[00:00:01]
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I FELT.YEAH, BUT I THINK SHE'S GOING, SHE'S GONNA, SHE'S GONNA MOTION FOR, EXCUSE ME.
[6. Nomination and Election of Chair ]
THIS TIME ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIRMAN? I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE TOM GIULIANO FOR CHAIR.ARE THERE ANY OTHERS? SEEING NONE.
PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE CALLED ALL THEM
[7. Nomination and Election of Vice-Chair ]
UM, ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIRMAN? I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE CLARK PERKS.ARE THERE ANY OTHERS? I'LL DO ROLL CALL MAYOR CIZIK.
UM, I, AND I'LL TURN THE MEETING OVER TO THE CHAIRMAN.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYONE, UH, HERE.
UM, WELCOME TO THE, TO THE NEW MEMBERS OF VOLUNTEERING YOUR TIME.
UM, THIS IS MY, I BELIEVE IT'S MY 10TH YEAR, UM, SERVING.
UM, IT'S BEEN AN HONOR AND UM, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR APPOINTING ME.
[8.a. 1-2026 – Appointing Planning Board Secretary ]
TO MOVE FORWARD AND, UH, ADOPTING, THESE ARE MORE RIGHT THE MEMORIALIZATION OF A FEW RESOLUTIONS.WE'LL TRY TO BE AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.
I KNOW EVERYBODY HAS SOME THINGS, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC HAS A LOT, UH, TO SAY TONIGHT, BUT WE'RE GONNA MOVE QUICK AND DO SOME MEMORIALIZATION OF A FEW RESOLUTIONS.
UM, WE ARE GOING TO DO, UH, THREE DASH, OR EXCUSE ME, ONE DASH 2026 APPOINTING THE PLANNING BOARD.
SECRETARY, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPOINT MS. BELL? IS THAT HOW WE'RE GONNA DO IT OR ARE WE JUST GONNA YEP, THAT'S HOW WE WANT IT.
SO WHO MADE THE MOTION? UH, NO.
AND MR. UH, MR.
UM, DO WE DO ALL IN FAVOR OR DO WE DO ROLL CALL? I'LL DO ROLL CALL.
[8.c. 3-2026 – Designating Planning Board Meeting Dates ]
SECOND IS, UH, UH, MORALIZATION OF THREE DASH 2026.DESIGNATION OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED.
[8.d. 4-2026 – Designating Planning Board Official Newspaper ]
THE NEXT ONE IS, UH, FOUR DASH 2026 DESIGNATING A PLANNING BOARD OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER.HAVE A MOTION? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED.
[8.e. 5-2026 – Appointing Planning Board Planner ]
NEXT IS FIVE DASH 2026 APPOINTING OF THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD PLANNER TO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPOINT, UH, TAYLOR DESIGN.[00:05:01]
SECOND SIMONS MAYOR CIZIK AYE.[8.f. 6-2026 – Appointing Planning Board Engineer ]
NEXT IS APPOINTING, UH, SIX DASH 2026 APPOINTING THE PLANNING BOARD ENGINEER.DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPOINT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS? SO MOVED.
IT'S, UH, MY 38TH SEEMS LIKE JUST STARTED YESTERDAY.
NO, WE DID 'CAUSE WE PULLED THAT ONE.
[8.g. 18-2025 – Eagle Auto Body, LLC, 37 Fostertown Road, 301/7.02, SPR5753AF – approving a one-year extension of Resolution 13-2025 granting Amended Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval. ]
18 DASH 2025 EAGLE AUTO BODY.DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT RESOLUTION? SO MAYOR CIZIK, MR. FUSS OR MR.
WHO, ANYONE WHO? I'M APOLOGIZE.
ANYONE WHO WAS I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.
OKAY, WE ARE GOING TO TABLE WHAT? RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA TABLE H WE'RE GONNA MOVE THEM TO LATER.
MOVE THEM TO THE END AFTER MR. TAYLOR'S PRESENTATION.
IT WOULD BE, THEY'LL BE MOVED FOR CONSIDERATION AFTER ITEM 12 ON THE CURRENT JUDGE.
ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIR, OVER THE MINUTES, I'M GONNA EXCUSE MYSELF FROM THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING.
[11. Reports: Insufficient escrow balances over 6 months]
BEFORE WE GET STARTED, UM, WE ARE GOING TO, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, UM, THE INSUFFICIENT ESCROW IMBALANCES, WE'LL BE DEALING MORE WITH THEM.[9. Minutes: December 18, 2025 Meeting Minutes]
THE, THE MINUTES.DO WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT? YEAH, DO WE QUICK? THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT I WAS HANDLING, UH, THE MINUTES, UH, OF THE LAST MEETING.
DO I HAVE A, A MOTION? I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.
MR. MUCK? UH, MS. MUCK IS NOT HERE.
UH, MS.
[10. Correspondence: NJPO November/December 2025]
MS. BELL READ NUMBER 10.IS THAT, OH, SO YEAH, SO I DO HAVE SOME CORRESPONDENCE.
SO YOU RECEIVED, LEMME JUST GET MY, UM, ELECTRONICALLY SO IT'S NOT COMING HARD COPY ANYMORE.
THE NEW JERSEY PLANNER, IT'S, UH, PRODUCED BY NJPO.
IT'S AN ORGANIZATION THAT THE TOWNSHIP BELONGS TO.
UH, SO THEY DO LIKE EVERY EVERY TWO MONTHS THEY'LL DO, UM, A LITTLE MAGAZINE SO TO SPEAK, OR NEWSLETTER.
IT'S FOR NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, 2025.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION IN THERE.
THERE'S PROBABLY GONNA BE A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION ON ALL THE STUFF THAT YOU GUYS WILL EVENTUALLY TOUCH.
SOME OF IT WE'VE NE WE YOU PROBABLY HAVEN'T DONE BEFORE, BUT, UM, SO I SUGGEST THAT YOU READ IT.
THEY DO OFFER SOME CLASSES FOR FREE EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE THAT WE CAN, UH, ALL SIGN UP FOR AND YOU JUST WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT ME.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I I REALLY HIGHLY STRESS THAT YOU READ THAT IT'LL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND ALL THE PROCESSES THAT WERE, THAT ARE COMING FOR YOU.
IT FILLS YOU IN ON WHAT'S GOING ON.
[12.a. Consideration of Resolution 33-2026, amending Resolution 110-2025 and Directing the Planning Board to Conduct a Preliminary Investigation of Block 803, Lots 6.01 & 6.02 and Eliminating the Preliminary Investigation of Block 401, Lots 10.01, 10.02, 10.04 & 15 for the Potential Designation as an Area in Need of Redevelopment]
POINT, UM, WELL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. TAYLOR.UM, THIS IS, UH, A REFERRAL FROM TOWN COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 33 DASH 2026.
I WILL SAY, UM, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IF THE PUBLIC WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK BEFORE WE, WE VOTE ON ANYTHING.
YOU WILL, UM, EVERYONE WILL BE GIVEN FIVE MINUTES.
UM, WE'RE GONNA ASK THAT WE STICK TO THE FIVE WE'RE GONNA ASK.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH WHAT'S GOING ON.
UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TO LISTEN AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S A TIME LIMIT.
SO, UM, FIRST WE WILL HEAR FROM MR. TAYLOR AND THEN, RIGHT.
[00:10:01]
YES.THEN, THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS.
LEMME MAKE SURE THAT I'M ON HERE.
UM, I'LL DO A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF THE PROCESS AND WHY WE ARE AT THE POINT WE'RE AT THIS EVENING.
AND THEN WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SITES THAT WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON TONIGHT FOR A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE THOSE TO BE AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT WITHOUT CONDEMNATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW.
AND THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY IS AS ALL OF YOU, OR MOST OF YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW WE HAVE SOME NEW BOARD MEMBERS HERE, UM, GOVERNOR MURPHY SIGNED IN TO LAW IN 2024, UH, AMENDMENTS TO THE FAIR HOUSING ACT, UM, THE NEW JERSEY DCA.
AND THIS IS BASED ON OBVIOUSLY THE MOUNT LAUREL AND THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS THAT REQUIRE EVERY MUNICIPALITY TO FULFILL THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE THEIR FAIR SHARE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE REGION.
UM, THE MECHANISM IS, IS REALLY, UH, A PROCESS THAT IS THRUST UPON UPON MUNICIPALITIES.
AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, MEDFORD HAS, UH, DECADES OF RICH PLANNING, HISTORY AND VISIONING WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN OUR TOWN.
MOST NOTABLY, DATING BACK TO 1972, THE TOWNSHIP HIRED THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, AN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER, IAN MCCART, TO DO WHAT IS CONSIDERED A, A VERY GROUNDBREAKING STUDY NATIONALLY, UH, TO FORM A LONG-TERM VISION FOR MEDFORD.
ALL OF OUR MASTER PLANS DO THE SAME THING, UH, AS MANY MUNICIPALITIES DO.
BUT WITH THIS FOURTH ROUND OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OCTOBER OF 2024, DCA ISSUED MEDFORD A PROSPECTIVE NEED NUMBER OF 171 ADDITIONAL NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT HAVE TO BE PROVIDED FOR, AND SOME FRANKLY, RELATIVELY SHORT TIMEFRAMES IN WHICH TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROCESS FOR THAT.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MEDFORD, LIKE EVERY MUNICIPALITY IN THE STATE IS STRUGGLING WITH BECAUSE PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING IS CHANGING OUR VISION FOR WHAT WE HAD CONTEMPLATED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE TOWN BASED UPON A SUPREME COURT DECISION JUSTIFIABLY, AND A COURT MANDATED NUMBER.
SO MEDFORD, LIKE A LOT OF TOWNS, HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE POSITION OF HAVING TO REZONE PROPERTIES AND MAKE OTHER LAND USE DECISIONS TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE AND IMMUNITY FROM BUILDER'S REMEDY AND TO BE CONSISTENT WITH, UH, THE LEGISLATION.
SO AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, UH, THROUGH 2025 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS DEVELOPED A HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE, UH, TOWNSHIP COUNCIL.
THAT IS THE IMPLEMENTING MECHANISM.
IT WAS ADOPTED IN JUNE OF 2024, I'M SORRY, JUNE OF 2025 AND AMENDED AGAIN IN DECEMBER OF 2025.
THAT WAS ADOPTED AS AN ELEMENT, A HOU AN ELEMENT OF OUR MASTER PLAN AS THE HOUSING ELEMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD BY TOWNSHIP COUNCIL.
MORE IMPORTANTLY BY THE FAIR SHARE HOUSING CENTER, WHO IS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVOCATE, AS WELL AS THE COURT AND AS WELL AS THE COURT APPOINTED COURT ADJUDICATOR, WHO IS A, UM, A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER WHO IS A HOUSING SPECIALIST THAT OVERSEES EACH MUNICIPALITY'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THEIR REQUIRED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO THAT GETS US TO THE POINT WHERE MEDFORD, AS WE KNOW, HAS IDENT, HAS IDENTIFIED THREE PARCELS FOR INCLUSIONARY ZONING.
THE CHALLENGER TRACKED, AND I CAN GO, I WILL GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE BLOCKS AND LOTS IN A LITTLE BIT.
THE CHALLENGER TRACKED THE CAMP EFS PARCEL AND THE, UH, PARK VIEW, ALSO KNOWN AS, UH, STALL ALTERNATE SITE AS REFERENCED IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
THOSE THREE SITES ARE GONNA BE INCLUSIONARY DEVELOPMENT.
THEY WILL INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF 20% AFFORDABLE UNITS AS WELL AS MARKET RATE UNITS.
THAT DISTRIBUTION, THOSE SITES HAVE ALL BEEN APPROVED.
THEY'VE BEEN ESTABLISHED TO BE AVAILABLE DEVELOPABLE AND APPROVABLE, UM, BY THE COURTS, UH, BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
UH, SO THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS IS MODIFYING THE ZONING TO FACILITATE THAT.
AS WE KNOW, WE HAVE PARCELS THAT ARE ZONED GMN GROWTH MANAGEMENT, NORTH AR AGRICULTURAL RETENTION THAT HAVE TO BE MODIFIED TO ACCOMMODATE THAT COURT MANDATED
[00:15:01]
AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION AS APPROVED.SO WE HAVE TWO MECHANISMS BY WHICH THIS CAN HAPPEN.
ONE IS A STANDARD ZONING MODIFICATION, A TYPE WRITTEN NARRATIVE THAT CHANGES THE UNIT TYPE CHANGES THE DENSITY SETS FORTH BUFFERS AND SETBACKS LIKE WE HAVE IN THE REST OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.
ONE OF THE OTHER MECHANISMS, AND THE REASON WE'RE HERE TONIGHT, OUR OFFICE HAS ALWAYS RECOMMENDED WHENEVER POSSIBLE TO GO THE ROUTE OF REDEVELOPMENT.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW IS STRUCTURED IN SUCH A WAY THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN GET VERY SPECIFIC WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING AT A SITE.
AND AS THESE PROJECTS MOVE FORWARD, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO MEDFORD AND MY OTHER MUNICIPALITIES TO GO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN ROUTE THAT ALLOWS VERY SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND ACTUAL IMAGES TO BE SET INTO THE PLAN OF THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TOWNHOUSES OR SINGLE FAMILIES WILL LOOK LIKE, THE FRONTS AND SIDES AND REARS WHAT THE ENHANCED BUFFERS WILL LOOK LIKE WITH CROSS SECTIONS AND OTHER GRAPHIC DEPICTIONS TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS GREATER CONTROL.
NO SURPRISES AT THE LEVEL OF COUNSEL OR ANY OF THE PLANNING BOARD HEARINGS AS A PROJECT MOVE FORWARD, MOVES FORWARD.
FRANKLY, IT REALLY GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTROL THE, THE QUALITY AND THE CHARACTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO MORE SUBJECTIVE, JUST BLACK AND WHITE NARRATIVE.
SO THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE HAVE AND CONTINUE TO RECOMMEND THE REDEVELOPMENT ROUTE, UM, FOR ALL OF THESE PARCELS TO BE ABLE TO GIVE US THAT.
AND WE DO, LIKE I SAID, WE DO THAT IN ALL OF OUR, UM, MUNICIPALITIES.
SO MOVING ALONG THAT PATHWAY, AND I ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF ALL OF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THIS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE PUBLIC WANTS TO.
THAT'S WHAT YOU, THAT'S WHAT YOU EMAILED.
AND I'M REFERRING TO A REDEVELOPMENT PROCESS, OUTLINE DOCUMENT DATED JANUARY 27TH AS IDENTIFIED IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
THE TRIAL ANDER PARCEL HAS ALREADY BEEN DESIGNATED AS AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT WITHOUT CONDEMNATION IN 2017 BY RESOLUTION 95 DASH 2017.
SO THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING IS TO DESIGNATE THE PARK VIEW AT KIRBY'S MILL AND THE STALL CAMP EFS PARCELS AS AREAS IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT WITHOUT CONDEMNATION, THAT DESIGNATION UNDER THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW, IT DOES NOT ENTITLE THE MUNICIPALITY TO EXERCISE ITS POWERS OF EMINENT DOMAIN.
ANY INCLUSION IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IS PURELY VOLUNTARY ON THE PART OF THE DEVELOPER IN ACCORDANCE AND, AND REFERRING TO THE COLORED SPREADSHEET.
NOW AT THE VERY TOP OF THAT COMMENTS, UM, ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE RELATE TO AND A GROSSLY SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF OF EFFORT THAT HAS GONE INTO, UM, GETTING TO A HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
BUT THAT TALKS ABOUT THE ASSIGNMENT OF MEDFORD'S PERSPECTIVE NEED.
AND THERE WAS A NEGOTIATION WITH THAT, THE ADOPTION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND THE FAIR SHARE PLAN AND WHERE THIS, THOSE SITES WERE SELECTED AND HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE APPROVAL, UH, IN JUNE AND AGAIN IN DECEMBER OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND THE FAIR SHARE PLAN.
SO THE NEXT STEPS ARE REALLY IMPLEMENTATION.
THE COURT UNFORTUNATELY, HAS IMPOSED A DEADLINE OF MARCH 15TH FOR ALL OF THE ZONING TO BE IN PLACE FOR MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
SO PLANNERS AND MUNICIPALITIES ARE SCRAMBLING, UH, TO MEET THESE DEADLINES, WHICH IS WHY YOU DO SEE AN ABBREVIATED TIMEFRAME, WHICH NORMALLY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER THAN THIS.
UM, WE ARE, WE HAVE ALREADY COMPLETED ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE.
THOSE ARE RESOLUTION FOR, FROM THE GOVERNING BODY, FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO UNDERTAKE THESE DESIGNATIONS AND ALSO THE PREPARATION OF THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORTS.
THOSE HAVE BEEN ON FILE MORE THAN 10 DAYS PRIOR.
THE STUDY AREA MAP WAS ON, ON FILE WITH THE TOWNSHIP CLERK'S OFFICE BEFORE THE FIRST NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED, UH, IN THE NEWSPAPER WHERE IT ITEM NUMBER SIX NOW, UH, WHICH
[00:20:01]
IS THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REDEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION.AND ASSUMING THIS'S POSITIVELY, COUNSEL WILL THEN DECLARE THIS AND AGREE, UH, WITH THE BOARD'S FINDINGS AS AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT WITHOUT CONDEMNATION.
THAT IS THE MECHANISM THAT ALLOWS THE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ITEMS EIGHT THROUGH, UH, 12, WHICH IS THE ACTUAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN ITSELF.
THERE ARE NO STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE REPORT THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS EVENING.
THIS IS REALLY THE STATUTORY STATUTORILY REQUIRED FIRST STEP TO ALLOW THE TOWN, UM, TO MOVE INTO A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THOSE WILL BE, BE, UH, INTRODUCED ON, OR THAT RE THOSE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS WOULD BE INTRODUCED ON FEBRUARY 17TH, REFERRED BACK TO THIS BOARD ON FEBRUARY 25TH FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION AT MARCH THREE.
SO THAT TOWN, THE TOWNSHIP CAN MAKE THE COURT MANDATED DEADLINE OF MARCH 15TH.
AND AGAIN, WE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THIS AS WE DO TO ALL OF OUR CLIENTS, BASICALLY TO HAVE GREATER CONTROL OVER THE CHARACTER AND THE QUALITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WE WERE PROVIDING.
UM, THIS SELECTION OF THESE SITES, UH, PROTECTS THE TOWN FROM WHAT'S KNOWN AS A BUILDER'S REMEDY, UH, TO ELIMINATE THAT RISK.
AND THAT'S, AND, AND TONY COULD EXPAND ON THIS CONSIDERABLY, IF THE TOWNSHIP IGNORES THE COURT MANDATE, A DEVELOPER CAN SHOW UP AND BUILD WHATEVER THEY WANT.
AND THE TOWN HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE ARCHITECTURE, OVER THE DENSITY, OVER THE UNIT TYPE.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S BEEN A, A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION OF COUNCIL MEETINGS, UH, OVER THE LAST YEAR.
SO THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US HERE TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT PART OF THE PROCESS.
IF NOT, WE COULD MOVE INTO THE DISCUSSION ON EACH ONE OF THE SITES.
JUST, I, I, I THINK YOU WERE PRETTY CLEAR ON THIS, BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, IF WE WERE TO KEEP THE ZONING AS IT IS OR DO OR REZONE IT, THAT WOULD GIVE US LESS CONTROL THAN DESIGNATED AN AREA DESIGNATED AN AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT AND ALLOWS US TO PUT MORE TIGHTER RESTRICTIONS ON IT YES.
AND IS IT ONE OF THE SITES LIKE HALF OF IT HIDDEN ALREADY OR AM I CONFUSED ON THAT? NO, UH, SO THE, THE CAMP EFS SITE, WHICH IS LOT 39.03, IT'S ALSO REFERENCED AS, UH, A SECOND LOT.
28.02, LOT 28 WAS ALREADY DESIGNATED IN 2017.
THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH OF 39 0 3.
SUBSEQUENTLY, A PORTION OF THAT WAS SUBDIVIDED OFF, BUT THE LAND AREA OF 20 LOT 28.02 WAS ENCOMPASSED IN THE LAND AREA PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED BY RESOLUTION 95 DASH 2017.
AND YOU SAID, SCOTT, YOU SAID THE THE ZONING
WHAT WOULD IT NORMALLY BE? WELL, WE'VE WORKED ON A LOT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLANS IN COMMUNITIES WHERE THERE WAS A UNI UNIQUE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
IT MAY HAVE HAD CONTAMINATION AND THERE WAS A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER OR SOME OTHER LAND USE.
AND IF THE TOWN SAYS YES, WE, WE THINK THIS MAKES SENSE IN OUR TOWN.
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS CAN TAKE 3, 6, 9 MONTHS TO WORK OUT THE DETAILS.
UM, THIS PROCESS UNFORTUNATELY IS, HAS BEEN ABBREVIATED AND ALL OF THE MUNICIPALITIES ARE SCRAMBLING TRYING TO SCHEDULE SPECIAL MEETINGS TO MEET THOSE, THOSE COURT DEADLINES.
SO IT'S JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS, REALLY.
IT'S AND WHO DETERMINED THAT DATE ON MARCH 15TH DEADLINE? THE, THE COURTS.
AND, AND, UM, UH, AGAIN, TO BE CLEAR, IF WE DO NOTHING AND WE DO NOT APPROVE THIS, THE DEVELOPERS SUE GO TO COURT.
THE COURT GIVES THEM THE BUILDER'S REMEDY AND THEN THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.
