Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

In accordance with the open public meetings act, please note the following all bernardsville borough planning board meetings will be held in person in the. 2026, the planning board meetings will begin at 7 0 PM meetings will be live streamed on YouTube with. but with no opportunity for public comment on YouTube. Members of the public wishing to offer comments or ask questions will be required to attend meetings in person, apparently. YouTube live streams access for all meetings is YouTube at Bernersville borough slash streams. This link will also be available on the agenda for each meeting, which is posted in the borough website, Bernersville.gov and on the borough hall public bulletin board at least 48 hours prior to meetings. Notice of these changes has also been made email to the burdens on news and the career news posted on the borough website. And filed with the municipal clerk all in January 27, 2026.

It's the intention of the board not to continue any matter past 11. Announced at the opening of each meeting.

In addition, the board does not intend to begin a new hearing after 10 PM, nor begin testimony of a new witness after 1030. Any hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider and reaching a decision. The quorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. Roll call.

Here here.

Right here here here. Okay, I saw you put out.

Two sets of minutes, but I didn't get a chance to look at it. Did anyone get a chance? No. Okay. We should just defer that. Thank you all. Communications. A letter from the DEP on suspected hazardous substance discharge notification. Anything on that? I didn't see it. It's about the gas leak on Claremont Road. Maybe.

I think that was it.

And second, a letter from the Borough Clerk on behalf of Borough Council to NJDOT with Resolution 164 . prohibiting certain left turn movements along morristown road route 202 so i guess exiting a property well either i guess both right exiting and entering um it's from the driveway yeah It's the name. Oh, the restaurant, Walters.

OK. OK, so they were looking for two access points, correct?

Like, and now 1 of them may be constrained not to be able to be exit may not be a left hand turn. Whatever. Yeah, no, I know. All right is is anyone so is anyone here to discuss anything that is not in any way part of the agenda tonight? 1, okay, we got 2 swings of this. This is the 1st. Opportunity. This. So.

For years, I'm giving the girl. Well, that. This meeting is people.

Oh, it's not in the summary, right?

We know we mentioned that told me about it. I just want to let you guys know that it should be working. Last borough council was posted. I guess the farmers market has got the recycling, the styrofoam, and all of that. So as a user, it's much easier. I know you're posting your notices legally on you. But notice, I'm going to be there. I'm just going to make the website work, go back to where it was. OK? Thank you.

Yep.

.

Summarizing the upcoming events as opposed to the entire calendar, right? It's like, it's the homepage basically, right?

And the town calendar. I think the issue might be in how the meeting is classified in the system. And if it's not connecting to the right classification, it might not be showing up. That's just my hypothesis for sure.

Hmm.

So can we, I know you've got a million things to do, and one of the things is prior to the meeting, can we be sure that it's showing up on the website? Maybe a, you know, check, pre-launch check or something. Is anything going to happen? Thank you. Anyone else that's here for topic unrelated to tonight's? Okay. Seeing none, there's no new business, right? We have the bills. Are we going to pay for the bills? First, Denise, there were no concerns, issues, rollovers, anything like that with any of the bills. It's clean. Okay. Thank you.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

Yes.

OK. So the next elements of the agenda deal with the Essex building, which is on Claremont, where the large parking lot is on Claremont. And they've had approval to build housing Including affordable on that, and they are asking, I believe their extension expired earlier this year, and they're asking for an extension. This had come up before, but they weren't present. So we've put them on the docket for tonight.

Sharing with your permission, I can see it up and you have a look at it. here as well.

That's fine.

As the board is very much aware, the site plan rules for benefits for a period post final period, two years, new section 4052A, excuse me, the initial name, provides for three one-year extensions thereafter. Uh, and that's the question you can make those not. That's the request for extension after the exploration. Uh, and, uh, you have, uh, as, uh, after 1 year, uh, with, with bringing out. Yeah, we're 23rd, 2027 rights. Yes, and you may proceed.

work and represent Essex buildings of our city. It's an entity of two departments, . They own the Essex building, which is a commercial building, or a mixed-use building, commercial on the first floor. apartments on the second, third, and fourth floors. It has insufficient parking. They do own the lot across the street, which is unimproved, the lowest paid. It's block 75, lot 6, block 76, lot 4 and 5, and 77, lot 5. They did obtain approval from this board on June 26, 2003, to construct 27 units, five of which are low and moderate. There are two two-bedrooms, two one-bedrooms, and one three-bedrooms. And those, according to Mr. Pigeon, the borough attorney, are included in the borough's third round of obligations. I have the developers, real estate partner with me. The reason why the delays occurred were illnesses that the two principals who are in the middle of the day suffered that made their ability to obtain financing for the construction of these units difficult. The ethics building had been vacant because of COVID, and by the time they got that straightened out, they weren't able to get financing. Because of illness, there's no other reason for the delay. As you know, the approvals, they are still permitted to build this project. We're asking for protection from changing the zoning. That's the only protection we need. I doubt that there will be any because this project is committed to five units, which is equivalent to a special reason under the law. I have Mr. Reimers here. He could show you the display of the building and explain it. Uh, I'd like to call them and have them testify.

No, I'm not sure that that's necessary.

Yes, she said it's been expired. It's just 6 months. Right? I know the girl with this development at some point.

Hal Hallstein, I think we understand that your your statement is that the labs we. Hal Hallstein, Just what you said, unable to get financing you had illnesses. Hal Hallstein, To the primaries and even their family probably. Hal Hallstein, And so you're asking for an extension with sure permitted to do and. Hal Hallstein, Do we have any questions for. Hal Hallstein, applicants again.

Well, the key is they can continue with the five units, I believe.

There are other things too, potentially, but it protects them against incremental zoning changes. If the units are what? Oh, that'd be an explanation. You know, it's third round. When did third round deliverables close? It hasn't. It still hasn't been. .

even though it's third round of engagement, my anticipation would be that, um, relatively brief delays get to the point of construction. And the, uh, it would be beneficial if the extension was granted. It might be a more precarious situation if the extensions were denied and protections were not extended but uh that's the the board to decide whether or not we want to make sure we're not putting bizarrely in jeopardy okay i think the opposite of the truth I'm sorry, I'm just before memory department for the benefit of the family. You said it was at the yeah. I'll repeat that the.

The quite the opposite could be true that if it's not extended, then the borrower on the fair share could be at risk to say this. A valid project, because we did, we took away the approval. So, for that reason, I would grant the approval. My understanding it is 6 months back. All right, we're going back to the day that expired. So it's the essence.

That would be 2 a year a year.

So the net effect is we're extending it into January 2027 for you to commence construction. So that's the hope and the desire. So I would, I would move to grant the extension.

I'll take that as a. That's what I'm thinking.

I just want to check.

Just a data curiosity effectively 7 months. This gives you 7 more months to commence construction. Where, where are you with the permit process? Permit where is the financing? I mean, is this all of this? Okay.

Uh, yeah, okay. Is everyone I'm good. We good to proceed to the section, which is the rest. Did you get them? Yes.

Yes. Yes. Mr. Kelly. Oh, yes. Mr. Graham. Yes. Mr. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Thank you.

Okay, now we're up to the, uh, the main events, uh, the public hearings on the, uh, non condemnationary need of redevelopments. And 1st, we're going to have Steve. Provide a bit of a overview. To the public on this process.

Your question that you do, so I know I was supposed to be brief. my response would give you as well as the term so uh but i do want to explain the best i can and a refresher for the board this would uh apply uh equally to public hearings that board is about to have both on the church street and march down road on condemnation area in need of redevelopment uh uh as well as the burns avenue on condemnation area in need of I am a planning board attorney. I am not a development attorney. I'm not the borough attorney. But as planning board attorney, I do serve in the field of development council elsewhere. I'm somewhat familiar with the process. And we have our student, our redevelopment and borough planner, Jessica Caldwell, who is presenting the studies as the author of the studies, as I understand it, as opposed Our or planner, they are here. But he's for the, the, the, the planning board received the mark 2326, the borough council adopted resolution directing the borough planning board to conduct a preliminary investigation of the properties identified in these two separate nation area. study areas to be smaller. When the borough council does that, the planning board, like for every governing body, planning board, or any of this is directed to have those hearings, the choice is have a hearing. When the planning board has the hearing, the planning board will make a recommendation. The planning board does not designate an area in the recommendation council and then the council will act with that recommendation whatever the recommendation is the planning board's job i like to see a keeper of the master plan uh and they have certain functions this is one of them uh having the the area to decide whether or not the project should say meets the criteria for a designated area. The way it works generally is after the planner makes the presentation of the study, if the study area satisfies at least one, they satisfy more, but at least one criteria under the local government have to go up legally, section five of the court record, and presumably the recommendation that it's an area of redevelopment, and presumably, not necessarily, the court will agree, there is a public hearing Uh, so I, uh, the planner, uh, I will swear in anyone who wishes to speak with respect to. Uh, the, uh, area need a redevelopment, uh, potential designation for each of the sites. Um, we have received as I understand it a few. Uh, a submission, which have been a path on to the board through the Florida. are planning administrative officer. And so that is a process. Everyone will be under oath for a new fee, because it is a public hearing. And ultimately, the board will, with respect to each, make this recommendation, yes, it is an area of redevelopment. And that's the recommendation from council. Or no, it's not, with respect to each. So hopefully, that gives everyone. And that's one step in the process um ongoing the borough is not policy i think that's important uh the board is not making policies should a project happen should it be here should it be there how should it be where should it be what are the impacts will there be financing will there be private payments and little taxes you know all those things are not what is within uh after hearing the planner and everyone else who wishes to speak with him does it satisfy one of the words that we experience under the local government housing law Uh, doesn't doesn't constitute an area need to be relevant either or not. That is essentially entirely the function of the board. Everybody has different functions in a multi step process.

Probably 1 key point I want you to explain to them what happens if we approve and what happens if we don't.

