Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay. All right. Well, we think we're good. So, good evening everyone and welcome to the what are we April 13, 2026 regular meeting of the Township of Montlair Planning Board in accordance with the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act, chapter 72 of New Jerseys public laws of 2025 and amendments to section 12 of the Municipal Land Use Law. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by posting a copy of the notice on the first floor of the municipal building on the township of Montlair's official internet website and on the statewide legal notices listing of the New Jersey Department of State. This meeting is being broadcast live on channel 34 and is streaming live and will be available on demand on YouTube. This meeting is a quasi judicial proceeding, meaning that the board has powers and procedures resembling a court of law, and we are obligated to objectively determine facts and draw conclusions from them in order to provide the basis of an official action. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues of what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and the decorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. I think there's only one fire exit here and that is back over that way which is kind of on my right and really where everybody would have entered this room. And first up is roll call

present

here. I'm here and welcome to our newest member, Siobhan Gaines. Welcome to the planning board. Welcome to your first meeting.

Next up, we have swearing in of board professionals. All right. And next up, we have minutes of meeting uh sorry, meetings from March 9th and the 23rd. Are we doing both together, chair? Um let's see if we have discussion because I think there was going to be more discussion on March 9th. Yes. And so let's take March 9th first. Move them. You want to move them? Does anybody need a chance for discussion?

I did want to bring uh just ask one question. Uh the addition notes on page four. Let me just make sure I have this right here. Um, I believe there was a discussion that there had been a vote by the council that memorialized that property in the N2 zone. Is that accurate, J? Do you recall? It's lack. It's not the proper, but there was a vote if I'm not mistaken at some point that recognized that property being in the N2 NC. Sorry. guest home.

No, the zoning map showed it. That's what I meant. But that zoning map showed it in the NC zone. Okay. I don't think that's noted in here. Um, and I think that should be noted that there had been a folks that had recognized that property in the NC where the original district would have been.

Sure. But I one of the reasons for my vote was in part and that was one part was because there had been a vote uh there had been um that map had been recognized as that property contained in the NC zone. So, I'd like that noted uh in in the minutes. Have suggested language you'd like in there?

But I think both had been um there had been a vote that had uh I think both were the same if I'm not mistaken, the the PDF map and the one in the

Yeah. I don't know. But I thought the township council adopted the online the official zoning, right? So I think the online I remember this process occurring several years ago and moving towards the online. That was my recollection.

Okay. So the online changing system is that that's only change the color of that we have of our but we don't change the history

that doesn't know So, I don't recall who pointed it out. Janice, I don't know if you pointed that out to us. I don't know if we need to specify who did, but I think we should say that um the board discussed a vote by council. I think we can say the board noted that the zoning map was adopted by the precisely what I was going to say. Yes, I think that I think that's that's correct. Thank you.

It's being investigated being examined now. Well, the map of the crime, you know, the ordinances that

I guess. So, you have I'm fine with the Genesis edition. We're getting um some text that it's hard for them to hear. Oh, okay. The sound is horrible. And I asked you in her, you want to sit next to me, Janice? Mayor, maybe I could scooch close to you a little bit. Sure. This one says no one can hear. Yeah. The ch apologies to those at home. We only have one microphone and it's at the very front of the table. So, it's uh you want to sit here so the camera can see. We're clearly not in our normal spot. I have to.

So, Janice, do you want to just that language? Thank you for reaching out for those of you at home. We'll amend the minutes to say that the board noted that the zoning map that was adopted by the council indicated that the property was located in the NC zone. Yes. All right. Do you have other other things you want to discuss, Mr. and Wally? Well, I don't I mean I I disagree, but it doesn't matter for purposes of the minutes. That's fine. It'll go before the zoning board. Yeah. Okay. So, we had a motion by the mayor. We got a second by Miss Willis. All those in favor? I

opposed. Any abstensions? Wallace abstains. Okay. Next we have the beh the minutes. This is going to be a tough meeting. The minutes from March 23rd. I have the revisions that were proposed by you, Chair Rod. Are there any other changes to the minutes? A motion to approve? Second. All in favor? I understand extended. Okay.

All right. Next up, we have the area continued public hearing on the area in need of redevelopment for 619 through 631 Bloomfield Avenue.

So, um after um the last meeting, um I have unfortunately can't be there tonight. He is in California. Lucky woman. Um, we did a a uh added additional information to support the potential designation of this property as an area in need of redevelopment. And the reason what we tried to do is emphasize um some of the language in the local housing and redevelop local redevelopment housing law which um allows a process called a section three process um by which you give additional scrutiny uh to properties um that are u necessary for the um how does it go designated because they're necessary for the effective redevelopment uh of the redevelopment area. It's called a section 3 analysis and it comes out of the statutory definition of redevelopment area in NJSA4A12A-3. The definition of redevelopment area um in says that it includes properties that may be designated if their inclusion is necessary for the effective redevelopment of a larger area even if it's not individually blighted. They're considered section 3 properties. The reason being quite often there are properties that because of their location, its configuration, whatever may be are really essential to effectively redevelop the area. We included that in this analysis because the subject property has very important frontage on Midland Avenue

um and allows access to the interior of the redevelopment area um through a a driveway on Midland Avenue would alleviate the need to have a driveway from Bloomfield Avenue. Right now, the only access without this properties is uh on Valley Road or potentially creating another driveway from Bloomfield Avenue. And Bloomfield Avenue is never a very safe or um desirable location to have two-way access in the middle of the block. So, that's just something else for you to consider um as part of we added it to this section to the report. I think it does meet some of the criteria that Zanab um laid out uh at the last meeting, but clearly it's up to you to decide how you feel if this meets the criteria or not.

So there are properties at Front Valley. Yes. That are part of this redevelopment area. The police station. Okay. Frontan Valley. Yes. And the parking lot behind the police station. Yes. Yeah. So it wouldn't it isn't necessarily just Midland Avenue. There's frontage on Valley. There's frontage on Portland Place. Not that I think we'd want to put more traffic down Portland Place, but there are other options if this property were not to be considered an area needed redevelopment. If you recall the first redevelopment plan that we worked on, we try very hard to um eliminate as much as possible access from Portland Place because it's a res. So

yeah, I just I just want to be complete so everybody had an understanding of what the other part of this area is that's already an area in need of redevelopment because I don't know if all the board members were here when we discussed that years ago. Is that on page 11 where the what is existing right now in the development?

Um if you look on page 11. Yes. The ashes I mean the swipes. Uh, it's the it's the pro the crosshatch area. Okay. Not the not the um not the leech building and not the town hall. The leach No, the town hall is in the re it's already been designated. It's hard to read, but the the leech building and the municipal and the police station were already designated an area need redevelopment as well as the properties that are cross-hatched. Yes. So, the only property that's being added is just the subject property, right? That's correct. Okay. And where is uh that's not right. That's

that's not is it fleet and one more building or is it just the building laboratory? Is that the same building? I don't have the answer to that. That's next. That would not be part of it. This is the build the lot that's that we're considering contains the off the former office. Oh yeah, there's two lot up there. See five. Yeah.

Well, it meets one of the All you need is one criteria. It's run down, right? It's definitely run down, right? Yeah. But that also fits area um in need of rehabilitation, right? I mean, so we don't have to approve it as an area in need of redevelopment, right? No, you don't. Yeah,

you don't. Yeah. It does not fit in in any way with the spirit of the original law. which is to fight the light that is caused by a place, you know, not having any economic viability. You cannot say that about Montlair Central Business District. You just simply can't say it about it. And there is no great plan for what this area is going to be. It's not a terrible idea, but I'm up for it because why why can't the market take care of the problem? And I'd be happy that we just talked about their area. They're already they've been designated, but there's a plan for them. Sure.

Yeah. I'd be happy to find uh area in need of rehabilitation, but I I'm completely unconvinced about area in need of redevelopment. Maybe. Yeah, maybe. What's you know? Not yet. Is there any way to get another microphone tied into this system? People are texting in saying they're having a hard time hearing people. Talk louder. Okay.

Yeah. I'm just wondering if there's anything that's We've had a couple of comments so far that folks are struggling So we can continue.

Okay. All right. Um well, yeah. So for me, one of the issues that that I see is that this building does seem to meet criterion B to me, prolonged vacancy, discontinuence of use, and disrepair. But where I struggle is it seems like the the the owner bought the property from what we heard at the last uh part of the hearing and it doesn't doesn't seem like they've brought tenants into it or really done anything to try to fix that condition. So I struggle with while I think it meets criterion B, is somebody allowed to and maybe this is more of a question for Mr. Nice. Is somebody allowed to to purchase a property, let it go to disrepair, and then have it an area in need of redevelopment or rehabilitation?

When he bought the property, there was no guarantee that the board would be considering this, right? So, he could have left it that way for as long as he wanted. You're imputing to him that he purposely left it that way. And that may be true. I'm not disagreeing, but he's had the property since what, 2019. And so you're contending that you're you're stating that he left it vacant for purposes of satisfying the local redevelop housing law. I It's a question in my mind, right?

Answer to that. You know, I I know we do have some vacant storefronts along Bloomingville Avenue, but I do feel like given the amount of need and demand for housing in the township, it seems odd to me that I was it two apartments that are there are could not be filled right between 2019 and now. That's just it strikes me as a strange it's it's you know opposite of what I expect market conditions to be here in the municipality.

Based on the analysis in this report though it would require quite a bit of money to rehabilitate that building and those apartments. Perhaps he didn't want to spend that money. Could didn't have them. There's no way to really know what what his intentions are or were. The fact is that it's been vacant since 2019. Yep. And 2018 for the apartment build for the apartment upstairs. Okay. I guess what you're saying is there's a concern that we're creating this precedent almost behavior, right? And

and I don't I mean there's nothing that says that the owner of this property will be the redeveloper redeveloper selected by the municipality, but it it's from what we heard at the last meeting, it sounded like that was part of the reason why this owner bought this property was to help out the town as part of a redevelopment. So it just seemed like there was something that, you know, had been perhaps somewhat agreed or not. Does a vote here become president? language. I didn't think so. I just wonder.

No, but a encourage council to give a designation that are going to need a redevelopment is the is the predecessor to creating a financial agreement which is what developers want rather than just going to have normal tax suits. We can tell that we should not be willy-nilly getting during that. I guess was a wrong term because Yeah, but you're you're right. We're not creating precedent, but perhaps encouraging certain behavior. Yes. Yeah.

Any other comments from the board? Do we have a microphone? We're looking for another microphone. Okay. Quick question.

Oh, sorry. We're doing the camera. I have all your names down. Speaking app, you want to do a quick city chart in your notes. So, yeah. Okay. I'm Bro, I I know who you are. I know who you are. I'll figure that out really quick. Why don't we have we'll just have everybody go around kind of slowly. You can take notes for a city chart. Then hopefully that'll get you most of the way there. Yeah. Eric,

back. Let me figure out Mike Graham. Sorry. I thought we I thought I went already. Yeah, no problem. Just a second. I'm gonna one of these. Sure. Well, we have public comment on over here. I think I think we should do that. So, Janice, maybe I could have public come right here. It's fine.

So, if there are members of the public who would like to comment on this area need of redevelopment, uh, please come up. We'll have to get you right over here near the microphone so that u the public that's watching can hear you. So, if you don't mind stepping up close to the table, please come on up if you so choose.

If you would give us your name and address. Yes. William Scott, 23 Cedar Avenue. in regards to areas of redevelopment and and I'm just going back on some past history when we dealt with the Mountainside redevelopment area and it was about a dozen and a half one family house, two family houses that were part of that redevelopment process. Yeah.

That dozen and a half uh homes were designated as an area of redevelopment and at least 16 to 20 some odd houses were demolished. um one family houses, two family houses. And to your point, you would have thought that uh the purchaser of those properties held on to them for a certain period of time, did not rehab those properties, and we they would a part of that redevelopment process and they were demolished. And I think what you're looking at there right now, absolutely, they put in a new medical center, but there is a parking lot that was representative of those 12 to 18 homes at that time. So I think that was a tremendous loss. So when we're talking about redevelopment, whether it's two houses or 20 family houses or affordable houses, we need to take a very very close look at that.

Okay, that's my point. Thank you. I think that that part of it will come if and when this is designated and as we work on or as the council works on a redevelopment plan. Thank you. I have a question. Sure. Does the redevelopment area um um what do both um rehab and redevelopment allow the redevelopment plan or is it just a redevelopment area instead? Both do. So you can change zoning with both. Both require a plan. Both require so new zoning basically and rehabilitation.

Wait, rehabilitation changes the zoning. No, no, you can have either either rehabilitation or redevelopment. Both of them are folded into a redevelopment plan. Folded into The only difference is um an area in need of rehabilitation cannot be subject to a financial agreement. Okay. That's the difference. Isn't there a shorter term? Is there a shorter term like a fiveyear? Yeah, you can do a fiveyear um tax abatement where basically you you you slow down the tax increase. Yeah.

Okay. When so when the the definition um says it stresses rehab, how much you know does that really have teeth at all or is it really are you faced with the same argument? Oh, I can't read them because they're too forward and I I have to I think that's the judgment call that you haven't made.

Actually, ultimately you're just making a recommendation to the council. Council makes decision. Other questions? Anyone else from the public like to make a comment on this? Nope, I don't see anything. Um, I mean, I'm I'm torn on this. Like I said, I I feel like it meets criterion B. I don't necessarily like it because it doesn't feel right to me, but to me it meets B. I don't I don't see that it meets D in my mind because I don't find conditions that are detrimental to the public safety, health, and welfare within the community. That building I think certainly has some safety issues, but I don't find that it's the community that's at risk there. A let's see what I say on A here. I'm not you know substandard obsolescent building conditions. I think it's more covered under Dilapidation or sorry B prolonged vacancy discontinued abuse and disrepair.

A I don't I don't really find that. Um, and then what was H was the last one with Sally? Yes. I'm a little on the fence about H2 in terms of, you know, I feel like the the other parts of this redevelopment area do have access that's not Bloomfield, that's not Portland Place, namely Valley. And so, you know, I'm a little on the fence, I got to say, about this one personally. Well, reading the laws it so I would I go to death. Yeah.

However, you know, because I can't speculate why it is what it is, but the um the redevelopment area, correct me if I'm wrong, does allow rehab does. Yes. But you have to approach it as an eminent domain. This is a non-condemnation evaluation and that came from the way the council worded the request to the planning board is to evaluate this as an area need to read an a non condemnation area need to read about. Why would you take the teeth out? Because you have

that would allow the town to if whoever owns it doesn't do what needs to be the town had to leverage at that point to say you can't do it someone else can. case law, I believe it's case law, requires that when the council uh request a planning board to do the area needed redevelopment study, they specifically asked that either it be a condemnation or a non- conddemnation area needed of redevelopment and this was a non-condemnation. Why in the very beginning? Why condemnation versus nonation? But why would why would why why give that away this question

I was say I think that's a council question not necessarily one for us to it does come from Harrison

but the key the key thing here is that just because it does fit a criteria does not mean you have to vote for it means you can vote for it you don't have to and it is absolute folly to think that this is the only tool that a township has to deal with a dilapidating think especially if it's posing a health and safety risk we have coding poor right I mean this is not just because something falls out of good repair you know we are not this is not a sanction this is not a punishment for a building falling disrepair this is a benefit that is being provided people who own this building want to have it because it's unique this is not so so the incentives here and this is not to throw any shade on the owner at all whatsoever. Not whatsoever. They are rational actor doing what they're supposed to be doing.

We would be giving a benefit to a property. So, which is and and it's designed to give a benefit to a property because it would never developed otherwise. It's designed to fight genuine urban blight and that just doesn't exist in my opinion. And again, so saying that because it meets the criteria, that in no way compels us to do it. It just gives us the the okay to do it. I completely agree with the counselor. I'm not imputing any motives to the developer.

In fact, I thought he had some reasonable uh points that he made last meeting about why this this occurred, but that's um in in my mind, we're not meeting the spirit of the law. I agree with what you said earlier as well and I think we should not be to your point uh Miss Wallace we should not be encouraging necessarily whether by intent or by uh circumstance beyond their control. We should not be encouraging this behavior to allow these properties to fall into disrepair like this and give an incentive then thereafter. So I'm I'm not in favor of this.