THEY CAN BUILD A THOUSAND UNITS, THEY COULD BUILD A 10 STORY APARTMENT COMP.
I MEAN, KIND OF THE SKY'S THE LIMIT FOR THAT, RIGHT? ESSENTIALLY.
THE TENANT WOULD LOSE ALL CONTROL OVER ZONING FOR
[00:25:01]
THANK YOU.SCOTT, ANN OR TONY, DO YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE OF WHICH SITE WE DO FIRST? WE DO THIS, THE STALL EFS EXPANSION.
SO THE FIRST ONE IS KNOWN AND, AND IT'S ON THE TITLE SHEET, THE STALL CAMP EFS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING BLOCK 3 0 2, LOT 28.02, AND LOT 39.03.
WE ISSUED A REPORT DATED JANUARY 16TH, 2026.
UM, UNDER THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BASIS FOR THE INVESTIGATION, IT BASICALLY IS A SUMMARY OF THE SUMMARY I JUST GAVE FOR BOTH OF THE PROJECTS.
WE DID NOTE THAT THE AREA OF BLOCK 3 0 2 LOT 28.02, THANKS.
HOW ABOUT THE MIKE CAN STILL PICK YOU UP FROM HERE.
THE AREA SHADED IN BLUE IS THE AREA THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AS AN AREA NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT IN 2017.
LOT 39.03 IS IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT.
AND IT, IT BECOMES AN EXTENSION OF THAT PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
SO THE FOCUS OF THIS REPORT WILL BE LIMITED TO LOT 39.03 AS AN EXTENSION OF THAT PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED AREA, UM, THROUGH THE REPORT, WHICH IS 20 SOME ODD PAGES.
UH, THERE IS A MAP AT, AT APPENDIX ONE AT THE REAR OF THE DOCUMENT.
UH, WE DO NEED, WE DO IDENTIFY THE NATURE OF THE PARCEL THAT LOT.
28.02 IS A 40.95 ACRE PARCEL IN THE AR AGRI ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, COMBINED WITH 28 0 2 TOTAL, ABOUT 61.55 ACRES PURSUANT TO THE TAX MAP, UH, FOR THE PRO FOR THE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE NORTHWESTERN QUADRANT OF THE CHURCH ROAD AND THE FOSTER TOWN ROAD INTERSECTIONS IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE IDENTIFIED THE EXISTING LAND USE.
UH, WE DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE, BASED ON AVAILABLE INFORMATION, WE HAVE SOME WETLANDS CONSTRAINTS, UH, ON THE SITE AND UNDER THE PARCEL ANALYSIS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I SHOULD MENTION IS THAT THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW HAS SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT NEED TO BE MET FOR THE PARCEL TO BE DESIGNATED AS AN AREA NEEDED REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, A PARCEL CAN BE INCLUDED PURSUANT TO THE DEFINITION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN THE STATUTE WHERE THE LAND AND BUILDINGS THEMSELVES ARE NOT NECESSARILY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE, BUT THE INCLUSION OF WHICH IS FOUND NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA FOR WHICH THEY ARE A PART.
SO BOTH OF THE REPORTS REFERENCE THAT AS WELL IN ADDITION TO CITING SPECIFIC STATUTORY CRITERIA.
SO WE NOTE FOR LOT 39.03, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN, UH, CLEARED AND FARMED SPORADICALLY DATING AT LEAST BACK TO 1931, WHICH IS A YEAR AT LEAST AVAILABLE AERIAL UH, PHOTOGRAPHY FOR THAT.
UH, IT, IT HAD FALLEN FALLOW AT SOME POINT INTO THE THIRTIES AND THEN WAS CLEED A PORTION OF IT AND FARMED WITH THE ADJACENT LOTS TO THE NORTH AND ALSO TO THE NORTHWEST.
THERE HAVE BEEN PERIODS OF AGRICULTURAL USE AND FALLING FALLOW BASED ON, UH, THE AERIAL IMAGERY THAT THAT HAD BEEN REVIEWED.
UH, THERE WERE ALSO PERIODS OF TIME WHERE, UM, SIGNIFICANT, UH, FARM EQUIPMENT HAD BEEN STORED ON THE SITE AND IN THE, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FIELD AREAS WHEN THEY WERE IN A FALLOW STATE.
UM, ACCORDING TO THE BRONX COUNTY TAX RECORDS ADJACENT LOT 39.04 TO THE NORTH WAS DEVELOPED INTO AN INDUSTRIAL USE IN 1984.
AND LOT 39.05 WAS DEVELOPED INTO INDUSTRIAL IN 1997.
SO THE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE ADJACENT PARCELS TO THE NORTH PLUS THE TINGER KEY REDEVELOPMENT AREA HAS LEFT A REMAINDER AGRICULTURAL FIELD ACRE OF APPROXIMATELY APPROXIMATELY 4.9 ACRES ON LOT 39.03.
[00:30:02]
CAN WE DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, UH, SUPREME COURT AND THE HOUSING ELEMENT UNDER THE DESIGNATION PORTION? BUT WE NOTICE, WE NOTE THAT THERE HAS BEEN AN EROSION OF THE AGRICULTURAL USE SURROUNDING IT, MAKING THIS, UH, SMALL AND UNDERUTILIZED, UH, PARCEL.UM, IN SUMMARY, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT, I'M REFERRING TO PAGE 16 NOW, MY APOLOGIES, SORRY.
UM, THAT, THAT EROSION, SORRY ABOUT IT DOES RESULT IN A GROWING LACK OF THE PROPER UTILIZATION OF THAT FARM'S EVIDENCED BY, UH, THE PERIODS OF INACTIVITY ON THE SITE AS WELL AS THE, UH, PRIOR EROSION OF THE CONTIGUOUS AGRICULTURAL LANDS, UH, THAT HAD BEEN DEDICATED TO, TO THE FARMING USE AND UNDERSTANDING THAT LOT.
28.02 HAS ALREADY BEEN DECLARED AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT AND IS SLATED FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENT AS AN INCLUSIONARY ZONING HEIGHT, UM, FOR ZONING PROJECT.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT THAT BLOCK 3 0 2 LOT 39.03 MEET STATUTORY CRITERIA E WHICH STATES A GROWING LACK OR TOTAL LACK OF PROPER UTILIZATION OF AREAS.
AND WE NOTED THAT GROWING LACK OF THE PROPERTY UTILIZATION CAUSED BY THE CONDITION OF TITLE DIVERSE OWNERSHIP OF THE RAIL PROPERTIES THEREIN, OR SIMILAR CONDITIONS WHICH IMPEDE LAND ASSEMBLAGE OR DISCOURAGED THE UNDERTAKING OF IMPROVEMENTS RESULTING IN A STAGNANT AND UNPRODUCTIVE CONDITION.
UNPRODUCTIVE CONDITION OF THE LAND, POTENTIALLY USEFUL AND VALUABLE FOR CONTRIBUTING TO AND SERVING THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.
WHICH CONDITION IS PRESUMED TO BE HAVING A NEGATIVE SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC IMPACT OR OTHERWISE BEING DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, OR WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT THAT IS MET.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROTECTION AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE IS ACTUALLY ADVANCED BY PROVIDING THE INCLUSIONARY FOURTH ROUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION.
AND THEN IT CAN, THAT IT MEETS STATUTORY CRITERIA E AND SECONDARILY UNDER THE DEFINITION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA, THIS COULD ALSO BE INCLUDED BECAUSE OF ITS CONTIGUOUSNESS WITH THE LARGER TRONS OR KEY AREA.
AND THIS BECOMES AN EXTENSION AND BASED ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND SHARE AND FAIR SHARE PLAN WILL BE, UH, DEVELOPED IN CONCERT WITH THAT LOT 28 OR 28.02 PARCEL MAKING IT NECESSARY FOR THE OVERALL EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA.
'CAUSE WITHOUT LOT 39.03, THE TOWNSHIP WILL NOT BE ABLE TO EFFECTUATE ITS, UH, HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN AS ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE COURTS, UM, WITHOUT THAT PARCEL.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT CRITERIA E IS MET AND IT COULD ALSO BE INCLUDED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
THAT WAS THE SHORT, SHORT VERSION.
I HAVE, UH, POTENTIALLY A STATEMENT AND A QUESTION.
SO I I IT'S SEEN IN YOUR REPORT THAT, UH, THIS PARCEL IT EXISTS IN THE AR ZONE, WHICH IN THEORY COULD BE USED TO GENERATE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CORRECT.
ON THIS SITE CURRENTLY WITHOUT ANY REDEVELOPMENT, CORRECT? RIGHT.
AND IT'S, IT'S BASED OFF YOUR REPORT, IT'S YOUR UNDER, IT'S OUR IT'S YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT, UM, WITHOUT THIS BASICALLY ESSENTIAL PIECE OF THIS REDEVELOPMENT ZONE THAT THE TOWNSHIP WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SATISFY ITS AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEED.
AND JUST, JUST JUST TO BACK UP ONE STEP, 'CAUSE THE BLUE AREA ON YOUR MAP IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH OR DOES NOT HAVE THE MEET THE RIGHT CRITERIA TO SATISFY A THIRD OF OF THE HOMES OR TO WHATEVER EXTENT IT'S, WE'RE GONNA SATISFY THEM.
[00:35:20]
THOSE, THOSE WERE MY QUESTIONS.ANYBODY ELSE? DO YOU WANNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE? YES.
DO YOU WANNA DO ONE AT A TIME AND ADOPT ONE AT A TIME? NEED TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST OR DO BOTH? BOTH.
THE, THE SECOND INVESTIGATION REPORT YOU HAVE IS ALSO DATED JANUARY 16TH, AND IT IS REPAIRED BY OUR OFFICE IDENTIFIED AS PARKVIEW AT KIRBY'S MILL.
UH, WE DO NOTE THAT THE, UH, IN INTRODUCTION IS REALLY WHAT I DID WAS, WAS COMMON FOR BOTH OF THOSE.
UH, THIS SITE, AS THE BOARD MAY KNOW, WAS INTRODUCED LATER IN THE PROCESS AFTER THE LAFFERTY FARM HAD TO BE WITHDRAWN BECAUSE IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE, UM, BECAUSE OF CON SOME CONTRACTUAL ISSUES BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE PROCESS, THE COURTS REQUIRED FOR YOU TO ESTABLISH THAT THE SITES ARE AVAILABLE DEVELOPABLE AND APPROVABLE, AND THAT COULDN'T BE JUSTIFIED.
SO IT HAD TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE PLAN.
I APOLOGIZE THAT WOULD YOU ABLE TO MOVE THAT MICROPHONE CLOSER TO YOU? SURE.
SO AGAIN, MOVING THROUGH THE REPORT, WE HAVE THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BASIS FOR THE INVESTIGATION.
AND AGAIN, THE MAIN ADVANTAGE WHILE, AND, AND JUST ONE MORE THING ON THE, ON TRADITIONAL ZONING, A LOT OF BOARD MEMBERS IN PUBLIC HEAR THE TERM SPOT ZONING.
YOU CAN'T JUST REZONE SOMETHING.
AND, AND THAT IS A, A GENERALLY TRUE STATEMENT.
A MUNICIPALITY HAS TO DO REZONING THROUGH A MASTER PLAN ELEMENT OR THROUGH ANOTHER EXHAUSTIVE, UH, PROCESS.
ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS, TOWNS ARE ALLOWED TO SPOT ZONE FOR THE PURPOSES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MEET A HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
UM, WE, WE DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S THE BETTER ROUTE.
WE THINK THAT GOING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN ROUTE AND BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFICITY DOES MAKE SENSE.
AGAIN, THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION AS A PLANNER.
FRANKLY, I'M, I'M ALSO A 59 YEAR RESIDENT OF MEDFORD TOWNSHIP AND THAT'S SO THAT THAT RECOMMENDATION HOLDS TRUE, UH, FOR ALL OF THESE SITES AS WELL.
THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF WHETHER OR NOT THESE SITES WILL BE DEVELOPED.
IT IS A MATTER OF HOW DO WE AS A PLANNING BOARD AND THE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL MAKE THESE DEVELOPMENTS THE BEST THEY CAN BE FOR THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND FOR THE FUTURE RESIDENTS WHO ARE GONNA LIVE THERE AS WELL.
AND THAT, THAT UNFORTUNATELY IS THE WAY THE SYSTEM IS STRUCTURED.
UM, THAT'S ABOUT AS MUCH LEEWAY THAT WE HAVE AS MUNICIPALITIES TO CONTROL THE QUALITY OF IT BECAUSE WE ALREADY KNOW HOW MANY WE HAVE TO PROVIDE.
WE IDENTIFY THE PROCEDURAL STEPS, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THOSE AS WELL AS THIS IS ALSO A NON CONDEMNATION AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION.
SO THERE WOULD BE NO EMINENT DOMAIN.
UM, WE TALK ABOUT THE DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA.
AND JUST FOR REFERENCE HERE, THIS IS ALSO SHOWN APPENDIX ONE OF YOUR MAP.
UH, BUT FOR REFERENCE WE HAVE CHURCH ROAD HARRIS DOWN ROAD HERE, LOT 6.01 IS THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE SHOWN IN YELLOW.
LAST 6.02 IS THE SITE WHERE RICK'S AUTO BODY AND THE RESIDENCE IS LOCATED ON HARRIS COUNTY.
IN THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE SITE.
WE HAVE TAX MAPS, EXHIBITS, EXISTING ZONING EXHIBITS, AS WELL AS THE BASIS FOR THE INVESTIGATION SHOWN ON THE STUDY AREA MAP.
BOTH LOTS TOGETHER, TOTAL APPROXIMATELY 64.17 ACRES, BLOCK 8 8 0 3 LOT 6.01
[00:40:01]
IS 61 ACRES LOCATED IN THE GM AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT NORTH DISTRICT FRONTAL AND CHURCH AIRS TOWN AND LAKESIDE DRIVE.IT'S CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED AS A THREE B OR A Q FARM AND IT'S CURRENTLY IN AGRICULTURAL USE, COMPRISED OF PADDOCKS AND FENCED FIELD AREAS WITH SOME LIVESTOCK LOADING SHEDS AND RELATED FARM STRUCTURES, INCLUDING A HORSE TRACK.
I THINK AS MOST OF US KNOW, UH, LOT 6.02 IS 3.01 ACRES LOCATED IN THE GMN UH, GROWTH MANAGEMENT NORTH ZONING DISTRICT, UH, LOCATED SLIGHTLY SOUTH OF CHURCH ROAD ALONG HARRIS TOWN.
THE LOT IS CURRENTLY USED TO SERVICE RICK'S AUTO BODY, UH, USE, WHICH IS NOT PROPOSED TO REMAIN CURRENT PROPERTY CLASS IS FOUR A COMMERCIAL AND CONTAINS A HOME.
THE AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR, UH, WITHOUT OUTSIDE STORAGE AND RELATED FACILITIES THAT WE GO INTO.
UM, ADDITIONAL DEPTH IN UNDER THE PARCEL ANALYSIS.
TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE, UH, PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES SURROUNDING, UH, AS WELL AS SOME AGRICULTURAL PRESERVED, UH, LANDS ACROSS AYS TOWN.
UM, UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING WE MENTIONED IT'S GMN GROWTH MANAGEMENT NORTH, UH, AND TOWNHOUSE AND PATIO HOMES ARE ALREADY PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE GMN ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, FOR SITES HAVING A MINIMUM, UH, TRACK SIZE OF AT LEAST 10 ACRES, UH, WHICH THIS SITE OBVIOUSLY DOES.
SO THE SITE CURRENTLY COULD BE DEVELOPED FOR TOWNHOUSE AND PATIO HOME DEVELOPMENT.
CURRENTLY STUDY AREA LOCATED WITHIN THE MEDFORD TOWNSHIP SEWER SERVICE AREA, ACCORDING, ACCORDING TO THE BRONTE COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN.
UM, AND WE DO NOTE THAT, UH, A REVIEW OF THE NEW JERSEY EMS SITES AND KNOWN CONTAMINATED SITES INDICATES THAT THERE ARE NO KNOWN OR DOCUMENTED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE STUDY AREA AND A REVIEW OF THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE N-J-D-E-P DATA SETS AS WELL AS INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE CONCEPT PLAN IN THE 2025 HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN DOES INDICATE THAT THERE IS A WETLAND, UH, FRESHWATER WETLAND AREA IN THE FORM OF AN AGRICULTURAL DITCH, ESSENTIALLY TO BISECTS THE PROPERTY.
AND THERE ARE, UH, TRANSITION AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, UH, THAT WILL NEED TO BE COMPLIED WITH, UH, WHEN AND IF THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD AND OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY DEP APPROVALS.
UM, UNDER THE PARCEL ANALYSIS AND THE REDEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION, AGAIN, WE HAVE STATUTORY CRITERIA A THROUGH H, UM, THAT WILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
WE SET FORTH ALL OF THOSE IN OUR REPORT AND STARTING WITH BLOCK 8 0 3, AND I'M ON PAGE 12, LOT 6.02, THAT IS THE RICK AUTO BODY PARCEL.
IT'S A THREE ACRE, 3.01 ACRE PARCEL.
IT INCLUDES SEVERAL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, OUTDOOR STORAGE AND MATERIALS, VEHICLES, INOPERABLE VEHICLES, WASTE OIL PARTS, AND OTHER MATERIALS.
UH, ALSO CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1900 ACCORDING TO THE BURLINGTON COUNTY TAX RECORDS.
WE IDENTIFY A NUMBER OF PICTURES SHOWING OUTDOOR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT, UH, VARIOUS MATERIALS ON PAGE 13.
AND NOTE THAT AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR FACILITY OR GARAGE IS NOT A PERMITTED USE IN THE GMN GROWTH MANAGEMENT NORTH ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, THAT IS DEFINED AS A REPAIR GARAGE.
WE SET FORTH THAT AND ALSO NOTE THAT SINCE THIS HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE AT LEAST THE MID 1970S, IT CURRENTLY OPERATES AS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE.
SO ANY IMPROVEMENTS OR EXPANSION OF THE FACILITY WOULD REQUIRE A D TWO VARIANCE FOR THE EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING USE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UH, THE SITE'S ALSO NON-CONFORMING WITH NUMEROUS OTHER ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MORE THAN ONE PRINCIPLE USE PER LOT.
MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, SETBACKS TO BUILDINGS, SETBACKS TO PAVING OR PARKING BUFFERS TO RESIDENTIAL USES OR ZONES, PARKING LOT BUFFERS PROVIDING PAVED PARKING AREAS ACCESSIBLE A DA PARKING AND ROUTES TO BUILDINGS, COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE, OUTDOOR STORAGE OF BOATS AND VEHICLES, MOTOR VEHICLE SCREENING AND STORAGE USE OF TRAILERS
[00:45:01]
FOR CONTAINERS FOR PERMANENT STORAGE, STREET TREES AND LANDSCAPING PROVISIONS.THIS SITE IS NON-COMPLIANT WITH A MAJORITY OF OF OUR ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.
ALSO, 5 25 SECTION SERVICE STATIONS AND REPAIR GARAGES.
UM, SET FORTH SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED ALL OF THOSE AREAS IN RED UNDERLYING TEXT, WHICH APPARENTLY DO NOT COMPLY, WHERE ALL PITS LIFT AND WORKING AREAS ARE REQUIRED TO BE INDOORS, WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
ALL STORAGE AREAS HAVE TO BE, UH, SCREENED FROM PUBLIC VIEW, WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
UM, ALL STRUCTURES SHALL BE SET BACK AT LEAST, UH, 40 FEET FROM ALL STREET AND PROPERTY LINES, WHICH THEY CURRENTLY ARE NOT.
UM, REPAIR GARAGES REQUIRED TO BE DESIGNED COMPATIBLY WITH OTHER PERMITTED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES IN THE DISTRICT.
AND I THINK THE IMAGES ARE PRETTY CLEAR THAT THIS IS REALLY NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
UH, ALSO REQUIREMENTS FOR MAINTAINING BUILDING SETBACKS.
ALSO NO AUTOMOBILES, UM, THAT ARE JUNK OR INOPERABLE MAY BE STORED FOR A PERIOD IN EXCESS OF 90 DAYS.
AND A REVIEW OF DETAILED, UH, QUARTERLY AERIAL UH, IMAGERY.
THERE ARE NUMEROUS, UM, VEHICLES THAT HAVE BEEN IN, UH, THE CURRENT LOCATIONS FOR, UH, FOREIGN EXCESS OF 90 DAYS, MULTIPLE YEARS FOR, FOR MANY OF THOSE STRUCTURES.
SO THE, THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE INTENDED TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
AND THE NEARBY LAND USES THE EXTENSIVE DEVIATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS OPERATION WOULD APPEAR TO HAVE A PARTICULARLY DELETERIOUS EFFECT UPON THE NEARBY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE IDENTIFY THE OUTSIDE STORAGE OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND WASTE OIL, AS WELL AS MATERIALS AND BARBED WIRE FENCING ON THE SITE.
WE ALSO NOTE ON SHEET 17 THE SUBSTANTIAL AGE OF THE BUILDINGS, UH, WHICH ARE SHOWING, UH, EXHIBITING SIGNS OF DETERIORATION AND DILAPIDATION.
THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS CONTINUE ON TO PAGE 18 OF THE REPORT AS WELL AND ONTO PAGE 19 AND ONTO 20.
WE NOTE, WE NOTE THAT THE OPERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR CAN GENERATE NOISE.
AIRBORNE, PARTICULAR, IT'S AN ODORS.
IN ADDITION, FLUIDS LEAKING ONTO UNPAVED GROUND FROM DAMAGED VEHICLES HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO CREATE SOIL AND GROUND ORDER CONTAMINATION IMPACTS.