If you make a recommendation that on result of the study areas are indeed areas of either redevelopment, the governing body can accept the recommendation or not. If the planning board finds that both of these study areas are not in board's opinion, Satisfying one or more of the criteria on the local refund housing with the constitution area redevelopment and makes recommendation that. On both of the study areas, not. Governing body, can you stop that recommendation? So all the, um. It's possible whatever word recommends. May not. accepted by everybody they're not everybody's not bound by the recognition and that's why it's a recommendation but the board is bound to conduct the study and to continue the process once they are directed to do so by resolution in the governing body which they were

Yeah, 1 addition, I'd like to mention that the planning board, although it's stated in the process, the planning board did not select these areas. They were selected by the council. That's okay, but just we. The official processes, it's supposed to originate. At request, it's supposed to originate from the planning work that didn't happen. Those those steps were. circumvent whatever expedited the town council basically did the analysis and made the preparations and we've participated already in discussions about these sites because ordinances were changed, etc, etc. So, in summary, the key is in this discussion in this, we have to realize there's an opportunity to express an opinion. In the recommendation in our recommendations, and there's certainly an opportunity for the public to record making statements as opportunities for the press, of course. But the Council is not bound by our decision as and I want to be sure that people do understand that. As an example, there was a previous significant application for which we denied in need of redevelopment, but we were overridden. So, I guess these, these projects both have significant public. Interest and we, we have a couple of choices. You're all here 1 choice would be to. Take a motion to postpone these. To not deal with them at all tonight, but you're all here and. That is something we can do. The other thing is, we can, it may be that 1 application is. Less of less concerned than another application we can, we could proceed with that and we can choose which 1 to deal with 1st. Because some of you may say, well, I'm only here to look at that application. As far as I know, and I'm going to ask, there has been no citizens committee formed by the town council to constructively discuss and optimize these applications. Is that. Am I just did I miss something or have citizens committees been formed. On these projects.

I'm sorry, just to be clear that the, they're not applications. They are public hearing that we thought, but not. Yes, correct. Sorry. Has has a citizen committee to your knowledge been created by the council?

No.

To your knowledge, no. Okay.

Just to be clear, I don't know if this is a record. I know a few times you said we've denied this and that. I know that you mean the purpose of the record. We've recommended it to be denied. So as you point out, we only have recommended for it.

I don't think there was confusion in the public's part, but fine. Thank you for clarifying that. Okay. So we're here to serve the public. And I want to do what I want to be sure that we craft this night's activity to satisfy as many as possible, including the That's kind of a quandary for the points that I've just mentioned. I'm going to ask the board if, just amongst ourselves, is there any interest in entertaining a motion to postpone these presentations? Till September, when people are back, there's obviously a lot of people here, so they've made a great effort for the record somewhere in the hallway.

And there are. But, or maybe there aren't. These come in and they may be a few.

My, my preference is to proceed. Yeah. Proceed proceed.

Proceed.

Yes.

Proceed proceed.

Okay. Is there. If you open public hearing, do we have to close it tonight? Depends on how far we get.

Good question. What's the answer? The answer is we can carry.

Well, I think he's not.

Right, and if there were, if every 1 of these people were going to get up and try to speak, we'd run out of time. So, we're allowed to, we're allowed to start and. All right, so it's the opinion of the straw poll here on the board that we should not. Postpone these processes until. uh september one of them like just dramatically more interesting than others and would does the public have any interest in the order in which we handle these two not not applications these two activities There's the Church Street area, and then there's the Bernards. Church Street, Church Street, anyone voting? You'd like Church Street first. I think that's what that meant. Anyone who wanted the quarry, Bernards Avenue first. 1, 2, 3, 4, like, everything democratic, it gets mighty small.

All right.

Well, we will. We will follow the agenda then and we'll handle church 1st. And so I think we just invite Jessica to present correct.

Oh, go ahead. at one of the hearings, but we do have the notices. I wanted the director to reflect that on our board. I did notice the public hearing. And the bulk notices would provide, I believe, the page. But we at least uh 10 and 17 days prior to receiving both hearings uh was provided uh on behalf of the board uh and i'll square in the store well you stand okay either right hand raise over you swear it out of the front of the customer that is I just want to be sure everyone can hear her. That's that's all. I just started sharing my screen shipping.

So that you have some digital to some of the properties that we started to share. It's not on the top of the plan, but you can look that up in the National Study. So there may be a little bit of a copy of that.

That was a June 31, 2006 study.

Yes, okay.

And that's your street mark down road, not kind of the area. Correct.

Okay, so this is, this is the study and it's. June 30th, 2006. Is for 10 church street, 66, 10. eight Church Street, block 66, block 11, 30 Morristown Road, which is block 66, block 12, 22 Morristown Road, which is block 66, block 14, and 137 Anderson Hill Road, which is a portion of block 66, block 22. So what you're seeing before you here on the screen is the cover page of the report. We can't highlight in yellow, that's a Google Earth photo. So you can see all the lives together in this diagram right now. So let me just go through here. This one shows the blocks that are placed over here. So I'm just going to describe the poverty and the anger in detail. So blocks 16, 16, 17. It's a roughly rectangular in shape . You can see it's kind of in the middle there, sort of starting in order from the highest. Make sure you can see the area to see how some visuals. So it's about a third of an acre. It has two to three ring buildings on the property. They total about 3,300 feet square feet, roughly 12 parking spaces, six adjacent to each building on the property. And in building one, which is the building close to Church Street, you have three one-bedroom apartments. And in building two, with the curtains from Church Street, You have a clinical in-care studio, commercial unit, a small management office on the first floor, and then on the second floor, a one-bedroom apartment. On 8 Church Street, which is block 66, block 11, so this is not a lot, just south, so north is the top of the page and south is the bottom of the page, This property is 0.17 acres. It has a building on, sorry, the first, the building on the first floor was constructed around 1900. The building on this left was constructed around 1890. It has 1,000 square feet. And it's turned into a bedroom apartment with about four or five apartment spaces on the property. 20 Morristown Road, Block 6, Block 65, Block 4. There's a lot of water here. There's a property on Morristown Road and Church Street. That property is also by the neighbor. And that was in 2000. The property was in the 90s. The ground floor of that property And on the second floor, just wanted to do that. On 22 Morristown Road, that's on block 16, block 14. That is just to the west of the corner on the left there. That is the location of the Columbia Bay. That was built in the mid-1970s. It's a two-story, frame-based building. um 3680 square feet with 35 apartments and then going to the top of the study area or north northern parcel that is what we're calling 137 anderson hill road it is a portion of the entire library property um just a portion that's on the western most side and it includes the parking lot On to the West that France on church see as well as some space property is under just under either 93 acres. And roughly half of that area i'm just under about 20,000 square feet is open space and the remainder of the lot is parking for the library and for releases. They go through some of the local redevelopment housing law, tax now, also of the area showing the study area and lots and lots of information on tax now. And they also go through the history. And we looked at various photos of the site I also researched Sanborn and confirmed when the construction was roughly built and how the property has evolved over time. You can see in 1930 that their development on block 66, block 14, 12, over 10 are all developed. However, on the property on block 14, That was not the bank of Gotsman. Moving over to the second historic area, the first one is from 1930 and the second one is from 1907. You see now that the bank has been constructed. All of the other parcels in the So you can see those were built in the study area that was built in the turn of the century. Those are inflates and you can see going down into the other historic aerials that would roughly go into place right around 2000 when the parking area for lot 12 is constructed. And from that time, the study area has been static in terms of involvement of this. We also look at land value to improvement value ratio to determine. It's a way to look at the study area to see Full economic productivity of the property. And what you look for, particularly in the downtowns, is more than a two-to-one ratio. But in this case, for downtowns, you would want more, but at least a two-to-one ratio. And for this study area, you can see that Block 10 is the only one with a two-to-one ratio.

where the land value to improvement value?

So it's the improvement value to the land value. So what you look for is a higher value for the property that shows economic productivity of the property. So we want to see at least two to one, but even more than that, particularly in the downtown area of Michigan. so on plot 10 we have two structures so it can be a lot So we also looked at the needs of students in the study area under the context of self-taught learning. We also reviewed our environmental constraints and found that there were no environmental restrictions as well. So I heard a lot of talk about our log base in the study area. We looked at surrounding neighborhood contacts of the study area. But to the northwest of the study area, there used to be a restaurant and coffee shop. And then you have commercial use. So you're actually pretty close to the center of everything. property which as you know has been recently done by the housing real estate plan uh recognition and government body uh march 9th 2016 uh we zoned the properties at age of nine affordable housing concerns for all five of the lost in the districts uh uh four districts which was 35 uh among the neighbor and also included a variety of commercials

so before i go into so we did um

aerial photos of the drone, and we also go on a tour of all of the buildings, except for the two on the left hand and the one on the right hand side. So we go on a tour and take photos inside and outside of the building and inside of the building. The south-facing side of Building 1 off of Long Island. You can see the entrance to Unit B with the spot around where it is. This is the east side of the building on Lot 10. You can see some of the Zoologation Church on this one. You can see the portion of the building on the top. You can see the air conditioning. You can see the air conditioning. You can see some houses. Also, unit A window on the south side, you can see the other deck. This is a picture of the other deck on the south side of the building one. Asking you not to go out. Yes, I was about to see that. That's of the bragging. This is the staircase going down from that deck. Also, some of the windows of building one. You can see chicken and cake. And it's here that around the . Yeah, . some of the handrails for this. This is again on the broken fabric on the back. Another girl that's only one. Basic bust. This is an entryway to get in. You'll want to see the deterioration around the stacks. I'm going to the interior. You have to be paid and wear the front door. You have the bedroom. a lot of units because older units, older buildings are chopped up into apartments. You often find that the furniture, storage, and things are in front of the windows that often go out to the light. Also, sometimes a lot of exits just because . You have the kitchen here. It's a very narrow, crowded kitchen. This is an example of um um um And in many of the cases, you would have the combination of Lyme disease infection, which is often considered to be quite long, and fortunately, older units without Lyme disease. So in this case, you have the Lyme disease infection. If you do that test, which is not a lot, So here's the . We have a window . Not very many windows in the . Part of the they do have damage on most of the walls and chicken paint, a lot of mold. around the windows again here again just an example We have the laundry room. It's going to be in a quad that you can essentially change. Staircase up to the second floor. And you have a wall, if you want to paint, a window in the bedroom. You have a practice space. Take a minute. And then moving on to movie two, which we, as I mentioned, did not do that. But you can see some nominations as well on the exterior of that building. Some of the movies on the exterior by the management office. Moving on. It's a lot of leather. Here's the front of the pencil scotcher. You can see the front of the building. Looking to the rear of the property. You can see This has a sort of eye on the staircase onto the side of the building to allow access to the second floor. There isn't any interior access. There are quite a lot of data on unsightly and appears to be safe. The other entrance to unit A on lot 11, you have concrete on front of . You have to the wall . and I think the photograph of the interior, the bathroom, the interior, it's lacking in windows, so very good for the veterans. One of the veterans. This one isn't proud of me. So you can see the cracks in the plaster and the seam line where it was placed over. This is the staircase. So if you ever get it, as you can see, it's quite dilapidated. These railings are, it's kind of like copper ice or something. I'm going to go on to the side. Unstable. You can see it's by Steve. Going down quite a lot. There's ovens and dramatic. On the exterior. Ceramics as well. Some here you can see them. This is the entryway. There's also evidence of insect infestation. Here are some of the insect traps. probably inside the US. So y'all can be used for at least a long time. You can also use it for some residential usage. This is water and water and water and water. Moving on to class 6.12, the principal structure. You see an aerial photo of Natalie. I have the way to pick a fence on the outside. I'm going to take a chance again to see if there are any questions about accessibility. There's a little bit that we saw at the end of the term, which I'm going to turn my mind on, on the website. We have a student saying, can you stare at me as if I'm a part of it, showing a bunch of her head to her head. The resin sheet helps set it forward and has a softer drier, which makes it easier for the body. The interior of the pinnacle unit. Now, third, the exterior of the interior of the antique floor. Going to the second floor, and to the third, we have a lot of carvings. We're going to do a submission on the space. It's very small. It's a bathroom. It's an insert and a storage space as well. That was sort of the . . . . . . . .

