The February 7, 2008 Planning Board minutes have been posted.

[Guest]

The February 7, 2008 Planning Board minutes have been posted.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/PB_minutes_020708.pdf

"...
CONCEPTUAL REVIEW

PB 098-05 Viridian (a.k.a. Unexcelled)
Block 10, Lot 10
Brickyard Road
Conceptual Review
...
Mr. Stannard indicated that perhaps the Applicant’s traffic consultant should consider whether the bridge was going to be built. The assumption was that a bridge would be there. If that was the case, the current arrangement of 50% coming from Cranbury might be close “to a point of a gun” if we are talking $8 million from Cranbury. For a small town it is a massive sum. He felt the consultant needed to consider both the possibility that the bridge perhaps would not be built anywhere near as soon as anybody wanted.
...
The Board and Applicant discussed the present debate of the COAH requirements and the huge impact that this could potentially have for a town like Cranbury.

Mr. Preiss said that he had a meeting with the Office of Smart Growth of which a COAH representative was present of which Mr. Preiss raised this same issue on the change of ratio for warehousing. He described the impacts that it had on Cranbury. The COAH representative said that they believed that the ratios proposed were ridiculous and if the ratios that we had on warehouse developments indicated something different the representative requested documentation be sent to him. He felt at this point that the ratios might overstate the number of employees. Aside from other provisions in the COAH regulations that may be challenged he felt this one provision was going to face substantial challenge for many.

The question was asked if the applicant would be willing to construct the affordable units instead of an in-lieu growth share payment. Mr. Goldman responded yes, but clarified his position saying that they could not be built on site. He did add, with help from the Township through eminent domain, land could be purchased to build the affordable units at another location within the Township.

Mr. Golubieski said that the Applicant had received the necessary feedback from the Board and the public. The Applicant had the option to incorporate those ideas into the plan. He felt everyone agreed that DEP had a significant say on the outcome. DEP’s input would determine the process of this application and how it could proceed.
..."