May 7, 2025, Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes

They're bringing in a little over three feet of fill in this area to raise this up and all new drainage through this area that connects out to that parking lot drainage. They have their tree replacement plan, and Mr. Petry presented TR2 in the set that was submitted. As part of the previous submittals made to the township, they're seeking the board's approval of their landscape plan, which includes some tree work that's already been completed as well as tree work that will be finalized as the front parking lot is completed. The portion of the plan that's been completed is outlined in red areas A, B, and C along the driveways. The trees there have been planted and are being maintained, but some of them needed to be replaced. There was some tree removal performed before a permit was sought. Basically they were attempting to replace in time. They weren't aware of the ordinance, and they have gone through the process in the courts, and there's a settlement in place. What the settlement requires is ultimately the board's approval. The additional areas are, again, as they install the parking in the front of that lot, they've implemented additional evergreens at that location. They will complete the evergreens along the exit driveway, mixed in with the red maples, and then they will have red maples and evergreens that will be placed along the front. The final piece in this application is a community garden, and that's located right behind and adjacent to the carriage house that's on the property. The carriage house currently has a greenhouse, and what they're planning on doing is developing this garden that will be overseen by the chef and his staff, most likely a gardener. It will be developed to serve the restaurant and banquet use, but will also be available for community groups. It will be on a first-come come first first-served basis for them to utilize this garden and learn from this garden. There are several non-conformities that are not being affected by this application. This includes setback violations on the south side of the existing building, accessory use setbacks for the pavement in that area, accessory use front setback for the parking that is within the employee parking lot, accessory use side setback for the parking lot as it abuts the hotel parking lot (they're required to have a separation there), and the buffer to the residential zone

within the employee parking lot, accessory use side setback for the parking lot as it abuts the hotel parking lot (they're required to have a separation there), and the buffer to the residential zone on the south side of the building and the portion of the employee parking lot that's closest to the building. While they have improved the impervious coverage, they're still at 60.53% where 60% is permitted. They call this out as a variance because they are over, but they are making this better by about 5,000 square feet. They're reducing the coverage from the existing condition, which is 61.75. They're dropping it to 60.53. They're over by about 1,900 square feet. They call this out as a variance despite the fact that it's an existing nonconformity, but in Mr. Petry’s opinion, there's a direct public benefit. They are adding 5,000 square feet of green space, and they are simultaneously reducing stormwater runoff, that is a direct benefit to the public. Mr. Petry doesn't see a substantial detriment associated with this granting of the variance because, in essence, they will be improving the condition, and therefore, he believes that it meets the C2 criteria. While they are increasing the previously approved parking, which was 434 spaces, to a total of 471 spaces, including EV credits, they would like to request that the board consider increasing that occupancy by 111 people, and 111 is based upon the difference between 471 and 434. 20