AND THE MYRIAD OF SITE DEFICIENCIES SIGNIFY AN OBSOLETE LAYOUT THAT RESULTS IN OVERCROWDING OF GROWING OR TOTAL LACK OF, OF PROPER UTILIZATION OF THE AREAS IN A FAULTY ARRANGEMENT OR DESIGN OF THE SITE, WHICH THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCES SPECIFICALLY SEEK TO AVOID.
THESE CONDITIONS HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO DISCOURAGE THE UNDERTAKING OF IMPROVEMENTS RESULTING IN A STAGNANT AND UNPRODUCTIVE CONDITION OF THE LAND, WHICH CAN HAVE A NEGATIVE SOCIAL OR ECONOMIC IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
THE PURPOSE OF THE TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IS SET FORTH AT DR SECTION 1 0 3 AND THE ORDINANCES ADOPTED PURSUANT NJ SA 40 55 D ONE AT SEC IN ORDER TO PROMOTE AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS AND GENERAL WELFARE AND FURTHERANCE OF THE FOLLOWING.
RELATED AND MORE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES, THE EXTENSIVE NONCONFORMITIES FROM THE ORDINANCE CAN THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE SAFETY, HEALTH, MORAL AND WELFARES OF THEIR SURROUNDING AREA OR THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT BLOCK 8 0 3 LOT 6.02 MEETS STATUTORY CRITERIA.
D AND EI MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A NON CONDEMNATION AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT.
BLOCK 8 0 3 LOT 6.01 IS THE 61.16 ACRE, UH, FARM PORTION OF THE PROJECT, WHICH FRONT ON CHURCH A CHURCH, ARIS TOWN AND LAKESIDE DRIVE THE LOT IS CLASSIFIED AS THREE B UH, FARM.
AND IT HAS THOSE RELATED FARMING STRUCTURES I PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED.
UH, FARMS ARE A PERMITTED USE IN THE GMN ZONE, WHICH INCLUDES THE PRODUCTION OF AGRICULTURE AND HORTICULTURAL CROPS, TREES AND FOREST
[00:50:01]
PRODUCTS, LIVESTOCK, POULTRY FOR ANIMALS, AND OTHER RELATED USES SET FORTH IN THE ORDINANCE.UM, ON PAGE 20, WE IDENTIFY THAT WHILE THE BUILDINGS APPEAR SERVICEABLE, MANY OF THE BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND FENCES ON THE SITE OF A SUBSTANTIAL AGE AND EXHIBIT SIGNIFICANT SIGNS OF DETERIORATION AND DILAPIDATION.
WE HAVE SOME CLOSEUP IMAGES IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT ON PAGE 20, SOME ADDITIONAL IMAGES ON PAGE 21 AS WELL.
AND WE NOTE THE DEFINED SWALE AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS THAT BISECT THE SITE GENERALLY ON AN EASTWEST ORIENTATION IS THAT BOTTOM IMAGE ON SHEET 21.
SO THE STATE OF DECLINE, THE DISREPAIR AND DILAPIDATION OF THE FARM BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES SUGGESTS THAT THERE'S A GROWING LACK OF PROPER UTILIZATION OF THE LOT RESULTING IN A STAGNANT AND UNPRODUCTIVE, UNPRODUCTIVE CONDITION OF THE LAND, POTENTIALLY USEFUL AND VALUABLE FOR CONTRIBUTING TO AND SERVING THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.
AS WE DISCUSSED ABOVE, METRO TOWNSHIP HAS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION, MUST BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN, UH, FOR, AS REAFFIRMED BY THE COURT, MUNICIPALITIES MUST PROVIDE THE ZONING MECHANISMS THAT WILL ENABLE THOSE REALISTIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS IS ONE OF THE INCLUDED SITES AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT PLAN WILL RE REQUIRE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY EITHER THROUGH TRADITIONAL ZONING OR THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WHICH WE HAD INDICATED PREVIOUSLY THAT THIS PROCESS, WE BELIEVE AND RECOMMEND THAT IT AFFORDS GREATER CONTROL OVER THE QUALITY AND THE CHARACTER OF THE REQUIRED INCLUSIONARY DEVELOPMENT, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, BUFFERS, LIGHTING, OPEN SPACE, AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT'LL BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH MEDFORD.
AND AS IT IS INCLUDED, WE BELIEVE THAT INCLUSION, UH, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING, WHICH IS SET FORTH AS AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE, BY DCA, BY THE STATE CONSTITUTION, UM, THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN DOES IN FACT ADVANCE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY AS, AS SET FORTH AND REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE.
SO WE BELIEVE THE BLOCK 8 0 3 LOT 6.01 MEETS STATUTORY CRITERIA E AND MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A NON CONDEMNATION AREA NEEDED ROUTE OF REDEVELOPMENT.
IN ADDITION, WE THINK THAT THIS PARCEL, UH, BECAUSE OF THE COMPLIANT RICK'S AUTO BODY SITE LOT 6.02, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, THE CONCEPT PLANS IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY FOR THE TOWN TO MEET ITS PROSPECTIVE NEED, UH, AS SET FORTH AND AS DICTATED BY DCA.
UM, SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE PARCEL COULD ALSO BE INCLUDED PURSUANT TO THE DEFINITION OF A REDEVELOPMENT AREA WHERE THE LAND AND BUILDINGS THEMSELVES MAY NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, BUT THE INCLUSION OF WHICH IS FOUND NECESSARY FOR THE OVERALL REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA OF WHICH THEY ARE A PART.
AGAIN, UNDERSTANDING THAT LOT 6.02 QUALIFIES AS AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT.
AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ON THAT.
I HAVE FOUR QUESTIONS AND, AND YOU, YOU, YOU JUST SAID THIS, SO I'M JUST KIND OF REFLECTIVE LISTENING IT BACK TO YOU.
UM, WE COULD DO SPOT ZONING, BUT REDEVELOPMENT GIVES US MORE CONTROL THAN SPOT ZONING WOULD DO.
UM, ARE THERE ANY UN UNDEVELOPED TRACKS OF LAND SOUTH OF ROUTE 70 THAT ARE LARGE ENOUGH THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS? SO I WAS NOT PART OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE HOUSING ELEMENT DEVELOPMENT, BUT UNDERSTANDING THE PRINCIPLES OF ALL PINE LANDS MUNICIPALITIES, IT IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THE DENSITIES IN THE PINELANDS PORTION OF THE MUNICIPALITY.
AND I, I WOULD DEFER MR. NOLAN MAY BE ABLE TO EXPAND ON THAT.
THE PINELAND ONLY ALLOWS CERTAIN DENSITY, UM, IN PINELANDS AREAS.
AND SO THAT DENSITY WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE THE FOURTH ROUND HOUSING.
UM, WE DO HAVE THE PROPERTY, THE SANS PROPERTY THAT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON IT IN ORDER FOR THAT TO BE ACCOMMODATED, UH, THAT REQUIRED DOWN ZONING IN SOME SURROUNDING AREAS.
SO THEY COULD UP ZONE THAT AND BE ABLE TO
[00:55:01]
PUT THOSE 60 UNITS THERE.BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE.
UM, HAS THE, UH, HAS THE BUILDER'S REMEDY BEEN BROUGHT OR LEVIED AGAINST OTHER NEW JERSEY TOWNS IN THE HAS AND IT WAS BAD RIGHT? FOR SOUTH BRUNSWICK IN MIDDLESEX COUNTY? PROBABLY THE SHINING EXAMPLE.
THE, UH, SOUTH BRUNSWICK IN MIDDLESEX COUNTY IS PROBABLY THE BEST EXAMPLE OR THE WORST EXAMPLE.
THEY LOST ALL CONTROL OVER ZONING.
THE TOWN TOOK IT OVER AND DID WHAT THE COURT DECIDED WAS GONNA BE DYING BY WAY OF BUILDER'S REMEDY.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE WORST EXAMPLE.
THERE'S OTHERS, BUT THAT ONE REALLY STICKS OUT.
RIGHT? AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUS OBVIOUSLY WITH ADDITIONAL HOMES THERE'S GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL FAMILIES, ADDITIONAL STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOLS AND YOU KNOW, OUR OUR SCHOOLS ARE, ARE CROWDED TODAY.
THEY WERE CROWDED WHEN I WENT TO MEMORIAL.
UM, UH, BUT UNDER THE BUILDER'S REMEDY THERE COULD BE MORE HOMES AND EVEN MORE STUDENTS COMING INTO THE YES THEY COULD.
THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAVE.
MY QUESTIONS, UM, WOULD BE MORE SPECIFIC TO PARCELS, BUT THOSE ARE GREAT POINTS, MARK.
UM, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THESE TWO SITES OR THE ONE COMBINED SITE WITHOUT REDEVELOPMENT OR WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT COULD BE UTILIZED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.
UM, AND WHAT, WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THIS REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, IF THE OWNER OF THESE PARCELS CHOSE TO GO THAT ROUTE, WHAT, WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD THEIR DENSITIES LOOK LIKE? I'D HAVE TO RESEARCH AND GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT.
IT'S SOMEWHERE IN LIKE THE, I DO KNOW POSITIVE, I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID LOOK AT THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS, UH, IN SOME OF THE EARLIEST DISCUSSIONS ON THE CONCEPT PLANS, A SIGNIFICANT PERIMETER BUFFER AROUND ALL OF THE ROAD FRONTAGES, UH, OF AN UNTOUCHED AND SORT OF BURNED AND HEAVILY LANDSCAPED AREA OF AT LEAST 50 FEET WAS CONTEMPLATED.
AND THEN AN EVEN GREATER ENHANCED BUFFER UP AGAINST THE EXISTING, EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT WAS THREE, 300 FEET THAT WAS HUNDREDS OF FEET.
AND THAT WAS DISCUSSED CURRENTLY UNDER, UNDER THE ZONING TOWNHOUSES, TOWNHOUSE LOTS COULD BE SET BACK 25 FEET FROM THOSE EXISTING ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO INSTEAD OF 25 FEET FROM ROADS OR ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE GETTING 300 FROM ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD AND 50 FROM THE ROADS FROM THE ROAD.
AND, AND WE CAN REQUIRE TREES BE PLANTED THAT WE, WE CAN REQUIRE.
AND, AND MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, UH, A COMBINATION OF SIGNIFICANT NATURALIZED BERMS THAT FIT WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE AND THEN PREDOMINANTLY EVERGREEN TREES.
BUT THEN LAYERING THAT WITH EVERGREEN SHRUBS, DECIDUOUS SHRUBS AND ORNAMENTAL TREES.
UH, SO THAT THERE IS A, A BOLSTERED BUFFER THROUGH THERE.
UH, BECAUSE THERE IS A DIFFERENT DENSITY BETWEEN THE LAND USES MM-HMM
OUR, OUR STANDARD ORDINANCE, OUR TYPICAL ORDINANCE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THAT.
AND AGAIN, THERE'S NOT HAVING LOTS TO BE 25 FEET FROM EXISTING HOMES.
AND YOU HAD MENTIONED SOME ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES WITH THIS LOT OR THE MAIN LOT, I SHOULD SAY 6.01.
JUST WALK US THROUGH HOW THAT WOULD PLAY INTO A PLAN.
SO, AND I WILL, I'LL ALSO REFER BACK TO COMMENT 15 AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THIS.
ONCE THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IS DEVELOPED, A LOT OF TIMES THERE ARE CONCEPTUAL WETLANDS LINES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BECAUSE OF THE COMPRESSED TIMELINES.
BUT DEP LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION AND LOI THAT ALSO ASSIGNS WHAT THE BUFFER OR TRANSITION AREA IS, ARE OFTEN NOT AVAILABLE AS CONDITIONS OF ALL OF THE APPROVALS.
AND EVEN AFTER WE DO ALL THE ZONING, ANY REDEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNTY SOIL EROSION AND DEP AND COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE OUTSIDE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS.
AND THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL HEARINGS FOR SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION AFTER ALL OF THIS GOES THROUGH.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE WETLANDS MAY INCREASE IN SIZE OR SHRINK IN SIZE.
UM, SO THERE COULD BE A MINOR RECONFIGURATION,
[01:00:01]
BUT ANY OF THOSE WOULD END UP GOING TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL TO BE APPROVED FIRST, UM, THROUGH THE PROCESS.AND THEN, UM, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE NUMBERS OF UNITS, A LOT OF TIMES IN OUR PREFERENCE WHEN WE WRITE A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, WE STRUCTURE IT SO THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS IS A GIVEN.
THERE MUST BE X AND THE MARKET RATE UNITS IS AN UP TO OR NOT MORE THAN.
SO IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS, THERE MAY BE A LOSS OF MARKET RATE UNITS, NO LOSS OF AFFORDABLE UNIT.
'CAUSE NOW THE TOWNSHIP IS NOT COMPLIANT AND I'M REALLY, IT'S NOT REALLY THE SUBJECTIVE TONIGHT'S YEAH.
HEARING, UM, BUT THESE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS.
BUT IT'S, BUT IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE CAN WRITE THOSE THINGS INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AS WE DO THIS AND GET VERY SPECIFIC.
SO THE TOWN IS AS PROTECTED AS IT CAN BE.
WE'RE DEVELOPING THE SITE, BUT WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN TO HAVE IT FIT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF MEDFORD AND WHAT, WHAT WE AS RESIDENTS AND BOARDS AND COUNCILS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR 60 YEARS.
SO MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU HAD MENTIONED SEVERAL NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUES WITH THE RICK'S AUTO BODY PARCEL 6.02 AND THERE, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY LISTED AND MAKES A LOT OF SENSE OUTSIDE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS.
WHAT WOULD BE, UM, A MEANS TO REMEDY THOSE, THOSE, I DON'T WANNA CALL THEM INFRACTIONS 'CAUSE THE, THEY'RE THOSE NONCONFORMITIES NONCONFORMITIES.
SO THIS IS A, THIS IS A QUANDARY OF THE TOWNS AND LAND USE BOARDS DEAL WITH CONSTANTLY WHEN THERE IS AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING USE, IF THEY EXPAND ONE SQUARE FOOT OF BUILDING AREA, THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE ZONING BOARD.
AND IN WHICH ALL THESE INSTANCES WOULD BE BROUGHT UP, THEY WOULD BE BROUGHT UP.
SO WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THOSE NONCONFORMING SITES JUST TEND TO EXIST THE WAY THEY ARE FOREVER AND THEY FALL INTO STATES OF DISREPAIR.
AND BECAUSE THERE'S NO INCENTIVE FOR SOMEBODY TO INVEST IN A PROPERTY LIKE THAT MM-HMM
SO IT, IT REALLY BECOMES A PROBLEM FOR A MUNICIPALITY AND FRANKLY FOR AN AREA.
AND IS THERE ANY HISTORICAL VALUE OR NATURE TO ANY OF THE STRUCTURES ON THE RICK'S AUTO BUDDY SITE? ARE THEY LISTED AS HISTORICAL SITES OR NOT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO FIND, BUT AS PART OF THEIR DEP AND THEIR WETLANDS PERMITTING, THEY WILL HAVE TO DO ARCHEOLOGICAL.
UH, 'CAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE, UM, THROUGHOUT ANYWHERE IN NEW JERSEY, PARTICULARLY IN THE CREEK WATERSHED, UH, SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES, CULTURAL RESOURCES.
I CAN GIVE YOU AN ANSWER ON THE, UH, THE NUMBER OF UNITS FOR PARK PARK VIEW.
UH, IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 80 'CAUSE IT'S 1.25, UH, UNITS PER ACRE.
SO AGAIN, NOT THAT THE TOWNSHIP WOULD LOOK TO PURSUE THAT AS A, AS A DEVELOPMENT SITE, BUT OUTSIDE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT SITE, THIS SITE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO RESIDENTIAL AT THAT, AT THAT DENSITY WHICH IS PERMIT, CORRECT.
JUST TO BE CLEAR TOO, THAT THERE'S NO REMEDY, UM, UNDER THE FAIR SHARE TO LIKE PUSH IN THE S RIGHT? THAT JUST, THAT'S JUST NON, THAT'S A NON-STARTER, RIGHT? THAT'S 'CAUSE OF A COMPREHENSIVE WHAT THEY CMPI THINK THEY CALL HER.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT GONNA BEND FAIR SHARE FOR ONE AGENCY.
THEY CAN'T GO AND SAY, WELL WE'RE GONNA GO HERE AND IT DOESN'T WORK.
I THINK, I THINK JACKSON TOWNSHIP IS TRY, WOULD TRY THAT IN THE PINELAND SPOT SPOT BASICALLY TURNED IT DOWN.
PROBABLY ONLY AGENCY THAT TRUMPS THE, THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST GONNA SAY.
IS THAT THE ONLY AGENCY THAT SEEMS TO TRUMP FAIR SHARE.
UM, YOU CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE.
UM, HOWEVER, GIVEN YOUR EXPERIENCE STARTING FROM TODAY, WHAT WOULD YOU GUESSTIMATE THE, HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE UNTIL THE FINAL HOME IS BUILT UNDER THESE, ON THESE TWO SITES? ARE WE TALKING A YEAR? ARE WE TALKING UH, THE, THE PERMITS WOULDN'T BE IN PLACE WITHIN A YEAR FOR CONSTRUCTION TO EVEN START, UM, WITH ALL THE OUTSIDE AGENCY PLANNING, BOARD APPROVALS GOING THROUGH RESOLUTION, COMPLIANCE, COUNTY APPROVALS, ET CETERA, AND DEP APPROVALS, FRANKLY.
UM, THAT, THAT TAKES A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME.
UM, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THE, UM, FAIR SHARE HOUSING WITHIN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR APPROVALS TO BE SOUGHT
[01:05:01]
BY THE DEVELOPERS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT SITS FOR 10 YEARS BECAUSE THE STATE AND FAIR SHARES OBJECTIVE IS TO GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING BILL.SO THEY DON'T WANT THINGS THAT LANGUISH, I'M NOT AWARE OF THOSE TIMEFRAMES, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE TIMEFRAMES OF THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR SO THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WILL START.
AND AGAIN, I'M, DON'T HOLD ME TO THOSE, BUT I, I THINK I RECALL HEARING WITHIN TWO YEARS, UM, STARTED OR COMPLETED START, START THE COMPLETION IS THE BIG CRYSTAL BALL NUMBER.
'CAUSE WE'VE WORKED ON PROJECTS AND WHEN THE HOUSING MARKET SOFTENS PROJECTS WILL STOP AND LANGUISH, UM, SOMETIMES FOR FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AND PROJECTS ARE OFTEN SECTIONALIZED FOR THAT REASON.
SO THEY CAN FUNCTION IF THEY'RE HALF BUILT.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE HARDER ONE.
DOES THE STATE PENALIZE US IF, IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS? THERE'S, THERE'S NO MECHANISM FOR THERE.
FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
UM, AND SO WE'RE THIS IS ROUND FOUR? YES.
ALL OF ROUND THREE HAS BEEN BUILT? NO.
I CAN GIVE YOU AN IDEA ABOUT THE, THE HOW LONG IT TAKES FROM INITIAL APPROVAL OR INITIATION FOR COMPARED TO ROUND THREE TO TOTAL BUILD OUT.
AND, AND ROUND THREE WENT FAIRLY QUICKLY EXCEPT FOR FLYING.
W FLY W IS PART OF ROUND THREE, BUT THEY HAVE FINANCIAL ISSUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE.
SO THAT'S ONE REASON THAT HAS NOT STARTED YET.
AND ALSO THEY WERE IN THE SEWER SERVICE AREA AND IT TOOK THREE YEARS TO GET THEM INTO THE SEWER SERVICE AREA.
SO FLYING W WAS PART AROUND THREE AND THAT THEY HAVEN'T, THAT HASN'T STARTED, BUT THE OTHER ONES TIMBER RIDGE, BEDFORD WALK BOTTOM PARK FROM START TO FINISH PROBABLY 6, 7, 8 YEARS.
BUT YOU GOTTA REALIZE BUILDING WENT VERY QUICKLY AT, IN THAT TIME PERIOD FROM 2020 TO 2024, UM, WE WENT VERY, THAT WENT VERY QUICKLY AND OUR OBLIGATION IN THE THIRD ROUND WAS FOUR 80.
WAS IT, UH, I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER.
OH, THE AFFORD, OH, THE AFFORDABLE UNITS, WHICH THEN CREATED ALL THE DENSITY TWO.
I DO WANT TO GO BACK, JUST SO I HAVE IT.
SO THE PARK VIEW PROPERTY THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW, THE CURRENT DENSITY IS ONE UNIT PER 1.25 ACRES, 1.25 UNITS PER ACRE, 1.25 UNITS PER ACRE.
AND THE, AND THE NUMBER OF ACRES 64.
AND I I, I'LL GO BACK TO THE EFS STALL PROPERTY.
SAME DENSITY? NO, THAT'S IN A DIFFERENT ZONE.
THAT IS AR THAT'S ONE UNIT FOR FOUR ACRES.
AND DO WE KNOW THE ACREAGE? WOULD THAT INCLUDING THE, THE CURRENT REDEVELOPMENT AREAS? CHECK MY EYES AREN'T THAT GOOD.
SO LOT 28.2 IS 40, APPROXIMATELY 41 ACRES AND ABOUT 39.03 IS 20.6 ACRES.
SO IT'LL BE 60 DIVIDED BY FOUR.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION ON THAT ONE MR CA? THAT DOES, UNLESS THE BOARD HAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
DOES ANYBODY ON THE BOARD HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO.
