Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woolwich JLUB delays decision on driveway shift at 2120 US Route 322 after sightline, wetlands and neighbor complaints
Summary
The Woolwich Joint Land Use Board agreed to adjourn consideration of a proposed 50‑foot southward shift of the south driveway at a fully built warehouse at 2120 US Route 322 to Aug. 21, 2025, after planner and engineer concerns about wetlands, headlight glare into a neighboring home, sightlines and whether the driveway requires a variance. The applicant will seek DEP and county engineering input.
The Woolwich Township Joint Land Use Board on June 19, 2025 voted to adjourn action on a site‑plan amendment for a fully constructed warehouse at 2120 US Route 322 after hearing concerns from the board’s planner and engineer and a nearby resident.
The application, presented by attorney Emily Givens on behalf of DPIF3 NJ 4 2120 Urban Renewal LLC, would move the site’s south entrance roughly 50 feet farther south on Locke Avenue and change circulation so the southern exit functions as a right‑out for passenger vehicles while allowing left turns for trucks. Applicant witnesses said the change was intended to reduce vehicle stacking at the Route 322 traffic light and to discourage trucks from routing through Swedesboro.
Planner Ashton Jones and JLUB Engineer Ted Wilkinson said the relocated driveway encroaches on the 50‑foot wetland buffer and raised safety concerns: Wilkinson testified that the adjusted location would reduce safe stopping distance (he cited 200 feet versus 800 feet) and could cause headlight glare into a neighboring house. Solicitor Mike Aimino advised the board that, under precedent discussed in the hearing (Angel v. Board of Adjustment, 1970), a driveway can be treated as a structure for zoning purposes, which would require a variance unless a DEP permit removes the wetland constraint.
Nearby resident Paul Biester, of 251 Locke Ave., told the board he has lived on the road for 30 years and said existing warehouse traffic and glare already affect his home. “It feels like an insult to injury,” Biester said, urging the board to account for neighborhood impacts.
Applicant representatives said they have applied to the Department of Environmental Protection and submitted a Gloucester County soil application and that some onsite trees would be removed (the presentation noted approximately 35 trees of about 8 inches diameter or more in the affected area). The applicant offered to consult the county engineer about sightlines and to explore glare‑mitigation measures for the neighbor.
Given outstanding permit and county‑engineering input, the board voted to adjourn the application to the August 21, 2025 JLUB meeting without re‑noticing. The motion to adjourn was made by Grasso and seconded by Cotton; the roll call recorded all voting members present as Yes (Cotton, Daniels, Grasso, Kauffman, Matthias, Nocentino, Rushton, Healey, Maugeri). The board’s solicitor and planner noted that any approval should be conditioned on receipt of required permits (for example, DEP approvals) and compliance with any county requirements.
The board’s action does not approve construction; any driveway work within the wetland buffer remains contingent on regulatory permits and, if required, variances. The application will return to the JLUB at the Aug. 21 meeting with additional county and DEP information if the applicant obtains it.