Um I'm going to go back to the on condemnation. Why was it referred to us with the option of condemnation taken out? because I mean because that's the leverage that the town has to be able to like I said before if this owner can't do it that well someone else can otherwise it would seem like it would seem like that's a green bargainship that the town should maintain.

Janice can can I ask you a question? So just because it's um an area need of redevelopment, that doesn't mean that we have to give them a pilot, right? No. Don't we still have an option? So I think that the conversations that I'm hearing around the table are leaning towards having people believe that then we have to, you know, make a pilot for them. And I think that it's important that we let everybody know that that's definitely not the case. Um I think that Mr. Bo, I would tend to agree with what you said and you went through each one and I just tend to believe the same. I think that it meets the criteria. I think that it meets the law and I'm I'm not going to um try to pass a personal opinion about why what somebody's uh reasons for for doing that. I agree with what you said and so I would be um inclined to vote for a redevelopment. What do we sorry said about you're saying we don't what are we voting saying we we say it meets the criteria yes no or you saying what is the actual criteria we're voting

the recommendation right to the council yes you're making a recommendation to the council because they ultimately make the decision but the public hearing is here at the planning board they've asked you to do the investigation which is what we did we present presented you all the facts and the planning board has to make a recommendation as to whether or not it meets the criteria. That's the only thing we're judging. That's yes no criteria met. It's a yes or no question. So is there room as Mr. said that's what I'm clear about. I don't I don't think it's does it meet the criteria or not? That's

right. That's what you've been asked to um evaluate and send your recommendation to the council. We can include other comments, right? As we tend as we tend to do, right? We can include but it is it's generally a yes or no. I'm definitely I'm sure there's ways to nuance it, but so we have two council members here and um so why is it not combination?

I believe Mr. Mr. Harrison is here and he might want to answer that question. Oh, see. Hey, your honor, thank you for being speaking loudly and nodded a council member, but as a lawyer who does your honor,

when when before the redevelopment statute was amended to allow the choice between condemnation and non-demation redevelopment narratives, there was a lot of litigation as to what notice had to be given to property owners. As a result, the legislature amended the law to require the municipality when it approved the redevelopment area either designated as a condemnation area or a non-demation area. Since the statute was passed, I would say over 90% of the redevelopment areas that have been designated have been as non-combination areas. The reason for that is the litigation that ensues when a condemnation area is designated is costly, time consuming and ends up with properties not being redeveloped and that's the reason most municipalities have chosen to be nonation areas and why the switch hatchs a little as a council member to defer this non developing order.

Thank you. Thank you. So well to that um even if it is consation area it's still notic so it's not we're not make you know there's no decision being made. So we could fall into the 90% that doesn't but you're just we want to always have that option. Yeah, I mean that's nothing we can do about that. That's a council decision, but it's something we could recommend to them, right? After put in the notes to them, you could say you recommend making it a condemnation. Yeah. Enabling the power to condemn

if it you know then it will have to come back to you and they'd have to you'd have to redo it all over again. Yes. If if the council agrees with that, right? Yeah. They determine that they're going to make this into a condemnation. Yes, I suspect that. So I put it in

well just it's not that you know something that someone doesn't deserve is if the town doesn't get if the town doesn't get what it desires not as if it sits for another five 10 years having not like we have to we Yeah. Yeah. One question for you. How how is this stuff publicly? Um are property owners notified of this? Where does that happen? The subject property the owner is notified. How about everyone within 200 feet? No. Oh, no. Not as owning change.

That's right. There's no there's no notice requirement within 200 feet. is that you notice the people who are subject to the redevelopment um request redevelopment study. These are um well I guess there would be something in the newspaper. Yeah, there's notice there's notice but there's not specific notice to right like we notice this is a public hearing. Right. Right. Any other discussion? Anybody want to make a motion one way or the other? Second.

Any recommendations or do you want me to call the Yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah. I'm sorry. Okay. Is this approved with notes or notes? Well, that's what I was going to say. If you had any recommendations or you know, we can see. So your your motion is that it meets the one or more of the requirements of an area need of redevelopment, right?

I would just say I would advise that think about what the initial intent of the law was and does is this is what it's really about. Are we really needing to fight urban blight in Montlair like you know in the seaw war corridor and do you think that that's what this is really about or is it about that we are again trying to take political control of the development process and inexurably end up with a pilot which is what will happen and inexraably end up in a situation where it's a tugofwar among political players rather than just somebody building a building and being taxed. And I just that's not what the law was supposed to be about. I know it. And so I'm just going to vote no. And it I don't care if people vote another way. But I think at a certain point we have to just stop this cycle.

I agree. I don't disagree with that. But I look at this a little more myophically. I think I think it meets and that's as much as I don't like my decision. Um I think for the same reasons I can't speculate on why this property has been vacant for so long I shouldn't speculate on what the next steps may be even though I happen to agree with with your prognostication let's say so with that sure let's call the role

uh Mayor Baskerville. Yes. And and and I just like to say also that I have every faith and confidence that when this goes back to the council, the council will make a a sound decision. And I think that there are enough people on the council who are, you know, now very very cautious and concerned about when we have a pilot and when not. And I just say that because we've had those discussions. And so, you know, I I trust that they'll make the right decision. Mr. Campbell. Oh, yes. Yep. Councelor Damato, no. Miss Gaines, yes. Mr. Graham, no. Mr. Ian Wallally,

seems to meet the criteria. Yes. Miss Willis. I'm voting yes because it meets the critering. Yes. But I would like to encourage the council to reconsider possibly the rehabilitation option that I brought up. I listened to the March 9th meeting or possibly condemnation. Okay. To include condemnation. No, like re think about it. Redevelopment with condemnation. Yeah. Just explore a wide wider variety of options. Okay. I'm taking notes. Got you and Sher brought up. Yes. with the same um notes that Miss Wallace

okay annunciated. Um okay. So the recommendation to the council is that it it does meet the criteria and so we will get a report from the planning board. Okay. Resolutions. Resolution. Okay. All right. Next up we have our amended fourth round housing element and fair share plan public hearing. Okay, good.

So, um the uh plan, the amended plan that was submitted to the affordable housing dispute resolution court um was the subject of quite a bit of debate and uh we did receive a uh settlement signed a settlement agreement and an order from the judge. um directing us to make certain changes to the housing plan. Uh those changes really involved providing additional information about certain properties that had been rehabilitated by Homecore and were used to meet our third round obligation. So, um we did additional research. We amended the plan and I think it's highlighted in the document that you have in yellow those the additional information on those units. Um I would like to I did however um so the plan was amended and the amended plan said that you have um indicates that uh our third round obligation which was 162 units um reduces the number of units we had to address the obligation from 190 to 178. It still meets the obligation. It's just that the number of units that we are using to address it was reduced. However, I received an email um on on Friday uh from the Fair Share Housing Center that actually accepts

right

additional credits. So, um I what I would like to do is incorporate the additional credits that the Fairshare Housing Center has stated we are permitted to include in our plan. And with those additional credits and that happens to deal with um they accepted the documentation that we submitted for 53 Mission Street, 59 Mission Street, and 62 Mission Street. And as a result, the number of units that we get credited is not 139, it's 144, which brings us up to a total of 183. So essentially, we still meet our 162 unit obligation. We just have more excess credits that can be used to address our fourth round. So, um there's some minor changes that we have to make.

Okay. Um but it's not substantive. It's again responding to uh the acceptance by the fair share housing center on the crediting and that's it. the settlement agreement have to be amended over? No, no. The settlement agreement um was that we were I referenced the report from the I used the special master um where we had to add the additional information which we did and then they would consider the creditworthiness of those units based on that additional information and that's where we are. So we did exactly what we were directed to do.

Right. So just some of the numbers on page 39. Yes, they will have to be revised. But it doesn't change the plan. It really just frame changes the crediting numbers. That's it. So what are our total numbers now with the new values? Um if you're on page 39, I am

um a total of 140 uh the the on the third sentence under prospective need. We'll say a total of 144 units and 39 bonus credits were provided for a total count of 183 units. As a result, in excess of 21 units were provided to address the third round obligation. Okay. And then you'll add in the details for those three properties. It's already in there. It's already in. Okay. Yeah. It's just they accepted it. Okay. Okay. Excuse me. Yeah.

Uh comments or questions from the board? Good work. Uh comments from the public about the get it right here. The four the amended fourth round housing element and fair share plan. If you would like to make a comment on that, please step up to over here where the microphone is.

Nope. Okay. I don't see anyone. Okay. And so we need a motion to approve this to adopt. Motion to adopt and I so moved. Second. All in favor? I opposed. Extensions. Okay. All right. Next up, we have the master plan re-examination report. And I assume, Miss Tally, you're going to give us a presentation. Yes. Excellent. Okay. to set up. Sure.

I'm going to be sitting over here. So, I'm going to take Is it going to be up? Yeah. So, I'm gonna sit over the mic. Yeah,

I was like watching I have gap. This was not the plan. I know once I once I saw the agenda my kids are 12 and n I found out last night. I know. I understand that. I just wish. No, don't worry. I got you out. I got them under control. I got We're doing too much organized too much organized. We could uh

you can see it right a little late here. you may have shut so people in the back of the room can hear you microphones here. Let me know when you're ready. All right, here we go. So, I don't know if this room's not that big. I hope you can hear me. Um, and if if you can't step up and get closer, feel free to do so. But what we are the purpose of tonight's meeting is to

talk about our master plan and the legal requirements for a master plan re-examination report. Um and I think that we have quite a few fairly new board members here who are not involved in the

No, I didn't know. I said this doesn't do half of them. we're not involved in the preparation of our current master plan documents. So, I'm going to take the time to go over what our master plan right now uh includes. So, a master plan is a document. It's adopted by the planning board. Uh and just the planning board. Uh it guides the use of our land. It's basically the blueprint and the backbone of our land development ordinances, which includes our zoning ordinances, our site plan ordinances, our subdivision ordinances. uh our storm water ordinances. There's a whole host of implementation ordinances uh that derive that are derived from our master plan. Um I'm not going to read everything exactly. I have 50 50 slides. So I'm going to try and go through them fairly quickly. What is comprises our master plan? If you look at the municipal land use law, there's probably 15, it identifies 15 elements that can be included in a master plan. And you can even go beyond that. You can make up your own master plan um elements. What we have here in Montlair um our most recently um adopted portion of the master plans, the sustainability, well, no, it's the housing plan. It was remended tonight. So

adopted in 2025, amended in 2025, amended in 2026. That how that's how Monontlair rolls. We adopt the plan and we amend it. We keep these as uh living and breathing documents. Um the sustainability and resilience amendment that was adopted in 2025. That's actually an amendment to the unified land use and circulation plan. Um back in 2015, um we created a combined element called the land use and circulation element because land use is so closely interrelated with circulation and mobility issues. Um that we are one of very few municipalities that combine those into one element of the master plan. Um so that was originally adopted in 2015. It's been amended many times and obviously the most recent amendment was in 2025 when we adopted the sustainability and resilience element which by state law has to be a part of your land use plan. We adopted a storm water management plan element in 2020, a historic preservation element in 2016, the Glenidge Avenue and Church Street amendment to the land use and circulation element uh in 2016. We did that as a separate document because it was too difficult to actually integrate it into the text of the unified element unified land use and circulation element. Um and then we did a conservation plan element in 2007. So those documents comprise our master plan. So I'm going to take a little bit of time to um to go through the the unified land use and circulation plan. It's a bulky document over 200 pages. It's very repetitive. Um, it's clunky. U, but I think the question here is what's in the unified land use and circulation element. And I

don't know how much time board members have spent reviewing that. Every time I open it up, I'm I'm reminded, you know, of certain sections in there because it is very comprehensive and and very lengthy. Um, and it takes a while to digest. But that element is based on five big ideas. Um one is to direct future growth and development to transit oriented mixeduse nodes within the township. to implement zoning revisions and new land use controls in select areas using formbbased code or similar standards that allow increased density and/or improved built environment. Unimproved built environment to conserve neighbor neighborhood form and character to improve connectivity between neighborhoods and nodes. and to maximi maximize mobility assets to make it easier for residents and visitors to walk, bike, park, and ride transit throughout the township. Uh the goals of the plan uh are to ensure a variety of land uses and transportation modes that p pursue a balanced mix of activities and vibrancy, generate and nurture dynamics that support economic vi viability. Build on and expand transportation choices that ensure convenience, safety, and access and encourage public realm and private development that maintains the scale and character inherent in the diverse and historic neighborhoods of the township. Pretty standard goals. I don't think anybody would object to anything in those specific goals. Uh the plan is structured um uh to focus on these specific townwide strategies, overall strategies. Um there's a number of recommendations related to transportation and mobility, land use and parking, neighborhood character, flexible, affordable urban suburban lifestyles, economic development and the arts, infrastructure

and utilities, and sustainability and resilience. and members of the planning board will remember in 2023 we spent quite a bit of time focusing on those uh different townshipwide strategies to see if they are still valid. Um it also includes area specific strategies. Um and these are the areas that it focused on. The Montlair Center and Bay Street Station area, the Walnut Street station area, the Valley Vanleck business district, the South Business District, the Watch on Kaza business district, Upper Montlair and Montlair Heights. Clearly the focus was on our train stations. Did I say that this was a DOT funded uh master plan? um did not spend very much time talking about our residential neighborhoods. So um that's a separate matter. Most of the focus was on on what's going on in our commercial districts. So in the area specific strategy for Montlair Center, um we've made a lot of changes over the years and this is the current version of the land use plan. Um it focused on uh or created four different categories land use categories for Montlair Center. Montlair Center activity nodes which are shown in the dark purple um are have a maximum height of six to eight stories and a maximum density of 55 to 75 dwelling units per acre. As you can see, those areas, it's kind of hard to see because some of them are dashed um where you have some redevelopment areas. Um but those those areas uh are where our redevelopment plans are in place. Uh the area that is shown in a pink

color um with a purple uh boundary are the Montlair Center downtown areas where the maximum height is four stories and 47 feet still maintains the uh density of 55 dwelling units per acre. Generally, these are the areas along Bloomfield Avenue facing Bloomfield Avenue in between the development nodes, in between the redevelopment areas. The MA the planning board amended this plan a couple years ago, specifically reducing the height on those areas in those between the the redevelopment areas along Bloomfield Avenue from six stories to four stories. Um then the areas that are shown in were outlined in red um are the Montlair Center edge areas and those are areas that are recommended for three stories and 37 ft and 28 to 40 a density of 28 to 40 dwelling units per acre. And then finally, the areas that are shown in the pinker, these colors are pretty close, but the p the paler pink color is the Montlair Center village area, and those are have a maximum height of 2 and a half stories and 35 ft and 25 uh dwelling units per acre. There's a lot more in here in terms of mobility. Many, many, many pages of mobility improvements and circulation improvements. I'm not going to go through them tonight because honestly, we've already evaluated them and a lot of them have been achieved. Um, and I know we're actually working on a lot of them with our whole complete streets program,

Miss Tally. Yeah. So, is this the actual zoning for downtown? No, this is the land use plan. Land use plan. So, different than the zone. So, how do those two compare or like some who handles what of of each of those two? You, the planning board, control this document. This is kind of the vision. Yes. Okay. and the council controls the zoning. And no, they are not exactly alike. Okay. As you know, we've been trying to I'm sorry. I don't What happened? It just t No, you just touched I think I think I stepped on something. Oh,

it like that better. All right. So we as the planning board create the vision and then the council sets the actual zoning that are the rules and regulations and the council has to listen to the planning board that they can adopt the zoning ordinance that is different from what the master plan says. Okay.