ARE WE AT THIS POINT, ARE WE DONE? BOTH AND YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I SAID.
UM, SEEING THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, WE WILL NOW OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC AGAIN.
I ASK, UM, WE'LL WE'RE GONNA TIME YOU KEEP IT TO FIVE MINUTES AS BEST WE CAN, UM, COME UP.
STATE YOUR NAME, GIVE YOUR ADDRESS IF YOU WISH, AND UM, WE'LL GO FROM THERE.
ZACH WILSON, 51 NORTH MAIN STREET.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED TODAY IS THE IMPACT OF DESIGNATING THESE LOSSES
[01:10:01]
AREAS IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT AND WHAT THAT MEANS IN TERMS OF ITS QUALIFICATION FOR THE PILOT PROGRAM.UH, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS IS THAT ONLY THE AFFORDABLE UNIT PORTIONS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE PILOT PROGRAM UNDER THIS IF THESE ARE DESIGNATED AS AREAS IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT.
AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US AS A TOWN TO DICTATE WHAT THESE REDEVELOPMENT ZONES LOOK LIKE, I DO QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT IT'S WORTH THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN LOST TAX REVENUE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE DO DESIGNATE THESE, UH, THESE PROPERTIES AS AREAS IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT AT 171 UNITS TOTAL WITH JUST A MODEST $4,000 A YEAR IN TAXES, WE WOULD BE GIVING UP CLOSE TO $700,000 A YEAR IN TAXES IF THOSE, IF THOSE PROPERTIES HAVE NO TAX RATES BECAUSE OF THIS, THIS MOVE.
AND IS IT WORTH HAVING EXTRA BUFFERS AND DETERMINING WHAT COLOR THEY CAN PAINT THESE TOWN HOMES IF WE'RE GIVING UP THAT MUCH MONEY CONSIDERING HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE WE'LL BE SENDING VITAL.
MR. ROSS, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
DON'T SAY I'LL, I'LL PAUSE YOUR TIME.
DON'T BUY LAW ZACH, IS THAT THE ESSENCE OF WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? YEAH.
I'M ASKING ABOUT THE PILOT PROGRAM.
THE AFFORDABLE UNITS BY LAW AFFORDABLES ARE ELIGIBLE TO THE MICROPHONE AFFORDABLES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PILOT.
THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE UP TO THE TOWN.
BUT WE ARE NOWHERE NEAR MAKING A DECISION ON NO, NO, NO.
BUT I I THINK MR. WILSON, YOU'RE SAYING THE AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL GET A PILOT.
AND AS PART OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION BEFORE I'M ASKING ISN'T THAT BY LAW WE HAVE TO YEAH.
THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR WHETHER OR NOT WE DO A SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT ZONE OR NOT.
IF, IF WE JUST DO SPOT ZONING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
I'M TOLD THAT THAT'S THE CASE.
SO IF THE CONCERN IS THE PILOT, I HEAR YOU.
BUT AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE MARKET RATE PORTION OF IT, IT'S REALLY UP TO THE TOWN, TOWN TO BE CORRECT.
WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
WHETHER THEY DO IT OR NOT IS UP TO THEM.
THE ODDS OF THAT HAPPENING, WE, WE CAN'T PREDICT NOW.
BUT THAT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S, IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT GUARANTEED THAT THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN FOR THE MARKET RATE PORTIONS.
BUT, AND NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, WHETHER WE DESIGNATE THESE, THESE PROPERTIES AS A SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT ZONE OR AREA NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED, THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL STILL GET THE PILOT PRO, THE PILOT AFFORDABLES ARE GENERALLY EL ELIGIBLE FOR A PILOT IS CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CONVEY.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE PILOT'S NOT MANDATORY.
AND I'M HEARING FROM I'M HEARING RIGHT NOW THAT IT IS MANDATORY FOR THE AFFORDABLE ZONES.
THE PILOT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE TOWNSHIP TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A PILOT.
BUT THE QUESTION IS, IS IT ELIGIBLE IT AS OPPOSED TO THE OTHERS? ABSOLUTELY.
IT'S ELIGIBLE, ALL, ALL THE DETAILS IN TERMS OF HOW THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS, ASSUMING IT HAPPENS, THAT'S TO BE WORKED OUT.
I THINK MR. WILSON WANTS TO KNOW, DO THE AFFORDABLES NO MATTER WHAT AND CORRECT IF I'M WRONG, SIR, GET A BREAK ON THE TAXES THROUGH THE COURT.
I MEAN, GENERALLY THEY DO, THEY'RE CERTAINLY ELIGIBLE.
SO JUST TO, JUST ON THE RECORD, DESIGNATING THESE PROPERTIES AS A SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT ZONE, HAS NO BEARING ON WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THE PROPERTIES ON THERE OTHER THAN THE, THE AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR A PILOT DISTRICT.
SO MR. WILL, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, AND YOU, MR. TAYLOR, TELL ME I'M WRONG.
IF, IF SOMEONE'S BUYING AN AFFORDABLE HOME AND YOU'RE NEXT TO 'EM AND YOU'RE IN A MARKET RATE HOME MM-HMM
YOUR AFFORDABLE HOME'S ASSESSMENT IS GONNA BE OFF OF, I DON'T KNOW, THE, THE DISCOUNTED PART.
SO MAYBE THEIR HOME IS OFF OF, CORRECT.
IT'S OFF OF THAT LOWER AMOUNT THAT SOLD FOR YEAH, AND I WOULD, I, I MEAN, FOR STARTERS, THE DISCUSSION OF PILOTS, ANY TAX EXEMPTION OR ABATEMENT IS REALLY ITEM NUMBER 14 ON THIS LIST.
WE'RE AT, WE'RE AT SIX TONIGHT.
THAT IS, THAT IS THE PURVIEW OF THE, OF THE GOVERNING BODY.
AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THE STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS OR REQUIREMENTS ARE, UH, FOR AFFORDABLE OR MARKET.
I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WE'RE AT STEP SIX AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PILOT PER PER DECISION BEING PART OF 14.
WHAT BEARING DOES OUR DECISION TONIGHT ON STEP SIX HAVE ON 14? YEAH, I, I, AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE REPHRASED THE QUESTION A COUPLE TIMES, BUT IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE PILOT BETWEEN A SPECIAL, SPECIAL ZONING? IS THAT THE RIGHT SPOT? ZONING SPOT.
ZONING SPOT? IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE PILOT SPOT ZONING VERSUS AREA NEED ENROLLMENT? AND I'M HEARING NO, I'M HEARING TENTATIVELY NO, AND I DON'T THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW.
YEAH, NO, SO, SO THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING
[01:15:01]
LAW DOES OFFER OTHER FINANCING AND PILOT SOLUTIONS THAT ARE NOT AFFORDED THROUGH STANDARD ZONING THAT, THAT RELATE TO MARKET OR AFFORDABLE UNITS OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.UM, BUT THOSE REALLY AREN'T THE SUBJECT OF THE DISCUSSION.
I, I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE FORM FOR IT, BECAUSE THAT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION.
AND IT'S NOT, NOT THAT THIS BOARD IS WELL, IT'S IN TERMS OF PROCESS.
HE'S TRYING TO PREDICT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH IT.
SO HE HE'S LOOKING AT POSSIBLE OUTCOMES.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS TONIGHT, I HAVE TO GO BACK INTO A DIFFERENT BOARD AND YELL AT THAT ONE.
WE'RE NOT THE DECISION MAKERS ON, ON THAT QUESTION.
IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BUT, UH, YEAH, NO, I, THE REASON I'M ASKING HERE IS 'CAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THE DECISION OF, OF THIS DESIGNATION ON POTENTIAL PILOT DISCOUNTS GOING FORWARD.
AND ABSOLUTELY, QUITE FRANKLY, I'M STILL NOT SURE WHERE WE ARE
NONE OF IT, NONE OF IT'S MANDATORY.
COUNCIL MAY SAY YOU'RE NOT GETTING A PILOT ON THE MARKET RATE STUFF.
AND TO THAT POINT, WE MAY DEVELOP SENIOR REFORM, WHICH WOULD MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE TO PUT ON SENIOR AFFORDABLE THAN JUST GENERAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WOULD GENERATE SMALL CHILDREN.
THESE AREN'T SENIOR, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BE.
SOME ARE, AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING A LOT OF ECONOMICS.
AGAIN, ALL OF THOSE LOOK, WE'RE REALLY GETTING WAY 14.
WE, NO, BUT IT'S, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
IF, IF, IF THE, IF THE DECISION THAT WE MAKE TONIGHT, UH, RESULTS IN A LOSS OF POTENTIAL REVENUE TO THE TOWNSHIP, THAT'S A, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO, BUT THE PILOT IS MONEY THAT COMES FROM THE TOWNSHIP.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, IT'S A PAYMENT MOVE THAT'S, IT'S NOT A PAYMENT WITHOUT TAXES.
IT'S NOT OUR YEAH, IT'S NOT TONIGHT.
THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'RE DECIDING THAT TO PILOT.
I MEAN, YOU'RE, YOU ARE CORRECT.
YOU'D HAVE TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT IN ANOTHER BOARD.
I, I'LL RESERVE MY COMMENTS FOR ANOTHER FOR THEM.
YOU THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST.
SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR NAME, SIR? MARU DEV.
UM, MY QUESTION IS ACTUALLY, UM, RELATED TO THE IMPACT OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS ON OUR, UH, ROAD INFRASTRUCTURES AND SCHOOL.
UM, WHEN THESE SITES ARE SELECTED, IS ANY STUDY DONE ON IMPACT ON LOCAL ROADS? 'CAUSE UH, THESE TWO ARE, UH, BLOCK 3 0 2 AND BLOCK 8 8 0 3.
THEY'RE ONLY HALF A MILE APART.
AND I BELIEVE THAT TOGETHER THE NUMBER OF UNITS AROUND 500.
SO WITH 500, WE CAN ESTIMATE THOUSAND CARS, THOUSAND CARS COMING OUT OF THESE.
SO IF THE THOUSAND CARS COMING OUT OF THESE IMPACTING OUR ROADS, DO WE HAVE ENOUGH CAPITAL MONEY ALLOCATED TO FIX THESE ROADS? I LIVE IN, UH, METRO CHASE, AND THAT WAS BUILT IN 1992.
WE HAVE A TOLKIEN PASSAGE, WHICH IS THE TOWNSHIP ROAD HAD NEVER BEEN FIXED ALL THESE YEARS.
I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE SINCE 1996.
THE ROADS ARE CRACKING AND A LOT OF POTHOLES HAVE POPPED UP AND IT JUST, BANDAID HAS BEEN DONE.
SO THESE TWO DEPARTMENTS, I'M PRETTY SURE THE TRAFFIC'S GONNA COME THROUGH THE TOLKIEN PASSAGE TO GO TO, UH, SUPER WAWA.
DO WE HAVE THE MONEY TO FIX THESE ROADS? ONE SECOND.
INTERCHANGES ALL THESE, UH, INTERSECTIONS, WE NEED TO IMPROVE THAT INTERSECTION.
DO WE HAVE THE MONEY TO DO IT? THE THIRD IS, I'M PRETTY SURE ALL THE, IF YOU DO THE TRA I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE TRAFFIC STUDY WILL BE DONE AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL.
IF, IF THE STUDY IS DONE, I'M PRETTY SURE THE TRAFFIC, MOST OF THE TRAFFIC IS GONNA GO TOWARDS SUPER WAWA AND THEN THE AIR STORM ROAD IS GONNA BACK UP.
AND THAT INTERSECTION IS THE STATE HIGHWAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE'S
[01:20:01]
ANY PLAN TO IMPROVE THAT INTERCHANGE AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL.I, I MEAN, I, I THINK TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UNFORTUNATELY, FAIR SHARE DOESN'T CARE.
I'D LIKE, YEAH, I'D RATHER, SO IT'S PART OF THE PLANNING BOARD PROCESS.
THEY'LL HAVE TO SUBMIT A TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND IT'LL DETERMINE HOW MANY UNITS, HOW MANY CARS, WHETHER IT'S A THOUSAND, 1500, 500, WHATEVER.
WE DETERMINED THAT YOU HAVE TO ASSESS ALL THE INTERSECTIONS YOU HAVE.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ROADS TO SEE IF THEY MEET THE STANDARDS AND THEY'RE OBLIGATED TO BRING THE ROADS AND THE INTERSECTIONS UP TO A SAFE STANDARD.
HOW FAR IS THE STUDY? UM, RADIUS WISE, MILE TWO MILES.
ANY, ANY INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED AND YOU USE THE, THE STANDARD TRAFFIC, UH, IMPACT STANDARDS.
SO I CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT IT'S GONNA BE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF, OF, UH, CARS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
BUT THAT'LL BE ALL SUBMITTED, ALL OPEN FOR PUBLIC REVIEW.
AND THEN THAT WOULD INCLUDE LIKE DESAL LANES, MR. DESAL LANES.
WHY PUTTING SHOULDERS IN THE COUNTY WILL LOOK AT THAT AS WELL.
'CAUSE CHURCH ROAD'S A COUNTY ROAD, UH, CHURCHES ROAD, I KNOW IT'S A COUNTY ROAD, BUT, UH, AIRSTONE IS NOT.
AND, UH, FOSTER TOWN IS NOT IT'S TOWNSHIP THAT THE TOWN WILL LOOK AT THOSE ROADS.
SO I'M SORRY, THE TOWN WILL LOOK AT THOSE ROADS.
MY, AGAIN, MY QUESTION IS, UH, THE IMPACT ON THOSE ROADS AND THE COST OF IMPROVING IT, UH, ARE, ARE THE DEVELOPER IS GONNA PAY FOR THAT, OR WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT THROUGH OUR TAXES.
THE DEVELOPER HAS TO PROVIDE A SAFE DEVELOPMENT, WHETHER THAT MEANS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ROADS, OTHER THINGS, UH, OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT'S PART OF THE COST OF DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY.
UH, SO AGAIN, MY QUESTION IS IF, IF TO IN PASSAGE IS IMPACTED, IS THE DEVELOPER RESPONSIBLE FOR FIXING OR, OR DOING ANYTHING TO THAT ROAD OR INTERSECTION BETWEEN TOLKIEN AND UH, UH, NEW FREEDOM ROAD OR THE DEVELOPER WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPROVING TOLKIEN PASSAGE? OKAY.
SO THAT MEANS TOWNSHIP WILL BE RESPONSIBLE.
THAT MEANS WE ARE TAX, WE HAVE TO RAISE OUR TAXES FOR THOSE.
AND, AND THIS IS AN UNFORTUNATE, AND SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THE CONCEPT OF SCHOOL CHILDREN TALKING IS A, THE TOWN DIDN'T ASK FOR THIS.
THE TOWN WAS GIVEN A NUMBER AND SAID, YOU, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE THIS NUMBER OF UNITS.
SO IT, THE, THE COURT AND FAIR SHARE HOUSING CENTER UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WILL BE ROAD IMPACTS, THERE WILL, WILL BE SCHOOL IMPACTS AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE THEIR NUMBER.
SO THE TOWNSHIP HAS TO ACCOMMODATE BEFORE SAYS, SAYS YOUR SITE, SIR, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T, YOU GOTTA WAIT UNTIL YOU'RE OPEN TO TILL ON THE PUBLIC.
IT SAYS HIS SITE THAT SITE IT, IT'S BEEN FIVE MINUTES, SIR.
I'LL, I'LL LET MR. TAYLOR FINISH, BUT WE HAVE, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON.
THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BECOMES AN UNFUNDED MANDATE.
THE TOWNSHIP WILL HAVE COST IMPLICATIONS THRUSTED UPON IT AS A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S NO DENYING THAT THAT'S WHY THE TOWNSHIP, THE TOWNSHIP COULD HAVE REZONED ANY OF THESE PARCELS TWO YEARS AGO, THREE YEARS AGO, 10 YEARS AGO.
BUT IT WASN'T WHAT OUR MASTER PLAN SAID.
IT WASN'T WHAT OUR VISION SAID.
IT WASN'T UNTIL OUR HAND WAS FORCED DCA AND THE COURTS GAVE US A NUMBER AND SAID, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE THESE IN YOUR TOWN.
WE ALL KNOW AND STRUGGLE WITH THE IDEA THAT THIS WILL CREATE A BURDEN ON THE SCHOOLS.
IT'LL CREATE A BURDEN ON EMERGENCY SERVICES.
IT WILL CREATE SOME BURDEN ON OUR ROADS.
IT'LL RESULT IN INCREASED POWER TO USE SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE TIMELY.
THE TOWNSHIP WILL HAVE TO IN THE FUTURE BUDGET TO HANDLE THAT.
BUT THIS, THE PROBLEM IS THE UNITS WERE GOING TO BE BUILT SOMEWHERE, ANYWHERE, AS MR. NOLL SAID, WHERE THERE ARE CONCENTRATIONS OF IMPACTS AND PRO RATA SHARE OR CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARDS INTERSECTION OR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS.
THEY GET HANDLED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL LIKE ANY OTHER APPLICATION.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THERE WILL BE MUNICIPAL COST IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, FRANKLY, JUST AS THERE WERE WHEN, WHEN YOUR DEVELOPMENT WAS BUILT.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON NOW, SIR.
DO I HAVE TIME TO YEAH, NO, WE'RE WE, WE'RE, WE'RE AT HERE LIMIT.
IT'S BEEN LIKE ALMOST EIGHT MINUTES.
[01:25:01]
I ASK ONE QUESTION? JUST ONE QUESTION.I'M NOT, YEAH, I'LL PUT IT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I I UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT AND YOU GAVE ME GOOD EXPLANATION.
AND ALSO THE, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT.
YOU SAID IF THERE IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT, THEY CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF MARKET RATE UNITS.
IS THAT APPLICABLE ON THIS SIR SITUATION? I, I APPRECIATE YOUR, THAT'S ALL I QUESTION.
AND MR. AS HE AS MR. AS MR. TAYLOR MENTIONED, THE NUMBER OF MARKET RATE UNITS WILL BE DECREASED.
WE CANNOT DECREASE THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
I I UNDERSTAND THAT BASED OFF ANY RESTRICTIONS.
THAT DPA WILL PUT IT ON US, BUT THE MARKETS MARKET RATE UNITS CAN BE REDUCED BASED ON THE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS AND THE IMPACT ON THE, UH, TOWNSHIP BUDGET.
ANY WAY WE CAN, SIR, WE WILL RESTRICT THOSE UNITS.
AND THAT IS HOW I WILL WRITE IT INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH IS ITEM NINE, 10, AND 11 TO SET UP THOSE STANDARDS ACCORDINGLY.
DO YOU NEED A PODIUM, MA? UM, I MEAN THAT WOULD BE GREAT, BUT I CAN HOLD IT TOO
I MEAN, IF YOU'RE WILLING, THAT'S FINE.
OKAY, JESSICA CHESKY FIVE BUTLER COURT.
UM, I KNOW WE'RE AWARE THAT THE 2021 ADOPTED OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN, WHICH, UM, MR. TAYLOR'S FIRM WAS INVOLVED IN.
AND I BELIEVE MR. GIULIANI, YOU WERE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD AT THAT TIME, UM, DESIGNATED THESE SPECIFIC PARCELS AS PRIORITY OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION AND FARMLAND PRESERVATION FOUR YEARS LATER.
I UNDERSTAND WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OUR OBJECTIVES CHANGED, HOWEVER, UTILIZING PRIORITY OPEN SPACE TO NOW SAY IT'S BLIGHTED AND IT'S STAGNANT, LAND IN A REDEVELOPMENT APPLIED ZOOM, LIKE APPLIED CRITERIA IS CONTRADICTORY TO YOUR 2021 MASTER PLAN.
I MEAN, EVERYTHING YOU WENT THROUGH SAYING THAT THIS WAS PRIORITY PROPERTY, YOU'RE NOW SAYING, OH NO, IT WE, YOU KNOW, WE MEET ALL THE CRITERIA FOR A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS.
I ADVOCATE FOR THEM IN MY JOB ALL THE TIME AS WELL.
HOWEVER, I DON'T ADVOCATE FOR FARMLAND TO BE REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE PARCELS, WE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THE AUTO BODY REPAIR, IT IS A LEGALLY PRE PROTECTED, PREEXISTING NONCONFORMING USE.
IT'S BEEN AN OPERATION SINCE 1970S BEFORE MOST OF THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WERE THERE.
THE TOWNSHIP HAS TO PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE OF THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
NOT SUBSTANTIAL POSSIBILITIES.
DO WE HAVE ACTUAL PROOF THAT THE HEALTH AND THE WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY ARE BEING JEOPARDIZED? IT CAN'T BE MERELY THAT IT'S NOT UNSIGHTLY OR THAT IT'S DILAPIDATED A LITTLE BIT.
AND WE DON'T LIKE THE LOOK OF IT.
THE LARGER LOT, WHICH THE AUTO BODY IS 5% OF THE PARCEL, THE LARGER FARMLAND, WHICH IS ACTIVELY FARMLAND.
SO BY DEFINITION IT'S A PRODUCTIVE USE, IS THE MAJORITY OF THAT PARCEL.
SO WE'RE TAKING THIS 5% PIECE AND SAYING WE'RE APPLYING THE WHOLE REDEVELOPMENT ZONE TO IT.
WE CAN DO OVERLAY ZONING AND WE CAN WRITE IN 300 FOOT BUFFERS.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN'T DO.
OTHER TALENTS HAVE DONE IT ALL THE TIME.
THEY'VE TAKEN AND WRITTEN IN BUFFERS.
