September 11, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

09/27/2024 06:14:01 AM Page 77 to 80 of 180 20 of 71 sheets 77 from the overgrown growth that exists, I guess in the1 northwest section of the intersection, which sort of2 blocks vision. If you look to the right of the traffic3 signal it'll overcome those issues also. So it will be4 a fairly substantial safety improvement at that5 intersection.6 With regard to the site plan, you've heard7 extensive testimony from Mr. Anderson and Mr. Appel.8 From my standpoint this evening what I just want to9 touch on with the site plan is, as testified to by Mr.10 Anderson, this site is designed with three points of11 access. Those access include Warner Road, the primary12 point of access, extending into the new community. It13 includes Kuzik Drive extending into the new community14 and it includes a emergency access drive that connects15 down to Howell Road from the area of Building D.16 The internal drive aisles are designed in17 accordance with RSIS requirements. The roadways18 internal to this site are basically classified under the19 Residential Site Improvement Standards. Just to back up20 for the benefit of the public. The State of New Jersey21 Department of Community Affairs back in the '90's22 adopted a state wide ordinance governing residential23 development. And that ordinance basically sets24 classifications of various roadways, residential design25 78 elements, parking standards and so forth that govern the1 design of a residential project. So in this situation2 under the Residential Site Improvement standards the3 internal roadway system basically be classified as minor4 collector roads. Warner Road, except from where it5 extends into the site, Kuzik Drive from were it extends6 into the site and then extending back to Road D to7 Building D. Those road systems then provide access to8 various parking lots serving each of the various9 buildings.10 The Residential Site Improvement standards for a11 minor collector road is a 20-foot wide roadway basically12 with parking, with sidewalks on both sides. And our13 design to accommodate the types of traffic, pedestrians,14 bicycles that are common to a residential development of15 this site.16 Under the definitions of RSIS they both, they17 represent both the minimum and the maximum that can be18 required in the design of residential development in the19 State of New Jersey.20 With regard to this particular

ions of RSIS they both, they17 represent both the minimum and the maximum that can be18 required in the design of residential development in the19 State of New Jersey.20 With regard to this particular application, the21 Settlement Agreement does speak to a request by the22 homeowners association to have some controls put in23 place on the access, particularly Kuzik Drive. There's24 a concern that the opening of Kuzik Drive to daily25 79 traffic flow would result in a hardship or imposition on1 some of the residents on that section of Kuzik Drive as2 it extends into the site. The Settlement Agreement3 specifically requests that we file what's known as a, de4 minimus exception, with the board to have the board5 consider having that road length controlled and gated6 and operate as emergency access similar to Howell Drive.7 It would be an improved road as opposed to a stabilized8 emergency drive that connects out to Howell, but9 nevertheless it's requested that it be gated and not10 open to the daily flow of traffic to and from the site.11 We have filed that application, we support that12 application and look to the guidance of the board as to13 approval of that. I would note that with regard to the14 boards jurisdiction, while RSIS does set the standards15 for the roadways and access, it does not specifically16 define the control of access. That does fall in the17 purview, we typical -- we actually don't really need the18 de minimus exception, it does have purview under RSIS to19 control the type of access and I'll give a for instance.20 If you had a development that was proposed to be gated21 or gate controlled by a guardhouse, the board could22 approve that. That doesn't require a de minimus23 exception. The board can approve emergency access24 controls. So it falls within the purview, but in this25 80 case, because it was in the Settlement Agreement, we did1 formally file that request.2 With regard to that request, from a traffic3 engineering standpoint, we don't need that roadway,4 Kuzik Drive, to be opened to traffic on a daily basis.5 Warner Drive extending into the site provides sufficient6 cartway width and capacity to accommodate the types of7 traffic, pedestrian and bicycles that will flow in and8 out of the site on a daily basis typical to a community9 of this site. That includes delivery vehicles,10 emergency vehicles and so forth. So we are

fic, pedestrian and bicycles that will flow in and8 out of the site on a daily basis typical to a community9 of this site. That includes delivery vehicles,10 emergency vehicles and so forth. So we are supportive11 of the request of the association and in my opinion if12 the board does agree with that request the site will13 still be providing safe and efficient access and the14 community will function appropriately.15 I would add to the testimony based upon some of16 the conversation we heard in the prior hearings. There17 was a discussion with regard to the resolution that was18 adopted by the township with regard to complete streets.19 That is a design guide that we look to state, state wide20 in designing projects such as this. I would note that21 this project does embrace the components of complete22 street design. It is pedestrian friendly. It is23 designed with a system of sidewalks throughout, with24 crosswalks, with highlighted crosswalk areas. Paved25