The Franklin Reporter & Advocate Eight Villages, One Community
A proposal to turn a car repair shop into a convenience store at Elizabeth and Cedar avenues ran into heavy flak at the December 4 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting.
The plan, which includes keeping an existing gas station., did not sit well with Board members, who cited concerns about parking and site suitability as their stumbling blocks.
There were times when the 2 1/2-hour meeting grew tense, especially when Township Principal Planner Mark Healey pressed the project’s planner for proof of statements he made during his testimony.
Board members also seemed frustrated by planning testimony given by the project’s traffic engineer, who is also a certified planner.
At one point, Board Chairman Robert Thomas begged a witness to “give us something we can approve.”
By the end of the meeting, the Board agreed to hear testimony from the project’s architect, who could not attend the December 4 hearing, in February 2026.
The Board first heard this application in April. Board members did not seem enthused about the project then.
Tyler Vandervalk, the project’s engineer, took the Board through changes made to the plan since that April hearing.
Among the changes described by Vandervalk were closing off the two driveways on Cedar Street, forcing entrances and exits on Elizabeth Avenue.
Traffic around the fuel pumps would be two-way, with parking along the perimeter of the property, Vandervalk said.
“What this allows for is a number of things,” he said. “Cleaner circulation where we don’t have vehicles coming from every which way. It also provides much better drive aisles.”
Vandervalk said eight parking spots will be provided where 18 is required by the zoning ordinance.
Vandervalk said that plans are to plant a number of shade trees and shrubs along the property to shield it from neighbors, and also add green space.
Speaking about the parking spaces, Gary Dean, the project’s traffic engineer, told the Board that there are “certain existing conditions on the site that limit, quite frankly, how much can be done. The canopy exists, the underground storage fuel tanks exist and were replaced fairly recently, and the repair bays exist.”
Dean also challenged the township’s parking space requirements, saying that requiring a space for each gasoline filling stall is not “practical.” That’s because, Dean said, people getting gas don’t need a parking space.
“In my professional opinion, all the parking required for this site can be accommodated on the site,” he said.
Dean, who is also a certified planner, gave what Board members considered planning testimony about the use relative to the number of parking spaces provided, adding to their frustration.
Adding to the Board’s seeming frustration was Cameron Black, the project’s planner. Black said he could not answer pointed questions posed to him by Healey.
Black’s contention that substituting a car repair shop with a convenience store would lessen the site’s “intensity” drew questions from Board vice-chairman Robert Shepard.
“How do you define the term intensity?” Shepard asked. “Because I look at this particular site as having maybe one guy at the gas pump and maybe two guys working in the garages to work on cars, and once in a while, as the other traffic engineer planner said, it’s not a very busy station, but I know that if we allow this, that there’s going to be a lot more people coming into the station to use not only the gasoline, but also the convenience store, many more people are going to be coming across that site, and for me, that defines intensity, not whether some guy is in a building banging away on somebody’s disc brakes.”
“So, I don’t agree, you know what, it’s not so much that I don’t agree, but I don’t understand how you’re defining intensity,” he said. “Could you give me a help there?”
“In planning, zoning, land use, you’ll delineate uses according to intensity in ways that an auto body mechanic shop would be considered industrial, potentially,” Black said. “So, we have a retail convenience store, you wouldn’t consider it to be borderline industrial like a mechanical auto body shop would be. You have to dispose of contaminated toxic waste, potentially, on site. You’re not containing, you know, those hazardous materials like you would at a convenience store, where you’re just going to dispose trash regularly.”
“So, those are the things taken into consideration,” he said. “I understand your concern, but based off of case law, this is how we would treat it.”
Healey then entered the fray.
“Which case law?” he asked. “Which case law addresses that intensity issue?”
“I would have to refer to my (Municipal Land Use Law) and look at the state law, but off-the-cuff, I don’t have the answer,” Black said.
Black said the township’s Master Plan encourages commercial and industrial development in areas with access to major highways, prompting another question from Thomas, who asked if Black could show where the Master Plan encourages the zoning board to approve a nonconforming use variance in a residential zone.
