Call to Order
Chair Wynn called the meeting to order at 7:40 pm and announced that the meeting has been properly noticed in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act and that the meeting is being recorded and can be viewed on the Township website or on Channel 34.
Roll Call
Chair Wynn, Councilor Schlager, Mr. Schwartz, Mr. Brandon, Ms. Willis, Mr. Rooney, Ms. Loughman and Mr. Gilmer were present. Vice Chair Brodock, Mr. Barr and Mr. Ianuale were excused. Board Conflict Attorney Andrew Ball, Board Engineer Thomas Watkinson, Board Architect Barton Ross, Michael Dannemiller from NV5 and Planning Director Janice Talley were also present.
Application 2543: Lackawanna SPE, LLC – Lackawanna Plaza. (Block 3213, Lot 2 and Block 4202, Lots 4.01 and 4.02)
The applicant was represented by Thomas Trautner, Esq. who stated that he planned to present two witnesses this evening to present the revised site plan. Mr. Trautner stated that the revisions to the site plan have been developed in conjunction with the anticipated tenant. He stated that parking, traffic and planning testimony will be provided at a subsequent meeting.
Mr. Bruce Stieve presented the revised architectural drawings in a PowerPoint presentation that was marked as Exhibit A-30. Mr. Stieve stated that the revised plan is similar to Barton Ross’s Option A for the property. He stated that the revised plan balances the needs of the supermarket tenant while also maximizing parking and maintaining emergency vehicle access. Mr. Stieve stated that he walked through the building to verify the column counts and quality. He showed how the site plan had been revised to provide paving enhancements in the railroad track locations. He noted that commemorative plaques will be provided in the pedestrian pathway linking the parking lot to Lackawanna Plaza (the street).
Chair Wynn asked for details about the treatment of the wall in the pedestrian walkway. He also wanted details of the wall on the east side of the parking lot. Mr. Stieve stated he does not know what is behind the wall at this time, so he cannot confirm what the new wall will look like.
Chair Wynn asked how the pedestrian pathway under Grove Street will be accessed. Mr. Stieve stated that this will have glass doors that will be accessed via a key fob.
Chair Wynn asked for details about the awning along the sidewalk facing the parking lot on the west side of the parking lot.
Mr. Schwartz asked if the renderings visually distort the amount of parking in front of the supermarket. He asked for a 360-degree rendering of the parking lot. He asked if it is feasible to maintain the concrete canopies.
Ms. Loughman asked why the pedestrian connection under Grove Street is private and not public. Mr. Trautner stated that easement indicates that this is private access, not public access, and that the applicant needs to ensure secure access to the residential building.
Ms. Loughman asked why the design does not activate Glenridge Avenue. She suggested that an alley or walkway be provided from Glenridge Avenue to the supermarket. She also asked for lighting and material details for the pedestrian alley.
Mr. Stieve presented Exhibit A-31 that shows details of the alley.
Mr. Gilmer asked for details on the columns. He wanted to know which ones are being relocated and the condition of the columns. Mr. Stieve stated that the condition of some of the columns cannot be determined because they are encased in concrete or behind walls. He presented Exhibit A-32 which showed an assessment of the columns in the building. He noted that there are 98 original columns, of which 74 will remain in place and 12 will be repurposed into light fixtures. He noted that the column assessments are based on the drawings for the shopping center conversion.
Chair Wynn stated that he wants to know which columns are original and which columns are new. Mr. Stieve stated that the simulated columns are not shown on the plan. Mr. Trautner stated that there are three columns that are not original and are shown on AR-103.
Mr. Schwartz asked why the concrete canopies cannot be maintained on the columns. Mr. Wynn stated that the tenant does not want canopies in front of their windows, which was testimony provided at the prior meeting. Mr. Stieve stated that this is one of the reasons. The other reason is that there is an issue with emergency vehicle access as expressed by the Fire Official.
Mr. Gilmer asked how uniform are the columns in their current condition. Mr. Stieve stated he cannot respond as the columns are not all visible. Chair Wynn stated that the applicant should examine the columns and come back with an answer.
Mr. Gilmer asked if the decorative striping in the parking lot would conflict with other striping. He asked if how the striping could be distinguished from a crosswalk. Mr. Stieve stated that this is an engineering question. Chair Wynn asked what is the most durable pavement option for the pavement pattern. Mr. Stieve stated that this is a question for the engineer.
The public was invited to question Mr. Stieve.
Mrs. Eschelman from 50 Label Street asked if a pedestrian survey has been prepared to determine how many people walk in this area. She stated that the area teems with pedestrians, but that the design creates a pedestrian dead zone. She asked how the parking lot can be attractive and whether the applicant has considered the recommendations of the shopping center consultant. Mr. Stieve responded that the site plan includes many pedestrian connections and amenities.
Frank Rubacky of 398 Upper Mountain Avenue asked for details of the parapet on the west retail façade, as he is concerned that the details of the head of the train shed are hidden by the proposed canopy. Mr. Stieve responded that the head of the train shed is on the west side of the building and are not hidden by the canopy. Mr. Rubacky asked if the parapet can be raised so that the glass if visible. Mr. Stieve said he would investigate this. Mr. Rubacky asked if the horse trough can be relocated to a more historically accurate location, perhaps at the corner of Bloomfield and Grove Street. Mr. Stieve said he would investigate this as well.
William Scott of 23 Cedar Avenue asked if Mr. Stieve was familiar with the May 22 Council resolution. Mr. Stieve said he was not. Mr. Scott asked if the changes to the plan are significant. Mr. Stieve said that the changes are not significant.