And the rear .

And also once again, our two steps down . This is the exterior of the main . On this, the only restrooms are staying from the second level, which is after the series . And the restrooms are quite a lot in . This is when it starts being there. as well as uh significant contingent from that as well so the new side of the harassment or you need to spot it there's some cracking on the wall and moving on to the basement of this browser this is the second floor of the office area uh just quite outdated and more conditioned staircase to the basement uh which the pipes in the basement froze apparently at some point uh you can see that everything was torn out um This is an exit from going out to where there are some clouds in the basement also showing shoes. This is also some of the office space that is no longer being utilized. And this is our former conference room in the basement that looks like that. So moving on to block 66, block 22, and block 27. And I don't remember the version of that. It's . we can see that um um It's not. It's not. No. yes the eight criteria in the development found that we you know criteria starting with bacteria um or are so light, air, or space as to be conducive to unwholesome learning or wrong decisions.

In that period, there are a lot of words with commas, followed by the word or, and then more words with commas, or being disjunctive. Am I correct? And it's possible that one more of the lots within the study area might satisfy one of those many subcategories. And meaning that in and of itself, satisfying criteria A doesn't have to satisfy all of them.

That's correct. So you can have an inflammatory condition, an evaporating condition, or a fluid condition. or can have any of those characteristics, or be lacking in the air and space, it can do good to unholy living or living conditions. So when you're looking at Criterion A, you might hear about that, that it's a bad situation for the people living in the natural world because of the state of the property. So we looked at all the lessons we learned in the Civil I, based on real estate, professional definitions, or what creates something to be . So there are three types of office of leverage. There's functional office of leverage, economic office of leverage, or physical office of leverage. You have to read all of those types of office of leverage. The functional os lessons occurs on the form for a function of a lot of activities of or application of all times so samples of national aspects are up on me. A lot of pictures and output. I'll question our to our second meeting and our patient they are. Economic obsolescence is also known as external obsolescence. It has an impact on the value and usefulness of the property due to external factors. So something happens around the property or to the property that creates an economic hurdle. And that can be something like changes in traffic patterns, like all of a sudden you get a lot of traffic in the area or something like that, that evasion, say a highway was still in necessity. So there'll be changes in our construction project if we provide high frame rate on something along those lines. Under a physical obstacle, that can occur when a property lands on because of the physical deterioration of the buildings on site. You know, the idea behind that, especially when you're looking at commercials, uh, or moment and use, it has to do with the ultimate, that this property isn't generating enough income to then have someone and owner read bastards and alcohol to bring it home. Uh, where it would be to, to either the lobby and. That's called unbearable obsolescence. It uses arm-generating income to cure that unbearable obsolescence. So those are the types of obsolescence that we looked at in the bed area. And we definitely found functional obsolescence. Because of the ,, particularly on loss of time at 11 and 12, All of the buildings that fill up in terms of the centering were not structures that were chalked up into pieces, so to speak. And you saw . You also have economic obsolescence because of poverty and result, not just through the , but through the 2020 of the downtown core. which looked at up to 35 units to be at your own properties. Poverty is definitely under you all in respect to the economics. And then our critical lots of reference. We saw the deterioration going on in the property. All the units are occupied, but what it appears to be is that they're not generating enough income to then reinvest in this property, even the bank property. And see, no one sticks to the non-stakes those interior bathrooms, you know, and the exteriors of the property and the interiors of the units are all dilapidated and in poor condition. So in my opinion, the entirety of the lead-about area displays obsolescence. And then you go to the second part, you have unsanitary. Uh, set the standard and say, as I mentioned, uh, several, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, because of the land space furniture and storage velocity and with respect to the building of the bank itself you have a great deal of deterioration not at the main level I'm just talking about in the second level offices as well for all those reasons The study finds that the general area of substandard state, unsanitary, dilapidated, and the best is one of each of those characteristics. And they also lack light, air, and space, as we can use living or living.

Criterion.

I can interrupt you again. Essentially the same criteria A, you have a lot of different terms that have different meanings.

So again, criteria D, you do not have to necessarily satisfy each and every of these terms that have meaning. There may be multiple criteria.

There's some criteria within criteria D. If you don't have it satisfied all of them, that combination I think is very important.

So there's criteria A and criteria B sound a lot alike, but criteria A is focusing on the building and their document to the people. Criterion D is focusing on a lot of the city issues, but it's looking at whether or not that happens in the community. And it's also looking at buildings and the environment, so there's not a lot of focus. But criteria A focuses on So we also put some improvements to the site. So with respect to that, we've already talked about the buildings being dilapidated, obsolescent. We saw overcrowding in the apartments, on the last panel as well. We also see a faulty arrangement in design, particularly in the bank property. where you don't have ADA accessibility. You show physical obsolescence there with not correcting issues on the property. And you also have some issues with modernization of the facility with functional obsolescence. Debate where it's not meeting the modern needs, it's not it's really set up in the whole top of your base right so i'm set up in a spot in the study um so accessible access to the layout of the property um each of the properties set on the bank um going into lots onto the back have separate evidences

um very much

functional way uh for the public uh there are several roles did you just say i'm referring to uh the 2020 that now announced element update And, uh, there's five, uh, some of the report. Uh, one is we promote the downtown as an influential and civic center. Two, to enhance the principal characteristics of the downtown, design, massage, and speech improvements. Three, to encourage art with special design that's consistent with historical character. So, uh, four to three is the best we've ever gotten to the downtown. uh reviewing the state of um structures and improvements of the study area uh we found that these properties aren't inevitable right now where the community is working on in that downtown These parcels are certainly not purpose. And therefore, that's an attachment to the general law there of the community. The parcels need to be very empty in the study area. There's also a criterion H, which is the designation of consistent with smart growth principles. So the designation of So we listed what smart growth principles are in general, mixing of land uses, compact clusters, community design, and so on. The study area is situated in the downtown. It's a walkable neighborhood, and you're going to see utility services. And the borough downtown is also located within a Highland Center, which was completed in January of 2026. With the definition of this area, the design and focus development, the development of an area that's part of a certified infrastructure, 3.5 to 5 million square feet. also focusing our spell near proposing focus development near the planet village uh burnsville station uh served by the glass uh branch of the university transit laws and methods so the sound definition uh definition um has adopted due to a lot of regulation from the smart growth and then the designation of this area would promote those uh small growth criteria and goals there's also a section a redevelopment law called section three which is about conditions uh which allows the inclusion of particles necessary for the effective redevelopment of the area that A redevelopment area may include vulnerabilities or improvements which on themselves are not detrimental to any policy, fee, or welfare, but the inclusion of which is not necessary with or without changing your condition would effectively develop an area in which they are a part. So the idea is that for some reason, the board or the council worked upon that perhaps one of these parcels did not meet the criteria There's still a reason to include all the parts of the study area, in my opinion. And that's because each lot within the study area, they're interconnected, specifically on a corner lot with high visibility. We need a two and a half acre block that would be a cohesive, developable area, such that I think all of the lots within the study area would be a good hindering investment in revitalization efforts. So in conclusion, the study found that block 66 met criteria A, C, H, and section 3. Block 66.11 met criteria A, C, H, and section 3. Well, I'm actually a D H. In your presentation, rather than just reading it.

There you go. Thank you.

The. And the portion of law 56. Page three. For the second.

Mayor of the nation to the county will be entirely.

Not. In my understanding.

Yes.

One of the criteria on the second example, criteria D satisfied all five of the last study area. That alone would be sufficient for the study area development.

Yes.

If you know, is there a general rule that if the only criteria that can each one might wish to add if not required to add a separate and independent criteria along with it in order to come to the conclusion that a study area may be constituted

Section H, or criteria H and 55, it needs to be modified by other bindings or other bindings or other criteria.

Here, Section H has to respect to each of the other lots of the study area at least one separate and independent criteria, if not more than one separate and independent criteria. that leads you to your conclusion that the entirety of the sediment area constitutes an area needed to be developed in your profession, meaning as a professional grant licensed to the state of Missouri. Is that the conclusion of your presentation? So that members of or senators of the public may have questions of the expert uh as well as uh public uh made a public comment which had to be supported testimony so it has the same um for the mc today the development insurance not here uh he played that most times that's huge okay

Any comments amongst us on the board?

Not right now.

Not right now. Any comment from our player?

No.

No is an okay answer.

Yeah.

Okay, so the next thing I have is procedural. We have the opportunity to have questions and comments.

Combined, or we can have a question section followed by comments section. And does any, I don't think any of us care either way. Right. How many would like us to do questions for us followed by comments. How many would prefer to have them combined 1 trip to the. Right, I think we'll combine them. Denise, I think we're also, we may need the 3 minute timer. Denise. Denise.

Mr. chairman at the risk of the board. Um. Uh, the, uh, if you're a 3 minutes exact, uh, 3 minutes combined for questions and comments per person for each.

Yeah, each person I please if you're making to see how. I just good. Three minutes is what I'm going to run with combined. The other thing is a lot of you must have similar feelings. If all you want to do is say, I agree, somebody else who's already spoken, please just say that. I agree or support that position.

For a statement, you which case you may speak on it.

Not only that, but also simply space. In repetition, yes, not to be repetition as well as. What is relevant for this proceeding? Not some of the other things.

