be substantially reduced. He said that there is no possibility of purchasing additional land to allow larger side yard setbacks, because the neighbors need the land for their own compliance.
With regard to the negative criteria contained in the law, Mr. Soriano said this application would provide no substantial detriment to the public good, nor would it be a detriment to the zoning ordinance. He said the parking conditions on the site would be similar to what is there now, and the front yard setback the bank has requested is relatively minor. The bank has proposed signs that are somewhat larger than the ordinance allows, but this would mean fewer signs on the site, which should eliminate visual clutter. All in all, Mr. Soriano said that in his view, the benefits of the proposed installation would outweigh any detriments.
Building materials -The board revived an issue that was first raised last month – the type of building materials to be used for the exterior walls. Last month Andrew Zalescik, a Commerce Bank representative, said they would like to use their standard building design, which has an exterior surface made of white split-face brick. Board members, however, said they would prefer red brick, which would be more in keeping with the surrounding buildings. Evidently a few Commerce Bank buildings have been built of the red brick.
Board chairman Win Thompson said that a Commerce Bank building made of red brick would still have its familiar logo, and would still retain its identity. From a visual standpoint, it would make the entire area more consistent if the buildings shared the same general color and material. A building of white brick, on the other hand, would not fit in. Mr. Zalescik’s response to this argument was, "This is our brand." However, he was countered by board member Jeanne Donlon, who told him, "This is our town." Mr. Zalescik told them that the bank would go along with the board’s decision.
Mr. Haggerty said the bank really needed a driveway where left turns are allowed. According to him, this is something Commerce Bank cannot do without. The DOT will be making a ruling on this, and he asked the board to leave the issue up to them. Edwin Schmierer, board attorney, said that the board had the option of approving the application with a right turn only. This would presumably carry some weight when the DOT makes its decision.
Board member William Meytrott, speaking about left-turn restrictions, said that from a practical point of view such limitations are very difficult to enforce. Their effectiveness results almost entirely from voluntary compliance.
Board comments – Board members then took turns stating their thoughts on the application as a whole. Jimmy Maul said that he had seen accidents resulting from left-hand turns at another nearby business. He seemed unhappy about the idea of allowing left turns at the driveway. However, he said it would not be fair to place restrictions on this business that do not apply elsewhere. Maureen Hassett said that this application gives the board an opportunity to act responsibly in the face of a potential hazard. She favored making an official recommendation to the DOT that they not allow left turns out of the bank driveway.
Pam Cain, on the other hand, said she thought left turns should be allowed. She noted that she plans her turns according to the amount of traffic, and said that customers would probably opt to turn right out of the driveway at times of congestion. Mrs. Donlon disagreed, saying it would not be responsible to allow left turns at this site. She thought the board’s conditions of approval should include a provision to prohibit left turn movements.
Mayor Riley said she was concerned about the potential hazard, and hoped that some long-term solution could eventually be found. However, she did not want to place a financial burden on the applicant. She said she was not in favor of having the borough restrict the turning options.
Mr. Meytrott said that he liked the project overall, and thought it would be a good use for the site. He had some concerns about the left turns, but said he was willing to defer to the DOT on this. He thought their review process was a good one. Mr. Thompson said he favored recommending to DOT that they ban left turns, but he did not think the board should prohibit them outright.
Member Bub Kovacs, who was not sitting on the board for this application, made a suggestion that the rest of the members seemed to like. He said they should forward to DOT a transcript of their discussion, along with the applicant’s traffic analysis and Mr. Orth’s report. This could be added to the documentation for DOT’s review.
Conditions of approval – Mayor Riley moved to approve the application with no recommendation on the left turn issue, and to send the relevant documentation to DOT. This was passed by a 6-1 vote, with only Ms. Donlon dissenting. The variances and the site plan were approved subject to the following conditions: The detention basin will be planted with something other than turf grass, and it will have a low flow channel. An easement for the basin will be granted to the borough. Cross-access easements will be made available on both sides, and pedestrian improvements will be installed as far as possible to the north. The front traffic aisle will be reduced in width from 30 to 25 feet. The façade of the building will be made of red brick.
Full documentation of the traffic issues will be sent to the DOT. If the bank is successful in obtaining a cross-access easement to the south, they will voluntarily give up the option of allowing left turns at Route 31 (assuming DOT grants them permission to allow such turns).