Kevin Webb, the civil engineer for the project, revised the revised site plan and marked the changes in Exhibit A-33, which is a simplified site plan prepared by Langan Engineering dated 8/27/18. Mr. Webb stated that the size of the supermarket increased by 4,291 square feet by incorporating the space within the first line of columns into the footprint of the retail space. He stated that the number of parking spaces in front of the grocery store is now 200, a reduction of 26 spaces from what was previously proposed.
Mr. Webb stated that all the columns could not be maintained in the parking lot as some of the columns needed to be removed to allow vehicle circulation. He stated that angled parking and one-way aisles decreases efficiency in use of the parking aisles, increasing traffic movements and would result in the loss of 10 to 20 additional parking spaces.
Mr. Webb testified that the colored pavement pattern details are to be determined and that pedestrian safety concerns about the pattern are valid. He stated that he is also concerned about the durability of the pavement pattern.
Mr. Webb stated that the rideshare drop off area would be increased from 50 to 60 feet. He explained the reconfigured loading area in the back of the building. He stated that the Fire Official would not allow the drive aisles to be covered with canopies. He stated that the grass pavers in the back of the building are for snow removal and stated that a masonry wall could be added to screen part of the loading area.
Ms. Loughman asked if there is a dedicated area for grocery pick up. Mr. Webb said that this would be determined by the tenant.
Chair Wynn asked if plantings could be added to the landscaping strip and grass paver area to create a solid green screen for the loading area.
Mr. Watkinson asked for the definitive location of the culverts, as it appears the building will be located over the culvert. He asked for more detail and documentation on the easements and culverts.
Chair Wynn asked for more details about the wall along Grove Street, particularly the height of the wall. Mr. Webb stated that this is a question for Mr. Stieve. Mr. Wynn asked if the height of the wall could be lowered to provide visibility to the property. Mr. Stieve said that it will be reduced in height.
Michael Dannemiller from NV5 asked if truck turning templates will be provided. Mr. Trautner stated that they will be provided for a future meeting. Mr. Dannemiller asked if the drop curb along Glenridge Avenue will include a concrete sidewalk. Mr. Webb stated that it would. Mr. Dannemiller asked if bike parking is provided. Mr. Webb indicated that it is provided onsite.
Barton Ross stated that the plan adequately addresses issues about the historic plaques, the horse trough, the bus shelter, the Grove Street stairs and moving the supermarket façade to incorporate the first row of columns. He stated that he is concerned about the colors in the stamped concrete pavement and suggested that a strip of metal or brick would work instead. He stated that he does not agree with changing the columns to create lights, as this would degrade the historic fabric of the columns.
Chair Wynn asked if the columns could be illuminated. Mr. Ross agreed that outlining the columns in LED lights would be acceptable. He also stated that emergency access is a valid issue and that it is important to keep as many columns in place as possible.
Ms. Loughman stated that she is concerned about the memory lines in the pavement, as when cars are navigating the parking lot these lines will not be visible.
The public was invited to question Mr. Webb.
Kathleen Bennett asked about the purpose of the three landscaped islands closest to the store. Mr. Webb stated that they are required to create a break between the end of the parking row and the driveway aisle at the end.
Cary Heller of 1 Greenwood stated that he wants to see the truck movement patterns for the loading area. He also wants information on the frequency of deliveries. Mr. Webb stated that the truck turning movements will be provided and that only the tenant can answer the question of frequency of deliveries.
John Reimnitz of 189 Highland Avenue stated that the distance between the front of the store and Bloomfield Avenue is between 300 and 350 feet. He asked if Mr. Webb knows of another downtown grocery store with such a large parking field between the store and the street. Mr. Webb stated that he could not respond to this question and he relied on the testimony provided by Mr. Volosin.
James Cotter of 21 Cloverhill Place asked about pedestrian access to the store and the access easement under Grove Street granted to the property owner in the 1980’s. Mr. Trautner stated that the language in the easement indicated that this passage was not a public right of way.
Chair Wynn stated that he Wants to look at the Grove Street wall and façade, up to and including the corner of Grove Street and Glenridge Avenue, at the next meeting.
David Greenbaum of Lloyd Road asked if the parking configuration is suitable. Mr. Webb stated that it is. Mr. Greenbaum asked if he can provide examples of other supermarkets in an urban setting with such a large parking field between the building and the street. Mr. Greenbaum asked why an entrance could not be provided on Glenridge Avenue. Mr. Webb responded that the Glenridge Avenue frontage including loading and other back of store functions and is not suitable for a pedestrian entrance.
Frank Rubacky of Upper Mountain Avenue asked if the tunnel under Grove Street is necessary. Mr. Webb stated that it is desirable for employee parking and resident access to the supermarket. Mr. Rubacky asked for details about the depth of the loading area, which Mr. Webb confirmed. Mr. Rubacky asked about the size of the bank. Mr. Webb stated that the site plan needs to be revised to correctly indicate the size of the bank but confirmed that a parking variance for the bank is not required.
Chair Wynn stated that if employee parking is provided on the east parcel, then he needs to know the impact on security for the building. He noted that there are typically three employee shifts for supermarkets.
The public hearing was continued to the September 24 Planning Board meeting at which time parking, traffic and planning testimony will be provided.
Payment of Bills
A motion to pay bills was made by Chair Wynn, seconded by Mr. Brandon and approved unanimously.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 pm.