That's really important. It's really important to keep in mind. What we can actually act on what's before us today and then that is pretty scope limiting. So. Let's let's try. Try a few whoever wants to be 1st, and do we want them standing at the podium? Denise.

They can be okay.

All right.

Well, close to the edge.

Okay, just stand in front of the mic is what you want me to do. Okay, and then let's put it and just raise it a little bit. That's all right.

So, your name and friends for the New Jersey library. Uh, You swear to God, or that's very bad. I do.

I think I'll start with a question. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I offer this with respect. I know public service is not always a thankful job. And reference to the study that was cited, I'd like to. counter the idea of obsolescence. In 2025, attendance at our 17,000 square foot library was over 94,000 people. We track it every day with door counters, and in 2026, we're tracking to exceed over 100,000 visits. This is far from obsolete, and this library is a considerable investment in this town. Some days we exceed 500 people for no apparent reasons. Some days we exceed 800. Some of those days have been Makers Week events, the Green Fair. the mini golf fundraisers, the power and internet outages, and perhaps most importantly, election day. In the posted document, there was the idea for a need to redevelop, and these and these directions made assertions that the portion of the lot in question isn't important to the library and downtown operations. I don't know, maybe some of these assertions were bluffing? Maybe some of them were drawn from a parking study that only examined the library a lot prior to the library's opening. I would think this picture is misleading. I would plead that the parking is important to the library operations. We shared this a lot and it isn't exclusively for the library. The coffee shop sandwich board says, park at the library. People do, as they should. Worship houses are supposed to come with the Palmer development. The parking need is likely to increase. New Jersey doesn't have a standard for how many parking spots you need for a public library, but we're 17,000 square feet. In Connecticut, they recommend five spots for 1,000 square feet. Losing 11 spots would be damaging to our community. My circulation supervisor and I did our own parking study. Before the library even opened, there were only 11 spots open. On Tuesday or Wednesday and then later in the day when there was activity there's only two spots open and the entire lot would during children's story time and leading into the next children's story time. Later that day when absolutely nothing was going on, there was only six open spots, so I. Statute I would like to encourage you to preserve access to all parking offered to the library and not to remove access through the loss of spots or through any monetary or technology hurdles to using them. They're a critical asset to the borough's public library, which serves all segments of this community through diverse services and resources. We're not a business, but we're an economic asset and we're a considerable investment. And my question is a point of information of what time that picture was taken, just the blue one.

Yeah, so I have been to the site at least three other times. Well, we did a parking study at the downtown in February and December. We also visited the site in April 2024-2025, as well as this site visit. And we also looked at who earned the Aerial Human Degree, starting February 2020, October 2021, June 2002, April 2003. In all of those cases, we had four, five, two, um So there's this fluctuation, and the idea is that the functionality is not optimal. I think just by saying that it doesn't meet the criteria because you want it to be How many parking spaces are in the section that is under the review? You can look it up separately. Let's let someone else come down.

Okay, come on then 13.

You know, often how many are in the main. Parking lot to the library that are not in the study area. I think that's an important I think that's an important statistic.

What was the number again? I'm sorry. 38 are in the study areas basis. I'm sorry. Not the whole study are just in the 1, just in the parking. The library lot 38 spaces. Okay, next next person.

Yeah.

Yeah, I apologize.

I apologize.

I will be discussing today.

The pictures in your studying parking lot were taken. You know what holiday. Correct. It was good Friday. Do you know if the library was open that day? The library was not open that day. Do you know if the schools were open that day? The schools were not open that day. Do you know if any of the local businesses due to the holiday, due to school closure, due to library closure, do you know if all those local shops were open that day?

I do not know if the local shops were open that day.

Would you admit that the parking lot would be alive? It would be a lot easier to elaborate. Potential word is your testimony that the library is not effective would be left empty.

A lot of various purposes, so. For visitors, library employees, and some of the structures, just to help with the . Why would you choose that particular day to take photos at the library ?

That would have been . Would you agree then, though, that your conclusion now that you've learned that the library is overclosed, that your conclusion that the parking lot is, I don't want to quote you or misquote you, but that fits NP most of the time? Would you agree that that conclusion is wrong?

Yeah, based on my review, also . Well, but again,

Okay, thank you. Did you reach out to anyone? Are you where there's some Summit Health Medical Office? Did you reach out to anyone from Summit Health? Did you reach out to anyone from ? Did you reach out to community in crisis located on Church Street to ? Did you reach out to any of the shops in town to ? Did you reach out to any of the restaurants in town ? Did you reach out to any of the school districts ? And are you aware that ?

Again, Mr. Chairman, I apologize.

Two minutes more. Would you agree that, generally speaking, that a lack of available parking can discourage people from using things like a shop, like a library, like medical backgrounds? Would you agree that the lack of ability to party would discourage something? For example, if I want to be in a library, would that discourage me from being in a library? So then when you're taking into account what the detrimental effect on the general welfare of the community are, what are you taking into account? It's not in the study that you're going to use the I'm focusing on the part of the study where you say something is a detrimental effect on the criminal community. It sounds like the study is leaning towards that it's going to have a detrimental effect on the community, correct? Because it's underutilized. Correct. I'm sorry, my time is limited. Please, come on. Please, come on.

I'm only specifically, going forward, I'm only specifically

You said part of law is not intuitive to use in your legal career, correct?

I believe that.

I don't want to hear this right now.

Okay. Because where it's located, I don't know if you've got a law firm or a law firm. I don't know if you've got a law firm or a law firm. You already scored.

And not to repeat a lot of what Carolyn said.

Describe what, why is the parking lot at the point, is the word you use.

Anyway, I read her text. People should read her text, what she wrote.

so i represent some of the friends friends of the library and trigger and i'm a citizen and i go to the library i walk through that lot every single day once or twice all right so on my gas it's between 50 to 75 percent full every day They put speed bumps in it a bit. That tells me that entry and exit is . If you're coming up Route 202, you can't make a left at Anderson, so you have to go to Church. Otherwise, you have to drive all the way around Claremont. Having two entrances, And he said, wasn't a good idea is doesn't make any sense. Our plan, we need both. There's no great parking.

If you can't find a place to park library, you can't park it. We need to cut through that, and that needs to stay open to the public so we can make the train.

The school is moving up five minutes later to help that, but they have to run to make class, Some days it's still congested. We have FedEx trucks, UPS trucks, on the threading truck, sterile medical truck. You can't even drive around the parking lot. So in closing, this is vital. This parking lot has to stay. I understand what you're saying about it may not have to be changed. We're in this plan. There shouldn't be in this plan. There's no point being in this plan for this future development. Thank you.

I just want to comment between this and that is. I think there are 2 issues that are raised. There's access and there's parking. My understanding of this project and what we prove is that access will still be part of this proposal. There will still be access from church. To the library, it is not being blocked. That's separate from parking, but access has to be provided otherwise the application.

Is got a problem well, 1st of all, it's not an application. It's not stop. It's a study, right? No, not this. It's not a plan. So we're not there yet.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no

Or not, it needs certain requirements to be redeveloped. It does not redesign the parking lot. It does not eliminate any of the buildings. It does not say that a bank won't be there or housing will be there. None of that. That is all for later when the town develops a redevelopment plan. I will gladly agree with you that access, parking, and all that stuff needs to be adequate, needs to be protected, needs to be sufficient, not just to support whatever project goes there, but to support the downtown, support the businesses, and support everything else. But we are limited in whether or not right now, today, and that's all.

I'm talking about previously.

It doesn't matter previously. I'm talking about today. I understand how uncomfortable you're staying.

not be developing outside your planning board during in essence uh to simplify it as much as we might want to consider what might be coming in a development project after this board decides whether or not the study area satisfied one of these criteria considering what might be coming On to this property is not our analysis today.

Right and but I don't want to do I agree with I agree with you. I'm going to stop. I just want people to know. Now is not the time to worry about access. There's a time to worry, but not this time. And there are 2 different things. There's access and parking. I just want to make sure.

on the board has a certain priority is supposed to look at a certain set of levels and facts and what we think might be coming down the road might not be might not be relevant even even though we might want to consider Um, that that might be something. Process, but there are attorneys here. All right, thank you. Oh, sorry, but.

Diarrhea 11 blazer drive.

I so firm Reese.

This is going to be fairly brief since several people have already spoken, but I'm concerned about what will become in the eventual use of Black 22 out of all of this. The study itself says primary ingress and eagerness off of Anderson Hill Road has a traffic study of any kind been done to count the entrances and exits from both the Church Street entrance and the Anderson Hill Road entrance? If not, I recommend that it should be done in order to not fib and say something is the primary egress. If it's not, Anderson Hill Road is heavily trafficked. It's very difficult to get in and out of that. And anyone living east of the library is going to come in Church Street. And I think it's very important that that data be known in order to correct that inaccuracy. If the primary egress is not in fact from the Anderson Hill Road under the address, then that needs to be reflected as it was followed. And I think for safety reasons and so many other reasons, it's very important to make both methods of ingress and egress

Chris Schenk, 36, Old Army Road.

S-C-H-E-N-C-K.

Thank you.

You swear you have referred to S-C-H-E-N-C-K.

Thank you. Good evening everyone. I'll do my best to stay on track here and cover quite a few topics. I've spent quite a bit of time reviewing both the redevelopment investigation The housing element and fair share plan and the board day only clear that my comments are not in opposition to affordable housing redevelopment or transitory development, I don't mean to my against that or just. My concern is whether the record before the board tonight provide sufficient support for the findings, the board is being asked to make. A stated, there is no project before the board tonight, as you guys are making clear. There's no site plan, no architectural plans, no redevelopment agreement, no pilot proposal before the board. So I want to keep that clear. Glad you made that clear. I think we all need to make sure we keep that clear tonight. At the same time, the redevelopment investigation, the study that we are talking about for you guys to make this determination does not appear to include any real traffic analysis, any actual parking utilization studies, any fiscal impact analysis, school impact analysis, any infrastructure capacity analysis to any degree. The housing element adopted earlier this year already identified this location and prior, as noted in 2020, or redevelopment designation. Approximately 96 unit concepts of what we have shown. What I'd like to know is what information did this study produce that was not already contemplated in that housing element and then used for the examination? The report also cites deteriorated conditions, aging structures, visual observation, as far as criteria A. Can anyone identify any building code violations, fire code violations, unsafe structure determinations, engineering evaluations, or health department findings that support those conclusions beyond visual observations? What quantitative evidence exists that these properties are legally or structurally deficient, rather than simply older buildings requiring maintenance and probably a visiting from somebody in our town make sure that they are compliant with housing codes. Finally, many of the concerns residents have raised over the past seven months and even years, as you all know, involve traffic, parking, infrastructure capacity, public assets, and the broader community impacts. Yet those are precisely the areas where I didn't find any supporting analysis in the record before us tonight. Good planning is built on understanding these problems, evaluating alternatives, measuring impacts, and weighing the trade-offs before these decisions are made. Yet constantly, Berners-Bell and its residents are often asked to react to these proposed solutions before underlying impacts can fully be quantified. Appreciate your time this evening. I really hope we take the time to learn the details, the real metrics, and real data before we start creating more problem sources.