THEY'VE TAKEN IN, IF YOU'RE THIS FAR BACK, YOU HAVE TO BE THIS MANY STORIES.
IF YOU'RE THIS FAR BACK, YOU HAVE TO BE FOUR STORIES, FIVE STORIES.
THEY'VE ALSO WRITTEN IN ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, THEY'VE WRITTEN IN YOUR MATERIALS, YOUR ROOF SLOPE, YOUR DESIGN OF YOUR ROOF.
SO BY SAYING THAT WE CAN'T DO THAT, THAT'S NOT A TRUE STATEMENT.
WHAT THOUGH, DO YOU THINK THAT GAINS US? THE, THESE PEOPLE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, VOLUNTARILY PUT THEIR PROPERTIES IN THIS PLAN.
SO THEY VOLUNTARILY PUT THEIR PROPERTIES IN THIS PLAN.
I I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND LIKE, MAYBE I'M GONNA SAY THIS WRONG, MR. JOS MAY HELP ME.
LIKE I UNDERSTAND WE TALK ABOUT THIS AREA, YOU NEED TO REDEVELOPMENT, BUT I THINK THAT IS COMING ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT.
[01:30:01]
AND I DON'T, I I DON'T WANT YOU TO GET CONFUSED WHERE YOU, YOU'RE THINKING LIKE THESE, FIRST OF ALL, THESE PEOPLE PUT THEIR PROPERTY.WE WANT, WE WANT TO DEVELOP, WE WANNA SELL OR HAVE OUR PROPERTY BE DEVELOPED.
I THINK THE MECHANISM IS REDEVELOPMENT.
YOU'RE THINKING BLIGHTED AND THIS AND THAT, AND WE'RE TAKING IT.
WE'RE NOT, I THINK IT'S JUST NO, I UNDERSTAND.
IT'S NOT SO IT'S NON DOMINATION.
YOU, YOU'RE GONNA GET TO THE SAME THING WITH MY PILOTS.
EVEN IF, EVEN IF WE DON'T DO THE PILOTS, YOU'RE GONNA GET TO THE SAME THING.
AND, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. TAYLOR, BUT WITHOUT OUR ABILITY TO SAY WE DON'T WANT ORANGE HOUSES, WE, WE DON'T WANT FLAT ROOFS.
AM AM I WRONG OR IS THAT KIND OF THE GIST? AND I MAY BE CON NO, NO.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST KEEP IN MIND THE SAME ARGUMENT AGAINST REDEVELOPMENT THAT YOU'RE HEARING TONIGHT WOULD ALSO APPLY TO OVERLAY ZONING.
IF THE, IF THE PURPOSE OF NOT DOING REDEVELOPMENT IS BECAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE PRESERVED FARMLAND OR OPEN SPACE, THAT WOULD BE THE SAME ARGUMENT FOR NOT DOING OVERLAY ZONING.
BUT REDEVELOPMENT DOES HAVE, THAT'S THE REASON WHY, THE REASON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS IS, AS YOU POINTED OUT, BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE THAT WE'RE CONFRONTED WITH.
THIS ISN'T TO TAKE MR. RICK'S AUTOBI AND GET RID OF IT AND ALL THOSE, IT, IT WASN'T FOR THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S RIGHT.
I'M SORRY SCOTT, YOU WERE ABOUT TO TALK.
I ASSUME I'M GETTING PAUSED FOR ALL THIS FEEDBACK TOO.
UM, UM, BUT WE DO IN REDEVELOPMENT PLANS HAVE A DIFFERENT STATUTORY REQUIREMENT WE HAVE TO HIT VERSUS AN OVERLAY ZONE THAT WE COULD JUST APPLY WITHOUT HAVING TO HIT THEM.
REDEVELOPMENT HAS STATUTORY CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE TO APPLY.
SO WE ARE REALLY STRETCHING REALLY THIN, TRYING TO FORCE THESE PARCELS INTO THAT CRITERIA.
SO AS I STARTED TO SAY, AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE ENTIRELY RIGHT, MUNICIPALITIES CAN WRITE DESIGN ORDINANCES.
WE'VE WRITTEN THEM IN AVALON AND OCEAN CITY AND IN DOZENS OF COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE WHO HAVE SAID, WE WANT REALLY GOOD ARCHITECTURE.
WE WANT STUFF THAT LOOKS LIKE THIS.
AND THERE ARE IMAGES IN THE MASTER PLAN.
AND WE'VE WRITTEN MINIMUM FENESTRATION REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM AND AVERAGE ROOF PITCH REQUIREMENTS.
WE'VE WON AWARDS FOR THOSE BLACK AND WHITE PAPER DOCUMENTS THAT ARE WRITTEN.
AND IF I HAND THEM TO THREE DIFFERENT ARCHITECTS, I GET FIVE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS OF HOW THEY INTERPRET THOSE ORDINANCES AND THE PREDICTABILITY OF WHAT THEY TURN INTO IS LESS.
THERE ARE ORDINANCES THAT CAN BE WRITTEN THAT CAN GET YOU CLOSE.
BUT MY OPINION AS A PLANNER, IF WE CAN SAY NO, ADD THIS, CHANGE THIS, MAKE THIS TO STONE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THOSE ELEVATIONS, SIDE ELEVATIONS, REAR ELEVATIONS, ARE WE ALLOWING UPPER FLOOR DECKS OR JUST FIRST FLOOR PATIOS? WHAT DO THEY LOOK LIKE? ARE THEY WRAPPED WITH AZAC OR IS IT JUST PRESSURE TREATED WHEN THOSE IMAGES GO IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN? THAT DEGREE OF SPECIFICITY LETS EVERYBODY KNOW THAT'S HARD.
OH, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
WE DO THE SAME THING WITH BERMS AND BUFFERS AND WE WILL HAVE CROSS SECTIONS IN THIS.
AND THAT TO ME, AGAIN, AS A 59 YEAR RESIDENT AS A PLANNER, IS A, IS A BETTER.
AND AGAIN, IT'S THAT FLEXIBILITY IS AFFORDED TO US BY THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW.
SO WE'RE USING THAT AS A TOOL TO IMPLEMENT THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
WE COULD JUST DO IT WITH STANDARD ZONING.
BUT I THINK, AND IF YOU'VE READ ANY OF MY REPORTS IN THIS TOWN OR ANY OTHER TOWN OVER THE LAST, YOU WILL KNOW THE LENGTHS WE GO TO TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE THE BEST THEY CAN BE FOR THAT SITE.
UM, YOU CAN ASK DEVELOPERS WHAT THEIR OPINION OF ME IS AND I THINK YOU'LL GET A PRETTY CONSISTENT ANSWER.
I THINK WE HAVE BETTER CONTROL OVER THE QUALITY OF THE BUILD ENVIRONMENT IF WE GO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN ROUTE.
I MEAN, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU.
I'M A PLANNER AS WELL, AND THAT'S USUALLY MY RECOMMENDATION AS WELL.
HOWEVER, YOU DO OPEN UP THE DOOR TO THINGS LIKE PILOTS TO OTHER THINGS THAT YOU ARE NOT AFFORDED ON THE, ON THE OVERLAY ZONES.
HOWEVER, I HEARD YOU SAY BEFORE, ARE WE PUTTING IT ON RECORD THAT IF WE DO THESE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE TOTAL CONCEPT PLAN HAS 48 AFFORDABLES, WHICH IS 20%, IF THIS SHRINKS BECAUSE OF THE FLOOD HAZARD ZONES, THE WETLANDS, THE TURTLES, EVERYTHING ELSE.
ARE WE PUTTING IT ON RECORD IN THAT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THOSE 48, WHICH IS 20% OF THE ORIGINAL, ARE GONNA BE BUILT NO MATTER WHAT? WE'RE NOT GONNA SAY IT'S JUST 20%.
SO WHEN IT'S A HUNDRED UNITS THAT CAN BEEN BUILT, IT'S ONLY 20.
AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR A FORESIGHT.
SO THAT IS HOW I, I WILL WRITE THE REDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT GO INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT
[01:35:01]
PLAN.SO IT'S GONNA BE BASED OFF THE CONCEPTS AND THE TOTAL UNITS.
SO WE ARE COVERED, AFFORDABLE.
AND IF THEY LOSE MARKET RATE AND THEY, YOU LOSE VALUABLE MONEY BECAUSE THERE'S LESS.
SO THERE IS, WELL, THERE, THERE IS A CERTAIN POINT THAT IF FOR SOME REASON SOME SITE ANYWHERE IN THE STATE WHERE SOMEONE THOUGHT THERE WAS A 20 FOOT WIDE WETLAND IN THE MIDDLE, IT TURNS OUT THAT IT'S A THOUSAND FOOT WIDE WETLAND AND ONLY 10 HOMES CAN BE BUILT THERE.
THERE IS A POINT WHERE WELL, WHERE THE PLAN, BUT YEAH, BUT HERE'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
IF THAT HAPPENS, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO BACK TO STEP NUMBER TWO.
WE HAVE TO AMEND THE HOUSING ELEMENT IN FAIR SHARE AND WE GET MORE TIME FOR THAT.
IS THAT WE WOULD GET, WE WOULD GET MORE TIME.
'CAUSE IF SOMETHING COMES UP, UH, LIKE THE 300 FOOT MOST LIKELY VERSUS THE 50 BUFFER THAT THEY SHOW FOR THE BACK TURTLE, WHATEVER THOSE PROVISIONS ARE, WE END UP HAVING TO GO BACK, MODIFY THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN AND THEN LOOK AT AN ADDITIONAL SITE, LOOK AT MODIFYING ONE OF THE OTHER SITES.
SO IF YOU'RE A PLANNER, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THESE, THESE ARE BASED ON CONCEPT PLANS AND PRELIMINARY WETLANDS, BUT UNTIL YOU AND NO FLOOD HAZARD YEAH.
SO, SO UNTIL ALL OF THAT STUFF AND ALL THAT DUE DILIGENCE IS DONE, OR FRANKLY, NOT EVEN THE DUE DILIGENCE, BUT THE PERMITS IN HAND, UM, ALL BETS ARE OFF, BUT WE WILL WRITE IT IN AS A MINIMUM OF, SO WE'RE COVERED WITH OUR AFFORDABLE UNITS.
SO WE ARE, SO WE ARE COVERED TO PROTECT MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM HAVING TO COME BACK TO THE PUBLIC AND SAY, REMEMBER HOW WE SAID IT WAS THREE SITES? IT IT NEEDS TO BE FOUR IF SOMETHING CATASTROPHIC HAPPENED WITH ONE OF THESE SITES.
WHICH HAPPENED AT LAFFERTY, WHICH HAPPENED AT, WHICH HAPPENED AT LAFFERTY.
AND, AND FRANKLY WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH FLYING W THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, I WAS GONNA USE FLYING W AS AN EXAMPLE
SO, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO GET ENOUGH, RIGHT? FLYING W THE ALL BECAUSE OF SOME ISSUES, ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHERWISE, THERE ARE UNITS HAVE BEEN REDUCED OVERALL UNITS, BUT THEIR MAR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS HAVE NOT BEEN.
I MEAN, AS LONG AS THAT'S THE WAY IT, IT'S GONNA BE WRITTEN IN.
BECAUSE I KNOW ORIGINALLY THE WAY THE NUMBERS ARE IN THE CONCEPT PLAN, THEY'RE NOT 20%.
SO AS LONG AS WE CORRECT THAT, AND WE DON'T JUST USE THE NUMBERS THAT WERE ON THE CONCEPT PLAN BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T A TRUE 20%.
UM, THAT'S EVERYTHING THAT I, THAT I HAVE FOR TONIGHT.
UM, I UNDERSTAND MOST LIKELY, BECAUSE YOUR SUMMARY ALREADY SAYS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVED IT, THAT THIS IS BASICALLY FORMALITY.
BUT, UM, I HOPE THAT THESE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED WILL BE EXPLICITLY WRITTEN.
SO WE DO HAVE A LETTER OF PROTECTION.
IS, IS THERE A POINT WHERE THE, UH, BUILDER CAN BACK OUT BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE MARKET RATE? LIKE IF HE, IF IF HE GETS THREE TO ONE OR I, I WOULD DEFER TO TONY, BUT, BUT THERE IS ALWAYS, AGAIN, IF SOMETHING, IF SOME ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE MADE THE SITE UNDEVELOPABLE THAT WASN'T ABLE TO BE REVEALED.
NOW WE UNFORTUNATELY WILL END UP HAVING TO MODIFY OUR HOUSING ELEMENT AND WHETHER THAT MEANS ADDING AN ADDITIONAL SITE, UM OKAY.
MODIFYING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE OTHER TWO SITES OR WHAT THAT COMBINATION IS.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE A PERSPECTIVE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE STILL GOING TO, WE'VE GOTTA, WE'VE GOTTA HIT OUR NUMBER.
BUT IT COULD MR IT COULD TAKE YEARS.
LIKE IF THE HOUSING MARKET SLOWS, LIKE IN OH 8, 0 9, WHO KNOWS? IT COULD.
THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED WITH THESS PROPERTY.
THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ANOTHER 12 UNITS BUILT 24 CREDITS AND THE DEVELOPER WENT BANKRUPT.
AND WE HAD TO ACCOMMODATE THAT IN OUR FUTURE PLANS BECAUSE THAT WASN'T BILLABLE ANYMORE.
SO THROWING IN OTHER PROPERTY SOMEWHERE.
UM, DID YOU WANNA COME SPEAK SIR? MY NAME IS BOB ZEN AND I LIVE OVER IN MEDFORD, CHASE.
SORRY, I COULDN'T HEAR YOU LIZ.
IT'S BOB ZEN HAGEN LIVE OVER IN MEDFORD.
SO WE, WE, WE'VE KIND OF SET ASIDE ALL THIS LAND, UH, TO CONSERVATE AND STUFF.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO PUT THAT IN BACK INTO THE MIX, SO TO SPEAK? LIKE WE, WE HAVE ALL THESE PROPERTIES THAT SEEM TO BE ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER AND KIND OF IN THE SAME AREA.
AND WE, WE DID PURCHASE OTHER AREAS TO CONSERVE LAND WITHIN THE TOWN.
COULD ANY OF THAT EVER COME BACK INTO THE MIX FOR DEVELOPMENT? BECAUSE WE'RE KIND OF IN A, THE PRESERVED LAND? THE PRESERVED LAND? YEAH.
ONCE IT'S DEEMED OPEN SPACE, ONCE OPEN SPACE, THERE'S NO WAY TO USED, UM, IT IS NEAR IMPOSSIBLE.
IT REQUIRES A DIVERSION THAT HAS TO BE ASSIGNED.
[01:40:02]
OFFSITE.SO IT JUST SEEMS THAT ALL THESE PROPERTIES ARE KIND OF TOGETHER.
SO WE'RE NOT, WE GOT LIMITED PROPERTIES AND LIMITED INTEREST, YOU KNOW, WELL THE TWO OPEN SPACE PROPERTIES ARE RIGHT NEXT TO IT.
STOKE OAKLAND AND FIELDSTONE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN THE SAME INTERSECTION, RIGHT? SAME AREAS.
HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT SEWER AND, AND WHAT THAT BEING ABLE TO USE THESE AREAS FOR SEWER, SEWER GONNA BE AVAILABLE THERE? YES.
WE HAVE ENOUGH TO CAPACITY IT.
YES, WE HAVE ENOUGH SEWER CAPACITY.
AND THAT'LL BE ALL, THAT'S ALL APPROVED BY DEP.
WE, WE, UH, DO THE CALCULATIONS.
WE HAVE TO A COUPLE, THE TWO OF THE SITES, UH, ONE OF THE SITES TO STOP THE, UH, CAMP FS SITE HAS TO BE, UH, PUT INTO THE, UH, SEWER SERVICE AREA.
SO THAT'S ALL REVIEWED BY DEP.
LOOK AT OUR
IS ARE THEY GONNA BE ABLE TO, MY BIG WORRY IS GETTING DEVELOPERS IN THAT YOU'VE PUT A FORMULA IN THERE THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING ENOUGH UNITS OUT OF, OUT OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT TO, TO, TO MAKE THE, THE PROFIT ON.
I MEAN, HAVING 500 FOOT BUFFERS IS GREAT AND YOU KNOW, BUT WHEN, IF YOU, YOU'RE NOT YIELDING, YOU KNOW, PER UNIT, UH, PER ACRE, YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE THE DEAL WORK.
SO FAR THEY'VE AGREED TO THE CONCEPT PLANS THAT ARE IN, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR ANY NUMBERS.
I DIDN'T HEAR WE'RE DOING 10 PER ACRE.
I DIDN'T HEAR WE'RE DOING FIVE PER ACRE, 10 PER ACRE.
IT, IT'S ALL ON THE, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN.
AND THAT WILL BE THE NEXT STEP.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS YET.
NO, THOSE NUMBERS, WELL THOSE NUMBERS ARE PRELIMINARY IN THE HOUSING MAKING FAIR SHARE PLAN.
AND THEN THOSE WILL BE, UH, BASICALLY TRANSLATED INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS.
AND, AND HOW ARE THE, SO WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS FOR THE, FOR THE, UH, FOR THE STATE FOR, UH, MOUNT LAUREL, HOW MANY DOES MEDFORD TOTAL UNITS HAVE? WE HAD A PERSPECTIVE NEED OF 171 UNITS.
THERE WERE FIVE CARRYOVER CREDITS.
SO IT WAS, SO A TOTAL OF A TOTAL OF 171 UNITS WILL SATISFY THE MOUNT LAUREL OBLIGATION.
AND THOSE NUMBERS ARE ALL SET.
SO ROUGHLY A THOUSAND UNITS, ROUGHLY 20% OF THAT, LIKE 850 OR SOMETHING, 800 AND SOMETHING UNITS WOULD DO THAT.
SO NOW WHAT, WHAT PROPERTIES ARE, ARE IN PLAY NOW THAT, LIKE THE SAMOS PROPERTY, IS THAT IN PLAY AS FAR AS THE MOUNT LAUREL? IT'S NOT IN THE FOURTH ROUND.
AND WHY, WHY WOULD, LIKE, WHAT, WHAT PROPERTIES ARE BEFORE THE TOWN NOW THAT ARE, ARE HAVING HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT PUT IN? ARE THESE GUYS ABLE TO SLIDE UNDER A MOUNTAIN LAUREL OBLIGATION? ARE THEY ABLE TO BUY OFF THE OBLIGATION OR, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE QUESTION IS.
THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT, SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S BUILDING GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
IS THAT PART OF THE MASTER PLAN OF, OF MEETING MOUNT LAUREL OB? WE HAVE 171 UNITS OR GUYS WHO ARE PUTTING, UH, PROJECTS UP NOW CONTRIBUTING TO THAT MOUNT LAUREL, REDUCING THAT MOUNT LAUREL OBLIGATION OR NO, ANYTHING THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW WOULD'VE HAD ITS OWN AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE TOWNSHIP'S ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE THOSE UNITS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.
UM, SO THAT DOESN'T, THAT DOESN'T REALLY COUNT.
SO WERE THEY AT THE BUY, YOU KNOW, SO THE WAY I UNDERSTAND MOUNT LAUREL TO WORK IS THAT YOU CAN BUY OFF CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TRANSFER 'EM TO OTHER THAT'S, THAT'S OVER THOSE DAYS, YEAH.
A REGIONAL CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT, RIGHT.
RCA WHERE YOU COULD SEND THAT ELSEWHERE AND THOSE DAYS ARE GONE.
SO GUYS WHO ARE, SO THE SANDWICH PROPERTY ISN'T PART OF IT.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT IN, IN THE BOARDS FOR BEING DEVELOPED.
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A FOURTH ROUND SITE.
THE TOWN ROOMS THAT WERE JUST BUILT, UM, AT KIMEL AND BILL, RIGHT? THEY WERE ACTUALLY THE SUBJECT OF A LAWSUIT IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FROM 20, AT LEAST 20 YEARS AGO.
IT, IT WENT ON FOR 30 SOME YEARS.
UM, BUT, BUT ALL OF THOSE, ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT YOU'VE SEEN DEVELOPED IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS HAVE PROVIDED THEIR, THEIR FAIR SHARE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSIST, UM, AND, UH, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT HAS PROVIDED THEIR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND ASSESSMENT.
SO THESE THREE PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE REALLY AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT IN, THEY ARE THE ENTIRE TOWNSHIP.
AND THOSE AGAIN, HAVE ALREADY ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
THAT PROCESS HAS ALREADY CONCLUDED OF SITE SELECTION BASED ON THE NUMBERS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY DCA.
SO THAT HOUSING ELEMENT BEING ADOPTED BY THE PINE BOARD COUNCIL COUNCIL, THE COURT FAIR SHARE HOUSING CENTER AND COURT
[01:45:01]
ADJUDICATOR THAT CONCLUDED, YOU KNOW, IN DECEMBER.SO NOW IT'S HOW DO WE BEST CREATE, SO NOW YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THE 171 UNITS AND ALLOCATE IT ACROSS THOSE THREE PROPERTIES, ACROSS THOSE THREE SITES AS SET FORTH IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT.
AND HOW DO WE BEST DEVELOP THOSE SITES TO BE THE LEAST IMPACTFUL VISUALLY, FUNCTIONALLY, AND OTHERWISE I SEE THE COMMUNITY.
AND IF I MAY, JUST, JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
SO THESE THREE SITES WERE NOT THE ORIGINAL THREE SITES.
THE REASON WE'RE EVEN HERE TONIGHT IS 'CAUSE THE LAFFERTY FARM ON SBO WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL SITES WE WERE DISCUSSING FOR THIS 171 FOURTH ROUND OBLIGATION.