Um there are a lot of recommendations uh for some of these other areas. the Walnut Street plan. There's not a lot of recommendations to changes for the zoning in the Walnut Street area in our master plan. Almost all of these recommendations have to do with most of them with um uh circulation and mobility, but I'm going to go through them because I think it's important that you know

what's in our plan and what the recommendations are for like the Walnut Street area. preserve open space and recreational assets. We do have quite a few open space areas along Walnut Street and provide strategic improvements that are designed to serve the neighborhood. Require clear pedestrian connections between parking and the front sidewalk. Establish bike share and car share incentives. Require quality investments in landscaping techniques and public realm furnishings. Evaluate parking requirements and density allowances as part of redevelopment plans with contributions to improvements including sidewalks, streets, and public parking. Provide a class three shared use bicycle route designated by pavement markings and signage along Walnut Street. I forgot that was in there until I started looking through this again. Provide bikes, bicycle lockers, or a shelter over the bicycle racks at Walnut Street station. make intersection improvements, including crosswalks at all intersection approaches, especially around the station area with pedestrian countdown signals included at signalized intersections. I believe we've seen a lot of those installed in that area. Add pedestrian walkways to the station parking areas to connect the platforms. Encourage shared off- streetet parking and allow under utilized parking areas surrounding the train station to be shared with complimentary uses in the area. an example, residential use overnight and retail use on the weekend. That's what our master plan says. And as we evaluate applications um in the Walnut Street area, these are the um items that you look for for consistency with the master plan. Um one of the other areas that the master plan focuses on is the Valley Van Black area. The recommendations for this in our redevelop in our master plan include

establish a scattered site redevelopment program to address is eyesore properties that negatively impact neighborhoods concentrating on the problem properties on James Street and Valley Road. We've actually seen quite a bit of change on James Street since then and some on Valley Road. Um, we still have some problem properties there, but reszone the Georgian in from R3 to the adjacent O3, which more accurately reflects its commercial use. And in fact, they came to us with a reasonzoning request, you may recall, and we we denied it. So, um, make pedestrian improvements at intersections, including crosswalks, bulb outs, pedestrian lighting, and pedestrian countdown signals of signalized intersections. We've got a couple of those at appropriately selected street trees. Reduce the number of driveways through the creation of shared central parking areas behind multiple lots. Sidewalk and bicycle route markings across driveways should be more visible. work with property and business owners to find opportunities to create centralized parking. I think we already mentioned that and the location of off streetet parking should reflect the existing building line. So that's that's basically what's recommended for that area. There were no land use changes recommended to that area. It's really again it was focusing on circulation and mobility. the south end business district. Again, there's not significant land use changes for the south end business district. However, there's a lot of changes regarding mobility. And in fact, if you look at this plan, this is the plan. It's in our master plan. It calls for improvements to uh the south the streets in the south end business district. Specific uh recommendations in our plan for the South End Business District include enforcing storefront

ordinances and window signage, widen sidewalks where appropriate to accommodate comfortable benches. I've been trying to do that for several years through the CDBG program and the funding has not been approved because it's a county road. um and and among other reasons. Um install an all-way stop sign or traffic signal, require and/or improve midblock cutthroughs with the additional landscaping, lighting, and public art. I do think we improved that midblock um cross pass through one of the site plan applications. So, we did achieve that when we reviewed that site plan application. Reconfigure the intersection of Orange Road West and Cedar Avenue to eliminate the channelized right turns to allow vehicles to turn without stopping. Install additional crosswalks at each of the intersections along the length of Orange Road. Consider metered parking or paper parking. Identify handicapped parking in the Orange Road west lot and ensure the presence of highly visible signs to direct individuals to parking areas. Um know that that's still a concern. So the focus really is on circulation and mobility uh for the south end business district. What is our unified plans call for the Wong Plaza area? Um and there have been a couple of recommendations here regarding land use, but again lots of it has to do with mobility. Require clear pedestrian connections between parking and the front sidewalk. Include bike share and card share car share incentives. require quality investments be made in landscaping techniques, reduce parking requirements, and improve public realm circulation assets, including sidewalks, streets, and public parking. The gas station located at the corner of Wong Avenue and Park Street is a prominent property that deserves a development or use that reflects the

character of the district. Redevelopment of this property is an important objective and existing parking capacity available within the overall district should be considered in the redevelopment of this property. That's a direct quote from our our master plan our land use plan. Traffic circulation and safety are concerns at the Park Street Wong Avenue intersection and traffic and this calls for a traffic study for a light which is now there. So, um, allow shared parking so development around the station area can use station parking as part of an overall shared parking strategy. Investigate the possibility of developing shared community parking facilities. Maximize on street parking by converting on street parking spaces into a parking lane with multisspace meters and use lighting and landscaping to enhance pedestrian alleys to uh, off- streetet parking facilities. Can you give me an example of encouraging car share?

We've done that in some of our earlier redevelopment plans where um as an incentive for developers to provide car sharing like zip car zip carried on those parking gaps and stuff. Yeah. They would put a zip car in and they'd get um I think credit for four or six parking spaces with one zip car. Okay. Okay. I didn't know you know what I know by you on a parkway or something if you share in a ride there's more people in the car. Right. Thank you. Right.

Um upper Montlair. Now I apologize the type is really small here but there were a lot of recommendations uh in the in the plan for upper Montlair and some of those had to do with land use but most of them again have to do with mobility. Require clear pedestrian connections between parking and the sidewalk. provide bike share and car share. Craft design, this is a bit repetitive, craft design standards to preserve the views of the first Wong Mountain from Anderson Park. Focus retail uses on the first floor in the village center with a wider variety of commercial uses permitted on the first floor at the edge of the village. Uh ensure that new development maintains the character and scale of key historic buildings. require new development to provide parking at an adequate ratio to meet demand. Prohibit drive-throughs, large surface parking lots, and blank walls. Increase density in exchange for improvements to sidewalks and streets. Redesign the A&P shopping center and CVS to provide screening and greening of the parking lots. Study the potential of a north south bicycle route using valley road or other uh township thoroughares. Provide bike parking facilities. Improve pedestrian circulation with midblock crossings. Undertake a traffic and circulation study to determine the feasibility of implementing left turn lanes at key intersections on Valley Road. Implement an obsolete parking wayinding system. Investigate districtwide valet parking. replace individually striped on street parking spaces with multi-pace meters and uh on street parking spaces should cost more than parking lots. Uh so that's a summary of the many recommendations for upper Montlair.

Is that acne? Yes, it used to I'm dating. It used to be the&p now is the acme. So this is

okay. So, I really wanted to to to talk about the unified plan because there's a lot there. Um, it's a pretty dense document. Um, but I think to understand the master plan re-examination report, you really need to know what the master plan says. So, now I'm going to go to our next plan element briefly, which is the housing plan because we just adopted that. So, I don't really need to spend a lot of time about the housing element. Just the main recommendations are to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing, encourage 100% affordable housing where feasible, continue the extension of affordability controls program, support redevelopment initiatives that create affordable housing, work with faith-based organizations to create affordable housing, encourage creation of accessory dwelling units, utilize vacant township owned or leased land to create affordable housing, and encourage opportunities for supportive and special needs housing. Um, storm water management plan. We adopted this in 2020. Um, some of the major recommendations were included adopting maximum impervious coverage standards for all zones. We did that. We have some of the tightest um impervious coverage triggers for site plan review of any municipality in the state. Um it calls for allowing the use of per permeable or porous pavement for parking areas. We added that and it amended chapter uh 295 the storm water control ordinance which we did amend. uh the historic preservation element um that was adopted in 2016 and uh I think you can see from the map here it started off with identifying all of our existing historic resources in one document. All of those blue dots are the existing and the gold dots are the existing historic resources which come

from township designated historic resources for uh properties that are on the state or national register. um properties that were identified in the 1982 preservation Montlair survey which was a very large document. Um board of education historic resources and township owner of historic resources and it also identified potential historic districts. Those are all those areas that are shown in purple here. Um and I list them here. I'm not going to read them all, but the Historic Preservation Commission has used this plan which identified these potential historic districts to do intensive level historic surveys through state grants. They get state grants every year. Um, and they have used th those funds to do these historic surveys. Once the property is surveyed or the areas are surveyed and it's accepted by the state historic preservation office, those properties are then um um part of or any demolition of structures within those properties must first uh uh obtain a total demolition permit from the historic preservation commission. So we focus on the commercial districts in the land use element here in the historic preservation element. I think it's been pretty effective about addressing at least the neighborhood character of our residential districts because as you can see a lot of these districts encompass residential neighborhoods and the HPC has been very good about doing their surveys um and not necessarily telling people how to maintain their homes, but if anybody was going to demolish more than 50% of their home that's visible from on the street,

they would then have to go to the HPC to get permit permission to do that and then they work closely with the HPC through whatever process they end up in. So um yeah, so I think it's been I actually think it's been a very successful um document. In fact, uh we were featured Monontlair's HPC was featured at last year's League of Municipalities. Um, there was an article in the New Jersey Municipalities magazine about how successful the Historic Preservation Commission in Montlair has been and how well they work with the planning board. It's a good team. So, the final plan element is our conservation plan element. This is from 2007. Um, some of the recommendations in our 2007 conservation plan involved conserving stream corridors and flood hazard areas, establishing greenways, regulating development and wellhead protection areas, protecting hilltops and ridge lines, strengthening steep slope regulations, encouraging energy efficiency and renewable energy goals in new development and municipal facilities, promoting tree conservation, recycling, habitat for wildlife and evaluating the noise ordinance. I think those are all still valid. Um, but there were a lot of recommendations in our previous um, re-examination report to um, bolster the conservation plan element and we'll get to that shortly because that's my segue into part two, which is what is a master plan re-examination report. We did it in 2016. By law, by New Jersey statute, the plan has to be re-examined every 10 years. Um, we adopted re master plan re-examination reports in 1992, 1999. It used to be six

years, they changed it to 10 years. Then we did it in 2006 and 2016. So, we are due to get this done this year. What are the statutory requirements for a um for a master plan re-examination report? And it's a bit of a word jumble. There's five requirements. You got to evaluate the major problems and objectives relating to land development uh at the time of the adoption of the last re re-examination report. So that's why when we started this process, I think in 2023 at the planning board, we've been talking about this. We went to 2016. What did the 2016 master master master master master plan re-examination report say? Then you have to look at number two is the extent to which such problems or objectives have reduced or have increased. Okay. And part of that leads into the next item which is look at significant changes in the assumptions, policies and objectives forming the basis for the master plan and development regulations as last revised. Well, we revise ours every year um with regard to the density and distribution of population and land uses, housing conditions, circulation, conservation of natural resources, energy conservation, recycling and changes in state, county and municipal policies and objectives. Then you have to look at the specific changes recommended for the master plan or development regulations if any including underlying objectives, policies and standards or whether a new plan or regulation should be prepared. I should say that this is an exercise for the planning board. Much as the planning board adopts the master plan, the planning board's also required to prepare the master plan re-examination report and and and and adopt this this this plan. And then finally, the recommendations of the planning. It has to include the recommendations concerning the incorporation of redevelopment plans adopted pursuant to

the local redevelopment and housing law and um and recommend changes if any in the local development regulations necessary to effectuate the redevelopment plans of the municipality. Like I said, it's a word jumble. So going back to the 2016 master plan re-examination report, the two ma main recommendations were to prepare a new housing plan, utilities plan and parks and recreation plan. Well, we did the housing plan. We did not do the utilities plan and we did not do the parks and recreation plan. So it was addressed partially um through the new housing element and it said that the conservation plan should be amended and expanded to address sustainability issues. Well, we did that partially. We did not touch the conservation plan, but we did address sustainability issues through amendments to the land use plan. Uh, specific land use recommendations in the 2016 report uh included one amending the land use plan for the streets near the Bloomfield Avenue corridor where the proposed intensity of development is inappropriate with existing neighborhood character. And we did that. Uh we amended the zoning ordinance uh to create a new C3 zoning district for those areas west of Grove Street and along Glenidge Avenue. Um we're currently working on zone changes for areas east of Grove Street, which we will talk about after this tonight. Um uh the second recommendation was to continue to create opportunities for open space in the central business district through use of increased setbacks and establishment of a parklet program. Uh we did do a parklet program. Um I think that was prior to COVID or during COVID. We did have a couple of park

prior to co Yeah, time flies. So uh uh yeah we um have since not we hadn't we experienced the parklet program and um it was good but there was been no support for expanding it. It does compete with parking parking demand. Uh we also included open space. Can you open that door? Thanks. Um we also included open space requirements in the Seymour Street and Lakawana Plaza redevelopment plans. again trying to create meaningful open space in our um business. I think you could use that brick to keep it open. Uh the 2016 report included specific housing recommendations. Um I'm going to try and run through them pretty quickly. Develop proactive strategies for adequate and appropriate housing for seniors. We did rent control. We did an ADU ordinance. We um in those were both um and and the the the need for housing for seniors was included in one of our re in our recommendations in the fourth round housing element and fair share plan. Continue to utilize state and federal grant programs to rehabilitate substandard housing which will assist in meeting the township's fair share housing um fair share allocation. We did create a local home improvement program um which uh did go towards improving uh our housing stock of homes owned by low and modern households. Consider appropriate residential development of vacant land owned by the township that's included in a recommendation in our fourth round housing plan. Examine current regulations to see what changes are needed to provide preference for affordable housing. Uh as of 2018 when we uh had our um spending plan approved by the court, the judge allowed us to do a local preference. So we have been uh implementing a local local preference

since 2018. And I know there have been some questions about how effective it has been. Every unit in a new building created since 2018 has been occupied by either a Monontlair resident or Monontlair employee. So it has been very effective.

Um identify sites for assisted living facilities for the elderly. We have not done that. Um I do know the owner of the Damp bus site has expressed an interest in building assisted living in that facility. So there is a potential to to provide assisted living. Um consider a universal design requirement that's been accomplished through building building design building code requirements. continue to collect development fees for affordable housing. We've done that and use the abandoned properties act to encourage owners to rehabilitate properties or condemn and resell them. Um we did look into um acquiring properties that are part of our uh vacant and abandoned program. It was cost prohibitive for us to try and acquire them. Um so uh those properties were were redeveloped uh privately or resold privately.