Jeff, you have an 18 foot long for now, you're good. Please raise your right hand. I don't see the. Yes, and he's putting out a testimony about the people.

Yes, thank you. I'll be great because I was going to say, as I said, I do think that some of the comments were based on opinion rather than the fact, for example, say that the bank is both set up in an old fashioned way. Well, any bank that still has tellers is an old-fashioned way. So I think that's an opinion, not a fact. I think many of the opinions have set up, particularly as they pertain to the bank and to the parking lot of the library, to include them into a broader picture in order to facilitate development in that area. There's no question that the three turn-of-the-century buildings that are residential are disgraceful. That's the only problem the landlord would be helpful to count. That doesn't necessarily mean that the greater area of redevelopment should pertain to the bank area and to the library parking lot. I think it is disingenuous to say that we can't guess ahead to how that parking lot would be used. One question I have here is, actually my comment, I should say, had to do with the open space, which is the portion of lot 22. So that's borough owned. I know for a fact, because I sat on council in 2019, 20 and 21, that we looked at that property for the potential for a pocket park. I want to make a comment as a member. Currently, you know, the environmental commission and chairperson of the green team. That not every open space has to have an economic purpose. And to say that was the word that was used. That it was underutilized. that ignores the purpose of open space. So I think that it really makes this whole study flawed in regard to parking lot and to the portion of lot 22, thank you.

Jessica, my understanding is that lot, which we're talking about, the parking lot lot, is in fact being restricted. Half an acre of it is being, it's deed restricted and cannot be developed.

The what?

No, there's a deed restriction on that. There's literally You're not saying it shouldn't be included. I'm just, I'm just saying, I believe for a fact. There's a deed restriction on that particular piece on the, I guess what we need the north side of the drive. And although it's included in the study. Actually, nothing could be built on it. Me.

All right, let's see.

Hey, Michelle, come over C. O. N. V. E. R. 16 rose Avenue.

Right hand, you just got her her password about.

Actually had a question about a few things that chairman Graham said, am I about to. To address something that he said, I just want some clarification, like, clarification type thing.

Okay.

Not with these redevelopment. Initiatives on them, and you said that the areas were selected by the council, but you said it's supposed to be initiated by the planning board, but somehow that got circumvented. So, my question is. Was this process done properly in your opinion? And if if the planning board is supposed to be the initiator, and they were not. And the council was the initiator, right? Is this the proper way to even have this plan come before you both? Go ahead.

You can answer the, the, um, my understanding.

Very good. Here.

The study areas certainly can be chosen, quote unquote, by the governing body in their resolution directing the planning floor to have a hearing to decide whether a particular study area or study area, this is another one, R&D, a hereditary development project. So, short answer is, I, my understanding the governing body is correctly irrespective of whether respectfully our chairman agrees.

Add to that, let me get some time back. Right? Yeah.

Yeah.

It's important for the public to also understand that. I'm going to put this in the layman's terms, but we're here. predominantly because of the state's affordable housing situation. You've been forced like all other municipalities within the state to figure out where you can put more housing because we have a lack of housing. Okay. And part of what was in the fourth round loss was also to find areas that can be redeveloped. Okay. And so I may or may not be stepping out of place here, but hypothetically, a lot of towns out of their way, municipal governing body perspective, to find areas where they could be redeveloped in addition to a lot of other areas and a lot of other criteria.

And what

five areas that could be re-owned in order to capture more housing in the county. So while it wasn't this board's specific, I guess, it wasn't them who was finding those areas because it was a municipal governing body who found this AHO-9 and AHO-10, I just want you all to understand that there are a lot of new pieces which came to fruition in order for this specific redevelopment area to be identified. You can identify areas through master plan re-examination process as well. And that is typically when the planning board would identify areas that are appropriate for things to be redeveloped, for example. And I think that might be what the chairman meant when he said that the planning board is typically the one who finds places.

Yeah, it's just the first few phases are If you did a reexamination at that time, one of the objectives would be to identify future opportunities for space. It kind of just due to the pressure that's applied by the state, it just sort of started in the middle. I don't actually have a problem with it starting in the middle.

So I think that was what- To your knowledge, Has it happened this in the past with other areas that have been declared redevelopment zones?

Yeah, it's kind of out of the scope of this, but.

Question traditionally, the municipality makes that decision, meaning the council and so traditionally, almost every town. Makes that decision and sends it here where they're here. So, and then it goes back to that.

So, I personally, I've been in this town for 24 years, but I also went to, you know, so I've been in this area for almost. And 1 of the things that I do find is that. The citizens don't feel like they're involved in the opportunity and. If there is a way to pursue that, you guys are the. Council, or whatever, I would love to have that in the future any other types of these types of things, because I think it's valuable to get public involved and also allowing us to feel like we're kind of the same picture here.

They go to the council meeting and suggest it, but my rationale is somewhat selfish because. I don't want to have to spend 6 meetings into midnight fixing. Developers plans that need to be repaired with 100 on things. I don't. That we ought to be able to solve those structural operational design problems before. The plane gets to us so that we can just handle minor exceptions and whatever and that's not what typically happens. And I would encourage. The town to. impress upon the council that you would like to have citizen participation in the brainstorming for these, ultimately, these applications that aren't baked yet. You know, they're still being constructed. It should not, in my opinion, just be between the developer and the town. And it should be the citizens that are involved in this. But the right approach is to go to the council and express your own opinions. Around for now, now, there's just so many people here that have. Yeah. Okay. Right.

We're just, we got some beef. I think everyone needs to comment that they.

We don't know . Second thing is Columbia Bank is a special place for the community. I don't know how many of you know that they give a lot of donations to non-profits. I went to the bank with two non-profits there just because of this. Because I'm older, the manager was really nice and said, any time you need something, just text me ahead of time. I'll come up. I said, I'm going to find it. and get in there with no issue. That bank has employees that will do anything for anyone. This is a rare day in the state. So just to say that their ramp isn't good for someone who's older, or that they have all these insulation problems, maybe we all could help them, because they give thousands and thousands to non-fab. God bless them.

Very hazel 10397 mind.

I'd like to start with a question for Jessica. We were all subjected to a litany of photographs of.

Deteriorating conditions in several of the buildings, both the board and. I would, would you say that. Having the buildings get to that condition and having those issues is. Something that should be corrected and by the landlord. And should not have gotten to this point.

That's not how. The same thing I mentioned under physical issues and said. The properties aren't bringing in enough money.

Here the issues that are out, I would suggest that that's a, that's a, that's an opinion. Let you finish this.

Yeah. and we don't see that issues the redevelopment of other tools to help incentivize reinvestment I'm not going to speak much in my time. We can restart again. Could you see that having

Category A really presents a perverse incentive for landlords to not take care of their properties because if they don't, they could then have an area in need using just that one category by letting their property deteriorate. We've been here before. We have had areas in need before. We have had the planning board say no to areas in need before because of parking striping. and minor issues on the outside of buildings and had that overturned by the council. So I feel like there is a perverse incentive in category A and that many of these things could be and should be fixed by the landlord and we should have inspections. I'm getting inspected with my garage apartment every single year. I could never be allowed to allow things to get that way. There's evidence of stacking. It's illegal to have people living in the basement. That's all a borough issue, and it should be addressed. And on top of that, I'd like to make a statement. Woman in Blue said that everyone from the East would be using the Church Street access to the library. I'm gonna tell you that everybody in the West is using the Church Street access to the Paragon as well, because I live in Twin Lakes on 202. When I come up, I can't make a left turn at Olcott Square. I go through the light and make a left on Church and a left into the parking lot. If I didn't have that access, and it seems to me like that lot sticks out like a sore thumb, it's not related to any of these other lots at all, it doesn't belong to the same person, it belongs to the borough, and if I didn't have that access, I would have to turn from Quindy Lane and then on Mill Street and then make an impossible left We're going to traffic and Anderson Hill road and put right into the parking lot that would probably be filled, which would be filled because any of the borough offices are there. So, East or West, we have to have that for our library. We need that parking and we need that access. We need that for our high school as well. And so thank you very much.

Uh, 150, not how many.

Yes, so 2 quick questions 1 is. Right next to the firehouse is that low income housing being built that of the destruction. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. What cross from the play field? So what is that building? Is that more low income houses over there? Yes. And I grew up in Bernardsville from the time I was 14 and moved back years later. So 69. So a lot of years here. I don't agree with this fair share BS. I'm really disgusted with all this low income housing. And I want to make a comment in 2016 when Trump ran and he said they're trying to wreck our zoning in the nice areas. And I agree with that. They're trying to change the flavor of our area. The traffic cannot handle it. The traffic is hideous. When you go, when I come in from working in the city, you can barely get through town. We're going to put 101 units in that area. Are you kidding me? So I think it's a travesty. I'm not for all this low income subsidies. I'm 69. I'm going to be paying for all these people to have readers, to have more kids in the school. And my taxes are going to keep going up. I think it's a travesty and I want it for the record. I'm disgusted. I'm going to probably have to move out of this area.

I mean, he's there, he is where you have or from this testimony. Yeah, thank you.

So I have, I guess it's a rhetorical question. Just in terms of comment, I guess I'm looking at this a lot in terms of comparison, and I take Ms. Fahey's comments about, you know, the big picture, what it is that has gone to the heads of both the council and the planning board to some extent as well. If you look in the 2025 housing element and fair share plan, in the proposed mechanism 4.3, section 4.3, there were four areas There is the quarry, 65 Claremont Road, and then the two that are before the board this evening.

And I think we can all agree and see from the testimony and the comments we've heard tonight that nothing services anything unoccupied. It's all being used.