“You don’t specifically call that out,” Black said. “However, there are implications that you want to improve the economics of your municipality and encourage retail and commercial uses, again, in established areas.”
Healey said that the applicant has to provide some testimony about the suitability of the project to the area, but, he added, he had not heard it yet.
“I haven’t heard planning testimony addressing any particular suitability,” he said. “I’ve heard we’re getting rid of problems and some other things. I haven’t heard any testimony about particular suitability for this site as a gas station and a convenience store.”
Healey also pointed out that there had not been any testimony about how the proposed project brings its use closer to the intent of the residential zone.
“How does adding a convenience store bring this closer to the intent of the R10 zone, because that’s what you’ve been saying, but then you bring up other things,” he said. “The intent of the R10 zone, single-family homes on quarter-acre lots.”
“The community benefits, I firmly believe, outweigh any detriments to the zone,” Black said. “The site is existing, and the site suitability is there.”
“Adding a convenience store, philosophically, means that we’re expanding a non-conforming use,” Thomas said. “Now, we’re expanding a non-conforming use onto a property that’s having difficulty handling the use that’s there, and for lack of better words, if that’s not expanded, how is any of this benefiting Franklin, the neighborhood, or the R10 zone? Why is this site suitable for this kind of use?”
“I mean, one thing you mentioned is proximity to a highway,” he said. “It’s true, it sits next to 287. That’s the border there between the zones. But you can’t get on 287 without driving a mile and a half, so how is that an advantage or a reason to approve this? Give us something we can approve.”
At one point, the developer’s attorney, Michael Selvaggi, suggested that the hearing may be a waste of time.
“I get where you guys are coming from,” he said. “If … you would rather see a crummy looking automobile service station because you don’t get as much traffic, then, quite frankly, you know, we’re wasting our time, to be honest.”
“I’m not angry, I’m not bitter, but that’s the reality of it,” he said. “I mean, what you’re getting here, presumably, what we thought was an improvement aesthetically … if the paramount concern is the traffic that this new non-conforming use would generate, you know, you’re right, it will. I mean, there are probably more people come to this site to buy a Coke than there will be to get their disc brakes changed.”
“And, if that’s the driving concern, then, you know what, we might as well end right now,” he said.
“I don’t know if that’s the single driving concern, but it’s a concern,” Thomas said. “The aesthetics are important, but you can’t say that the town wants something that’s not good for it in general just so they can ride by and say we like the way it looks.”
“I don’t think anybody likes the way it looks now,” he said. “I don’t want to justify that either, but I don’t know about the rest of the Board, but I haven’t heard real justification that you can hang your hat on, for me anyway, at this point, to approve it. I don’t know what else to tell you.”
“I just want to add, I’m just not hearing that aesthetics is enough to justify adding another non-conforming use,” Board member Cheryl Bethea said. “It’s already in existence. The cars are already there.”
“The biggest argument I’m hearing is it’s going to look better, but if we’re adding a non-conforming use, to me that is not closer to what the goal is,” she said. “That is one aspect of it, but I just feel like hanging that one component on a reason to approve, I’m just not convinced.”
“I think what we’re attempting to do, we’re attempting to ask you how we can okay this, but in all due respect to everybody, we haven’t heard it, so I agree with Cheryl,” Board member Gary Rosenthal said.
Speaking during the public portion, State Assemblyman Joe Danielsen, who told the Board that he has lived in the neighborhood of that gas station his entire life, said the property owner has not kept up with its maintenance or upkeep.
Danielsen showed the Board pictures of the property, pointing out things he objected to to, such as a disabled truck parked on the sidewalk.
Danielsen also said that putting a convenience store on that property would worsen traffic conditions on Elizabeth Avenue.
The Board will once again take up the application at its February 5, 2026 meeting.
Stay ‘In the Know,’ subscribe to the Franklin Reporter & Advocate!
No other media outlet covering Franklin Township brings you the depth of information presented by the Franklin Reporter & Advocate. Period. We are the only truly independent media serving the Eight Villages.
But we can only do that with your support. Please consider a yearly subscription to our online news site; at $37 a year, it’s one of the best investments you can make for yourself.
To subscribe, please click here.