Um conservation recommendations create a natural resource inventory. We have not done that. Um improve enforcement and transparency in the tree preservation ordinance. The tree preservation ordinance has not changed since 2016. Um increase e vehicle usage. Uh the department I should say the department the township has purchased e vehicles not the department um when possible pursue sustainability jersey certification we've done that prepare a wellhead protection ordinance that has not been done establish a noise ordinance that has not been done conduct a buildout analysis determine that what we did not do that I don't think that's a sensible um requirement uh create a conservation easement along the first mountain ridgeel line that's not been accomplished and include establish requirements for construction of green buildings and we did include that in our redevelopment plans. On the economic development side, the re the 2016 report said that we should create ordinances to address vacant properties that was uh addressed through our vacant properties act. We also amended the ordinance to come up with to establish new requirements for boarded up storefronts. Create new wayfinding signage. We've not done that. Create an app to identify available parking. I think that's a great idea, but we haven't done that. Create ongoing redevelopment workshops. We did not do that. Create subzones for the C1 zone district. We've been trying to do that for many years. Um, and we created the C3 zone district several years ago, and I need to update. We proposed the CD zone district. um which I know that the council's now going back to C3, but we should still evaluate creating um a zone district for fourstory buildings along Bloomfield Avenue. One step at a time, right? Um create tax for public art that was not accomplished and expand the business improvement districts. And I

know that uh our economic development coordinator has been looking into that. Traffic parking and circulation recommendations create a parking fund where applicants receiving parking variances pay a fee. I believe the planning board at a subsequent date decided that they did not want to do that because then people could buy out of their parking requirement. So this was in the 2016 report and I don't think this is at a subsequent date is what the planning board wanted to see. Evaluate alternatives to a shuttle bus that are more financially viable. I know that this is complete currently being evaluated by the mobility committee. Continue to support the installation of traffic calming devices and that's the role of the complete streets department which was not in existence when this report was prepared. Uh parks and recreation a new parks and recreation element should be prepared. We did not accomplish that. Evaluate the impact of future development on the use of Montlair parks and open space. We did not do that. Uh they require a public open space component in all redevelopment plans and that was all subsequent redevelopment plans have included open space utilities prepare a new utilities plan element. Um that's been accomplished in part through the storm water management um element that we adopted and the sustainability and resilient amendments in the master plan. And then the the 2016 report had many zoning recommendations. Implement the recommendations in the unified land use and recirculation plan plan. Some of you may recall when we rewrote the zoning ordinance in 2018 completely. We had a subcommittee spent a year working on rewriting the zoning ordinance um basically restructuring the entire uh ordinance uh to address what was in the plan. That was not adopted by the council. The

council at that point said, "Janice, you have to do it in smaller pieces." So, that's what we've been doing. We've been doing it in smaller pieces to try and accomplish the major objectives of the master plan. Um, not all of those um proposed ordinances ordinances were drafted. Not all were adopted. Some were adopted. That's probably the best way to to say it. So, some of those were were um some of those recommendations were were implemented. Some were not. And I'm not going to go into all the details tonight. We will have that in the redevelop in the in the the master plan re-examination report. Minimize light pollution. We did not touch the light ordinance. Establish requirements for electric car charging. Um that was created those requirements were established by state law. Establish ordinance for new telecom technologies. We did adopt the small cell ordinance. add design requirements for new development. Um, we did not uh amend the site plan ordinance uh after 2016. Require bike rocks, bike racks and lockers. We do did not do that. New regulations for trash enclosures. We did not do that, but we did put in maximum impervious coverage requirements for every zone. So the next part of the master plan B examination report is evaluating what has happened since 2016 that needs to be considered as part of our master plan and as you know a lot has happened. Um so I'm going to start with population and you've seen the population numbers that we had these in our housing plan. Start off with demographics. um population has increased and I use 2013 here because that was the number I had handy to 2024. The trends are still the same. Um the number of younger children is declining. The millennial children, the millennial generation,

baby gener baby boom generation uh cohorts are increasing. As the population is aging, the demand for senior services and housing options appropriate for older persons is increasing. It includes traditional senior housing and assisted living facilities. The racial composition has been changing. I think we've talked about this before. The black and African-American population has continued to decline. We've looked at this in terms of um uh um population of one if some how many individuals uh claim one race, how many individuals claim multi multiple races. So the numbers are um a little bit jumbled because not all census data going back in history tracked it that way. But I think if you go back to 1950, the the black and American um the black and African-American population has declined uh significantly particularly since 1970. Now the population of mixed races has increased. So I think it's safe to say is our we are still a diverse population but the the the composition of that diversity has changed you know uh with the blending of races with the uh increases in the Hispanic population and increases in the uh Asian population as well. So um that's the story in terms of racial composition. Now from a development perspective, um there has been a lot of development since 2016. Uh we've added 542 new dwelling units. Um that includes 50 deed restricted affordable housing units which have been built, approved, or are pending. Uh this of course does not include anything that's planned for Lacawana Plaza. That's um I didn't think

it was good to include this because when I was working on this that wasn't sure where that was going. But this gives you the type of units uh that we've seen. We've had 33 single family homes, 18 two family homes, 23 accessory dwelling units. I think that's pretty significant. Yeah, it is.

You my staff spends a lot of time explaining the AD accessory dwelling unit ordinance to homeowners and walking them through the process. So, we've had 23 applications for permits. Um, and 468 multif family multif family dwelling units. Uh, there's been an increasing issue with homelessness. The number of homeless inter individuals has followed a sharply upward trajectory over the past decade. I guess we're mirroring um uh the situations uh in New Jersey as well as nationally. Uh the annual point in time counts recorded 41 individuals experiencing homelessness in Montlair in 2022, rising to 58 in 2023, 82 in 2024, and 115 in 2025. I think that's significant. Nearly a three-fold increase in three years. Um so uh according to that there's been a demand the demand for affordable housing is continuing to increase. Uh and I'm not going to we've talked about this a lot but I think the important thing is I used to say our waiting list for affordable housing was 20,000 people.

It's up to 29,000 just below 30,000 households on our waiting list for affordable units. um of which of that 30,000 1,877 either live or work in Montlair and there are 16,000 almost 17,000 on the waiting list for sales units of which over a thousand either live or work in Montlair. That kind of gives you a frame of reference for the need for affordable housing. One of the other items that we're seeing is demand for short-term rentals. We've been trying to work on a short-term rental ordinance for many, many years. Um the number of short-term rentals has this is an estimate because it's it's not highly scientific. You look at them trying to determine the number of units in various um uh ads. Um but it appears that the it's increased from a number of 112 in 2020 to over 200 in 2026. And this is prior to the World Cup. Who knows what the World Cup what the number is going to be. So, the issue with short-term rentals is that they take rental long-term rental units off the market, drive up rents, alter neighborhood character, um, and raise legitimate concerns about parking, noise, safety, and trash, and they take potential customers away from our local hotels. So, I know we've been trying to get a short-term rental ordinance for for for many years. Um, and it used to be, Janice, the numbers are not that high. It's not that much of an issue, but we're up to 200 in 2026, and I think the number is only increasing. So, I'm hopeful we'll be able to get a short-term rental ordinance working with this council.

How how how do you know that they're 200 units? AI. I had I had a couple in 2020, I had a study done. I there was a um a firm that was trying to get us to buy their services. So, they said they did an analysis and came up with the number of were able to tell us how many uh short-term rentals were in Montlair. I don't have that number for 2026. So, I relied on AI to give me the number. So, is there any connection between ads and short-term rental?

No. No. In fact, ADUs ADUs cannot be used for short-term we prohibit short-term rentals of the ADUs in our ordinance. don't stop them.

Uh we've talked about this before. Another issue, the need for missing middle housing, starter housing. Um not affordable housing. This is this is the middle income, not moderate income, middle inome housing. uh the need for more missing middle housing is fundamentally tied to a national affordable housing crisis which is tied to a national housing shortage shortage and I'm not going to go through all this num these numbers because they are in our housing plan and we've talked about them before I think what I want to say that there are opportunities to provide middle inome housing through infill development and we've talked about infill development gentle density um areas where we can look for this we can look in our business districts. This is something Are there areas in our business districts where maybe we can instead of having um mixeduse buildings, maybe we can permit multif family housing um without the commercial component. Something to think about. Uh and some of our R2 zone districts are they particularly those that are near our business districts, are there opportunities for uh missing middle housing? Some of our again uh some of the properties that are identified in our housing plan, commercial properties, if those commercial properties are no longer become obsolete and they turn to another use, those are opportunities to transform them to missing middle housing, which may be uh town houses, maybe a forplex, a series of duplexes or threelexes or forplexes. Those are the types of housing units that fit within the scale of a of a neighborhood um and can be designed to look and look like a single family house and complement the other houses in the neighborhood. Um what's happened from an economic

development perspective since 2016 um we have uh approved 1,25,000 square feet of new office space. Much of that has been for medical office Some of it um is actually in Glen Ridge. There was 45,000 square feet of medical office space that was in a redevelopment plan that we did with Glenn Ridge and the office space was in Glen Ridge. We just got the parking here in Montlair. Um the only light industrial class space approved in Montlair is the 82,000 square foot self- storage facility which you can see it's now been built over on Grove Street, but it's not completed. They're not occupied yet. So Montlair is a fully developed community with limited vacant land available for development. New development is is accomplished through private redevelopment. Redevelopment initiatives led by the township subdivision of existing lots. Where do we see development occurring? Obviously Lacawana Plaza included in here. The Montlair Center gateway phase 2. We've been talking about that for quite a while. There's um underutilized properties there, the Walnut Street area. We have the um the bus the the camp bus lot and I believe there's the north the North Jersey Development Center property next door which is underutilized. I've heard that's been for sale on and off for sale over the past couple years. So those two properties are key in the Walnut Street area and then the Upper Montlair area. We've talked about the uh acne, not entropy, which I think is can can be much improved. Um, not that I don't like the acne. The acne is great, but the appearance of that property can be improved and it can be a you can build up there. It's a one-story building right now.

Even under the existing zoning, you could go up to three stories. Right now, it's just one. So that's where we anticipate change. Um where is what's going on with the office uh um the office sector postcoid again going back to co many office employees had the option to work remotely for all or part of the week. Remote work has significantly reduced the demand for office space. Although this reduced demand has changed as as um employees office employees have reported back to the office, there is still a trend uh of more than previous number of office employees are working at home one or two days a week which changes uh how you deal with parking and commuting. Um we also notice that there's a stronger demand for medical office space and offices for creator economies. Um, and I would also note the office market in Montlair is pretty strong. We have not witnessed what New York City and other the major metropolitan areas have with the the the loss of occupants in their office spaces and the vacancies. So, um, while it's changed, I think that there is still a pretty strong office market in Montlair. The issue is parking. How you manage the parking? Um and I'll get to that eventually. Retail retail has changed significantly. Uh we've seen postcoid the the decline in or the change in shopping habit habits. The change in the demand for brickandmortar stores. People buy online. Everybody's shopping habits have changed. Um, more and more people are buying things online and the demand for traditional retail space has declined and it's gone from typical

shops, you know, which sell goods to retail stores that provide experiences, you know, the the paint and the the paint and drink and paint. Yes. Paint and sip. Things like that where you go, you can't do it at home. you go to the store because you have that's part of the experience, not just to buy things. These days, you can just buy whatever you need on Amazon or online or whatever. So, uh the the the retail uses have changed and not only have the the the uses changed, but parking's changed, loading's changed. Um so, all of those factors need to be considered particularly as we look at our commercial districts. Are we over retailed? Do we have too much retail space? Do we have enough retail space? Do we need to change the retail uses that are permitted in our zoning ordinance? Yes. And I think we've tried to keep up with that. Um I think we need to revisit that. That's something that we should probably look at a little bit more closely as part of this re-examination. Is that where we would decide like if you can have three or four nail salons in the same area or five you know that is that where we would do that or you can't do that anywhere like say you have to have x number of um you know feet between this type of business and that type

we can have the discussion those are always dangerous to have you you can have you know so many feet between similar uses usually it has to be related to health safety health safety and welfare okay

but yes We can take a look at that. Um, here's the big issue. Parking. Now, I have to say I did ask um our I did ask our park our parking consultant Jerry Giosa to update his parking study. He did it in 2023 and he gave us he he did an analysis of how postcoid parking in our parking structures has changed. Our many of our redevelopment plans and our site plan approvals include shared parking. How does that work with changed commu commu commuting patterns? Um people are at home on Mondays and Fridays. That means the whole shared parking concept changes. What is the utilization of our parking decks and our parking lots? So I asked um Jerry to do an updated analysis. He has not completed that yet. Um so we will fur have a further discussion once he's completed his analysis on where we are with parking and parking utilization of our decks and whether or not our um parking ratios work. But the numbers that I have here um I did get parking activity in our in our parking decks 20 I used 2019 precoid and compared it to 2023 postcoid. I think you members of the planning board have seen these numbers before. The numbers have declined pretty significantly as the at least as of 2023. Uh as you can see um percent change is 5.8% for the Bay Street deck. The Crescent deck was down 10%. These numbers will be updated when when he's finished his analysis.

Question. Yeah. when he does that, did he provide the total number of parking spaces in each deck and if he could provide um some information in terms of uh various permits that are, you know, the overnight permits, the transit permits, any other permit, the quantities of those would be interesting. And then the day parked if we can break that down by

I'll see if he has if he can break it down by that by that. It all depends on the data that he gets from our parking utility. If the parking utility can give him that data then he can provide it. Okay. I can't guarant I don't know what what level of detail data detail our parking utility can provide him. I've just hooked the two of them up. So, and Janice, you might want to just take a look at uh when there are events like things like conscious the Walmart. I couldn't find any parking on Saturday. All the decks were filled up. So, I don't know if that's going to be factored in also. Okay. Because, you know, Walmart is popular. Yeah. We'll see. I'm sure we will find out when he does his report. I know.

I was wondering if he's including that because it um everything was I don't think that's probably unusual on a Saturday night. So, we'll see.

Um, another issue, curbside management. I think that we we have a problem with double parking. We have managing our curb. I don't think we we we've upgraded our management, our curbside management to meet current demand because there's competing demand for um um car car share services, drop offs, pickups, loading, loading, loading, you know, um in addition to parking. So, what some towns have done is they've done a curbside management plan. Uh this I took from the city of Hoboken. They've done a curbside management plan where they hired a consultant and they've evaluated how they what what's going on at their curbs to identify where to provide areas for um and loading zones, uh short-term parking, metered parking, the bus stops. I think that this little graphic here shows to how many different uses take place uh on our curbs. And I know Jake is here tonight. Jake and I have talked about this. Um, it would be a wonderful addition to see if we could get some grant money to come up with a curbside management plan as part of the complete streets initiative. Electric vehicles um we've um actually I know you've seen that the the numbers have been increasing. Uh I think that this is interesting in Montlair there were over 532 electric vehicles registered in 2022. Um the state does not provide the those numbers at a municipal level. They have not updated it. Um so um I think 2022 was the last I could get numbers at the municipal level. But in comparison, the state does have numbers. They showed 338 vehicles in TW electric vehicles

statewide in 2012 and there's over 254,000 in 2025. So you could apply maybe the same increase in Montlair if this increase statewide is is applicable to Montlair unless Jake you have better numbers than I do. Okay. No. So this is what we we do know that there's an increasing demand for electric vehicles. Um there's a demand for charging stations. We require electric car charging stations when we can. Um which is pursuant to state law. Um circulation and mobility. There's a lot going on. We have the Essex Hudson Greenway in 2016. I think that was a pie in the sky. We have since is now it's a reality and planning for the Essex Hudson Greenway is is incredibly important. It's why we're putting in the first phase of the bike lane to connect downtown Montlair along Glenidge Avenue to the entrance to the Essex Hudson Greenway. Uh big change, complete streets. We have our complete streets department. We have our vision zero task force. we have our complete streets uh oversight board. So, the township has done made amazing strides uh in terms of advancing complete streets and they're currently working on the local safety action plan and again federally funded local safety action plan uh to better define how to create um our safe streets. And then micromobility. Uh microobility is you know electric bikes. Um I should say electric vehicles because you see all sorts of electric bikes and electric scooters.

Yeah. And planning for those. And again I know that Jake and the complete streets department is going to be taking the lead on that. The reason I'm raising all these issues is because we're required to look at what's changed since 2016 and how that affects our planning documents and our land development or regulations. Public transportation postcoid numbers are down significantly as you know. Um uh according to here you can see we we have the numbers for the train state the train stations in fiscal year 19 compared to fiscal year 2026 Bay street stations down 17% walnut street station was down 32% Wong station is down 24% mountain avenue station was down 40%. So, we're just giving you the numbers um on how uh changes in in boardings on our trains at the train stations. We did the same thing for the main bus stops. Uh again, you can see that in the comparing September 2019 to September 2025. Um the only one that increased was a Belleview Plaza. Um and and that might be because

from two to eight. Yeah. It's I think because the numbers were so low. Yeah.

So anyway, I think to put this in perspective, I mean, public transportation is part of life in Montlair. It's why a lot of people move here. You move here for the bus service. You move here for the train service and for the ease of getting around. And then the camp closed. I think that's significantly affected um bus trans public transportation. And I know it's an issue and I know the mobility committee is working on it. I'm not going to recreate it, but I'm just going to tell you that it's an issue despite the fact that the numbers are have gone down. I think that's because of the the postcoid uh changes in the way people work. Microtransit, this is a new thing which was not part of our 2016 plan. It's an ondemand transportation provides highly flexible routing. Uh basically it's through mini buses. I know that we have been using microtrans transit for our seniors through our partnership with Essex County where we contracted with easy ride provide uh transit for our seniors and and disabled adults I should say disabled uh residents. Um also uh easy access to ride sharing services. Uber andyft is also a form of microtransit. So, it's something it's expensive um but it can be tailored to meet specific needs. Uh climate change continues to be an issue. I think you've all seen this um through the uh climate action plan. What's the name of the one that's been adopted by the township as well as our sustainability plan? It continues to be an issue.

All right, I'm almost at the end. Next steps. Good. Janice, this is really I I had this originally tagged as food for thought

and then Matt Ammerald said Janice food for thought. You're calling it food for thought. They're going to expect food. So, uh I it's now the very boring next steps. some thoughts and the reason we I'm doing this presentation this very detailed presentation tonight is I hope that for people here this is um tweaked something in your mind something that we need to address through a change to a master plan I'll either be it a whole new element or a change to a section or the wording or a change to our regulations this is the time to to mention it and some of the things that I've noticed and my staff has noticed there's one we really need to evaluate our commercial zoning districts to determine potential locations for multif family housing as a permitted use. Some of our commercial districts prohibit multif family housing, which doesn't make sense to me. It's not a permitted use.