THAT SITE BECAME UNSUSTAINABLE FOR UNAVAILABLE UNAVAILABLE.
UM, SO WE HAD TO FIND AN ALTERNATE SITE AT WHICH TIME THE LANDOWNER OF RICK'S AUTO BODY PUT THEIR PARCEL UP INTO THE, INTO THE PLAN.
WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY PURSUE RICK'S AUTO BODY.
THEY, THEY PUT THEIR PROPERTIES UP.
AND SO IT'S, ONCE IT'S DEEMED AVAILABLE, THEN WE HAVE TO THEN POTENTIALLY UTILIZE IT FOR FAIR SHARE.
AND MR. TAYLOR, LIKE NOW THAT LAFFERTY FARM IS OUT, WHAT, WHAT HAP WHAT COULD THAT BE TODAY? JUST, I, I KNOW PEOPLE ARE SAYING, OH, COULD NOW THEY GO BACK TO THERE AND I SAID, WELL, IT'S NOT IN THE PLAN.
SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHATEVER IT'S ZONED RIGHT.
WHATEVER, WHATEVER IT'S ZONED.
I BELIEVE IT'S H-M-H-M-H-M-A, WHICH H HM.
AND IN ITS ENTIRETY, TOWNHOUSES.
BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO, THERE'S NO ABILITY THAT RIGHT.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO, THAT'S COMPLETELY NOW NOT A PART OF THE PLAN.
AND OR COMMERCIALLY USELESS COMMER.
WHICH WOULD ALL BE, HAVE, HAVE TO BE APPROVED, RIGHT? YEAH.
ANYTHING ON ANY SITE IN THE TOWNSHIP, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD.
IS THERE ANY, ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, SIR, WANTED TO TURN IN THIS OBJECTION, THE, UH, PLAN.
MAY YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN SOCIAL LY 22 MILTON COURT, METRO NEW JERSEY.
AND, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST, THE OTHER THING IS I JUST ALSO, I KIND OF OBJECTED, I SAID EARLIER JUST THE IDEA THAT THE RICK'S AUTO BODY IS BLIGHTED.
UM, LOOKING AT THAT PROPERTY, IT'S ALMOST ALL FARMLAND.
YEAH, THERE'S SOME PICTURES, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LITTLE MESSY, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S ALIGHTED AREA NEEDING, NEEDING REDEVELOPMENT PER SE.
UM, I THINK THAT'S BEING FAST, LOOSE WITH THE, UM, FACTS.
ANYONE ELSE? I WASN'T SURE IF YOU WERE GONNA SPEAK, MAN.
UM, I I WANNA ASK A QUESTION FIRST.
WAS THE COUNCIL SINCERE ON WANTING TO GO INTO THE DIRECTION OF EXTENDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEED RESTRICTIONS AS A PRIORITY? YES.
ALRIGHT, THEN I WANT TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
IF YOU ARE TRULY SINCERE ON THAT, WHY AT THIS POINT IN TIME ARE YOU RUSHING TO DO IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS THE MOST POWERFUL OPEN-ENDED ZONING YOU CAN GIVE A DEVELOPER, IT'S A GIFT TO THE DEVELOPER.
WHY ARE WE DOING THIS AT THIS JUNCTION WHEN YOU COULD DO THE OVERLAY, STAY IN COMPLIANCE, KEEP YOUR IMMUNITY, KEEP A BREATHING ROOM, INSTEAD OF HANDING A GIFT TO A DEVELOPER FOR THEM TO COME IN WITH APPLICATIONS THAT COULD BE SLOWED DOWN.
IF YOU ARE SINCERELY, IF YOU ARE SINCERE ABOUT EXTENDING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, MS. HOLLY, DESCRIBE TO US WHAT YOU FEEL IS THE GIFT WE'RE GIVING TO DEVELOPERS WHEN YOU IN NEED OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS THE DESIGNATION IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL DESIGNATIONS.
THAT YOU CAN GIVE TO ANY PARCEL OF LAND.
IT OPENS THE FLOOD GATES FOR NOT ONLY PILOT PROGRAMS, DENSITY INCREASES, ZONING CHANGES.
IT IS, IT IS A MECHANISM THAT YOU USE FOR BLIGHTED AREAS.
THE REASON WHY PEOPLE KEEP SAYING BLIGHTED IS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE LEGISLATION.
AND IF YOU DON'T USE THAT WORD, MORE THAN LIKELY IT DOESN'T QUALIFY.
SO LEMME SAY REAL QUICK, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS AND, AND I'M, I'LL PAUSE YOUR TIME, BUT THANK YOU.
LET'S JUST SAY WE DON'T DO IT.
WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THIS SPOT ANYWAY.
[01:50:01]
I'M WRONG.THE PROFESSIONALS HAVE SAID THIS, IT CAN BE DONE THROUGH THE ZONING.
SO WE'VE KIND OF SAID THIS, UNLESS I'M MISSING IT, THAT THIS HELPS US TO CONTROL WHAT THAT IS.
IF, IF WE DON'T DO IT, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THROUGH SAY IT AGAIN, MR. TAROT.
THROUGH, THROUGH OVERLAY ZONING.
SO WE HAVE THREE SITES, AND I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANY SITE IN PARTICULAR.
UM, SO TO YOUR POINT, THE, THE WINDFALL FOR A DEVELOPER OR WHATEVER IS WE HAVE TO, BY MARCH 15TH, REZONE CREATE NEW ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY.
AND IF THAT ZONING AND THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN, AND I'M JUST TO OVERSIMPLIFY SAYS A TOTAL OF A HUNDRED UNITS, 20 OF THOSE SHALL BE AFFORDABLE.
WHETHER WE DO IT THROUGH TYPICAL ZONING OR THROUGH REDEVELOPMENT, THE IMPACT TO THE PROPERTY IS IDENTICAL.
THE, THE DEVELOPER HAS THE, THE SAME RIGHTS TO DEVELOP AND GET SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION BECAUSE WE'RE ESSENTIALLY, UM, WE'RE REZONING THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE EITHER REZONING IT UNDER REDEVELOPMENT WHERE AS I TALKED ABOUT, I PREFER BECAUSE WE CAN GET VERY SPECIFIC AND, AND WITH IMAGES AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND GET A BETTER QUALITY AND A MORE PREDICTABLE SET OF OUTCOMES.
BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I CAN WRITE A 20 PAGE ARCHITECTURE AND FACADE GUIDELINES DOCUMENT, AND IF SOMEBODY SAYS, DRAW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, YOU WILL GET NINE DIFFERENT PRODUCTS.
SO I I I THINK IT'S A MORE PREDICTABLE THAT ONCE THOSE ELEVATIONS AND WHERE THE HIGH VISIBILITY FACADES ARE AROUND THE PERIMETER, HIGH VISIBILITY REAR FACADES, WHERE WE HAVE REVERSE FRONTAGES SIDE ENTRIES, ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE MUCH MORE EASILY DONE AND MUCH EASIER TO CONTROL THROUGH A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THROUGH ZONING.
BUT, BUT TO YOUR POINT, THAT BENEFIT TO THE LANDOWNER AND OR DEVELOPER HAPPENS ON MARCH 15TH WHEN WE ARE OBLIGATED TO EITHER REZONE AND THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE REASON NONE OF US WANT TO BE HERE.
SO WE HAVE TO EITHER REZONE OR REZONE THROUGH A REDEVELOPMENT.
I UNDERSTAND THE MARCH 15TH DEADLINE INTIMATELY.
THE POINT I'M ARGUING IS THE NEED TO DO IT TODAY.
IF YOU DO AN OVERLAY AND YOU TAKE A BREATH AND YOU DON'T GIVE AWAY THE STORE AND YOU DON'T AND IT IS GIVING AWAY THE STORE, IT'S GIVING AWAY THE TOWN.
BUT, WELL, I KNOW I'M, I KNOW SOME PEOPLE DON'T AGREE, BUT I'M GONNA ASK THAT THE CHAIRMAN PAUSE YOUR TIME.
AND I'M JUST GONNA ASK FOR A MOMENT TO SPEAK TO YOU DIRECTLY.
MS. HOLLOWAY, WHEN YOU SAY GIVE AWAY THE STORE AND WE'RE EMPOWERING OR GIVING THE MOST POWERFUL TOOL TO THE BUILDER, I NEED TO HEAR YOU SAY WHAT THAT MEANS.
IT INCREASES DENSITIES BEYOND, IT CAN, BEYOND THE SPOT ZONING.
DO YOU FEEL IT INCREASES DENSITY BEYOND THE SPOT ZONING? I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.
SO WE HAVE TO EITHER SPOT ZONE OR REDEVELOP.
WELL, WHAT ARE THE TWO, WHAT ARE THE, WHAT'S THE THIRD OPTION YOU THINK WE CAN DO? IT CAN, YOU CAN DO AN OVERLAY ZONING.
AND, AND, AND YOU WOULD AND STILL STAY IN COMPLIANT.
AND THE OUTCOME'S, THE SAME AMOUNT OF UNITS.
AM I MISSING THE OUTCOME MAY NOT BE THE SAME AMOUNT OF UNITS.
IT ALSO CLOSES THE DOOR FOR TAX FOR PILOTS.
FOR DEFERRED STATEMENTS, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA PUT PILOTS ON THE SIDE FOR ONE SECOND.
I WANNA STICK WITH THE ZONING.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND ANYONE ON THE BOARD AS WELL, THE OVERLAY ZONING DENSITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT DENSITY ARE NEARLY IDENTICAL.
THE TWO OPTIONS WE HAVE FROM THIS POINT FORWARD EQUAL THE SAME DENSITY.
SO THAT DENSITY IS SO, AND IF I CAN END THERE, BUILD 71 UNITS, HAS TO BE WE RIGHT? CORRECT.
KNOW, BUT WHAT I, WHAT I, WHEN I CAME UP, I ASKED SPECIFICALLY IF IT YOU WERE IN SINCERE YEAH.
THAT 171, I DON'T WANNA BEAT A DEAD HORSE.
WE'RE JUST, I'M GONNA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AND I'M GONNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU HEAR IT LOUD AND CLEAR FROM US.
NOT ONLY COUNSEL, BUT THIS BOARD AND ALL THE PROFESSIONALS HERE WANT ZERO UNITS.
SO WE'RE GONNA DO ANYTHING IN OUR POWER TO DRIVE THAT NUMBER DOWN.
WE'RE EXPLORING, WE DEED RESTRICTION EXTENSIONS.
WE KNOW THAT IF WE EXTEND THEM BEYOND 20 YEARS, WE GET A CREDIT AND A HALF FOR THOSE DEEDS.
[01:55:01]
HOLDERS, BOTH CORPORATE AND PRIVATE, AND AN ATTEMPT TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH THAT NET SUM WOULD COST US, US AND I MEAN THE TAXPAYERS TO DO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE DOING TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME HERE.
I, IF I MAY OF YOUR TIME IS PAUSE, WE'LL GET BACK TO YOUR TIME HERE.
I AM CONFIDENT THAT THERE'S NO OUTCOME, WHETHER IT'S REDEVELOPMENT OR OVERLAY ZONING THAT YIELDS A DIFFERENT NUMBER OF DENSITY.
WE'RE GONNA GET THE SAME NUMBER OF HOMES.
DOES IT, DOES IT GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO LOWERING BUFFERS, TO DOING THINGS, UH, IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL WAY? A LEEWAY ON SOME OF THOSE THINGS? DOES IT, DO ANY OF THAT 'CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING? NO.
IT WOULD MAKE, SO WHAT I'M BEING TOLD OUTSIDE OF MR. TAYLOR SAID THE BUFFERS WILL BE, IT DOES DOES THE OPPOSITE.
THE REDEVELOPMENT DOES THE OPPOSITE.
HE CAN WRITE THE PLAN EXACTLY WHAT YOU CAN'T HAPPEN.
THE REDEVELOPMENT DOESN'T INCREASE, MA'AM.
I'VE DONE A DOZEN OF THEM MYSELF COMMERCIALLY.
WE NEED, I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN ON THREE SIDES OF THIS.
I'VE BEEN ON THE MUNICIPAL SIDE, THE COUNTY SIDE.
I'M PLANNER NEW JERSEY AS WELL.
AND I'VE ALWAYS, I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT REDEVELOPMENT WAS AN GONNA GO ON, NOT, NOT THE OPPOSITE.
AND I'VE BEEN IN SITUATIONS WHERE TOWNS HAVE NOT BEEN PAYING ATTENTION.
THEY, THEY ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THEY, BEFORE THEY ADOPTED AN AREA REDEVELOPMENT AND THEY GIVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOPERS LIKE THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE OUR OWN PROFESSIONALS WRITING THE PLAN FOR US WITH OUR PARTICIPATION AND, AND THAT THAT EMPOWERS THE, THE TOWNSHIP TO, UH, DEVELOP, DEVELOP AND BUILD IN OUR BEST INTEREST.
I I MIGHT, I I, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY ELSE HAS MENTIONED TOO, I DON'T KNOW WHY THERE'S SUCH A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION AROUND THE, THE WORD PILOT.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S AGAIN, IS IS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MUNICIPALITY TO TAKE IN MONEY AND, AND USE IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN IN TRADITIONAL TAXES, SIR.
SO PILOT PROGRAM, 95% OF THE TAXES GO TO THE TOWN.
NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, MA'AM.
BUT WE'RE ON A DIFFERENT, 5% GOES TO THE COUNTY AND ZERO GOES TO SCHOOLS.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE ON THAT'S STEP 14.
THAT'S, THAT IS NOT FOR, SO THAT'S NOT, I UNDERSTAND THIS DESIGNATION OPENS THE DOOR.
IF THE DESIGNATION ISN'T THERE, THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PILOTS AND THE TAX DEFERMENTS.
MS. HOLLOWAY, I MADE THE STATEMENT AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ALL OF COUNSEL, BUT I ASSURE YOU THE GOAL OF REDEVELOPMENT IS NOT TO PROVIDE A TAX INCENTIVE OR BENEFIT TO A BUILDER AT ALL.
THAT'S THE MOST ABSURD THING I THINK I'VE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE.
AND I KNOW THAT IF WE DO HAVE TO DO REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH WE, IF WE HAVE TO DO REDEVELOPMENT FOR THE AFFORDABLE UNITS, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE WILL.
BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT BY THE MUNICIPALITY TO, TO, TO HOLD ALL 95% OF THAT PILOT.
I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE SCHOOLS AND GIVE THEM BACK THEIR FAIR SHARE OF THE TAXES THAT WE COLLECT FOR THESE PROPERTIES.
WHETHER IT'S PILOTED, IF IT'S NOT PILOT, THEY'RE GONNA GET IT ANYWAY.
NONE OF THESE ACTIONS THAT WE'RE TAKING TODAY OR ANYWHERE IN THIS REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WILL BE IN SPITE OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, I CAN ASSURE YOU OF THAT.
WE'RE DOING IT TO CONTROL, NOT THE DENSITY, WE CAN'T CONTROL THAT DENSITY, BUT HOW THESE HOMES LOOK AND FEEL AND HOW YOUR PROPERTIES, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THIS ROOM, HOW YOUR NEW NEIGHBORS WILL BE SITUATED TO IN YOUR BACKYARDS.
WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE MONEY FROM THE SCHOOLS.
WE'RE NOT GONNA GIVE MONEY BACK TO THE BUILDERS.
NO, I'M SAYING THE PILOT PROGRAM'S IN THE TOWN RIGHT NOW, SCHOOLS ARE GETTING ZERO.
SO WE WE'RE, WE'RE IN THE WRONG, WE'RE, IT'S THE WRONG NIGHT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, BUT WE'RE REVIEWING ALL PILOT PROGRAMS AND WE'RE GONNA MEET WITH THE SCHOOLS.
I, I SINCERELY, MY CHILDREN GO TO THE SCHOOLS.
MS. HOLLOWAY, UH, UH, IT'S NOT TO MY GRANDCHILDREN.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M DOING THIS.
SO I FILED A FORMAL OBJECTION WITH FAIR OR SHARE.
UM, I HAVE THE PAPERWORK, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE.
IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE MAKING DECISIONS PRIOR TO HAVING INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
JUST LIKE JESSICA HAD SAID THAT IF THEY ARE SHRUNK, IF THINGS HAPPEN, BUT IN NEED REDEVELOPMENT, EVEN EVEN A PROFESSIONAL HAS SAID AN OVERLAY IS THE BETTER OPTION AT THIS POINT.
I STILL, IT KEEPS YOU IN COMPLIANCE.
I STILL DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE IMMEDIATELY GOING THERE.
[02:00:01]
IF THE TOWN IS SINCERE MOVING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.I HAVEN'T HEARD, I'M GONNA STOP TALKING BECAUSE I I DON'T WANNA BEAT A DEAD HORSE.
IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
I DID WHICH PROFESSIONAL IS SAYING THAT A ZONING OVERLAY IS BETTER FOR THE MUNICIPALITY THAN A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY, WHO, WHO SAID THAT TO YOU, MS. HOLLOWAY.
IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY GIVE THE PILOT OPPORTUNITIES AND TAX DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES THAT IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT DOES.
IS THAT CORRECT OR NOT? THE THE THE REDEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GIVE THE PILOT.
THERE'S SEVERAL REDEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT DON'T HAVE PILOT, NEVER HAVE PILOTS.
YOU KNOW, I'M REALLY CONFUSED AND I'M GONNA, AND I I WANNA, I DON'T WANNA TAKE UP A TON OF TIME, RIGHT.
I'VE SAT THROUGH EVERY MEETING AND I HAVE HEARD FROM COUNCIL, NOT THIS BOARD.
THIS IS SEEMS TO BE A NEW THING, RIGHT? HOW THEY HAD TO GIVE THE PILOTS BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR A BUILDER TO BUILD WITHOUT THEM OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN FROM NOT ONLY YOUR COUNCIL, FROM THE PLANNING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
IT'S NOT ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE BUILDER WITHOUT IT.
IS THAT NOT TRUE? THE, THE DEVELOPMENT I I TELL YOU, I JUST BUILT, I KNOW PEOPLE, I'M A DEVELOPER.
YOU BUILT 600 UNITS IN MOUNT LAUREL.
WE HAVE A PILOT ON THE 120 AFFORDABLE SENIORS.
THERE IS NOT A PILOT OR A PENNY OFF FOR THE 480 MARKET RATE UNITS.
JUST LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF, UH, SENIOR HOUSING THAT WE CAN BUILD.
I I DID THEY WHAT LIMIT THE NUMBER HOUSING? THEY DO.
I SENIOR, WHAT I'M TELLING MY JOB WAS, I'M JUST TELLING YOU MY JOB.
BUT I'M TELLING YOU, I'VE DONE MANY A JOBS TOO THAT ARE IN REDEVELOPMENTS, AWAS, CHICK-FIL-A, THEY DO PILOTS AND THEY PAY FULL BOAT.
'CAUSE THE TOWN WANTS THE 95% OR THEY DON'T DO A PILOT AT ALL IN A REDEVELOPMENT.
SO IT, THE REDEVELOPMENT FOR EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM DOES NOT MEAN THEY'LL BE A PILOT.
AND IF IT DOES, IT, IT, I WOULD GUESS, AND I SHOULDN'T SPEAK FOR COUNSEL, BUT IT WOULD, 99%, THEY WOULD BE NONE ON THE MARKET RATE.
THERE'S, IT'S UP TO COUNSEL, BUT I DON'T SEE THEM DOING IT.
MADE THIS STATEMENT IN PUBLIC SEVERAL TIMES.
I KNOW THERE'S, THERE'S THE PAST AND I CAN'T CHANGE THE PAST.
WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE PILOTS AND RE REALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS BACK TO THE SCHOOLS, WHICH WE'RE LOOKING INTO.
BUT PLEASE DON'T COME UP HERE AND TELL US THAT WE'RE GONNA USE REDEVELOPMENT AS A TOOL TO IMPLEMENT PILOTS SO THE BUILDERS CAN GET MORE MONEY AND OUR SCHOOL CHILDREN WILL LOSE OUT.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
BUT ISN'T IT THE, THE NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT, ISN'T IT THE ONLY ZONING MECHANISM WHERE THE BUILDER HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT? OF COURSE IT IS.
BUT THAT'S NOT THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA USE.
THE
LET'S STAY OFF OF PILOTS ALL I KNOW.
WE'RE NOT, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA, IT SEEMS, AND, AND I'M GONNA SAY THIS OUT LOUD.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE DECISION WAS MADE BEFORE YOU GOT IN HERE.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS ALREADY A DONE DEAL JUST LISTENING TO MR. TAYLOR, IT SEEMS LIKE, AND THE QUESTION'S BEING ASKED THAT NO MATTER WHAT ANY CITIZEN SAYS OR RESIDENCE SAYS, THAT IT WAS ALREADY DECIDED.
AND IT'S, IT'S GETTING TO, BUT WHAT WAS DECIDED MSS, THAT THAT, THAT THIS, THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE COMING NO MATTER WHAT.
WHETHER WE DO OVERLAY ZONING OR WE DO SPOT ZONING OR WE DO REDEVELOPMENT.
I BELIEVE IN THESE, THIS GENTLEMAN'S SERVED THIS TOWN FOR 38 YEARS.
THAT MEANS, NO OFFENSE, I WAS LIKE YOUNG WHEN YOU STARTED AND MR. TAYLOR'S BEEN HERE FOR YEARS AND LIVES HERE.
IS HE, THEY'RE SAYING THIS IS OUR BEST MECHANISM TO, TO IT'S COMING EITHER WAY, BUT THIS IS THE BEST MECHANISM IN ORDER FOR US TO HANDLE WHAT'S COMING OUR WAY.
