Jain Center Wins Planning Board Approval For Driveway Arch

---

It took about eight months, but the Jain Center on Cedar Grove Lane won approval for a proposed driveway arch at the February 7 Planning Board meeting.

The biggest stumbling block of the application – whether the Center was obligated by prior Planning Board decisions to align the driveway with that of Cedar Grove Center – was removed when the project’s engineer said that aspect had been changed by Somerset County planning officials. Cedar Grove lane is a County road.

The planned archway would be 28 feet high and 56 feet wide, and positioned about 50 feet from the curb along Cedar Grove Lane.

The archway would display six signs, one at the top and one on each base, on both sides of the structure.

The application was for variances for the sizes of the signs, but the main issue for the last several meetings had been the alignment of the driveway with that of Cedar Grove Center, across the street.

The Board, led by Board member Robert Thomas, maintained that a prior approval for the Jain Center included a realignment of the driveway.

Center representatives argued that the idea of a realignment had been discussed, but was never a condition of any approval.

Project engineer F. Mitchell Ardman was brought in by the applicant to try and clear up the dispute.

Ardman said that while the initial approval for the center in 2000 included a driveway aligned with the shopping center’s, that was changed when Somerset County planners looked at the plans.

“As we checked our notes and what was in there, there was a County review comment about shifting (the driveway) because of drainage and inlets, and other restrictions in the County right-of-way,” he said. “They were OK with the driveway being off-center with the Cedar Grove shopping center across the street.”

“They had final say, and they’re the ones who asked us to shift it,” Ardman said.

“The next time the Board saw this plan was 2006, we came with a construction phasing plan,” he said. “On that plan it was shown … not aligned with the driveway across the street.”

“Subsequent to that is when the County came in and did their roadway improvements, additional right-of-way, additional pavement and the turning lane in front of the shopping center,” he said.

The Jain Center went before the Board’s Technical Review Committee in 2012 with a plan for realigning the driveway. Even though the TRC approved it, plans to do it never materialized.

In 2013, the Jain Center appeared before the Board with a plan to create a parking lot and a solar-topped roof for the lot. The plan included a realignment of the driveway, but it was never acted on.

“I don’t understand why this research couldn’t have been done before the application was presented,” Thomas said, after Ardman finished his presentation.

“I may be getting old, but I’m not senile,” Thomas said. “The driveway was originally approved lined up, and I would like that to be clear to the attorney and to the applicant.”

“I have no knowledge, and no Board member has any knowledge, if it goes to the County and they make a change,” he said. “We don’t get copies, or we don’t follow the applications through to completion in that sense. My understanding is the County made a comment about the drainage, not a recommendation, not a requirement. So to me that indicates the applicant was pretty willing to change it.”

“At some point the decision was made to do it the way you wanted to do it, and the heck with the approval,” Thomas said.

“For the first time in 30 years, I’m getting to the point where I don’t care,” he said. “If that’s the way you want it, obviously, this is not one we’re going to end up winning and it’s not worth fighting.”

“But I want to make it clear, I was not crazy, I was not picking on an applicant, which came back to me in no uncertain terms through different channels,” Thomas said. “That driveway was supposed to be lined up. The latest approval shows it aligned with the one across the street. Even your traffic expert admitted it would be a safer, better solution. But she defended what you have on the plan, which is her job.”

DeLuca said he’d never said Thomas was senile, and did not mean his any disrespect.

Answering a question posed by Board chairman Michael Orsini, Board attorney Peter Vignuolo said there was no way to connect the variance application to a realignment of the driveway.

Mark Healey, the Township’s Principal Planner, concurred with Vignuolo.

“If somebody was to come to me now and say the Jain Center is in violation of their approval, my answer would be no,” he said. “Now that we’ve looked into it, I couldn’t say their 2000 approval is in violation.”

“There’s no defensible way to link this application … to realign the driveway,” Orsini said.

The Board unanimously approved the application, with teh following conditions:

• Landscaping as reflected on plans.
• Sidewalk reflected on plans.
• Turn lights off at 10 p.m., except for special events, then 12 a.m.
• Landscaping, sidewalk and other improvements should all be completed before the arch is constructed.
• Steady progression toward completion once started.
• Screening the caretaker’s house.

Your Thoughts

comments