It's entirely occupied. There are families living here. There's a small business, a bank. You've heard a lot about the parking. I remember the Columbia Bank, I think, was a trick-or-treat site a couple years ago. The trunk-or-treat, rather, is a community space. And I don't want to repeat, just sort of fully endorse Dr. Hammond's comments about the open space and the importance of that woodland that's right there near downtown. So just in terms of the comparison to the other areas that the council has designated I admire, I guess is the best word I can think of, politely. This is a real outlier, and I think that is, has to be considered. And then in terms of comparison, my rhetorical question is, you know, this is, in my day job, I've seen quite a few of these redevelopment studies as well, and I'm always frustrated by the lack of what I'll call comps, right? Someone said during the presentation, someone said, oh, it's dilapidated, and I heard, compared to what? Compared to you know, and I don't I don't fault. Miss Caldwell I don't know full process, but it is frustrating to look at the study and. These these criteria and you're so subjective and there's nothing compared to what you know it's tricking the word chicken paint several times, you know so. The only thing that seemed to have any sort of standard to the definition of obsolescence and that was very, very buggy. So I strongly encourage and urge the planning board to be exacting and really take a look at this and think about the criteria and what are they about.

I do. Thank you. I just want to go over very quickly.

I've been here a bit, maybe more than most of everyone, but in this town, we've been here for 13 years and seen some disheartening things, but a lot of good things as well, especially at this board. But one of the most disheartening things I've seen is at this board tonight, and it makes me really sad. And that's that. That's stopwatch. I think it's embarrassing that our council does it. You can't run out the clock on public input. You're public servants. You said it, Mr. Chairman. It makes my heart sink. Anyway, you have a 30-something page report exclusive of exhibits. Not anywhere near possible to address the questions that this, very serious questions about this hearing tonight is supposed to address in that amount of time. But I'm going to, I guess, skip a question. You can dive right into comments if you have time for it. But quickly, Mrs. Fahey, excuse me, Ms. Fahey's point. Yes, part of the Rapport Plan is identifying redevelopment areas. But we need to be careful with, you know, when you say redevelopment, it's smaller redevelopment means there's something there. We're gonna put something else there does not mean area in need of redevelopment because you can't pass a statewide statute that says you need to identify areas need to redevelop when there might not be areas you need to redevelop in your town. There are very specific statutory criteria that you need to meet. So they're saying you need to pay focus development. No more, no more sprawl. Don't take, you know, these, these massive estates or farmlands. We've seen some of the, some of the portals in the state and, you know, create town on the belt and city, like with faulty Denver Road. You, you can take your sewer service area and, and build up and that's fine. And that's what we did. And so I was part, unwilling, but, you know, part of the round four process. We presented, the borough, not me, the borough presented to FairShare, to the developers, hey, you know, like they wanted a settlement, they walked out a settlement, and they said, you know, here's what we're gonna do. And it is, it's that, you know, 96 units with 19 to four, I'm not sure that the final agreement, so they had to be age-restricted or whether it was they may be age-restricted, but that's neither here nor there. The, you know, the point is, you know, that we said we would do that. The court entered an order saying you need to pass. Resolutions zoning that. Implements the requirements that you would read to. And your cell in your fair share of stuff in your plan that continues. Yes. Thank you. And we did that. And the board reviewed it. And you said, OK, here's the implementing ordinances. They're in place. They're the H09 ordinances. They're in place. The court, we submitted in this opinion, submitted it to the court, said, judge, in fulfillment of our obligations under your order and under the Fair Housing Act, here are the resolutions that implement our agreement that we need to do to satisfy our constitutional affordable housing obligations. The court lifted them. Said, great, that works. Here is your certificate and judgment of compliance and repose. You did it. H09 is in place. This is superfluous to that. You don't need to say it's an area in need of redevelopment or not because it's going to be redeveloped pursuant to that zoning that the developer agreed to. This is what we need to develop this property, no more financials that are needed. The market rate units will subsidize the 20% affordable that we need to subsidize. That was settled, that was agreed. That's it. So, you know, in Ms. Caldwell's report on page two, she cites the local redevelopment housing law and the purposes thereof, and it says, provide a process for addressing the underutilized, untenable, vacant, and abandoned properties That without public effort are not likely to be corrected or Amelia ameliorated by private. We already found out judges said this is going to be redeveloped or developed redevelop small are. You know, pursuant to your domain that you have in place this the local housing redevelopment law this turns it on the look we're going to have those path so that. community could find blighted property, as it used to be called, and say, you know what, look, nothing's happening without this. We need to have some government intervention, massive government intervention, serious government intervention, long-term tax credit, 30 years, giving public property to private owners in order to allow for these developments to happen. Because if we don't, they're just gonna continue to deteriorate. Everybody's gonna get, it's gonna be detrimental to the whole community. It's bad news. This is a solution looking for a problem. We're looking for the tax breaks. We're looking for the ability to give away property without public benefit. And so how are we going to do it? Well, the only way you can do it is through inherent need of redevelopment designation. And so you're trying to nail a square peg into a round hole. And it absolutely contravenes the opposite of what the local redevelopment housing law was supposed to do. You're taking a property that does not need any additional. Incentivization as you know, there's already been rule and say, well, here, here, you know, here's what we're trying to do. We're trying to lease and convey property. How do we go through a public bidding? Grant long term tax management abatement from title. It's it's really, I think, perverting, abusing the local redevelopment and housing law in a way that was never intended to do. I guess I'll stop there. Thank you for your time.

James Cavanaugh, 36 Maple Village, Florida. Are you sure you've got a recurring testimony? Yes.

Growth Team, Nice going later there's a lot of things I was going to talk about it already mentioned, but I did still have one question with all the building that's going on early and three new housing developments and then this potential for how's our sewer system.

Growth Team, Even the rest of our infrastructure. Growth Team, These are rhetorical quite right yeah. Growth Team, As mentioned already that any board has. Is by whether or not the criteria, but we've gone out and what the study areas is regularly. It's satisfied 1 or more. Uh, that may be a question of the body of the night, even tonight, perhaps the solution.

And again, what comes up is when we first started the presentation, it sounded like it was mostly economic. We weren't making enough money for that property. And then after the presentation, it's presentation. After listening to everything that was wrong with everything, I'm surprised we're not coming down and bulldozing. I think what we do see

project, we have a firm hand on exactly why and what we want in front of the foundation.

And the reasons for it. Is it because we need readables, or is it because these have become uninhabitable and not able to be maintained anymore?

As we said, there's probably a lot of work to do with that.

I would listen to Steve and Raise your question about sewer, long term sewer planning with the council directly. They have to deal with it all the time. There are lots of expenditures that they've come through recently, but they would have a good handle on what they've done. Just they would just know. So.

Okay.

I guess my frustration is who's protecting the citizens of New York. We have an aging population. We've been here for years. I could see developer will give me a lot of money. and the taxpayer having to put the bill for the sewer system. It's happened time and time again. If the library loses those spots, you summon health leaves, quest leaves. That's detrimental to our community. There's so many empty business spots throughout the area. They're gonna just go somewhere else. They're not gonna put up with no parking. And I find it almost fraudulent that days were picked to do the studies. when businesses was closed. I mean, we're not being honest or fair to the citizens of Burnsville. We did very hard to make this a wonderful community. That high school depends on that parking. If you have a play at the high school, we need that parking. If there's games, we use that parking all the time. This is part of our community. And somehow, someway to make 20 spots of low-income housing, we can put 20, Departments there just put 20 departments there and that's it and call it a day. We meet our requirement.

Why not?

You know, why do we have to have a 100 units?

I'll just, I'm going to play that again. Just so I know. I also want to talk about the furniture with the chair.

Certainly. It might be outside this. Okay.

about the sanitary sewer. I want to make everyone aware that I don't disagree with anything that Mr. Dove said about the way that this law was created in terms of the tools that it was supposed to bring about and the way that it is Fire of the developer as a part of this, and that is done through what's called a redevelopment systems. Well, I would hope that the municipal governing body would. Do that for you, but that's never done. There's more power given to the municipality through this law to ask. Things like that of the. And that's all I wanted to just bring that. So, we're spending a lot, a lot of money for 20,000. Well, I think the 100 affordable developer, like, you have with the property across the street and the other 2 properties that are being developed.

The redeveloper, I think.

Yeah, the only way that you can make the program work is if you have a lot more market rate of apartments to pay for the apartment. The center account is so crowded, you can't get through. I just wanted to tell you, this is just, it's not a legal map.

It's a full, and it's, our neighbors own that. And this is not a legal map at all. I just don't think it's been working.

So, yeah, I don't think so. So, maybe either one.

So, we'll verify. Hello. Pretty out of the test. Yes. So, so. What he was saying about this designation. In my experience, and I think I left that this kind of thing is happening constant redevelopment being forced upon us because of the. Long mapping issues in my experience, really long designated for used by developers to remove the zoning restrictions and protections. That keeps the talent we want it to be. Uh, and it's often kind of a bait and switch, uh, situation where they, we agree to remove these protections by designating it that way. Before we know what's planned and that's that's on purpose. They don't want us to plan beforehand. So we remove the restrictions that would keep that from ever happening. And then what is happening is once those restrictions are gone, developers come, they propose things that none of us would like, would have gone against from the beginning. Um, and then.

The developer is in I've seen this time coming in.

I literally left because of this. I was fighting constantly. I hired a lawyer, I hired environmental people to fight this thing and stop things like this from happening. But this is the bait and switch that we're looking at right here. Let's designate it first. Don't worry if it's going to come in here. And then don't worry, it'll be great. And then all of a sudden, it's not great. It's exactly what we didn't want to happen. And that's why those restrictions are in place to protect us in the beginning. Okay, the next I will ask the question here. So, Allison, you know, obviously we do have some pressure from us from the state. Is there anything we can do? It's my last point. Same way. We had tons of low income housing, but it wasn't designated for them. Is there any way to say, hey, we have tons of low income housing. We're going to solve this and say, hey, let's, let's figure out how we're going to be able to designate some that exist today and possibly building more low income housing. because it doesn't currently fit the definition. Is there any way to change the definition of some of the housing we have?

It seems to be a qualifying affordable unit. There are a lot of criteria.

I'm sort of walking you through the housing plan.

Okay, let me back up a little bit. The details have been considered that. Our important point is that if we have unlawful housing for decades, we need to reduce that. Yeah, here are our playing cards.

So, in order to have a governing body, nor are we, I'll be addressing. Responsibility planning for this 1 function, which is does it or does it not want to work here?

In any way, find ways to not have to build affordable.

