It was a matter of balancing economic trends with the West Windsor’s usual initiatives to encourage more eco-friendly development, as the Planning Board grappled with whether to allow for more parking at new office buildings coming into town.##M:[more]##
The board had begun discussing revisions to its parking and impervious coverage ordinances earlier in January, and conversation at its January 30 meeting centered around the amount of parking at large office buildings, whether that parking should come in the form of more porous and permeable pavement, and how much of the parking should be allotted for compact cars.
In a prior meeting, the board had expressed concern about using national and international ratios when determining how much parking should be allowed per 1,”000 square feet of office building. Board members were worried those ratios might not fit in with the unique characteristics of the township, the county, or the state. Those national statistics suggested that as little as 2.8 or 2.9 spaces be allowed per 1,”000 square feet of general, corporate, or research offices in suburban areas. West Windsor currently allows for 3.3 spaces per 1,”000 square feet of office space, a ratio used since 1985. Board members wanted to see how West Windsor’s ratios compared with neighboring towns.
Township Councilwoman Heidi Kleinman suggested that the ratio in West Windsor be bumped up to 4 parking spaces per 1,”000 because recent corporate and business trends show that companies are packing more employees into smaller spaces, like cubicles, and would need more parking. Having ratios that are too stringent would discourage potential corporate offices from locating to the township, thus bringing fewer tax ratables to the township, officials pointed out.
Before the board began discussions on January 30, Township Planner John Madden presented the board with the results of his research into what neighboring municipalities were allowing. He found that Plainsboro’s parking ratio is exactly the same as West Windsor’s. But Hamilton and Hopewell both allow for 4 parking spaces per 1,”000 square feet, and Lawrence has a sliding scale from 3.5 to 4.5 spaces per 1,”000, he said.
“It looks like many of our neighbors allow much greater parking,” Madden said.
Madden said one of the options Kleinman had recommended was to require a minimum of 4 spaces per 1,”000 for major office buildings over 50,”000 square feet. She recommended allowing for banking of the parking spaces, but an applicant would have to “demonstrate on their site plan that they could accommodate 4 per 1,”000 within the maximum impervious coverage,” which in West Windsor’s office zones, is 50 percent.
Since board members had originally objected to this suggestion, he came up with a compromise option. That suggestion was to raise the minimum to 4 per 1,”000, but require that 17.5 percent of those spaces be parking spaces set on porous pavement or on permeable surfaces. For example, a 100,”000 square foot office building would then generate the need for 400 spaces, and 17.5 percent, or 70 of those spaces, would have to be created with a permeable surface material.
“How did I come up with 17.5? That is the difference between four spaces per 1,”000 and 3.3 spaces per 1,”000,” he explained.
Darlene Jay, a township planning consultant, explained two potential types of porous pavement offered by a company known as EP Henry, a Woodbury-based manufacturer of unit concrete products. The first, Eco Pavers, have a 10 percent open area that would be pervious and would let water filter through. The second option, turf pavers, allow grass to grow up through the pavement, with a 40 percent open area. The turf pavers would have to be mowed. Both types of pavers could be used as part of a LEED credit certification, Jay said.
In addition to the parking discussion, Madden also suggested that for trails and other site amenities like courtyards, that those surfaces should be outside of the maximum impervious coverage cap of 50 percent on site.
Still, board members said they felt adding more parking spaces, despite being more eco-friendly, would encourage vehicular travel, if not more, and they want to encourage other modes of transportation.
“To me, that’s not a compromise, because my goal is to reduce the parking and make sure we have more porous pavement,” board member Diane Ciccone said. “So I would like to — whatever number you come to — increase the percentage that has to be porous, not just the difference that you’re suggesting.”
In addition, she suggested the board increase the amount of required bicycle spaces, and require more bicycle lockers and showers inside. “I think we have to do things to make people understand that this is an important issue to us,” Ciccone added. “The only way to do that is to require it.” Board members also threw around the idea of requiring some of the spaces in the lots to be created specifically for compact cars, which would take up less impervious space.
Township Division of Land Use Manager Sam Surtees said the board should consider whether properties like Carnegie Center would be affected when trying to lease out their office space.
“I don’t want to be Draconian, but I don’t want to be driven by what a developer thinks he or she wants,” Ciccone said. “I think we’re at the time now where we have to make policy decisions that involve forward thinking. I would advocate that we start trying to shrink the land in terms of parking, and you could still do it in a way that there’s flexibility, but I still want us to start moving in that direction.”
“Yes, we have to be competitive, but at the same time, I think we have a responsibility for our grandchildren,” Ciccone added.
Board Vice Chairman Steve Decter said there needed to be some flexibility, but that he agreed with Ciccone in that the board should begin shrinking down the amount of impervious surfaces. He suggested that “if there is a need for some expansion, if we leave some flexibility in the plan that would allow for an increase under some certification of need that we agree with, they would have to come back to the board in order to do that.”
During public comment, resident and Environmental Commission member Andrew Kulley said he liked the idea of encouraging more permeability of the surfaces and decreasing impervious surface. “It’s better to start with a lower parking ratio and make people demonstrate they have exhausted all these other possibilities before you grant them something higher, rather than start with something higher.”
Kleinman, who also spoke during public comment, said the idea of requiring a percentage of parking to be for compact cars might not be effective in that people who drive normal-sized or larger cars will still park in those spots, just taking up more than one space.
She also reiterated that she didn’t believe the board should increase the maximum impervious coverage at all, but rather that the ordinance should include some creativity about banking spaces, and that the businesses should have to show why they need more.
Still, “maybe you have some kind of eco-friendly firm rent out 50,”000 square feet and every person who works for the firm drives a hybrid, but then the next tenant doesn’t have that,” Kleinman said. “I’m just trying to make a reality in terms of businesses who want to have offices in our town.”
Harris Road resident Valerie Servis said she was curious why West Windsor’s ratio wasn’t compared with those in East Windsor, Cranbury, and Robbinsville, and that she’s seen a lot of commercial real estate signs along Route 130 in those towns stating that those properties were sold, and that office buildings similar to those in West Windsor might be moving there. Madden said the other three municipalities weren’t located in the Route 1 corridor.
In addition, she said, “If I were a person working in, let’s say, Carnegie Center, I don’t care how many parking spots you make for the bicycle, you’re not going to catch me riding my bicycle down Alexander Road, or any of the other busy roads, to get to my place of business. But if you put a trail that has the ability to allow a bicycle to travel on it, as opposed to woodchips which is a lot more difficult, I may be more inclined to use it, because I see it’s a safer avenue to ride my bicycle.”
Councilwoman Linda Geevers said she thought it best to go for regular size spaces, as people with bigger cars will still use them, just making it more dangerous in those parking lots.
Madden said he and other professionals would put together a draft ordinance for the board’s meeting on Wednesday, March 19, based upon everyone’s comments he received.