Um there are areas where multif family housing um without the mixeduse component, just multif family housing are appropriate. And I think we should take a look at our uh districts to see where that may fall. Um, evaluate areas adjacent to business districts and train stations to identify locations for mission middle housing. Consider returning to the original zoning ordinance which included a parking allowance that encourages adaptive reuse of buildings in the C1 and the C3 zoning district. We talked about this at the planning board going back to what what basically our previously previous zoning ordinance allowed adaptive reuse of existing buildings and minor additions to existing buildings in our commercial districts without triggering triggering a parking variance which would then send them to either the zoning board well usually the planning board. Um, so in this case, they would not be required to get a parking variance and they would not have to come in for to the planning board for site plan approval. Um, I think that might have depressed some of the uh commercial activities and commercial conversions of our buildings. Um, continue to fine-tune the C1 zone district because it's work still needs to be done. It's too large. The C1 zone district along Bloomfield Avenue where you permit six-story buildings is very large. We've been pushing for years to limit that to where the redevelopment areas are and bring everything back down to to four stories and to establish appropriate transitional zones with adjacent residential neighborhoods. Prepare a curbside mobility and parking action plan to effectively manage the often competing interests of loading, short-term parking, long-term parking, and mobility. And I have to say this um amending the sustainability and resilience element.

Uh these are specific changes to the language that has been strongly pushed uh on the planning board to address turf fields. So it's very straightforward just revising the language very simply not saying that turf field turf fields are prohibited but that they have to be very carefully planned. So page 52 says synthetic turf athletic fields that register higher surface temperatures than surrounding areas and natural grass. That would be permitted. Taking getting rid of some of that other language in there and that when replacement or installation of athletic fields is considered prioritize non-heat intensive alternatives such as natural grass period. So that is it for me. So I'm there any questions?

Well, so to outline the the broader process and then I'll I'll get over to your question. Um, so we have to complete this re-examination by the end of this year. Correct. By November. By November of this year. And so the idea tonight is kind of the introduction I'll say to this concept, letting folks know, you know, where what, you know, some of those things that you've seen are and you've encountered in the last 10 years, your department, getting that out there. Um, and I assume this will all be up on the township website. It will be.

Okay. So, this will be up on the township website. And the idea is to have several of these sessions between now and November so that we as a board have a chance to make our comments, the public have a chance to make their comments so we can incorporate a lot of this information in well before our November deadline is is my hope. So we're not scrambling so we have a time for a thoughtful process here. So um tonight is not the only time to you know make comments. We will open it up if if members of the public do have comments. Um, I'm gonna let the board members go first and then we'll have the public come up. Um, but you will have to I know this is a lot of information. It's even and I've seen this before so but it's hard for me to digest a lot of this and so want to make sure that everybody knows tonight's not the only night to make comments. My comment was everybody has been so big that like gingerbread

right there by the yellow bottle there's cookies. Oh, you're so I thought you joking. I'm like the blood sugar up. Thank you. Mr. Camp, how should we contemplate the And you may have to speak up a little bit just so people in the back can still hear you. Sorry. I know.

How should we contemplate the um the sections of the presentation that reflected note like are there be action I'm sorry owners assigned? I got make sure how to think about it. There's a lot. The question is, do we need to change any of our planning documents? Just because it was not complete doesn't mean that it it should be done. Correct. Yeah.

Some of these I mean a lot of these things we don't we're not made of money, you know. So some of the things things that are prioritized get done first. I think what I'm trying is there anything that should be removed? Is there anything that should be added? or at the end of the day, do you re recommend a whole new plan? And that's why I went through each of our elements because there's a lot to it and people can complain about the master plan,

but I think it was there's actually a lot of good in all of our documents. And what we've been focusing on the last couple years is is going in and amending them to get rid of the things that need to go get be eliminated, adding the new things that you need. Unless you want a whole new plan or thank you. That's a different animal. So that's essentially just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean

it's still in the plan maybe on next year's agenda. And so as we move forward to have um community input, I I I think it would be a very good idea to um focus perhaps on some of them on specific areas. For example, and here you mentioned the um park and recreation. I noticed when you talked about the um areas that would fall under mobility, mobility is doing that. I think that we have an amazing um park and recreation advisory committee and that they can be extremely helpful with that and I think it'll be good to bring in you know some of the people that we already have in place that could be a part of whatever that team is but then when we are doing those discussions say for example maybe some people just want to go to a meeting to talk about south end business or upper month or whatever and don't necessarily want to spend a lot of time on some of the others. So, we might might want to consider how we're going to do the presentations to get um maximum use out of people and maximum participation and interest and people would know if you're coming on such and such a date, you know, we're going to spend the lion share on whatever, right? and then you know sure they can comment on whatever they want to but you know know like maybe some of the major topics and I'd like to volunteer to work with you on on how this is going to look when we break it down whoever that team is there's already a team

I don't think we have a team yet sign me up I think I think we're making one now okay good I think that's a great idea to not have I didn't know if I volunteered not have every evening be about the entire thing together like have and that way for the public as well that I think it's a great idea. See, um, we work together. There you go. That's I guess I think I think we have a team. Yeah, I like to volunteer when I'm making suggestions. Sometimes it helps. Appreciate that. And we and we draft you right in as a volunteer.

Yeah, I I think that makes a lot of sense. Like along those lines, I back in 2023 when we were working on this, I reached out to the environmental commission and the historic preservation and the housing commission. Housing commission submitted their their report, their recommendations for the re-examination report, and those went into our housing plan that we did. The environmental commission, I still have all the recommendations that came from the environmental commission. I know the historic preservation commission's working on it. So I think we should should we post those kind of as a you know a lot of thought and effort went into that even though I know with the housing commission that all got rolled into this element but just so folks can see

here's some of the thinking that's occurred already and certainly things have changed between 2023 and now but I think that's helpful. I think that might help spark some other ideas. It will even see great examples of great work. You know they go on and say oh this is what they're talking about. Yeah. Yeah. I uh I think this has to be seen as the single most important re-examination that would take place right now. We're at an absolute Yeah. crux point in the history of the town. Probably the most important moment since planning in the town was invented. You have a confluence of things that are going on. Uh a

a jelling of a popular feeling that the town was built out for a variety of reasons. a movement that happened on the council on Tuesday, last Tuesday, to do the biggest single move that goes and I'm not going to pass judgment on whether it's right or wrong, but goes flies absolutely in the face of all progressive uh planning as well as the core of the earlier master plan which is transit oriented development. And what we did on Tuesday was begin the process to downzone at our key transit hub in our central business district. Nowhere else in the world is this being done right now. Like so. And it's I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it is a fact that we're down. No, I'm trying to be open-minded. We are downzoning. We are downzoning the one part of our central business district that has immediate walkable access to a transit hub. That's a seven day a week transit hub. A B as Janice said, retail is changing and we may be over retailed. That's hugely important. C. A planning meeting right now, a planning re re-examination involving uh transport around town and mobility in 2026 is like one in 1896 before the first car showed up because we will soon have cars, a whole new type of car that's going to be going around. We'll radically change everything, especially the need for parking or the way that parking is used. So, it's I think going to lead to our being totally free and wonderful way to get rid of parking minimums tied to individual buildings and to to to do um buyouts or what do we call allocations reallocations of parking of your minimums. So, you can

keep a minimum and you can do extend it anywhere else easily. At the same time that that's going to be good news, we are going to be looking at more congestion, more street congestion of a different type, but it's going to be all of the pickup and delivery and everything going on is, you know, just going to be change. It's going to make it's going to be radically safer in the future. I think we can worry less about safety, but it's going to be we're going to have more congestion. But fundamentally, these are a bunch of things that are hugely important all happening at once. And again, the moment that we just had where we downzone the part of the central business district at our transit hub and if you look at it's like the first sentence of the master plan is transit oriented development. So, it's kind of like, you know, we're going to the moon is the plan and then we're like, we're not going to go. So, I mean, maybe going to the moon is bad, but like that is a big change. So, I just wanted to say this stuff is not just working around the edges. It's all very very big

and we'll need a lot of cookies.

Mr. Chairman, so I would just like to um respond a little bit to to that um the whole notion of down zoning. So actually what happened here in Montlair in and about 2008 2010 somewhere along that time when we first got very aggressive with this transit um oriented type of development and we were going to each and every one of the train stations and we said yes we have to have higher density around the train stations and so forth. the community jumped right in to, you know, the southernmost areas, the Bay Street train station, and in that area, oh yes, we're going to put six to eight, whatever the densities were. And we had a plan for each and every train station in Montlair. And by the time we made it up to Belleview Avenue, North Mountain, and Upper Mountain Avenue, the neighbors said at that time, "No way. We do not want that here." and they came in and they fought and so if you notice there was never anything zoned in those areas. So if we want to talk about downzoning that's fine but we have to keep that in the context of then we are now due to move on to upper Mont Clair Belleby Avenue North Mountain Avenue and those other training stations and give them some density. So I don't think that the intent and certainly mine was not to say oh yes we're going to down a zone something here. I think if we're going to really do transit oriented development we have to do it equally across the township and we can't let any particular ward or group of residents bear the brunt of all the density and that did not happen as we did this now. So because they were able to successfully mount a campaign and say stop, no, we don't want, you know, this high density. We don't want all the traffic and we did not go into those

neighborhoods at this point in time. If it is the will of the council and the majority of people in the neighborhood, then we just pick up where we left off. And so I guess we would start, you know, um, Watch on Plaza, then we would go to Belleview Avenue and Mountain. And there's plenty of space that we can do that if that's what people want. But let's be fair about this when we tell the story so that everybody understands what we're doing. And I don't think it's just fair to say, oh yeah, so we got a down zone now. No, now we're going to do what many other residents did because people are coming out and I appreciate all of you for coming out. Residents are realizing that they matter, that your voice is important and that you guys can be a huge part of what's going on here. and they're exercising their right. And so the residents now in an area that has historically, you know, carried a huge responsibility in terms of density are saying no more. We have enough here. We have to look somewhere else. And so I'm happy to see the residents doing that. And I applaud you guys for standing up. Again, it's, you know, just the question of like I think overall in town we have to I mean I'm pretty new obviously and I've just and and relatively new to the council and I've just you know I don't I don't get a lot of people who say you know we need to have a lot more development. So you know it's it's it is what it is and we should just recognize it and work within it and try to work towards zoning that actually reflects the will of the people. I'm like I said I wasn't you know I was concerned about how we quickly we moved on that in the context of this of like there was a master plan and it didn't go to the master plan and that's fine you know plan changes

and that's what I'm suggest I'm just saying it's a very big change and we're looking at big changes and we should be being quite deliberate about it and and looking down in the future what's going to happen. So amen. I just and I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying. Okay. Good.

Other questions or comments from the board?

You know, with respect to the activity um you know, comments about retail, comments about the uh you know, the commercial aspects of all our business districts, we should probably um you know, let's involve a bid. Let's um let's talk to um the business communities. We do this because you know just again I I don't have the information but m center and and I mean there seems to be well I you know my perspective is you know growing up here we had hannes we had stuff it was really really active 60s and 70s and then it just went and then it sort of really quieted down up a lot. Now the activity level that we have is exciting because you can see so many people walking and spending spending time walking around. So um you know before we think about maybe limiting commercial uses in those spaces, we should really understand um you know what we're you know doing because I think a little bit of commercial vacancy is also good for rents if if it's too full that rents really increase and having some and also we can eliminate the like for example the first um the first um item that we oh the Bloomfield Avenue redevelopment study area.

Yeah, you can't even count those available. they were never intended to be rented and maybe they didn't have these as vacancies in a way because the owner didn't have any maybe intention to um to lease them. So maybe maybe they would be filled if they were um leased at reasonable rates. So anyway, I think just I'd love to get the business community um involved

and the upper Montlair business district also they might have a little bit different opinion on retail because um I know the president of organization has been here and said they have retail that's thriving up there and I think in part because what to your point Tony there's a lot more foot traffic on the streets so people are popping into stores a lot of restaurants a lot of retail and I thought the conversation was about expanding um uh the types of stores that we would see in the commercial district, not uh restricting it. So, yeah, I I agree with you. Bring bring in the business district.

We we saw what happened with um you know, Durban removal plan to take out um everything from Grove all the way, you know, all the way down and that Glenidge Avenue and Bloomfield Avenue from Grove down to Elman. um that was vital, you know, that was and it was it was quieted down with essentially um residential,

you know, um you know that there there and also when you take streets like with you know when a street is double loaded when there's commercial on both sides it's a lot more vibrant than it would be if it's just a a single side. So we have experience of what happened um from let's say um you know going from Grove Elm down to Maple on the northern side of Bloomfield it's really quiet because it's it's just all it's all basically there's a maybe a little bit of retail when we get down to the new properties but if the retail on the other side face retail it would be I think just more walk and active.

Yeah. in the same uncle Japs stores on both sides. But you know, but that's history.

Anyone else? Do we need to decide anything? No, we're we're all taking it. No, I mean, we will have many more meetings to discuss this both with the board and with the public. Um, and that's what our committee here is going to start laying out schedules and approaches and and make sure that, you know, we I I like this idea of focusing in on certain aspects for each meeting. Um, I think that's going to be helpful and very efficient. So, you know, there will be and and I guess things to consider, you know, how many are with the full planning board, how many are with a few planning board members, you know, because we can certainly have more meetings if it's not a noticed meeting with the whole board. Um yeah, and still it gives

members of the board an opportunity to hear from the public directly and bring that back to the full board and especially with Miss Tally um also there. So how many members of the public if you could just raise your hand of of who would like to make a comment? I see three, four, and this doesn't have to be absolute. I'm just trying to gauge. Um, do folks need a break before we Yeah, we're going to take a five minute break and then we're going to start into public comment on that matter. Uh, I'll fountain.

Okay. I didn't even know, but you did great. Everybody, you know, was at an understanding level with everybody. I feel like,

oh yeah, good job. I'm excited because I really thanks for some of those things earlier today like the one we just voted on first whenever I process And so I had a better understand some of us, you know,

make a comment on the um master plan re-examination report. Come on up. If you would stand over here so the microphone can pick you up. I promise we're friendly folks. Awesome. And and if you could keep it to three minutes, we'd appreciate it because we've got three more matters to attend to tonight, but it's not necessarily hard and fast.

All right. I am Tanya Carter. I'm at Five Orchard Court in Montlair. I own a business in the South End Business uh district and I'm the president of the South Business Association. So, I'm so looking forward to future meetings, but I just wanted some clarification on a few things. I noticed that about a year ago we were here and a lot of the things that were mentioned in the South End Business District um plan uh we suggested and they were going to be funded by the block plants, right, which never happened. And um my clear what what I would my question and what I would like some clarification on is that just uptown Wong and it's gorgeous right and the comments on the investment in landscaping techniques and things like that. What I saw in Wong Town Plaza is everything we need in the south end. The sidewalks are broken with the bricks. Um, I do all of the beautifification, me and a couple of the other business owners. We do the planting, we clean up. Um, I tripped over Blick brick. If you're on the uh what is that? North, south, east, west side is is township, I guess. East side is um county. So on the west side, the bricks are all broken up. And I tripped over. I sleep I sweep ac near the trees and things like that. when you get out of the car, broken bricks, right? So when we talk about mobility and we talk about seniors, that's a problem. Bin up Wa Chong. So my question is like where did the funds come from? Like is how did Wa Chong get get serviced

is the question and and I'm just clarification like I'm not sure how this happened. Okay. So I was like that's not a planning board thing. So I don't know but if the community block grants I know we were here and we tried we tried to get CDBG funds for the south end right but when we because half because it doesn't it doesn't fall within the income will the the the qualified district I took it to the county because I've tried several times to get it done and I've tried to play with the numbers and every time it doesn't meet the percentage of lowincome households to benefit. So it doesn't qualify for CDBG funding.

