Commission reviews multiple site plan resubmittals; repeated calls for tree replacement, solar readiness and EV spacing

Franklin Township Environmental Commission members reviewed several resubmitted site plans and offered consistent recommendations on trees, stormwater, solar and electric‑vehicle infrastructure.

Hamilton Street Management (resubmittal): reviewers flagged a compact parcel proposed for a three‑story mixed‑use building with ground‑floor commercial, 6 one‑bedroom and 12 two‑bedroom units and 38 parking spaces (6 designated for EV). The commission questioned the applicant’s request for eight parking spaces in a setback and noted the lot already approaches the zoning impervious maximum (85%). Reviewers recommended clearer documentation of changes since the prior submission, additional landscaping where feasible, and that the applicant consider solar‑ready roof design and pervious paving in passenger parking areas.

Ode and Done (Cedar Grove Lane, larger subdivision resubmittal): the applicant proposes a multi‑lot residential subdivision on roughly 16–16.5 acres with several dozen new units. The commission recorded back‑and‑forth on tree loss and replacement: the applicant revised its tree‑replacement plan upward and proposed a monetary contribution to the township’s shade‑tree fund; the commission asked for further tree preservation where possible, a shorter cul‑de‑sac to preserve trees at the end of the project, and consideration of green‑roof readiness.

NPH (Davidson/New Brunswick corner) and Muslim Foundation (subdivision/conditional use): reviewers urged additional buffers of evergreens along northern and side boundaries, stronger plantings at stream corridors and anti‑idling signage at vehicle entrances.

Executive Drive / IDI Logistics (commercial resubmittal): the commission noted a proposal to demolish three vacant office buildings and construct warehouse/logistics space. The application included an expanded tree replacement program; commissioners reiterated that large flat roofs are prime candidates for solar arrays and recommended requiring solar‑ready construction and consideration of fast‑charging truck infrastructure in future phases.

Several smaller residential applications also came up: an in‑law suite addition (Manu Goyle) that would exceed the 30% impervious limit (proposed ~33.3%); and a backyard accessory garage (Schneider) seeking a side‑yard variance to place a storage/garage structure 8 feet from the lot line where 15 feet is typically required. Commissioners noted these are small, technical requests but asked staff to confirm setbacks, drainage impact and tree protection on each property.

Across all plans commission reviewers repeatedly requested: (1) clearer resubmittal change logs so reviewers can track responses to prior comments; (2) that EV charging stations be spaced rather than clustered to ease future expansion and load management (recommendation: alternate charging/blank spaces where possible); (3) consideration of pervious pavement for passenger parking where truck traffic will not damage the surface; (4) preservation of on‑site wooded corners and buffers; and (5) anti‑idling signage and trash/dumpster placement that does not front the street.

No formal approvals or variances were granted at the meeting; the session recorded comments and recommendations to be included in commission memos to planning and zoning boards.