My understanding is part of the 4th round plan was payments to keep some affordable housing as affordable. So we built affordable housing years ago. That time period had expired and. I think part of the plan was to repurchase. Right? Right. Correct. So we have existing affordable housing by the Rite Aid and the CVS, right? That time period of affordable housing has like a 30-year time period or a 20-year time period. They will come in off, and if we didn't move to extend it, they would no longer be counted. So the town did do a great effort, and we will pay for that, right? We'll take that developer and we'll say, hey, keep them. Yeah, keep keep them affordable, but didn't come with any market rate. It doesn't come with any set aside. So that effort was done by the town to your point to try to keep. That's they're working through that process, right? They have to buy the credits back from that. The person wants it. But that is part of the. Part of the plan. Okay. Right. Right. So they still have to execute. They still have to execute. But to your point, they took the affirmative step not to lose some, because then they would have to make up more.

Yeah.

Most of the .

And no one .

I'm just going to do it quick. So just saying . The house is older. It probably has some feeling pain. Well, I bought that for a reason wanted to utilize my. Right. And that's the environment to move this panel forward. I think most people like the environment the way it is. So, pulling that underutilized doesn't fit a high density definition of maximizing the use of land is, I think.

the magna 133 claremont road burning stories in our garden that's funny yeah i do thank you i will be brief i feel like tonight was a presentation on code violations and a need for the slumlords to take care of their buildings i think it's ironic that in order to improve and maintain The historical nature of Bergensville and its charm is that we're going to remove homes that were built in 1890. so we're going to preserve the historical nature of the town by tearing down homes that were built in 1890s. If the criterion that were demonstrated in that proposal. Represent homes that should be torn down. I have to be honest. I think most of our homes would be torn down. I have lost. I have. And there was a bug in my kitchen today. With the fact that, and I'm going to try and quote you as closely as I can. Lack of repairs could be evidence of an inability to reinvest in a property. I'm curious if to, you know, that landlord has been running this bank, or if he's just choosing not to repair something. You sleep with a tremendous amount of confidence and conviction, yet almost everything you said tonight can be easily contradicted and was actually opinion based on an outcome you're hoping will be in your client's favor. So you can be very forceful. That doesn't mean what you're saying is actually true, and I find that a sense.

Uh, 2nd round for anybody if they want. I don't want to suppress anyone. Even Aaron.

Thank you.

Thanks for that. Okay, I want to.

Uh, because I didn't get saved before it ends. Uh. is the moral hazard concerned, but the last speaker and Ms. Hazleton, I think is a really big concern here. Like the purpose of planning and zoning and what everyone up here volunteered and is on this board to do is to help our town improve, right? Like use the expertise that you have to aid the borough in, you know, making the downtown, making the old borough a nice place to live. But when you have situations where, and these are all cold bellies. I have the property maintenance coach out there. And like, you know, you have prohibitive conditions. I'm not gonna go through them, but obviously you can't have insect infestation. You need to keep your sideways, steps, driveways in good repair. You need to not have peeling paint. broken glass, missing substantially, you know, Ms. Calvo has been on this property now a few times, like she said, from 2024, you know, two and a half years ago until until now. And you have a landlord who's going with you saying, don't go out there. That's dangerous. Like, come on, don't be crazy. But that's his property that he's letting people live in. And The report that you wrote back in 2024, January 2024, you delivered to the borough administrator, you delivered to the council, and you cited evidence of unsafe, unsanitary conditions not commensable with wholesome living that are detrimental to our community. Did anyone from the council, from the administration, did you advise the zoning officer whose job it is to make sure that these property owners are providing livable space for burnable residents, our neighbors? How is that allowed to happen? And then to come back, you know, two and a half years later, say, oh, it's still there. Well, yeah, because nobody told them to do anything. Nobody called up the, did anybody even like say, hey, Mr. Randall and Mr. Kohler, hey, you know, your property's, It's not safe for the people that live there. You told me so yourself. Can you fix it? And why? Because then you wouldn't have 33 pages of why this needs to be an area you need to resolve. And again, condemnation, not condemnation. That's why this is just, it's an abuse of what the law was meant to do. If this was a condemnationary need for redevelopment, it wouldn't be me. It would be their lawyers coming in and stomping their feet, waving the papers, and saying, are you joking? And you bet that that property would be shit-faced before your hearing. But when it's a non-condemnationary need for redevelopment, they've got nothing to lose. They can sit back. You open the door. The big tax breaks. It's a pilot agreement. It's a moral hazard. You're incentivizing people who are supposed to be taking care of the people who live in their homes, in their rental unit, you're subsidizing them to make those properties unsafe, unhygienic, so that you're encouraging your borough to do that. So then they get massively financial reward, 30-year tax breaks worth tens of millions of dollars. And so the borough council can take the private revenue and . Sorry. I got Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.

We have the second question. Yeah, you can.

Again, again, I appreciate you. Thank you. Everybody today. And probably will not chairman character obviously taking time tonight. I know this is an intense issue. I may cover some stuff that I think we've already discussed, but. 3 points that I think came up today that I really. Again, just kind of want to talk through again, I think, as it's been mentioned by many people, your expertise is what we rely on. This board obviously comes to us with that foundational knowledge that we rely on to make these decisions to help us guide us make these plans. Obviously, our great attorneys over here, Allison, you had mentioned, I think. there's a great word understanding right understanding complexities of the affordable housing is extremely challenging most individuals around here do not come prepared with the amount of paperwork that you have in your hands right not just details that you And even Mr. Chairman alluded to was the process that is in place for so many of these issues is a challenge for even you, right? The framework isn't there. And I think that that's what we all react to.

I know Sloan talked about it. Understand what it all means.

And I'm not saying that we're going to find that out in a two-hour session here in Clinton. It's going to take a lot of time. But obviously, there's a lot of emotion. There's a lot of just, you know, pent-up aggression. People have their own thoughts about this. But at the same time, I think we all want the same results. We all want a town that is beautiful, safe, that we all enjoy being a part of, that, you know, makes home for everyone. And I think it's also something that the public needs to understand. And using the word low income is, you know, Because if you look at the rules, if you look at region three that we're in, you know, the income that you need to have to be able to live in these units is not low. And any standard in the United States of America, you are actually well above the poverty line. You probably make more than myself, all right?

And that, it makes me upset. Dealing with a doctrine that is a

We have to keep coming back to these plans, these procedures, all these things just to go in another circle, another cycle, and we just seem to get stuck in. I think what residents want today and the future going forward is to break that cycle, is to allow for you as a planning board to have a framework that you can operate from. And I think what we'd like to see is a little more guidance, a little more input from you, and how we can go back to the government body, hold them accountable, we do that? Because I think a lot of people here just don't know what to do. They want to do. They want to be involved. Everyone here cares about this town. We care about families. We care about the people that are community members. And I know I do. That's why I'm here today. And I think that that is what we're seeking, which is more guidance, more access to information. I think that's what made that report. And I know you spent a lot of time on that. And I don't think it's fair for us to judge your, you know, Just a minute or so. I don't think it's fair for us to attack you. You're just doing your job. I think all of us understand. We all live in a professional world where we get, you know, things that we have to do that maybe we don't necessarily agree with or outcomes that we're just not in charge of. But I think what we'd like to see, of course, that are generated and decisions that are made is that they stand up to credible, real facts, right? Real quantifiable, like I said earlier, quantifiables. Right, the fact that you have the metrics you want that and you talked about the days that you counted. That's true. It's frustrating when you have those metrics, but they're not being given to us. Right. It makes us feel like we're coming to solutions and we're seeing things put in our face that we are just all of a sudden being like, well, I think it's more important that we really do, as a community, find a way to break that cycle, create these frameworks for you guys to do your job, make it easier. I don't think it's fair for you guys to have to sit here until 10 o'clock at night. I know most of us probably don't want to be here either. I think we're all just seeking guidance. And obviously, we want to have that input. But as you can see, we're still out here and still with the care. I thank you for all that you guys are doing. Really good.

The family, yes. I know you know how to remain out of it. Yes. Actually, I was going to thank you as well, too. It's very hard to be here, listen to all this. I'm sure many of you want to stick a poker in your eye. I think the townhouse people like you who step up and do public service is a debt of gratitude, so thank you. My question is, and this is not a rhetorical question, I don't know, but I think it's important for us to consider what are the ramifications of Calling an area need a redevelopment, non condemnation area, need to redevelopment. Since we talked about that, it goes. The decision then goes to the council about whatever the developers plan is does. All in this scenario, a non condemnation area needed redevelopment, hamper the ability of the council to insist on certain things. Does it obligate the council to allow the developer to bypass them? The zoning rules? What are the ramifications of doing this? It's actually the opposite.

Not a problem. I think we're winding down on the public comments just to deal with some of this. So the original zone back in 2020 with this had 35 units per acre in the downtown corridor. And that was done as a result of a citizen committee. There was a group of people came together and they met, they met often. And they worked with the council, they worked with the planning board, and they recommended that zoning for the center district or the downtown district. The affordable housing came, they put another overlay over that. So the property's already zoned for what everyone's worried about, right? Multifamily housing. Property's already zoned, right? They can come tomorrow, tear down those buildings and build housing per unit. Mr. Duff talks about how this becomes an abusive process because we go through this and to get to your point doctor is the town then has additional tools at its facility. Yes, there are additional benefits that the developer will ask for. He will ask for a pilot. I'm sure he will. Whether he gets it or not, it's up to the council. He will probably ask for other considerations. He may say to the town, hey, it's going to cost me so much, give me the parking lot for free. I don't know, right? But that's what the developer will probably do. But the town also gets additional tools. The additional tools that the town gets is to get to say, hey, we want the building to look different, right? We have generic zone in there. but how many parking spaces where the access driveways are what the design or what the unit count is what the unit mix is right maybe 101 units but is it 101 two bedrooms or is it 101 single bedrooms age restriction, all those other things that are current zoning doesn't have in place the redevelopment plan, which is the heart of the matter. That's where I would bring out the pitchforks and the knives and the stakes. I really would, right? Because that's where the deal gets done. That and the redevelopment grant. Apparently I'm out of time. I didn't have to ask, but to your point, right? You answered the question. But all of what I just said, has no bearing on my decision on whether or not the planner and I, based on her testimony, believe that this area meets that criteria, right? That's all the important stuff. The narrow question before us today is that.

It doesn't.