So and that's why it might have seemed at one time that we were going to be able to do something. Yeah. And then at a different time as recently as perhaps the next year or whatever, if that the income in a group has changed so much that they no longer qualify or that the groups in that area no longer qualify for that, then we can't override that. So if we thought so one time, right? Yeah. My suggestion is it's a county road. Yeah. Some of those improvements to in watch plaza because it's a county road there. The county's made some of those. I think we should put a lot of pressure on the county to make improvements to the south end. But it's in the planning.

It's in the report. It's in the report. We understand you need those improvements. Wider sidewalks, more street, street trees. But how does Wong get it? It's in their report, too. I know you had mentioned the investment. They haven't they haven't been part of I mean, I'm just a question. Wong Plaza the park was done through a grant from NJ but that was just the park. They don't have as far as I know any received any funds to make it. So they got a grant through the what? No they don't they didn't department of environmental protection. Okay. For the park. For the park itself. Yeah. Okay. The area that you're talking about that has a path and stuff.

It's lovely. And this is why I know Jake is is Jake still here? Yes, it is. We've talked about this before. Yes, this is a big issue. It's a county road. We should be really pushing for the county to make those.

It's a county road and I think we should really the county that took the lead on making the improvements on Bloomfield Avenue. So, um, uh, at the most recent complete streets oversight board meeting, uh, we passed a resolution, uh, talking about our feelings on the county's local safety action plan, which specifically touched on, uh, Grove Street. And one of the things we talked about was what it didn't cover. And that included incorporating suggestions for the municipal or sorry, the rest of that corridor, right? So, Elm, Elm, and Orange Road down in the south end. And one of the specific asks in that resolution was for them to think about the the circulation pattern down there and how it may be improved and whether it's still appropriate for the current uses. And so that is something we're thinking about and and trying to get some movement on.

Thank you. Did you have any other questions or Okay. Others? Yeah, just come on come on up. Whoever whoever wants to go next, just come on up. We'll do it a little informally.

Hi, I'm Helen Litman. Um I'm part of the well I'm part of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation at Monontlair and we've been involved with the Yiggby obviously and basically on behalf of our group we want to thank uh thank you for mentioning the faith-based uh housing and the afford but I would just want to say given that in 10 years the need for affordable housing has increased so much to me so visibly in town and I'm hoping to see that this somehow there's incorporated more steps more support for affordable housing including the faith-based housing and then I want to say something as a private private resident something ridiculous but it's about parking I've always wondered how come the distance parking from parking to corner the space left is double what I have seen in any other place in my whole life and it seems like just a way to have less parking And just for what it's worth, I throw that out there. Thank you.

Thank you. Because some people are saying move them back because they can't see around the corner. Did you sure? Sure. Mr. Neman, if I may. Um, so the reason there's so much distance between uh where parking is and the corner uh is to provide sight lines and make sure you can see pedestrians and other road users trying to get around. Um, parking very close to the corner really inhibits those sideline sight lines and makes it a lot more dangerous to to be going around walking biking

right people telling us to move back because they can't see park. More parking, less parking.

I'm Sarah Avery. I live at 25 Irving Street in Montlair and I'm here to talk about affordable housing because uh affordable housing in Montlair is is really uh it's a it's a disaster. Um and you spoke about the middle missing middle housing. Well, the destruction of naturally occurring affordable housing has been uh very severe and it's basically uh started in um 2019. But I'm going to start with these maps. But you can see this black outline. That's Montlair. The blue is first class. I'm sorry. The green is first class. Blue is uh second class. The yellow is third class. and the red is fourth class. And there are three separate uh redlinined districts for her redlinined districts in Monontlair. D20, D21, and D22. Now, I have in my analysis, I've primarily focused on D21 because that's where I live and where I own property. Now, over here, this is a sort of a zoom in to D21. And you see I have boxed in here a few streets which is Washington a new mission and then I'm going to talk about Wheeler Street which is just over here and this is a bigger blowup uh detail of those uh areas. Now Monontlair is an urban aid municipality and that is a designation that was created by law in 1978. And so I haven't pinned it down yet, but I assume that Montlair was designated an

urban a municipality around 1978, the late '7s and pretty much corresponds with um you know the segregated schools. Now, after the red lining was uh repealed by the uh federal fair housing act of 1968. These red line districts, they became the low and moderate income census tracks which are the basis for the urban aid municipality status. And because of that status, that is why Montlair doesn't have the housing affordable housing obligation that other municipalities have. But what has happened in Montlair is well, let me

and this this will go towards the I assume the housing element of the re-examination report. Okay. Now, the Fair Housing Act, New Jersey Fair Housing Act of 1985, this down for a minute, stated there is a need to assist municipalities in the rehabilitation of housing for occupancy by low and moderate income households. To this end, a specific program for housing rehabilitation by municipalities would best serve this need. It is the intent of the legislature that this program will be utilized especially in urban areas which were the main recipients of regional contribution agreements to continue to upgrade housing stock in order to provide a wide variety and choice of housing for people living in the area. Right? So the people who lived in these areas, the Fair Housing Act of 1985, the intent was the housing stock should be rehabilitated for the people who live there. But now what has happened? These are just some excerpts of maps. Um, this is Mission Street. This is New Street. This is Washington Street. And over here, this is Wheeler Street. In the dark blue, those are all properties that I've identified that are all I call them luxury, right? Because you have market rate rentals and then you have luxury rate rentals. So, for example,

um right here on Wheeler Street, when number 13 was completed, it went on the market for $7,000 a month. Now, let's remember these streets are all in the low and moderate income census tracks that give Mon g gave Montlair is the basis for Montlair's status as an urban aid municipality and Montlair got aid over the years to rehabilitate properties. So the blue, those are all the properties that I've identified. Doesn't mean there aren't more that are now luxury, unaffordable. The properties I've identified on just those four streets. 41% there's 128 properties on those four streets. 41% of those properties formerly naturally occurring affordable housing have been converted to luxury. Now you'll see some of these properties I have outlined in red. Those are all those are properties that the zoning board gave variances to multiple variances. There were 17 applications that went through the zoning board for 19 properties. So, not one application, not two, but 17. There wasn't one member of the public who attended any of those hearings. Why?

Because only owners are noticed, not tenants. So, what that means is all the people, all the low and moderate income people who live in all of those properties had no say. They were completely disenfranchised. And how I first got started on this investigation is I own a house on Wheeler Street that is within 200 ft of 13 Wheeler Street. And I was not noticed. And that's when I started to investigate what was going on in the historically AfricanAmerican, formerly redlined districts, low and moderate in consensus tracks of Montlair.

Now, so do you have a recommendation for how we address this in the re-examination? Um, I'm first I'm giving you the facts and then we'll work up to recommendations. But this is a very serious problem. I I don't disagree with that. I just So, we know now that the affordability

has been completely obliterated and now where I live on Irving Street, it's on here somewhere. Um, now my street, which was naturally occurring affordable housing, four houses have been turned into McMansions. So now the affordability of my street, the two streets, I own a house on Wheeler Street, I own a house on Irving Street. So what do I see? I see the increasing gentrification and I see the decreasing diversity. And to my mind, it's completely illegal because the Fair Housing Act of 1985 and the Urban Aid Municipality status that Monontlair has had in since at least 1978. Look at the outcome. This is a complete failure because the people who lived here, those homes were supposed to be rehabilitated for the people who live there. And now you have a waiting list for affordable housing of 20 or 30,000 people. I mean, doesn't that just tell you that we have completely um failed? And what I want to say about all of the ones in red, the zoning board concluded, whereas the board based upon the foregoing findings, concluded that the applicant, this is not the lowincome moderate, right? This is the the out of town developer who came in and scooped up these properties for a bargain. The applicant did prove peicular peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties and exceptional and undue hardship with

regard to the requested variances which all had to do with setbacks, bulk and parking, right? Parking reduction, bulk increase, setback, you know. So, so what do we what do we do about trying to get Let me let me finish. Let me just finish. But I do need to get this to the re-examination report, right? I I understand your position and I don't think you're Well, this has got to stop. It's got to stop. So, you have to put in some controls. Okay. You know, I see uh Councelor Harrison has left, but he had the power to not grant those variances. How could the the board of adjustment

recommendation is for the board of adjustment to not grant variances? So the board of adjustment, they don't they don't know the history of the town evidently. They don't they don't care about the people who live here because this is the result of the the zoning board's influence, right? This is the result of the zoning board's influence. And I let me just finish control. We can't We're the planning board. We don't control the zoning board. Well, you got to put it in the master plan. But we can't. No, we can't. The master plan doesn't I actually think it's in there by the way. Well, nobody follows it. So, here we have a plan that nobody follows.

Plan calls for the preservation of naturally but it doesn't. No one no one has taken any steps. Not one step has been taken by this town to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing. Now, what do you have to do to uh enforce it? I don't know. That's not my job. But that's not my job. We just put it in at the last That's not my job. My I'm I'm I'm telling you, we have a serious crisis here because of neglect. It's neglect. And I don't disagree. I don't have a problem. All we can do as a planning board is to put the things into the master plan.

Oh, but hold on a minute. The planning board has approved plenty of things. Just not these in particular. The planning board has approved plenty of you just approved something tonight that you probably shouldn't have have approved. Okay. But here it says, let me just can I just finish this one statement because I think it's important. Okay.

All right. and proved that variances could be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the zone plan and the zoning ordinance pursuant to which is a complete fiction. Right? So, so if this town is not committed to the residents, it doesn't matter what you put in that master plan because what my analysis has proved is that this town, whoever you are, if it's the planning board, the zoning board, the town council, they don't care about the residents because the residents have all been evicted.

Great. Thank you, Janice. Was it just in the fourth round that we put the part about preserving the naturally occurring or was it in there before that? No, no, that's the fourth round plan, right? So that's then it's new. But then that's something, right? Do you want to restrict the size of the additions neighborhood? They just put on additions on those houses. Well, three houses just had big additions and I brought it to everyone's attention and everyone dismissed my concerns. It doesn't matter. You know, you can come here and explain things and nobody cares.

I think Can I just say I've heard what you said? We put it in the plan and the and the next step once the litigation is finished is to actually implement the zoning changes to reduce the size of the additions and establish floor area ratios which would limit this but we have to get there. The damage has been done and the damage is irreparable. Well, if the damage has been done and is irreparable then there's nothing else we can do. Yeah. Well, you've never done anything anyway. All you do is pay lip service, right? Hello everyone.

Hi, I'm Kate Albreight, 176 Midland Avenue. Thank you.

Um, this goes kind of to the conversation earlier between um, councelor Damato and Mayor Baskerville about train building density around train stations and so on. Um, so I just feel like the appetite for making our town more exclusive and unaffordable is really disheartening. We are in the middle of a housing crisis with a severe need for affordable housing, both low and middle inome households. So why are we focusing on downsizing parts of Bloomfield Avenue? Why not jump straight ahead to what you were suggesting and upzoning parts of upper Montlair, especially around the train stations? It's in the master plan. That's something we should really be working on. Okay. And and to Mayor Baskerville's point, to show how um unbalanced this town has been, the fourth ward has 582 affordable units. The third ward has 170. Second ward, 22. And do you want to guess how many the first ward has?

Three. I thought two, but did we add one? Okay. No, two. We would have had Listen, we would have had three if you all approved the 260 Park Street. I don't understand why that wasn't approved. That's density around the train station. Yeah.

Makes so much sense and would add an affordable unit to a very very measly amount of affordable units in the first ward. So it's it's very very dish disheartening to hear about this down so downsizing which will only add to the housing crisis and not adding to the upzoning of upper Montlair which is exclusive. Back to Sarah Avery's point about redlinining. Today, because of inequalities in income and generational wealth, minorities are less able to afford single family homes. In Montlair, we have large areas zoned specifically for single family homes. Um, by clustering more affordable multif family dwellings apart from these single family homes, we continue the legacy of redlinining and segregation throughout our town. So, this bounces back again to the need to upzone Upper Monontlair. It's exclusive. It's white. We're making our town more and more wealthy and more and more white. And that's sad that we're talking about down zoning instead of upzoning areas. Um, and I think that's all I have for my notes.

Good point. Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Scott, William Scott, 23 Cedar Avenue. Uh, this is probably going to be my second time around with monitoring the master plan re-examination. Yes. Okay. Because back in 2024, 2023, okay, we had the presentation. Matter of fact, it was based on your master plan re-examination reports that hit on specific sixpoint portions of the master plan and there were subcommittees. You guys were on certain subcommittees. Well, I guess this new master plan re-examination report is the a complete start over. Okay. I wouldn't say that that

we started the process in 23 because you just we have to do it within 10 years and we had free time in the beginning of 23. So we started the process and then we got busy. Okay. And so I wouldn't say this is a restart. I think one thing we had talked about earlier was posting some of those reports, okay, that say the housing commission did, the environmental commission as part of that 2023 evaluation, putting that on the township website so that residents and everybody can see some of the work that's already done. And I think it's a good jumping off point. I'm not saying that everything from 23 should now get carried into 26 because things have changed. But there was a lot of good effort, you know, including by by you and and others in the township. Okay.

Um we don't want to throw that away. I want to build upon. Well, I that that really is very important because there were recommendations that were made and some good recommendations and things we could work through. So that that was very important. But I think one thing that it's really um has always concerned me is the fact that you know we we talk about preserving the character of the

Okay. All right. Yeah. Okay. Just to follow up on Miss Avery's in addition to her

definition of Monley's urban a definition and categorization. It's based on, from what I found out, there's only two towns in the state of New Jersey that got that designation on the on the fact of vacant land. Vacant land. Okay. Not not vacant land. Okay. Vacant land. Now, that you that can be confirmed. Okay. But from what my research out of 540 towns in the state of New Jersey, Monle's designation was on basic land vacant land. and the vacant land. Okay, when you're looking at your RO and ROA zones and you've got lots that are two, three, four, five acres, okay, but you've got a house sitting on that,

it takes into consideration the entire square footage. So that's not really vacant land, okay? So that's something that I think we really need to in addition to M Avery was saying, I think that that's another point that how Monontlair got that designation is interesting. Very interesting. But I I don't I don't want to get into that. But when you look at the designation, it's based on vacant land or Monontlair is a builtout community. And if Monontlair has not built in the first and the second ward for the last 60 70 years, it is not a builtout community. All right, good point.

It needs to be the point is that like you know the zone is the zone. So and how you where you look for it. That's great. People should look at places. Now I always say that for me it is about aesthetics and form a lot of it. So I live in a you know what people would think is the absolute archetypal we live you know in the absolutely archetypal R1 zone. I get out in the morning, I open my door and there's a beautiful house across from me that is as of last week not only a two family house but will soon be a three family house because it has an ADU that is in the back or or it'll be so the point is that and actually from my sightelines I look right at my front yard at two two family houses but you but it is not a thing they're you know they're they're they're existing non-conforming and and there is it's sort of a naturally occurring thing but to to change a do you know uh designation of like a block is obviously a it's a tough process you could do it in places but we also have in the for in the first there is a actually a lot of land in the NC zone and it's very inefficiently used because of the parking minerals that's fundamentally it it's like you know so there are again we can't talk about applications but there are interesting things that's happening and there will be residential uh development in parts of it for sure I don't know but come up with language that can be you know that can be done there but but overall I mean this board my objective in general for that my objective is that the zoning reflects where the town is really at so that every development application is not a battle to the death that does onto the land use boards because it's not fair to the volunteers of the boards and

it's not what the process is supposed to be. It's supposed to be when somebody pulls an application it should be like okay we're talking about some little small thing not like 260 Park where people where it is you know tearing part of a neighborhood apart. So, whatever it is, put it down on paper and I'm sure as always it will be very thoughtful and thank you.

I'd just like to um first of all, thank you because I know we've had those conversations for a long time and not getting much traction even from the housing commission when we first started talking about the RO zones. But it's very simple language. We can just say something as simple as the RO zones, the permitted uses in RO zones will be assisted living, group housing, housing for our unhoused population, and you know, it's a veterans housing.

