Livingston planning board asks for traffic, signage fixes as Somerset Regal seeks canopy over two stalls

Somerset Regal Bank asked the Livingston Planning Board to approve a 12‑by‑18‑foot canopy that would allow customers to conduct teller transactions from their cars without removing parking stalls at 66 West Mount Pleasant Ave.

In a presentation that opened the application, the bank’s executive David Orbach said the canopy would cover two existing parking stalls and allow customers to pull in, use a pneumatic/tube teller link and pull back out. “It’s not a drive through. It’d be a drive in and pull it back out,” Orbach said, describing the intended customer flow.

The bank’s site engineer, Fred Stewart, told the board the canopy’s highest point would be about 11 feet and the structure would be set roughly 7.2 feet from the building on one corner and about 6.9 feet from the westerly boundary — both closer than the township’s typical 11‑foot offset requirement. Stewart said those reduced offsets are the two variances the applicant is seeking. He also reported the site has 91 existing parking stalls and, by his calculation, the property meets the ordinance parking requirement of 90 stalls (15 stalls required for the bank’s 2,912 sq ft net floor area plus 75 stalls required for the 18,614 sq ft of other occupied space).

Board members raised repeated concerns about vehicle circulation and queuing. Several members said that if two cars use the canopy and another driver attempts to pass or park, the layout could block access to adjoining stalls or the westerly driveway. The board explored mitigations including directional striping and arrows on pavement, a painted stop bar two stalls back to give space to back out, a clear canopy legend (for example, “drive in/back out”), a lit open/closed indicator and reserving the first few stalls beyond the canopy for employee parking.

A board professional recommended that a condition of approval require the applicant to work with the board’s professionals to revise plans to incorporate striping, signage, stop bars, employee‑only stalls or other circulation changes as needed. The engineer agreed the applicant could add a stop bar and suggested the first four stalls could be designated for employees to reduce conflict with queued customers.

The applicant agreed to revise the plans and return. Stewart estimated the revisions and coordination with staff could be completed in roughly two weeks. The board noted the applicant may need signage variances if some existing or proposed signs lacked prior approval; Stewart said current signage totals about 79.9 square feet against a local 10% face‑of‑building maximum (approximately 325 sq ft) and that the canopy sign would be comparatively small.

The board recorded that the matter would be continued for further review and plan revision; the record includes a stated continuation to March 3 at 7:30 (no further notice required) and, later in the discussion, an additional mention of March 30 — the record is not fully consistent on the final calendar date. The board then moved to adjourn.

What happens next: the applicant will submit revised plans that incorporate the board professionals’ guidance on queueing, striping and signage to address circulation and safety concerns; the board will review the revised plans at a future meeting when they are distributed to professionals and board members for comment.