In the sense that by law. By law it doesn't. He's going to tell me I can't consider any of this. Yeah. I mean, that's the challenge. I know what the next question is. I know what the next hearing is. I know what the next conversation will be. I got to deal with the one in front of me first. That's really the frustrating part on this end of the table.

We see this bifurcated into two questions. One is the dilapidated buildings. I think anybody's arguing about that. the other is the inclusion of other space through which there is some subjectivity in terms of the interpretation of its obsolescence or its economic like how meaning because so the question then what's the obligation of the owner to mediate something which is easily remedied that doesn't that doesn't take anything so the point is So, unofficially, the parking lot in the bank, and we're making more developer. And that is fully necessary. So, if we, so that's why I think looking at what the plan is going to be, and we finally already know, you know, that's important. Looking at. Presented whether or not.

the study area satisfies one or more of the criteria. That portion of what you said is absolutely valid and is clearly something they're going to do. It's all effectively that they're going to do. But objecting or even knowing, quote unquote, what's going to happen in the future with plans for the future, regrettably, perhaps, they are constrained to have to simply Look at the evidence and decide, does it satisfy one or not?

How did the study area use your time to study area get to find in the 1st place? Because I'm only going to continue in the other area is a study area. It seemed to be intended to.

Yeah, well, this is a repeat. You haven't spoken to me.

That's an offering.

I'm sure that's 75 burners.

Avenue. I do. Thank you. Please.

See, I just have a question in regards to the sharpness meetings this evening. Talked a lot in my movies and there's two projects on the site. On the docket. On the docket, for example. At what point do we say, OK, we've defined all the definitions, we've defined all the terms, we've decided it's an access road, a driveway. We understand that. And I was born and raised in this town. I still live here. And now I'm living in a property where there making opinions, they may be making opinions. And I want to know, at what point do we move from one property to the next? Or is that going to be pushed to the next meeting?

Well, we'll try to close it here and try to address it. We haven't gotten to that second item yet.

We're going to sit here and then .. We'll start it.

We'll start it.

We're trying to get through it right now to try to cover what's on the docket.

I'm seeing that and it was.

The chairs. And it's been shared. So, whatever.

I recommend that the board read what's in the report. You can just say no to everything. You can say it's the parking lot and everything else. My recommendation is I read this report. The only part I do not agree with is the analysis of the parking lot. It makes no sense. The analysis of the parking lot makes sense. Not the parking lot.

Um, the former property across the street is going to be developed supposedly. How many units are going there? So, we're going to have 68 there 90, right across the street. How is our. I mean, there's, you can't get through the summer. Is any of the.

No, there's not. But you should bring that up in front of the council. We're just trying to get a clear picture. No, I just had a question about whether the new...

The challenges. Yeah, that's fine. The challenges.

I don't serve the public. I thank you for your. We both do. Sir.

On blast called, you know, um, stay on top.

Sir, the floor is yours.

So, I'm curious if peeling paint is really properties were done. When you would draw your recommendation, honestly.

Thank you.

That's all I need to hear. I think that's all we need to hear on that piece. And I'll say, absolutely, land owners, we've talked about these grants in the past, land owners absolutely start seeing this trend and start using this on their behalf. And they go, okay, I'm going to let my properties go into decay. Then what they do is they let it go to the point where they make plenty of purchases. They go, to remediate, I've now milked this property for 20 years. To remediate what it should be is going to cost so much money, it's not reasonable. I have a hardship, you got to help me.

And then they end up winning that case. What is acceptable? What's not acceptable? What we should give and what we shouldn't give?

We will lose every time, right? I'm a sales, like, these people are professional negotiators. They don't beat us every time. And you can get what you do not want if you open this up and give them these rights to kind of take down the laws that are protecting us.

Okay, closing the, uh, questions and comments section. And, um, you have a, I'm sure have a resolution ready to insert in their resolution the board and decide whatever it decides again.

No doubt. Well, they make reference to the government violence. Uh, we could recommend wherever you recommend that we're at is there.

Um, and, uh.

Yeah, that's what I've been doing before. That's fine. It is as part of the business in. as the interest of the borough and in accordance with the law um you can have discussion with and legally you can pick this up but it satisfies at least one if not that's a great period that is uh sharp i think you you emphasize the church helpful

Probably my conclusion is the driving force. Is actually section 3 ends up being. Pay attention to that, but you are. Namely that, okay, I've got X number of parcels, you know, but they're all part of 1 thing and even if 1 parcels. Okay. Because it's a total total package that has weight. So, without a discussion, or you can comment as you make your vote, anyone want to generally comment.

Well, I just want to put 1 thing out for discussion with everyone here. And I will remind everyone that aside from 1 of us, all of us are appointed. We are not elected officials and much of the concern needs to be addressed. To the elected officials by parking. I, there are several things I can take exception with. But even the parking study that the town. I agree is inadequate, although I did walk the properties on Monday and when I was there, I was the only car. But I know that parking is an issue, but at the same time, if we pull out the parking lot. Does that make a difference? And does that make the project. Even possible or impossible if that's not included.

I don't think that's your option. Your option is you can take some of the X's out of her grid, according to your belief, and then assess the end result of that grid. And you would vote. According to that grid, if we're trying to stay on target, so you would say, well, I'm going to drop the X out of the parking lot, right? You know, I don't think you can't remove it from consideration if that's what you're asking. I'm saying that you can say, I don't agree. You say, I don't agree that there's an X in row D of parking. I don't think that's been proven. But then you start to look at whatever the whole grid is and then use that as a piece of your conclusion. I think that's. And the other.

If our recommendation deviates from what was agreed to in the fair share plan and the council agreed with that, took our recommendation, what would be the next steps from there? Would that put the borough in jeopardy from a building?

We're just giving them advice. It's a formal step. We're responding as we should. And it's our advice. We have an opportunity to comment back to them. But it's their decision whether to agree with us or not, whether to proceed with an AINR. Not ours.

It's recommendation and it's based on the evidence, but they, they can.

They're in control there. Hey, run the time. Yes. Not to recommend it.

Make that determination and the purpose of this is to for full public hearing. Longer than you would get at the council, right? 3 hours in on this topic, which is a substantial time. In some respects for what government spends on these things. You know, I do side with the planner, right? I mean, yeah, the buildings aren't. Completely contaminated and everything else, but. They really don't serve an economic purpose, or they don't really fit in the overall long term goal that this town has had envisioned for downtown. They're not laid out right. They don't fit in with the other aspects. They're not. They've always been underutilized or always been afterthought how they're laid out or whatever. The parking lot does concern me in some respects. I get comfort that the town does own it, right? So it's not like some private person gets a windfall or whatever. The town still has the ultimate decision whether to include it in any future or part of it or anything else. I got to have some trust in that going to really weigh the factors right the library is one of the jewels and essentials right and anything that detriments is detrimental to access or use of that i think as as an under would be horrible right in some respects i do believe though that you know the buildings are not of equality all the standards that we all want in our downtown and the bank is a 1970s building Find it operates. It's. Really not what I think the properties are already zoned. I know it's not a factor, but it's just out there that I think this, this. moves that along, right? They were zoned for five, six years and nothing has happened and the affordable has been in place and nothing has happened. I think one of the reasons or purposes of an area in need of redevelopment is to try to kickstart that a little bit more. So I'm inclined to vote yes.

I agree with what you say. The parking lot's the only area that, you know, I struggle with, but overall. The other the other buildings is really much question for me.

You're okay.

If you can speak up and Mike, I think they're just sure. Yeah.

We will see, so I would say the parking lots, the only area that, you know, that I struggle with. But as a whole, you know, I mean, trying to agree with the recommendations.

Yeah, I think, so lots 10, 11, and 12, so the apartments, I think, you know, we have to evaluate them in the state that they're in right now. And I don't disagree with a lot of the comments around they probably should have been kept better. But the way that they are now, they meet these requirements. The bank, I think there's a bit of obsolescence there definitely it's I agree with you it's it's probably not ideal for what we want in downtown. But the parking lot and I was going to use the exact same language, the library is a jewel to this town it's probably like the number one thing that I think we should really be thinking about in that area and I would hate to see. parking, access, anything of it jeopardized. So that's, you guys have said everything that I was going to say.

In my opinion, the burden of proof was not established for lot 12 for either A or B. I also believe the burden of proof was not established for the bank for the D category. Of course, the D category was not established for the parking lot. Nonetheless, it's borderline in terms of the A and D checkboxes, not related to space, but just on sheer numbers. H is sort of a kind of a bonus thing as Steve was trying to allude to. It's kind of an interesting characteristic. But the big thing is we need to pick some place to develop, to redevelop. This seems reasonable that it's a location that's central that satisfies a lot of the conditions that our state wants us to deal with. But it's all in how it's implemented and how it's architected. Clearly, there has to be access to the library as part of whatever this is, as part of what ultimately happens. And there also needs to be it's in the zoning, but there needs to be some retail on the 1st floor. You can't just have residential slammed up against Morristown road, because that violates the vitality options. And so all that's the, it's in the details, right? But that's beyond this phase. So. The entire projects needed to get the density. You need the parking lot area to get the density to even be tolerable, to get a density of 38, which is close to 35. You've got to have that green area as part of the project. It has to stay green. And you need the area that the parking lot is covering, whatever purpose you obviously access, but however the parking stalls are going to be arranged. and what technologies can be used to optimize parking, shared parking and so forth. There's a lot of stuff that can be done. So I am inclined to, even though it's a toss up, once you take the items out, I'm inclined to approve the area in native redevelopment. Any other? Okay, then I guess we'll call for motion.

and uh we can go right as a whole to a resolution the motion second or co-vote on the resolution uh to find the actual requires her decision uh to find that planning work sets and stops and if i recommend that the study area be declared in my foundation next That you be clear, you're not. So, applicable. Ordering out there. Circulated.

Yeah, all the fine print that scrolls by the screen. So take a promotion from anyone.

Or not, no, I'm sorry, I'll move it. That board hereby recommends. That the area of the church street redevelopment area. I'll be to plan an area and need to redevelopment for the reason set forth in the planners report.

And would you be also moving to adopt the resolution grant memorialize the same?

Yes, sir. That's what I was reading. I'll second.

Call call.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay, so great.

We think we can, we should just kind of collectively side 1st of all on the board. Are you okay? I think the next 1 actually should I think it's easier. Are you okay with starting it? We still can and I prefer to get it out. I'm okay.

Let's see. Yeah. And so we'll take a 5 minute break. We.

so we will we will resume at 25 after 10 according to that clock uh give me tempers

That's right.