Simple. Boom. Write it down. And then I guess the council would just have to pass it and agree to it. This is not, you know, something that's like you have to go into the back room or have a sidebar on. It has to be the will of the people. to do that. You know what I mean? There has to be the will first of all of all of the council people to agree that when you have large, you know, uh uh facilities that may be able to accommodate multiple unhoused people or, you know, assisted living that it's okay to do that. Well, I would say first of all, group home is a it is a permitted use I believe in all zones. No, it

Well, no. The group home as defined in the municipal land use law, which is a single kitchen. That's your conflict. That has to be a licensed group home. Oh, licensed group home. Yeah. Which if it's unlicensed, then it's just a single. So, let's go. Assisted living housing for the unhoused, multiple affordable units. I'm just saying I I'm not familiar with any zoning in the RORO that gives us permission to do that. and I've asked for many many years now and so to the best of my knowledge it's not there but this is something that you're interested in and we can get the majority of the council to vote on that we could make this happen maybe this is the time maybe this is the year Mr. Scott,

I hope so. I'm getting older. But again, I mean, if we are downzoning, I mean, the overall feeling of the town is that it's congested and that people feel the word I've been using is dysphoria. People kind of go out and they feel like, where am I? There's a lot of congestion and stuff like that. I don't personally feel that a lot of the time. I feel it some of the time. I feel it at Watch Plaza. Yeah.

You know, driving down and like the fact that you can't really bicycle and all this stuff. And I talk to the residents and like no one is clamoring that I meet on the street that we should be that Watch Plaza needs to be well. It's not really in my ward either, most of it. Uh but but uh but yeah, these this is these are absolutely great conversations. It's all trade-offs though. You're always just trading one set of a problem for another set of problems and and you know, it's hard work. That's all. But it's it's a great but permitted use. Yeah, that's the key. Yeah, that is the key because once you identify those uses are available,

they're not going in and going to clearcut, you know, half of the RO or zone and put in, you know, three or 4 thousand assisted living facilities or nursing homes or whatever the case might be. There is a need. Okay. And and I think there's an opportunity and I think the purpose of providing permitted use gives you opportunity. That's all. I think it's a really interesting and in the future. Good point.

Families are not particularly large. I mean, it is really I mean, I live in a 2400 foot house and it feels big to me. So, we do, you know, there is a question of what is some of this real estate, but obviously for people who live there, you know, it's it's like the neighbors like anywhere else. We should be compassionate and thoughtful as we do it and take away. Thank you. Just just just to remind folks, we do have three other things to get to tonight, but 10:15 you're bewitching. I don't I I fully agree with that. I but I I want to just reiterate I appreciate the discussion. I think it's good. I just know there's other opportunities we're going to have to have these conversations. So, um

I'm going to be very short and I'm not not going to dial down because you said you're going to have individual we will have more pieces. So this is just a general thought which is that

oh I'm sorry xat um 316 Park Street um which is that in in the plan as it exists we can deduce guiding principles and values but they are not actually stated in a larger way. So let me just give an example. We value all four words equally. If that is stated upfront, then it really helps to make decisions like where are we upzzoning that was brought up tonight.

If we are talking about affordable housing and short-term rental um what is it? It's a it would be a or a regulation. So, a short-term when we have when we approve short-term rentals at Lacawana Plaza, we would say that's not okay. That's not good for the residents. So, I think that there needs to be that it doesn't have to be a lot. It can be simple, but guiding principles which help decide

what happens when, where, who, how, and what. and that there are people in this room that have disagreements in the audience about how these things should happen, but the guiding principle is the same. So, it's not to say we're all going to agree on how to do it, right? But at least we will know it's very important to this town that we have affordable housing, for example. So, I I am happy to put forth what I think some of those not now. Mhm. No, I don't

what those are, but I I think that that is super important and it will help um defay a lot of the feelings of frustration and anger at individual projects that happen in the town all the time. That's it. Good night. Thank you. Send send proposed thoughts to Miss Tally as part of this would be helpful and she'll get them over to us. Thank you. guiding principles like

I'm gonna set a timer so I so I can because I also need to like uh so my name is David Corfage. I live at 58 Tuxedo Road. Um I a lot of the stuff I think is talked about zoning. I'm going to try to look big picture. Um I do sometimes feel I could be wrong but I do sometimes feel people want to kind of freeze Montlair in glass and I think it's important not to do that. There's a quote which really stuck with me from the writer Louise Erdrich which is that was it I wrote it down so I could remember things which do not grow and change are dead things. So I encourage you to think about like Monontlair is an evolving town. I live on tuxedo road 100 years ago it was cornfields and now it's a lovely street and it could be a lovely but different street 100 years from now. Um I think that how we design the buildings and the standards we lay down is just as important as other things. So in terms of change, I actually would like to speak on behalf of encouraging open open density. I think that does actually help. There's a lot of evidence that encourages it can bring down housing prices. There's been studies, there's examples of towns that can happen a lot of different ways. Um I live off of Grove Street and I see all the one-story buildings along Grove and I that's a zoning thing. not for you guys necessarily, but it' be easier. Great members of the township council to make it easier to build up on top of the existing building. You could have two more stories there and that would build stuff out. Um, also I would also re agree with the missing middle and I just the idea of like there's urban centers and just gradually as they gradually spread out. It would be a gradual process. It would build more housing. It would keep the character of the town not frozen but evolving over time. And I think if that's a vision where like it's amazing to me that a block away from Washington Square you have single family housing, right? So I encourage that you all to think about a plan which envisions gradually moving these things out over time. It will take a long time

in the same way that my street was residential for was farmland until 100 years ago. And now two blocks over there's on Oxford there's two family houses and you would never know they were there. They look just like the houses on my street, right? Um, I would also like, um, as you may know from a real environmental background, so I would encourage you to think about walkability. It's in there in the original plan, but I really think it should be encouraged. There's a lot of evidence that walkability and bike ability and active mobility are good for the town in a variety of ways. So, I'd love to see a strong emphasis that on the plan. Um, and that might include things like like I know like northeast Montlair up around, you know, up on Grove is like a it's kind of a commercial desert, right? There's literally you want to like where I live, I can walk to drugstore, I can walk to a pizza place, I can walk to a liquor store, I can walk to a dry cleaner. If you live up around Northeast, there's nothing. You walk to ice cream, which is great. Um, but aside from that, there's not much up there. So I encourage to think about maybe even dotting commercial small commercial areas and also economic development to encourage the kind of things that people want to go to. I know retail has changed. On the other hand, when I go into American Royal Hardware, they always have customers like they're a local hardware store and they're always always busy.

So there was still demand in town for that. And finally, I was the related last thing I'll say is encouraging actual mobility and biking. I think there's been one things there's actually a lot of interest in biking in town, bike buses going. I'm involved with the grocery greenway effort. Um I know there's uh encouraging uh in town I've been encouraging town to create a bike plan. So that's just an extension of the walkability and active mobility side of things which I would love to see incorporated. Uh uh it's already there but a stronger emphasis as you move forward. Okay. Thank you and thank you all for your late nights. Have a good night. About 20 others from the public.

I think so. everybody. We have time to Okay, so our committee will our yes our master plan re-examination subcommittee will take a look at scheduling some new events and outlining what this will look like. Um you know leaving us plenty of time to care leaving us plenty of time to have our meetings you know say September October so we can meet the November deadline. Yep. All right. Thank you. Next up, we have council referral ordinance uh 02608, which is a change to the cannabis definitions. Committee.

Uh that is Miss Wallace, Mayor Baskerville, and Miss Tally is part of it. Would you like to also join? Thought I was on it. Oh, sorry. You I thought I was Oh, the master plan subcommittee, right? Yeah. You may be. I don't We We haven't even done committee assignments. We now have a new member. Um I don't think we even did committee assignments when Miss Wallace got here. We probably need to do that. Um maybe not tonight. Yeah, if that's acceptable to the board. Totally. But we'll put that on the agenda for maybe next time if we can. But thank you. Yeah, Miss Tally's already on it. Of course she is. Yes. Yeah. But that's a good point. So, I guess this this is a bit of an ad hoc, but

yeah, if you'd like to be involved or if you think it should be the master plan committee instead, but at least this will get it started and then after we assign or reassign committee assignments, we can discuss all of the Yes. I mean, at least we have people that are like, I want to be involved. So, this is good. However, yeah. Do you want to discuss the cannabis? Oh, yeah. Well, it's I didn't prepare a memo because I think it's pretty self-explanatory. Um, this is an amendment to expand the licenses. extended the license

and when we were evaluating that question that there are some definitions that should be in the zoning ordinance to be consistent with our cannabis or so mainly this is really cleaning up our definition section in the zoning ordinance to reflect cannabis ordinance pretty straightforward and is the question before us consider consistent, you know, is this consistent with the master plan? Is that our job here? That's your job. Okay. Actually, the master plan doesn't really talk about cannabis usage.

We did mention it in the pre-examination report, at least my draft examination report, because it's a new law, you know, and we think it's consistent with kind of trying to keep our uses and our requirements up to date. What do you mean, Jean? this changing world. So yeah, so what do we we're just voting whether it's consistent with the master or evaluating whether it's consistent. This section is just a definition, right? Correct.

So I I agree with Miss Tally. Our master plan doesn't mention cannabis establishment. So maybe you're, you know, I would propose that these new definitions are not inconsistent with the master plan because I can't say it's consistent because there's nothing in it. Nothing there. Right. Right. You know, and I I searched several of the elements for can the word cannabis and couldn't find it.

We I think we only have 45 days. Is it Miss Tally? Yeah, we have 45 days from the date of the council referral. So I don't think we can wait until November. Yeah. Right. Um but certainly we can add some of this to the re-examination report because I think it is an important concept. Anybody else have any other questions, comments? Then I would move to um yeah basically what I said this is not inconsistent with the master plan. Second by Mayor Baskerville. All in favor? I

All right. Next up, we have the council referral for the ordinance to resend the Elm new mission area redevelopment plan and amend the zoning map and ordinance.

So, um, yes, I know that the planning board, we spent a lot of time creating that new zone district for the area that was formerly in the or is in the Elio Mission Street uh plan, redevelopment plan. Um and there were a couple quite a few questions at the council level. So the council tabled it. We worked it um sat down and and reworked some of the recommendations and where we ended up was there was a desire rather than to go to four stories because these are very these lots are not very deep. is immediately adjacent to an R2 family zone and the push was chance it should be the three stories. Uh so immediately we have a C I think it's the C3 zone district.

Yes. Um which permits commercial development with a maximum height of three three stories. That's what we put down Bl Avenue and it's over on Church Street. So the recommendation was to apply that for these this area on Bloomfield on the south side of Bloomfield Avenue between Grove I guess Elm Street. Elm Street and Maple Avenue. So this was introduced at the council meeting and referred here to the planning board for consistency with the master plan. Even my memo is not exactly consistent with the master plan. The master plan calls for four stories in this area stories. So that's where we are. And as a result, when this does go before a public hearing before the council, all of the individual property owners will have to be

I'm sorry. All of the what? All of the individual property owners within this area to be reszoned will be note because it's it's inconsistent with the master. It's not as part of as it stands now. They would need to be notified. No. No. If it's as a result of the master plan, they don't have to be notified. If the master plan adopted master plan calls for a zone change, you don't have to notify everybody within a that zone. That's the case. If that property is being resoneed, the ice we don't you don't have to notify. I think there's a specific um

you're if it's done as part of a master plan. I don't think so. You're wrong. But that's part of the master plan. No individuals. That's I'll find it. I'll send it to you. Okay. So most people don't know what's in the master and you're taking value away and you're not telling that's that's I mean it's the land you saw. So I don't think it's that's really not

I always thought that if someone was going to own a property on it that the owner of that property would be and never thought it's buried in some because the master plan has intent. It doesn't it's a lot of pages of non-specifics we have this sort of general objective. How do you sort of tie back that very general nature of master plan to specific intent the properties? That goes back to the master plan includes maps. The master plan includes very specific densities. So I can't I I you may disagree, but that's that's the law in New Jersey. And when we made changes as a result of the master plan, we don't identify we don't notify individual property owners. I only brought it up because I felt that this is different and we definitely will have to notify the property owners because it's it's different. It's not the natural impossible.

Well, let's look at the legal aspect. I mean, I I I'm not going to based on that general knowledge and it seems like, you know, by downing properly. If I had it um in R2 and then somewhere it said, you know, we're thinking about maybe doing this. There's no such thing as thinking about it. The master plan has a map and the map and the map is adopted and it may say this property is R2 this property is R1 that's a policy map that's the public hearing that's public and the council goes to actually spectate that they're not individual not

wait is this what are we what's the what are we voting you're not voting this is a recommendation to the council on the proposed um C3 zone. Uh um we'll we'll build that. That's all is and and the and the focus of the planning board is is this consistently let us know. So section

planning board shall be public notice of a hearing from adoption, revision or amendment to the master plan. Such notice shall be given by publication in an official newspaper in the municipality if there be or in the newspaper general circulation in the municipality at least 10 days prior to the deal. Well, what's the master plan? I'm talking about actual zone change not the master plan. What what requirement is there if council is changing zone? That's just what notice the board would be to give to discuss the master plan. So that's not my point. I see that's I think that I don't think that's what we'll look into it. Tony, I've been doing this for 40 years. I'm pretty sure that um in all my work if it's in the master plan, you make the zoning consistent with the master plan. You don't have to ident notify individual property owners. But Janice, you're saying but I don't want us to get too far off track on this specific point. If right for this specific issue, they will be noticed.

Absolutely. Okay. So, so, so these people will be noticed. These people will be noticed. We have a master plan. Yeah. And this is clearly not consistent with plans. They're saying pizza is consistent with a hot dog. It's not. That's how we Well, hang on, hang on, hang on. Mayor,

I I just have a question. So, um, considering that the areas around it, right, um, very consistent with what's there, the existing development in that area is very consistent with the C3. So, what are the options to get that particular area consistent with what is in close proximity to it is what I I need to know. What are my choices? I understand and receive that, you know, it's not consistent with the zoning as it as it stands now. So, what are what are the options? Because I believe that the purpose and intent was to get it consistent with what is there.

I think the planning what you need to do as a planning board is decide is if this zone change is consistent with the purposes of the master plan. Now I'm saying tech my opinion is technically it's not because this is three stories and the master calls for four stories. However, the master plan also calls for context uh appropriate scale and neighborhood preservation and it does call for reducing the height although in here it's going from six to four and this is 63. So it's kind of sorry this is six to three you said Janice right? This is six to three. Yeah. The plan of master's going from six to a new zone which is what we've done. We we developed

what's a central valley something you said earlier when you were going there was that three story the village the village what's the village three story okay so this is consistent with the village right so but it's not shown in the village category on the map maps are important the map we learned how important max stories the question and honestly you know that these these properties are very narrow. They some of the other business districts are bigger and they're um bordered by streets. Here you have a sixstory zone immediately adjacent to an arts zone, right?

So it's a little bit different and that's why very different. I didn't feel that going from four stories to three stories was such a problem because it's immediately adjacent to the R2 zone right behind. There's no street there. There's no other separation. So maybe think of and we were trying to those side streets. Even though the master plan calls for four stories here, is there is it is the idea of four stories consistent with maybe the transitional perspective

scale? I if we're about to do an ask why wouldn't we just that because the council because the the council introduced this ordinance and you are being asked to comment on it Janice from a practical standpoint 45 days but also Janice from a practical standpoint if uh somebody were to submit an application now they are subject to six right now. So, so the council would want to minimize how many applications could be submitted as six stories. How long is it?

Uh, I don't know. It's been six stories since 1920. It's a leech building. So, it's not they've changed some other things in the area and they're looking to change side over to R2. So back to R2. So by changing this to lower I I'm going to be I mean appropriate scale contact an appropriate scale. Part of what we did, we first went to the council. What the suggestion is it's taking the C1 zone on Bartley Street because we was back several blocks, right?

Jason, right across the street from it's the R2 zone. So, I think all of this is trying to make better neighborhood R2 basic R2 on both sides of Street and keeping the more intense development, more appropriate development. Yeah, you have almost like a standalone sixstory building, right? You know, surrounded by lowrise. It's very odd. What are the options? What are the options, Janice, in terms of a vote? What are the options?

