CRANFORD — The Cranford Planning Board struggled to work through the sole application at its June 4 meeting after the developers and owners of a new youth sports training facility at 140 Bryant Avenue failed to submit the proper site plans addressing ordinances for parking, landscaping and lighting. Board members Dennis Geier, David Leber and Mayor Terrence Curran were absent from the two-and-a-half-hourlong meeting.

Owner Greg Wofsy told the board that Cranford Performance Institute, LLC will specialize in pitching and hitting for baseball and softball, as well as individual golf simulator training. As a certified golf instructor, Mr. Wofsy said he will provide one-onone coaching, along with two salaried baseball and softball professionals. Mr. Wofsy told the board that he sees the business as a continued investment in the community’s youth athletes, and that he hopes to “meet the unique needs of every child in this town.” This would be Mr. Wofsy’s third business in Cranford, acting as an offshoot of his current golf-simulator entertainment and training space, Cranford Golf Studio. Mr. Wofsy also owns a construction company, and says his wife, Judi Wofsy, will manage Cranford Performance Institute.

Attorney Michael Gilson and Engineer John Dunlea represented Mr. and Mrs. Wofsy during the hearing. They were joined by Brian Petrucci, who identified himself as the lead director of the project with the Richard Pierce architecture firm. Mr. Petrucci explained that he is not a licensed architect, but that he was authorized to speak on behalf of Richard Pierce, who approved the plans but was not available for the hearing. After some consideration between Board Chair Molly Kellett and Attorney Jonathan Drill, Ms. Kellett decided not to deem Mr. Petrucci as an expert in the field of architecture and ultimately did not hear his testimony.

Mr. Wofsy provided an overview of the architectural plans for the 22,000square-foot, one-story commercial building, which include little to no changes to the exterior and interior. He said he will maintain the four existing offices and four ADA-compliant restrooms, and that a majority of the interior renovations require equipment setup. Mr. Wofsy explained that the space will be outfitted with a turf floor, and that sporting equipment like pitching machines and netting are set up without major construction. However, board member Donna Pedde said, “I just had seen a drywall truck outside the building,” and questioned if work had already begun.

In response, Mr. Wofsy said he was patching existing drywall to “make the place presentable,” and that he “consulted with the building department; they said I did not need any building permit associated with that.” Mr. Drill said the board would confirm whether or not permits are required for drywall installation.

Multiple members of the board questioned the proposed operating hours of 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., as well as the ability to run with limited staff. Although he plans to utilize the full operating hours, Mr. Wofsy testified that use of the facility will depend on bookings as well as coaches’ personal schedules. After considerable back and forth about the number of athletes, parents and coaches potentially in the building, Mr. Wofsy and the board determined that the number of visitors could be as high as 40 at peak use. “What limit on the number of customers are you willing to put in order to get the parking variance?” Mr. Drill asked, while Ms. Kellett questioned, “how are you going to control the occupancy of the building?”

The biggest issues for the board hinged on the number of parking spaces available on the lot, as well as their size. Township ordinances require 70 parking stalls for the building, which must measure 10 by 18 feet. The property currently only includes 11 stalls measuring nine by 18 feet. When Mr. Drill asked Mr. Dunlea if he is qualified as a traffic engineer, Mr. Dunlea responded that he is not and that he plans to bring a traffic engineer to the next hearing. Without the necessary site plans, Mr. Drill attempted to guide Mr. Dunlea through a series of questions to parse out what kinds of variances and exemptions the developers would need to address parking concerns, advising him to return with detailed plans when the hearing on the application continues next month. Mr. Gilson also testified that the neighboring commercial business, the Durst Corporation, has agreed to rent any number of its 200 parking spaces to Mr. Wofsy. Mr. Gilson agreed to return with a written agreement, as well as evidence that the Durst Corporation will maintain sufficient parking according to the Commercial Zone 2 ordinance.

Mr. Dunlea confirmed that he would return with the proper site plans, with specifications for addressing parking, landscaping and lighting ordinances for the property, all of which Mr. Drill said the board’s development review committee provided guidance for in an earlier memo. “This is crossing the t’s and dotting the i’s; this is what the town ordinance requires,” Mr. Drill said.

The hearing on the application will continue at the Wednesday, July 16 meeting of the Cranford Planning Board, at 7:30 p.m., in the township committee chambers.