IS IT COMING IF WE ARE SUCCESSFUL IN EXTENDING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? OF COURSE NOT.
WELL, NO, WE'RE GONNA HAVE THIS, THE NUMBER'S NOT COMING.
WE'RE GONNA SATISFY 171 UNITS, WIN, LOSE OR DRAW.
BUT YOU'RE NOT GONNA SATISFY 170 UNITS ON DEED RESTRICTIONS.
I MEAN THERE'S UM, DO WE KNOW THAT? WELL, THERE'S AN OP THERE'S A MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY THAT IT COULD HAPPEN.
BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO GET ALL THOSE DEED RESTRICTING OWNERS TO AGREE TO A 20 PLUS YEAR EXTENSION AND THEN COME UP WITH THE FUNDING SOURCE TO DO SO.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS SEVERAL TIMES.
I KNOW THE, THE MOONSHOT THAT, THAT THAT IS IT'S NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE.
BUT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT GONNA NOT TRY, BUT WE'RE NOT,
[02:05:01]
I CAN'T SIT HERE AND SAY THAT WE'RE GONNA FIND, AND FORGIVE ME, I'M DOING MY MATH BACKWARDS HERE.WE NEED, IF WE GET ONE AND A HALF CREDITS FOR EVERY DEED WE EXTEND, THEN WE WOULD NEED LESS THAN 171 DEEDS TO BE EXTENDED.
'CAUSE I CAN'T DO, IT'D BE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WE'LL FIND ANY WAY TO DO THAT.
WE'LL PUT IT AT THE REFERENDUM.
SO IS THE IMPACT OF ALL THIS BUILDING, RIGHT? WE'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE MATH, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA BE IMPACTED BY THIS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
EITHER WE'RE GONNA PAY FOR IT NOW OR PAY FOR IT LATER.
AND MARIANNE, WE'RE GONNA DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO REDUCE THE DENSITY AND THE NUMBER OF HOUSES BUILT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MEDFORD.
AND I I I JUST WANNA MAKE THIS CLEAR UNTIL I STARTED TO BRING UP ALL OF THE OPTIONS THAT THE TOWN HAD.
AND WHAT I'M SAYING NOW IS, IS THAT WE'RE SPEAKING AS CONCERNED RESIDENTS AND NOT ADVERSARIALS.
WHEN YOU LISTENED, YOU FINALLY HEARD PEOPLE.
I'M NOT AGREEING WITH YOU, BY THE WAY, ON THIS ANITA REDEVELOPMENT.
I'M NOT AGREEING THE PROFESSIONALS.
AND SIR, I KNOW YOU BUILD A LOT AND I DON'T, I, AND I'M GOING TO, YOU KNOW, YOUR KNOWLEDGE IS GREAT.
I JUST TELL I'M NOT THAT SMART, MA.
I'M NOT GONNA DEBATE NOT PROFESSIONAL.
AND I JUST KNOW THAT THE TOWNS THAT I'VE WORKED WITH, THEY USE REDEVELOPMENT FOR THE TOWN MORE THAN A DEVELOPER.
IN AN AREA THAT'S BLADED, YOU KIND OF SIT DOWN.
BUT AS HE SAID, ANDREW SAID ON THE END, IT, THIS IS THE OPPOSITE.
THIS IS REALLY TO SAY, NO, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BEAUTIFUL BUFFER ALONG THIS, THIS EDGE.
AND NO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, WHATEVER PLYWOOD DECK ON THE TOP.
IT'S GOTTA BE AZA AND, AND REDEVELOPMENT REALLY DOES THAT.
AND I FEEL LIKE THIS IS WHAT OUR PROFESSIONALS ARE TELLING US.
WHY WOULD, WHY ARE WE NOT BELIEVING 'EM? WHAT WOULD BEHOOVE US IF HE THOUGHT IF THEY THOUGHT SPOT ZONING OR OVERLAY WAS THE BEST? I BELIEVE THEY WOULD SAY IT.
SO I KNOW THAT THE BUILDER WAS REALLY HOPING FOR ANITA REDEVELOPMENT AND THERE WAS A PUSH FOR IT.
IT IS AN ADVANTAGE TO THE BUILDER.
IF THIS PASSES TONIGHT, HOW FAST IS DR HORTON PUTTING APPS IN IF IT DOESN'T PASS? DR.
HORTON'S GONNA GET SOMEONE AND SUE THIS TOWN.
PROBABLY BY FIRST YOU IMMUNITY.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE, YOU HAVE IMMUNITY RIGHT NOW, YOU ALREADY HAVE SOMEBODY SUING THE TOWN.
NOT IF WE DON'T DO THIS, WE'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE.
YOU ARE IN FULL COMPLIANCE FULL MR. JAWS.
WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO NOTHING? MARCH 15TH IS YOUR DEADLINE, RIGHT? THAT'S IT.
I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN, YOU CAN STAY IN COMPLIANCE.
WE'RE GONNA AGREE TO, AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS NOW BECOMING A DEBATE AND I DON'T WANT DEBATE IT.
WE'VE BEEN ABOUT 14 MINUTES AND I YEAH, I, WE INTERRUPT YOU.
I APPRECIATE THAT ALSO BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME I CAN CUT OFF.
UM, JUST KNOW THAT I I DON'T AGREE AT ALL.
AND EVEN THOUGH, AND I WILL LEARN EVERY DAY, I LEARN SOMETHING ELSE EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I'VE RESEARCHED THIS TO DEATH.
I KNOW I DON'T PULL THIS STUFF OUT OF THE AIR AND I DO THINK YOU'RE MAKING A MISTAKE.
OKAY? YOU CAN STAY IN COMPLIANCE FOR MARCH 14TH WITHOUT DOING THIS.
AND I I'M GONNA ASK ONE MORE TIME.
HOW FAST DOES DR. HORTON PUT IN AN APPLICATION ONCE THIS IS ZONED? IT'S A QUESTION THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN ANSWER.
DO WE HAVE AN ANSWER? THEY HAVE, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
WE'RE, WE'RE JUST, RIGHT NOW THE PLANNING BOARD IS JUST AGREEING TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL WE'RE ABOUT TO DO HERE.
SO IF YOU CAN DO THAT AND YOU DON'T DO IT TONIGHT, WE DO OVERLAY.
YOU STAY IN COMPLIANCE, YOU DO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO DO A NEED, A REDEVELOPMENT.
I THINK WE'VE BEEN DOWN THE ROAD NOT AGREE, AGREE.
THIS IS GETTING THE UNITS ARE GONNA BE THE SAME.
JUST ONE THING I WANT TO CLARIFY.
UM, A, A THING THAT MS. HOLLOWAY SAID, AND I WOULD, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT SHE'S CLEAR AND THE BOARD IS CLEAR.
SHE SAID THAT REDEVELOPMENT GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO REDUCE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU CAN'T IN AN OVERLAY ZONING.
UM, AND, AND UNLESS I MISHEARD.
UM, SO THEN JUST TO CLARIFY, THE INTENT HAS BEEN TO CREATE ENHANCED BULK REQUIREMENTS AND BUFFERING.
THAT HAS BEEN ALL OF OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE TOWN TO MAKE THIS THE BEST IT CAN BE.
BUT LITERALLY UNDER A SUPERSEDE THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF
[02:10:01]
ZONING, SUPERSEDING ZONING WHERE IT'S NO LONGER AR OR GMN AND IT IS NOW THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING 15 ORDINANCE OR AN OVERLAY WHERE IT COULD STILL BE DEVELOPED WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING, WHICH THE DENSITY'S SO LOW, WE WOULD THEN NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE.SO IF WE DO SUPERSEDING ZONING OR REDEVELOPMENT, IT'S THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS WE CAN REDUCE OR WE CAN INCREASE BUFFERS.
ONE OF THE EXAMPLES I CITED BEFORE WAS RIGHT NOW A FEE SIMPLE TOWNHOUSE LOT CAN BE 25 FEET FROM AN ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT, WHICH IS ABOUT THE DISTANCE BETWEEN ME AND MS. BELL.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SIGNIFICANT A HUNDRED PERCENT INCREASES OR SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET IN SOME AREAS, UH, WITH THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
SO FROM A PHYSICAL LOCATIONAL BULK STANDARD, BOTH ARE IDENTICAL.
THE ADVANTAGE PILOT DISCUSSION ASIDE, WHICH IS REALLY ITEM 14, THE REAL BENEFIT FROM MY STANDPOINT AND MY RECOMMENDATION IS WE CAN PUT THE GRAPHICS IN, WE CAN REQUIRE THOSE ARCHITECTURE PLANS, TALK ABOUT HIGH VISIBILITY FACADES AND MATERIALS AND COLORS.
AND EVERYBODY CAN KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THESE THINGS ARE GONNA LOOK LIKE BEFORE IT EVEN GETS TO A PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT BOTH HAVE THE SAME FLEXIBILITY AND I APOLOGIZE MS. HALL, IF MY, IF I MISUNDERSTOOD.
ANYONE ELSE? HI, I'M CLAUDIA CARDELL, 13 CHAUSER.
AND I JUST WANNA SUBMIT MY OBJECTION, JUST LIKE MR. LINES DID IN WRITING.
I DON'T AGREE THAT THAT PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE IT NEEDS A LOT OF WORK.
IT'S MESSY, BUT IT'S BEAUTIFUL TO SEE THE COW'S.
BEAUTIFUL TO SEE THE DEER PRANCING IN THE MORNINGS, IN THE AFTERNOONS AS WE'RE TAKING OUR KIDS FOR A WALK.
AND MR. CIZIK, YOU ASKED A QUESTION, UH, TO MR. NO, DID MI DID WE MENTION THAT PART OF RICK'S PROPERTY IS ALREADY ZONED TO BUILD HOUSES? IS THAT WHAT I HEARD? IT'S IN A ZONE THAT ALLOWS FOR, FORGIVE ME HOW MUCH DENSITY? 1.25 UNITS PER ACRE.
RIGHT? SO YOU SAID ABOUT 80 HOUSES.
AND WE'RE GONNA REZONE IT TO PUT IN, WAS IT 280 HOUSES? SO WHY CAN'T WE USE THAT ZONE TO SAY ALREADY YOU CAN ONLY PUT 80 HOUSES IN HERE.
AND OF THE 80, YOU'VE ALREADY SAID YOU WANTED 48 OF THOSE AS AFFORDABLE UNITS.
SO WHY ARE WE NOW TAKING IT FROM 80 TO ALMOST 250 HOUSES? 'CAUSE WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION OF 171 AFFORDABLE UNITS.
BUT IN THAT PARCEL, THERE'S ONLY 48.
IT'S THE, IT'S THE ECONOMICS OF THE, THE BUILDING, THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE DEVELOPER WAS ONLY ALLOWED TO BUILD 80 HOMES AND 48 OF THEM HAD TO BE, SO THEN IT WOULDN'T BE BUILDABLE.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO PROVE TO THE COURT IS THAT THESE SITES ARE AVAILABLE APPROVABLE AND DEVELOPABLE.
AND THEY AREN'T DEVELOPABLE AT 80 HOUSES.
RIGHT? NO, BUT, BUT THEY AREN'T BECAUSE THE ECONOMICS AREN'T THERE.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE, THE COURTS HAVE, ARE REALLY USING A FORMULA OF ABOUT 20% SET ASIDE.
BECAUSE IF THESE UNITS COMPARE, THE COURTS, THE SUPREME COURT, THE LEGISLATURE AND THE COURTS THAT ARE OVERSEEING THIS PROCESS WANT THESE 171 UNITS TO BE BUILT.
AND IF, AND IF MEDFORD SAID, WELL, YOU'RE GONNA BUILD ALL 171 UNITS OUT ON THIS SITE AND WE'LL ZONE IT FOR THAT, AND YOU ONLY GET 10 MORE MARKET RATE UNITS, THE PRO FORMA DOESN'T WORK AND THEY WOULD NEVER BE BILLED.
AND THEN MEDFORD WOULD BE AT RISK FOR A BUILDER'S REMEDY.
SO THE GENERAL FORMULA IS ABOUT A 20% SET ASIDE IS WHAT MUNICIPALITIES ARE NEGOTIATING WITH THE FAIR SHARE HOUSING CENTER, THE COURTS, AND THE SPECIAL COURT ADJUDICATORS.
SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, AS THE MAYOR SAID, THIS IS NOT MEDFORD'S VISION FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS OF WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN THIS PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND THEN DCA GAVE US A NUMBER OF 171 AFFORDABLE UNITS.
WHICH TRANSLATES TO 800 AND SOME TOTAL UNITS.
SO THE ONLY WAY IT'S BILLABLE FOR THE AMOUNT THAT YOU WANT IS BECAUSE YOU'RE REZONING IT.
BUT IF YOU DON'T REZO IT, IT'S REZONING, IT'S BILLABLE FOR 80.
SO WHY ARE WE JUST NOT GOING FOR THE 80? 'CAUSE THE BUILDERS FOR 80, THEY
[02:15:01]
WILL SUE AND IT WILL GO TO THE COURT AND THE COURT WILL SAY THE DEVELOPER CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.I'M OVERSIMPLIFYING HERE, BUT BECAUSE IF, IF THEY ONLY BILLED 80, WE WOULD HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING SET ASIDE OF 16 UNITS HERE, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE A SHORTFALL OF 32 UNITS THAT WE, THE TOWN WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THEIR APPROVED HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN, FIND AN ADDITIONAL SITE AND BUILD THOSE 32 UNITS.
PLUS 128 ROUGHLY, UM, MARKET RATE.
SO WE'D HAVE TO PICK ANOTHER SITE AND ADD TO IT.
AND THEN ALL OF THOSE SITES WOULD THEN BE DEVELOPED AND THE TOWNSHIP, THROUGH THE HOUSING DOWN COURT, WE'RE CHOOSING TO PUT, PUT 2 48 IN THIS CORNER.
PLUS THE 800 IN THE SAME AREA, AS OPPOSED TO LEAVING THAT FOR 80.
AND THAT'S THE PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN JUNE.
SO JUST PUT IT ON THE NORTH SIDE.
WELL, IT'S, I, WE HAD SAID, MA'AM, THAT SOUTH SIDE IS IN THE PINELANDS AND THE PINELANDS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT TRUMPS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
YOU'RE NOT, AND I THINK I ALSO HEARD, YOU'RE NOTED HE'S NOT HERE, MR. PRIME, BUT HE SAID THAT IF YOU DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE STATE AND SAY, WE'VE DONE OUR DITCH.
BUT YOU'RE GONNA DO WHAT YOU NEED TO, TO DO.
I GET IT, BUT I JUST NEEDED TO SAY THAT.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC MA'AM? UH, HI.
UH, I'M NANCY PINS AND HAGAN AT SIX PROTE COURT.
HAGEN AT SIX BRONTE COURT IN, UM, MEDFORD CHASE.
UM, I MEAN, I LOVE LOOKING AT THE RICK'S AUTO BODY AND THE FARM, AND I HATE TO SEE THAT GO.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S AN OBLIGATION AND WE HAVE TO MEET THAT.
BUT I, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT DENSITY, POPULATION DENSITY, BUT YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THE NUMBER OF ACRES.
WE KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 855 UNITS, BUT I STILL DON'T GET A FEEL FOR HOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE NUMBER OF HOMES PER ACRE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THESE THREE PROPERTIES.
IS THAT I I, I, I THINK MY HUSBAND ASKED AND SOMEBODY SAID IT'S IN THE PLAN, BUT CAN YOU JUST HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS? LIKE, WHAT THE POPULATION DENSITY IS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING? I DON'T KNOW IF THE CALCULATIONS WERE DONE IN THE ADOPTED.
I GOT THIS CALCULATE IT'S ABOUT 4.5 UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE PARK VIEW SITE.
2 87 DIVIDED BY 64 ACRES, I BELIEVE IT IS.
AND FOR THE, UM, THE, THE RICK'S AUTO BODY SITE, THAT'S THE ONE I'M TALKING ABOUT.
SO IT'S, IT'S FOUR PER ACRE, KIND OF 4.5.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, MULTIPLE STORIES UNITS WITH MULTIPLE STORIES? DO WE KNOW THAT ALL THE, THE TOWNHOUSES WILL BE THREE STORIES MAX.
WHICH IS WHAT'S PERMITTED THERE NOW.
AND THEN THE REST WILL BE TWO, TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING? THERE'S A MIX, UM, THROUGHOUT THE SITES OF SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWNHOUSES ON ALL OF THOSE.
SO THE ACTUAL COMPOSITION NUMBER OF STORIES AND BEDROOMS WILL ALL BE SET FORTH CONCEPTUALLY IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT.
THOSE WILL ALL BE SET FORTH IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN ALONG WITH THOSE DEN THE DENSITIES ON PER ACRE BASIS ARE SOMEWHAT INCONSEQUENTIAL.
'CAUSE AS WE MENTIONED BEFORE, OUR CAP IS, AND I'LL USE WRONG NUMBERS, UM, A CERTAIN SITE MUST PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 48 AFFORDABLE UNITS AND MAY CONSTRUCT UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 200 MARKET RATE UNITS.
SO THAT NUMBER MAY BE A VARIABLE.
BUT THE MARKET RATE UNITS WILL, WILL BE, THAT'LL ALL BE SET FORTH IN THE, IN THE
JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION.
I LIVE IN BROOKSIDE, SO I'M NOT A PLANNER.
A LOT OF LETTERS AFTER MY NAME AND CERTIFICATIONS.
I DON'T, I'M JUST TALKING FROM A LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE.
I GET THAT WE HAVE TO DO THESE UNITS, THIS,
[02:20:01]
WE HAVE TO MEET THIS FAIR HOUSING SHARE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO 'EM WITH TWO RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND.WE DON'T HAVE TO CHOOSE THESE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES.
WE, THE TOWN IS CHOOSING TO CHOOSE THESE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO, RIGHT.
WE HAVE TO MEET 171 UNIT OBLIGATIONS.
SO AS A LAYMAN, I JUST THINK IT'S KIND OF, DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE GREATEST PLAN THAT PUT TWO OF THEM RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER, UM, IN SUCH A SMALL AREA AND PUT THAT ONUS ON THAT SMALL AREA.
AND AS FAR AS SAYING THAT THESE PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE DOING IT ON, LIKE RICK'S AUTO BODY IS A BLIGHT.
I MOVED INTO THIS TOWN, UM, WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND WE, WE CHOSE A HOUSE THAT'S RIGHT NEAR THAT AREA AND THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY A NICE THING, THAT IT HAS OPEN LAND.
THERE'S A FARM ME FOOT AS A WHOLE HAS LOTS OF OPEN LAND PROTECTED LAND.
THESE, THESE AC THESE FARMLANDS THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED AS SUCH, UM, AS A, AS A BIO THAT WAS A, THAT WAS VIEWED AS, AS A BENEFIT TELLING YOU THAT FIRSTHAND LIVING NEXT TO A AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS CONDENSED IN A SMALL AREA WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN VIEWED AS A BENEFIT.
AND, AND I WOULD SAY THAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT IF THEY, IF THEY'RE TELLING THE TRUTH.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST ONE THING THAT I JUST DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.
WE HAVE A GIGANTIC TOWN, PRETTY BIG, I WOULD SAY WHY TWO OF THESE HAVE TO BE SO CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.
UM, SO THAT WAS JUST, IT JUMPS OUT AT ME AND I GET THAT THERE'S THIS PINES LANDS, PINE LANDS OBLIGATION, WHICH THERE'S, THAT'S PROTECTED, BUT ALSO PART OF THE TOWN AND THE STATE TO HAVE ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTED AREAS AND HAVE FARMLAND AREAS TO HAVE OPEN SPACE.
RIGHT? SO WE'RE SORT OF LIKE USING THAT SAME ARGUMENT TO, TO JUST SAY, WE CAN'T DO THIS SIDE OF TOWN, BUT, BUT YET WE CAN HERE.
UM, SO I, I THINK THAT THAT JUST RAISES QUESTION TO ME WHY THAT WOULD BE THE CASE.
UM, AND THEN I ALSO HOPE THAT, YES, WE WANT TO GET AS MUCH AS WE, WE WANT TO GET, WE WANNA MEET THIS 1 71 OBLIGATION WITH ONLY THESE THREE PARCELS.
WE DON'T WANNA HAVE TO DO THIS.
AND AGAIN, LIKE IN OTHER WORDS, WE ONLY, IF WE ONLY BUILT 80 UNITS ON THIS ONE AREA, RIGHT? WE'RE ONLY GONNA GET 16 OF 'EM TO BE THIS TOWARDS THE 1 71.
SO WE WANT TO GET MORE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND FIND TWO MORE AREAS THAT WE HAVE TO NOW DESIGNATE FOR AND GO THROUGH THE WHOLE REGULAR ORDERS.
AND I GET THAT THAT'S A, BUT AGAIN, THAT YOU'RE NOW CONSOLIDATING THE ALL OF 'EM INTO ONE LITTLE AREA AS OPPOSED TO POTENTIALLY SPREADING IT OUT.
SO I KNOW THAT'S MORE WORK TO SPREAD IT OUT, BUT AS A HOMEOWNER, THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE ONE THAT LIVES RIGHT NEAR THERE.
I WOULD RATHER THEY NOT BE CONSOLIDATED TO THAT SAME AREA.
AND I THINK AS A TOWN THAT IS A, IT IS BENEFICIAL TO SPREAD THEM OUT, UM, FOR EVERYONE IN THE TOWN.
SO THAT'S JUST, THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
I DO WANNA SAY THAT THE, THE PROPERTIES THAT WERE ALL TALKING ABOUT THAT THE OWNERS HAVE VOLUNTARILY AGREED TO PUT THEM IN THIS PLAN, CORRECT? THEY HAVE.
AND AS THE MAYOR INDICATED BEFORE, UM, THE PARKVIEW SITE, RICK'S AUTO BODY IN PARTICULAR WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOWNSHIP'S ORIGINAL HOUSING ELEMENT AND FAIR SHARE PLAN.
AND IT WASN'T UNTIL THE LAFFERTY PROPERTY HAD TO BE WITHDRAWN 'CAUSE IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE, WAS THIS THIRD SITE.
SO I, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ENVISIONED THAT THIS IS WHERE THE PLAN WOULD TAKE US, BUT UN UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE CONDITIONS WITH LAFFERTY BEING WITHDRAWN, THIS SITE BECAME, IT WAS OFFERED TO THE TOWN.
ANYONE ELSE, SIR? HELLO? SHANE.
UH, I'M JUST ASKING FOR, UH, CLARIFICATION ON THE WAY FORWARD, RIGHT? SO I UNDERSTAND THE 1 71, I UNDERSTAND THE BILL, UH, THAT WE OWE, I GET ALL THAT PART, BUT TALKING ABOUT KIND OF THE PARALLEL PATHWAYS THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW, WE'RE TRYING TO EXTEND THE DEEDS, RIGHT? OF THE 1 71.
WE MAY GET A PORTION OF THAT, RIGHT? DOES THAT HAVE TO BE LOCKED IN PAPER? SIGNED FUNDING PROVIDED BY 15 MARCH? I BELIEVE THAT ANSWER IS NO.
WE CAN AMEND THE FAIR SHARE PLAN.
WE SATISFIED THESE UNITS IN A DIFFERENT MATTER, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO GET ALL THESE DEEP RESTRICTIONS EXTENDED BY MARCH 15TH.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT, RIGHT? WE, WE HAVE TO TRY EVERYTHING.
THE ANSWER, THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES.
YEAH, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE BY YEAH.
[02:25:01]
AND THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS OTHER PLAN WITH THE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES AND HOW THEY'RE GONNA BE BUILT OUT.
WE'RE ASSUMING WE'RE GONNA DO TO 1 71.
1 71 HAS TO GO TO THE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES.
OKAY? THE BUILDER AGREES TO IT, THE TOWNSHIP AGREES TO IT.
THERE'S THE DESIGNATION OF THE ZONING AND WHATNOT.
SAY THERE IS A CHANGE SOMEHOW.
15 MARCH ISN'T THE DEADLINE RIGHT NOW, THE NUMBER GETS WHITTLED DOWN.
THERE'S 60 DEEDS THAT GET EXTENDED.
DOES THAT THEN OPEN UP THE TOWNSHIP TO LITIGATION FROM THE BUILDER? BECAUSE WE PROMISED THEM 1 71, WE GAVE THEM THE PLANS FOR 1 71, AND NOW WE COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, WE FOUND SOME MONEY.
NOW YOUR NUMBER'S ONE 20 OR A HUNDRED.
DOES THAT THEN OPEN UP THE TOWNSHIP TO, YOU KNOW, DO WE JUMP BACK TO STEP TWO OR DO WE, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT? I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO PURSUE IT AS MUCH AS WE CAN AND THERE'S A RUSH TO DO THAT.
BUT THEN IS THAT ALL MOOT IF WE CAN'T LOCK IT IN BY MARCH 15TH BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY PROMISING SOMETHING AND, AND, AND PUTTING A PLAN IN ACTION BY 15 MARCH? WELL, THE ONLY THING I'LL SAY IS YOUR FIRST POINT WAS IMPORTANT.
THE MAYOR'S INDICATED THAT WE'RE GONNA RUN PARALLEL PATHS AND MAKE EVERY EFFORT POSSIBLE TO SEE WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THAT REGARD AS THE INCLUSIONARY PROJECTS, THE THREE PROJECTS MOVE FORWARD.
THERE'S GONNA HAVE TO BE A CONTINUOUS DIALOGUE BETWEEN THAT EFFORT, WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND WITH ALL OF THE REZONING.
AND IF IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS, ARE OPTIONS THERE, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IMMEDIATELY THE TOWNSHIP WILL NEED TO GET WITH THE FAIR SHARE HOUSING CENTER.
THE COURT AND THE COURT ADJUDICATOR TO SEE WHAT MECHANISM THERE IS.
BUT THAT IS GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT'S DECIDED BY SOMEBODY IN THE ROAD.
IT WOULD, IT WOULD THEY LOOK, THEY'D AMEND THE PLAN IF THEY COULD TO TRY TO REDUCE THE OBLIGATION.
I'M SURE THE TOWN WOULD TRY TO DO THAT.
THE MAYOR CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT THAT TONIGHT.
BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST A BIG IF THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE PROCESS.
BUT THIS IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT'S TIME CONSUMING THAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD.
CONCEIVABLY, THIS COULD BE AMENDED TO IF ALL THAT HAPPENS AND IF THE TOWN'S OVERALL OBLIGATION CHANGES.
BUT THEY'D HAVE TO GET, IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF THE TOWN SAYING OUR OBLIGATION NOW CHANGED.
YOU HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FOR A DIFFERENT NUMBER.
SO THE BEST COURSE IS TO MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT MIGHT CHANGE.
AND IF IT DOES CHANGE, WE'LL AMEND.
BUT FOR NOW, THIS IS WHERE WE ARE.
THE PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT BECAUSE I'M THINKING I'M BEING REALISTIC ABOUT THIS, RIGHT? WE'RE TRYING TO BUY THE DEEDS, WE'RE TRYING TO SATISFY OUR REQUIREMENTS BY 15 MARCH.
AND THEN THE THIRD WAY, WELL, NOT A THIRD WAY, BUT A CONCURRENT ACTION IS THAT WE'RE GONNA GET ALL THESE STUDIES ABOUT THE, THE LAND AND THE FEASIBILITY OF THE LAND AND WHATEVER, RIGHT? SO SAY THAT THEY COME BACK AND THEY SAY, HEY, I KNOW YOU WANNA PUT THIS MANY UNITS ON THERE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WET LANDS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, NOW YOU'RE LIMITED TO THIS MUCH SQUARE AC ACREAGE.
RIGHT? AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE OVER HERE WORKING AND SAYING, WELL, WE'VE ALSO BOUGHT DOWN THE NUMBER BY 60 UNITS, SO NOW WE GOT THREE KIND OF THINGS GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
SO I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW MUCH FLEXIBILITY THERE IS WITH THE FAIR SHARE HOUSE.
I KNOW WE'RE, I'M GETTING INTO MORE OF A COUNCIL TYPE QUESTION.
BUT THERE COULD POTENTIALLY BE, HEY, WE GOT THIS LINE OF ACTION GOING HERE.
WE GOT THIS LINE OF ACTION GOING ON HERE.
HOW DOES THAT OPEN US UP TO POTENTIALLY D HORTON SAYING THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU AGREED TO.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? YOU'RE NOT GONNA KNOW ABOUT THE YIELD RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT FOR A LONG TIME.
THIS, ON THIS, ON THIS, ON THE REDEVELOPMENT PORTION OF IT, THAT'S NOT GONNA BE RESOLVED IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS.
IT'S GONNA BE TWO YEARS A YEAR, WHATEVER.
RIGHT? SO THAT'S WAY DOWN THE ROAD.
WE'RE GONNA FIND TURTLES IN THE SHORT TERM, PLEASE.
IN THE SHORT TERM, THE, THE TOWN WILL BE CON ATTEMPTING TO EXTEND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS IF THEY CAN.
HOW MUCH IS GONNA GET DONE BY MARCH 15TH? AND WHERE DOES, WHO KNOWS FUNDING COME? FROMS, HOW DOES IT GET PAID FOR ALL OF THAT? YEAH, EVERYBODY WILL PUT UP 500 BUCKS.
BUT YEAH, SO I THINK I, I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS YOUR POINT.
UM, BUT I THINK IT'S, IT'S NOT THAT IT'S ALL GONNA BREAK AT THE SAME TIME, ALL THE THREE ISSUES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, SOME OF THEM, LIKE PARTICULARLY THE YIELD ON THE REDEVELOPED SITES, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A LONG TIME FROM NOW.
IF THAT NUMBER CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THAT.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW THAT, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION OR NOT.
SAYING, I'M THINKING, I'M THINKING THE WAY FORWARD, RIGHT? AND THERE'S GONNA BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT AND THEN ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO THIS AMENDMENT.
AND THEN YOU, YOU KNOW, THIS IS CONCEPT PLANS.
AS LONG AS THEY'RE, BUT AS LONG AS YOU'RE DOING, AND THEY'RE DOING THE, THE
[02:30:01]
TOWN IS DOING, AND, AND THROUGH, THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ENGAGED.THEY'RE DOING, THEY HAVE A PLAN.
IF THEY NEED TO AMEND THE PLAN, WHAT THEY ULTIMATELY WANT SEE IS ACTION ON A PLAN AND PROVIDING A REALISTIC OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CREATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO IF THEY'RE DOING THAT, THE ODDS ARE BETTER THAT THEY'LL GET RELIEF.
AND THE ONLY THING I'LL LEAVE WITH THIS IS THAT I ASK THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT, BUT MOVING FORWARD, AS SOON AS THOSE TYPES OF THINGS COME FORTH, THAT EVERYBODY'S TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT AND THAT WE ALL KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, OVER THE LAST THREE MONTHS I'VE LEARNED MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I REALLY EVER WANT TO KNOW.
IT'S ANY CONSOLATION IT HAS TO BE DONE PUBLICLY.
SO THANKS, THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.
SORRY, WHAT WAS, SORRY, JUST FROM A TRANSPARENCY STANDPOINT, WERE THERE SOME THINGS THAT YOU, YOU, YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE TRANSPARENCY OR JUST WHEN THESE THINGS COME UP, JUST PUTTING OUT THE INFORMATION.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S LEGAL PROCESSES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT IT'S JUST LIKE, ALRIGHT, THIS IS, THIS IS OUR LINE OF EFFORT FOR HERE.
THIS IS OUR LINE OF EFFORT FOR HERE.
THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE.
THIS IS THE LATEST INFORMATION THAT COME OUTTA HERE.
WE FOUND OUT THAT THERE'S TOO MANY TURTLES THERE AND WHATEVER.
OKAY, NOW THIS IS THE LINE OF EFFORT HERE, RIGHT? AND THAT THIS IS KIND OF PUSHED OUT VIA THE WEBSITE OR WHATEVER.
SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN READ, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THAT BEFORE THEY COME HERE AND, AND, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT STUFF THAT'S BEEN DECIDED BEFORE, A LOT OF MEANING THE PROCESS OR EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
A LOT OF IT JUST TO TELL YOU FROM A DEVELOPER STANDPOINT, LIKE EVEN IF A SITES, OH YEAH, THIS IS ZONED, I MEAN THE DEP, THE TREATMENT WORKS, APPROVAL, THE LAYOUT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, THERE'S, IT'S A VERY LONG PROCESS.
AND THEN THEY HAVE TO COME IN FRONT OF THE BOARD AND THEY HAVE TO GIVE ALL THAT THEIR PROFESSIONALS TO REVIEW.
SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS IN THE BLINK OF AN EYE.
UM, THEY HAVE TO DO A LOT OF STUDIES AND A LOT OF THINGS.
I I PERSONALLY HAD TO GO THROUGH THAT WHEN WE DEVELOPED.
SO, YOU KNOW, MR NO WILL TELL YOU THEY HAVE TO DO, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, TRAFFIC STUDY, UH, AND TREATMENT WORKS WITH THE DEP.
MAYBE, MAYBE THERE IS A, WE FOUND A TIGER SAL MAN ON OUR SITE.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A CHICK-FIL-A.
THERE'S NO CHICK-FIL-A THERE NOW.
IT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, IT DOES, IT HAPPENS.
WHERE DO YOU GET THOSE? NO, I WOULDN'T WHERE WAS THE CHICK? THAT WAS, THAT'S CATHERINE.
WHERE WAS THE CHICK-FIL-A'S SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT DOWN SHORE? THANK YOU.
SO, UM, NO, IT, IT'S JUST A LONG PROCESS.
BUT THIS IS, I MEAN, AS IT ALSO, AS IT RELATES TO TRANSPARENCY, A LOT OF THESE DEADLINES THAT THE TOWN HAS BEEN STRUGGLING WITH SINCE END OF 24 REALLY ARE THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP QUICKLY.
THE, AND THE, THE STATE IS PUSHED BY THE STATE.
THE STATE IS PROUD OF THAT, THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE PUSHING THIS AND THEY'RE GIVING TOWN SHORT DEADLINES AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY RESPONDING.
HOW MANY HUNDREDS OF TOWNS HAVE RESPONDED, BUT IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT.
AND THIS, THIS ROUND'S FASTER THAN EVER.
I MEAN, FROM A TRANSPARENCY STANDPOINT, THE TOWN IS, IS, IS HAS TO, HAS TO, HAS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.
BUT THEY'RE DOING IT UNDER SUCH SHORT TIMEFRAMES THAT IT MIGHT SEEM LIKE IT'S LESS THAN TRANSPARENT.
IT'S JUST THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING QUICKLY.
AND I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S OUR JOB AS A TOWN AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN IS TO BUILD AS MUCH TIME AS WE CAN TO THEN COLLECT ALL THE INFORMATION.
DELAY THAT DECISION POINT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE WE MAKE A SOUND DECISION.
AND I HOPE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE PURSUING THAT.
SO TRUST ME, I WOULD'VE LOVED TWO TO THREE MORE MONTHS TO DO ALL THESE STUDIES AND PLANS AND REPORTS.
'CAUSE ALL THE DOWNS HAVE THE SAME DEADLINES, AND IT JUST UNFORTUNATELY CAN'T GET ANY EXTENSIONS.
AND JUST TO, TO YOUR POINT, BUT JUST FOR THE, SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 65 PRIVATELY HELD DEEDS.
SO WE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE LAND, IF YOU'RE A HOMEOWNER, YOU HAVE A DEED, THE TOWNSHIP NEEDS TO ENGAGE WITH THOSE 65 PEOPLE.
AND THEN THERE'S FOUR, IT'S NOT ONE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
WELL, THERE'S FOUR CORPORATE OWNERS THAT HAVE HOLD 90.
AND NOW WE'RE NOW THE TOWNSHIP IS ENGAGING WITH CORPORATION THAT HAS VALUE IN THESE DEEDS BEYOND THEIR RESTRICTION.
SO ARE WE ALLOWED TO KNOW WHO THOSE ARE? WHAT'S THAT? ARE WE ALLOWED TO KNOW WHO THOSE ARE? THOSE ARE LIST, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE PRIVATELY KNOWN ENTITIES.
I'M SORRY, PUBLICLY KNOWN ENTITIES.
UM, YOU CAN LOOK THESE, THESE UP YOURSELF.
YOU CAN OPEN THEM, BUT, UM, THE, THE COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS IS PRIVILEGED BECAUSE IT WOULD BE LIKE, IF I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR HOME PER, PER SE.
SO, UM, THERE, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS WE WERE ALLOWED TO SAY TO THE PUBLIC, BUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A NEGOTIATION WITH SOMEONE'S DEED, THOSE ARE SHIELDED CONVERSATIONS.
BUT WE'RE GONNA BE AS TRANSPARENT AS WE CAN.
I JUST DON'T UNDER, LIKE I SAID, YOU GUYS EVER, TRICIA MEADOWS WAS THAT WITH MR. DAVIS? HE SWAPPED ANOTHER GIANT DEVELOPMENT FOR IT, BUT OTHERWISE IT'S A GIANT NUMBER THAT
[02:35:01]
THE TOWN HAS TO WRITE CHECKS TO BECAUSE YEAH, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO COME TO THE BUDGET HEARING THE BUDGET MEETINGS.IT'S A, IT'S A BIG NUMBER, OUR CFO, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE STARING AT A HUGE NUMBER TAX BURDEN FROM US.
HOW DO YOU POSSIBLY PAY FOR THAT NOW IN ADVANCE? RIGHT.
IT'S LIKE BUYING A CAR VERSUS LEASING OR MAKING PAYMENTS.
WE DON'T WANNA DO EITHER, BUT WHERE DO WE COME UP WITH THIS HUGE DOWN PAYMENT TO TO RIGHT.
LIKE TO RIVER HAD MILLION HAD MILLIONS FROM THEIR $9 MILLION FROM THEIR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
THE SLUSH FUND'S LIKE 250,000 OR WHATEVER IT WAS.
I'VE COME TO WAY TOO MANY OF THESE MEETINGS.
ANYONE ELSE? SEEN AS THERE'S NO ONE ELSE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC? SO MOVED.
UM, UM, I LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE NEAR SHAWNEE.
WHEN I WAS A LITTLE BOY, IT WAS ALL WOODS AND ALL, YOU KNOW, MOTORCYCLES AND ALL.
AND, AND BEING A DEVELOPER DOESN'T MEAN THAT I WANTED MY TOWN.
I LIVE IN THIS TOWN FOR THAT REASON.
I LIKE THAT IT'S PINELANDS OUT HERE THAT DOES HELP US TREMENDOUSLY.
UM, SO PERSONALLY FOR ME, UM, I, I UNDERSTAND IT.
UH, UM, I UNDERSTAND YOUR FRUSTRATION.
UH, WE'RE, I, I DO SAY AS A CITIZEN HAS LIVED HERE HIS WHOLE ENTIRE LIFE, THAT YOU REALLY DO HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT CARE, UM, THAT, THAT ARE TRYING TO DO THEIR BEST.
UM, WHETHER YOU BELIEVE ME OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT'S WHAT I TRULY BELIEVE.
AND, AND, AND I DO THINK THIS TOWN IS GREAT.
I DO THINK IT'S ALSO COME A LONG WAY SINCE I'VE GROWN HERE OVER 50 SOME YEARS.
OUR MAIN STREET IS GREAT AND I THINK THERE'S GREAT PEOPLE HERE.
UM, SO OVERALL I CAN, I CAN DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS.
AND, AND I DO THINK IT IS THE STATE, AS MR. CHARLES SAID, THEY'RE PROUD, WE'RE PUSHING IT.
AND, UM, I JUST THINK THAT, THAT IF WITHOUT THOSE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS, ROUTE 70, WHERE THE, WHERE THE CVS IS WOULD STILL BE A FARM FIELD,
I JUST DO, I JUST THINK THAT, UM, BUT THAT'S MY OWN OPINION.
UM, AND, AND I'LL BE QUIET NOW, BUT I, I DO WANNA THANK EVERYONE FOR BEING POLITE AND BEING NICE AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING, UM, AND, AND I HOPE WE ANSWERED A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
UM, I DON'T HAVE YOUR AGENDA ON MEAN.
I DON'T KNOW WHY I CLOSED ON MY, UH OH, HERE YOU GO.
[8.h. Consideration of Resolution 7-2026 – Recommending Designation of the Stahl Camp EFS, LLC Area (Block 302, Lots 28.02 & 39.03) as an Area in Need of Redevelopment ]
UM, YEAH WE ARE DO WE HAVE A MEMORIALIZATION OF RESOLUTION? UH, SEVEN DASH RIGHT? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO? CORRECT.SEVEN DASH 2 26 AND ALSO EIGHT DASH 2026.
THAT'S WHAT'S UP FOR CONSIDERATION RIGHT NOW.
CORRECT? DO I HAVE, IF THE BOARD IS INCLINED, THERE'D BE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT? DID YOU JUST SAY SEVEN DASH 22? I I'M SORRY.
YOU CAN DO BOTH IF YOU WANT BOTH, SIR.
LET'S, LET'S DO, LET'S DO 'EM INDIVIDUALLY TO, OKAY, I APOLOGIZE.
CONDITION OF RESOLUTION SEVEN DASH 2026 RECOMMENDING DESIGNATION OF THE AL CAMP EFS IN AN AREA NEED REDEVELOPMENT.
MS. COOPER, UM, MS. SIMONS AYE.
NOW, NOW WE GO TO THE, CAN I JUST SWITCH? YEAH, SURE.
I'M PLUGGING THIS COMPUTER MIND.
[8.i. Consideration of Resolution 8-2026 – Recommending Designation of Park View at Kirbys Mill Area (Block 803, Lots 6.01 and 6.02) as an Area in Need of Redevelopment ]
OF RESOLUTION, THE DASH 2026 RECOMMENDING DESIGNATION OF PARK VIEW AT KIRBY'S MILL AREA IN THE NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT.UM, BLOCK 8 0 3, LOT 6.01 AND 6.02.
DO HAVE A MOTION? SO, UH, I'LL SECOND.
MS. COOPER, UM, MS. SIMONS AYE.
[02:40:01]
YOU THINK WE NEED TO CHAIRMAN JULIANA? AYE.CONSIDER, DO WE NEED TO GO TO NOW STRAUS, DO WE DO THE CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION THREE THREE? THAT'S, THAT'S THE MATTER THAT WE HEARD, CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT GOT US TO THE RESOLUTIONS THAT YOU JUST APPROVED.
SO THAT'S THAT, RIGHT? THAT'S DONE.
THAT WAS THE AGENDA ITEM THAT LED TO STOP.
AND THIS WHAT I HAVE TO GENERAL PUBLIC.
DO I HAVE OPEN IT UP TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC SEEING? IS THERE NO ONE CLOSED? MOTION TO CLOSE? MOTION TO CLOSE.
AND DO I HAVE A, A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I'LL MAKE A MOTION ADJOURN.