If if say for example, I'm interested in doing that, right? But then you say no because this says that it has to be something else. What are the options? Well, it doesn't matter what the planning board does though because the council can also go along with that or really we can't I mean really I just want to know their options here is is the planning board what are options for the planning board if we were to master plan yeah yeah what are those options I mean the office has to make a decision as to really on its consistency with the master plan

and then the council O can um he heed the planning board's recommendation or they can do their own go separate from the planning board's recommendation do what they want as long as they see the reasons. So we can state some reasons that while this, you know, was consistent because of the um appropriate scale or something else that that we feel that it'd be in the benefit of the neighborhood not to and then vote against it. But the plan just said,

I'm sorry. I'm just trying to understand because there's some stuff only. Yeah, like they did a like having a

that's the council and we can we already did and we will do it but the planning board should as a body look out for its own prerogatives and frankly I wasn't on this body but like there was a lot of work done a lot of work done it doesn't get paid attention to but it'd be nice to lay a marker down and just say this is what we and earlier on that this body had decided on the CMC wasn't involved in making it but there was work that went into it. So just to recognize that this is not the master plan which is what the exercise right now is about. Does it conform to the master plan? Answer it's okay it will pass but clearly the plan and the plan will be updated but the plan as it's written now says

yeah I just have one practical question. If we were to vote No, I'm not saying everybody's been No, I'm sorry. I'm not saying everybody's been impractical. I maybe technical sorry, maybe a technical question, not practical. No, no, no. But technically speaking, if we were to vote that this uh were uh in conformance with master plan, would these people be notified still or is it only if we vote that it's interest? I would still notify them. They would still be notified either. Either way, I think you either have to notify they have to be either way. That's that's just what I was uh

I'm reading from 40 55 62.1 changeable boundaries and conditions exclusive of the classification of battery recommended examination of the master plan is required at least 10 days prior to exclusive of what's in the master plan. If you're changing the zone command 40 55 I could be wrong it's best the first paragraph of it says that you have to give notice with respect to mass plan then it goes on to say if you're changing zoning exclusive of what the master said you have to get sense

that makes sense but if it's if it's part of the national plan you go it says if I can just interject I think it's a good question to raise I don't think we need to debate it.

My point is that the reason why this law exists is that we're devaluing these properties. People will be know just by general. No one's ever built a seam prop. No one's ever built seen one. It just doesn't work. So we're tagging ourselves against something that has never happened. The big stuff happening. Maybe there's been some seport stuff. It's really hard. These properties are really shallow. Um, this zone calls for 60 foot bricks. Very few of these properties have 60 foot bricks that call for what's the minimum lot 6,000 previous size lot sizes. So, this seems really may not fit what's there as well. We were, you know, we we got this um aversion from these elements which um there would be like well the see what I know never never happened maybe the C4 is happening someplace there's a four story but I I guess

yeah there is a story yeah there is a story there's one story on on so you know the the steps and then I think there's like a zone that we've got. Wow. There there's one part of this which says that the back of the property or something. So I think we need to kind of talk through this

the C3 I'm sorry. So we're going from what you know we're going from C1 all up and down um the recommendation would go to a CD now but even the dimensions minimum dimensions of the C3 still don't think so it's not the only building unless they be saw and then they smaller than the average size. You can't park. That's a whole another

so I think what's going on the other are you know what's happening in the neighborhood is that people are taking our properties and they're causing the damage with the properties that are in the bar. They're taking these um simple houses and building those out in the R zone. That's that's the casual. That's what's happening. The damage isn't being done in C1. So, we're we're stressing out about what's happening with C1. But

Tony, question. Could there be a situation? I'm I'm gen genuinely asking. Wasn't the Eagle Lounge combined with another building and then he was able to build bigger um because they were then able to park the larger structure, right? Couldn't they combine? I'm trying to remember. It's been a little while, right? That was really deep, right? But could they potentially I know there's more shallow lots, but could there be a situation where you buy a couple of blocks and put them together and build something uh six stories? Probably could, right? And a lot, you know, you think about having to drive in Yeah.

ramp circular you need a pretty good size. And I think that the pseudo deaths not they're not very deep that go back to that. But we've seen some some uh uh applications that squeezed in quite a bit, right? Uh that didn't really feel like they necessarily fit the lot, right? But but they were designed well enough where they

I do it. No, understood. But nothing happens till it does, right? And and I think we we should prepare for we should still prepare for it in case um because especially next to a to an R2, right? You could have this monstrosity next to a a transitional uh zone. So that's that's all I'm saying. This has already been factored in by the council and the council has already introduced. Okay. And that's one. This is this vote is for discussion really about the project planning board needs to give advice and and like it's a huge deal. Yeah. But I think you know if we're having the discussion about the master plan it's going to mean something. Yeah.

And at least try to make it mean something so that it's you know that's all it is. It's gonna happen. Yeah. Right. I mean 61 61

I'd like to ask question. So even though you know this week's criteria, I am convinced that the negative criteria outweighs the criteria that it meets and blah blah blah. Then is that the situation because I know sometimes I don't know when right you say the negative criteria outweighs the criteria so therefore I want to vote no because of boom boom is that here or that's something different that's something can you explain to me when you would use that when would you use the negative criteria

that's the analysis for positive criteria and negative so I couldn't This doesn't separate. Oh, thank you. You could you can decide whatever you'd like. I mean, or whatever. No, I'm just trying to find out, you know, when you So, you're not really given an option if it's like like that. You know what I'm saying? That's what I'm trying to find out. Are there options?

There are. I mean, this I mean, it's it's on its face, it's a yes no question, right? We don't have to stick to that. You know, in the past we've said it's generally consistent or like we just did half an hour ago, it's not inconsistent with. So, it's not a a yes or no. And then the other part of of the require not requirements, the options the planning board has is we can make that determination for consistency and then provide any other recommendations we would like to the council. That's the other option we have

including the fact that they should move forward quickly when likely reexamination because once they do that of the master plan then that might change the whole thing. But that's not going to happen until at least November, right? So the council probably will act sooner than that. I think, you know, to to Tony's point and a couple other members of this body, I think one of the recommendations should be that the property owners get notice regardless of for sure. You know, what what the law requires, but I think that is a recommendation that I'm hearing from this body

to the council and you know, the council can do what the council wants with that recommendation. Um, but I think it's Yeah, I mean it sounds like you are, but I just I feel like we want to put that in writing. Every time we make a change to the zoning ordinance, you know, increasing lot sites, we do not notify the property change and and I think, you know, I think we'll have a separate, you know, maybe Mr. will look into the details and you know maybe we have a further discussion on it but I think here we are very important

where we had a building had And we have a plan that has never been implemented because it's a bad plan. Correct. And we were trying to correct correct. So is this any question among the board right now that I don't hear that? Yes. I I should be corrected now because I don't think we lose ever neighborhoods to stay. No, I mean I'm correct. I mean to this that that we that we have we have we had two family neighborhoods right

were being squeezed and attacked and we were very concerned about it as it happened and we wanted to prevent it happening to the rest of the neighborhood. We said this is a bad plan that never really did change correct because it was a bad plan and we did this to change that and correct

and now I think we've talked for a long time and I'm wondering if you still agree that we should be doing this. Yes, I think that let's do your question and I respect that your question is a little different from mine because it's not whether they should be our two. It definitely should be but so more consistent with that would be the C3 because they're trying to bring it down so that it all merges into one thing for better sight lines and relig you know how to do that. Scott, is there any question about what you're talking about? That's 100%.

If I could if I could maybe address your your question, Miss Willis, I I think this body agreed that the recision of the Elm new Mission Street redevelopment plan was appropriate. Yeah. I think what we're talking about here is what replaces it, right? We have to have zoning that will replace that plan. And the question is, you know, if we we do nothing per se or if the council does nothing, it becomes, I believe, C1, right, Miss Tally? Yeah. So, it would become C1. This wouldn't be Well, if if the if the council simply rescended the plan, it would become C1.

But we said here what we wanted to be. That's what I'm correct. So we spent time it's not going to be C1 because we have already said it's going to be but it went went back to the council and the council had different correct we we said CD was our recommendation and the council decided introduced an ordinance that said C3 instead of the CD that we recommended. So now

it's back to the planning board to evaluate the C3. I was asking them though why were they bringing it back to the planning board because they're already held on they want this to be C3 uh because um you know um councelor Harrison and councelor Toller had a very thought out their their opinion right and so there was like some of the council people were that and some were like you know but then they came back here so I don't understand like basic ificantly different from what? Yes. But so what if it goes back to them, right? And they vote they vote to have the C3, then what? C3. It's going it's going to pass.

So it's just going like this because we say something like this is just the truth, which is that this does not conform with the master plan. However, it does substantively conform with the planning board's vision of the recision with a new zoning thing. Yeah, I'm not so certain we have to say it doesn't. I think people would be justified to vote that it does confirm considering that it's a transi it's a transition into that R2 zone, the decision and then the the C3 zone. I I don't see that as necessarily being inconsistent. I get How do you say that?

I like to kick because I have to try to kick. Yeah. No, I understand. I don't know. I think a sixtory building in that zone is inconsistent. So the change, right? But the change is still we've been recommending you know C4 forever, right? going down to suggestions on how to technically but I think in the spirit you're talking I don't know that it's just getting ideas

I was just well just because we are still recording even though we don't have our own microphone so we just need to make sure it's one person at a time I don't know sorry you all want to finish that I was just going to say I don't maybe I think we've kind of come to an Eric is okay with me um council tomorrow is okay with me saying uh it it may not be inconsistent with the spirit of the master plan which has been advocating for lower uh heights in the that's technically it is it is objectively or technically

technically it's inconsistent I think to the spirit of that's fine more or less except for the transit Okay. Mr. Ian Wallally had maximize density, right? They're saying they want more density. Don't say

look at the C3 that's on elements around it has no R2 around it. That's the gas station. There's C1 across on it. It's also going to be across from a highly developed one. So, you know, and that's a that's a really deep property that, you know, could um could sustain sustain more development C3. Again, it doesn't mean it's on the corner. It's the larger property that's on the corner. Fire. Yeah.

And everything else that's there. My point is that that city, those don't abide R2. It's also across from C1 across Elm and it's across Avenue from the new plan. So that corner with the intensity of blockana C1 across the fact that this corner that C3 is not adjacent to R2. I would argue that that could be and maybe these which are closer to the R2 stay that way that way out of this.

Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. It's next to bullet, right? Yeah. And it's not nowhere near an R2 and it's consistent with what else happened around it. I don't disagree with that. And I think they were moving, you know, trying to move down the street to get a street going all the way down would be very consistent with Sorry, Jan. You would recommend putting those that block of properties at the corner of Elfield in the proposed CD zone, which is Well, it could be C1. There's C1 right across the street on that, you know, in that corner that that could remain C1. you got lock. So I guess my feeling is um

we want more dense by the school though. We wanted that that by the school right and by the entrance to the school which is the death trap and then we have right on the corner of that block. Yeah. A lot of schools with little kids. Yeah. I'd be concerned about that one. Yeah. Yeah. Is there C2 down, right?

But they line up there. There was testimony that they'd line up there. The car they do warning. There's always backlog and right the kids go down to the other corner which has a prek where right on the corner that's at Washington Street right no I'm talking about Maple and right that one right there's so many schools with kids in that area I thought that that that corner could be what he's thinking about school

yeah that's fair but yeah I think we should we should careful way that we're not but in a way I think you had not the word but the spirit or you said that you said it the spirit I was borrowing the council boards from earlier but I mean I'm still struggling because the master plan the master plan's corner transit oriented development and so this down zoning right here I'm not saying it's a bad idea I'm just saying it's not it's not in conformity with the plan, which is fine if we just say it's not in conformity. We're still going to do it, but it's true.

We don't have to agree. We can give or separate recommendations. Say one counselor felt this, one counselor, one board member felt that. Just because quite often there's inconsistencies in the master plan. The master plan promotes transit oriented development. Master plan promotes neighborhood preservation and it doesn't say maximize transit density, right? So transit oriented development conflicts with neighborhood preservation. So we could say that explicitly doesn't wait. I want to hear what you're saying because I'm hearing that. So I'll just say that the planet was conflicted about the consistency. That's a great way to put good way to put it. Pleasantly very good. Excellent.

There's one more. Yeah. One more. Wait, wait, wait. But what do we have to do to resolve this to wrap this up? Where do we put how do we put a bow on this? Well, I think what we're going to do is I'm going to take what you said prepare a resolution for the next meeting which is on uh the 27th and Okay. So, you'll have a resol a resolution and we can make sure we agree with it and get it to the council and I think the council's scheduling public hearing on March 5th. So, that'll work. Okay. Way to go, Jen. Comments, too. Just fine. I just want to get the resolution back to the planning board meeting. I think it's good.

We're not we're not going to vote on it right now. We're going to get a resol a draft resolution that we can discuss at the next meeting and then we'll vote at the next meeting. We're still okay. Okay. Correct. Good work team. All right. Moving on. We have our council referral for an area need of rehabilitation study for 14 Miller Street. It should be very quick. Oh, those are the motion. You had to

we purchased this property and we've been trying to sell it for affordable housing in order to to to prepare an RFP um with the with the options that we want. Attorney said you need to do a redevelopment stand. So this is a perfect example of an area in need of rehabilitation. We've done scattered site revel for um properties to be rehabilitated uh and affordable housing. This was affordable from home. So essentially um it does meet the criteria for an area needation. Daniel here did the research finding that the utilities are more than 50 years old and in need of repair which is is is in is is a situation on this property. So I think it's a very simple decision whether or not you recommend the council the area of rehabilitation.

I'd like to make a motion that we Yes. Questions. What is the benefit like as opposed to the contract just doing they bought it? We can't we have to sell it to the highest bidder if what if we don't do it for redevelopment and that could be turn it into market. Yeah. You can't put controls on. You want to put controls. We want to do it. That's all the rehabilit. Okay. Thank you. I made a motion that that we accept that. There's a second. Is it Well, I mean I I dis I just Well, I was going to say I disagree, but that's that's okay. Oh, okay. Okay. So, can I like to hear you?

Oh, okay. Um I I'm fine if the board folks No, I want to hear you. It's important. It's just for for me and I appreciate the intent of doing this. I'm on board with that. I just I don't I don't think to me personally that I can say that just because something is you know has old infrastructure that well a I didn't see that the Mr. Pera said it was in need of repair. He said well 100 years old so yeah it probably has to be in need of repair but didn't really make that. So to me it doesn't qualify for that reason.

And I also think that well the whole township could qualify under this and I'm not really sure that's what we're supposed to be doing. There are municipalities situation where they just do the whole town. They do the whole town. It's not unheard of. Okay. Because there's no this doesn't give any the rights of any pilots. Basically it just gives you the opportunity. I'm I'm not even looking at from that. I know you're very technical. I'm I'm Yeah, I am being very technical on this. As much as I agree with I like that. Give me a best argument for why uh why is it dilapidated? What if you have

Well, we we had some um frozen pipes that have bursts because it's in a very right now it's in a serious state of disrepair. Yeah. when I did my visit um to try it's a three family house and uh the rooms are very awkward. It's not a good You mean that the the the level like it's settled and the way that they're giving up, you know, you have some rooms with no windows, you know, and it's not good housing. Yeah. I think they would do much better. Yeah. And make it historically.

Now you're speaking my language. Yes. I know it's the Miller Street historic district. We can do it. No, I I I think the burst pipes and the uh the no windows in the rooms is a problem. Let me recognize your um Congress to put restrictions on the sale. Let me just articulate that. And here are the here are the I can't I can't tell you. This is what our legal council our council told me that Janice you can't do an RFP for this. You can you can only restrictions and then choose the new owner

but we don't we want to choose the design we want to choose the you know the how this is structured I think better architecturally and we can also we can also um put up parameters for what kind of affordable housing you want this to be right yes I'd like to have that option that can't be articulated in the from the property. I mean, why do you have to do the whole process? If there's an attempt, do something articulate what the parameters are that for the sale and then too. Yeah,

that's not a conversation for me. Attorney said, Janice, you can't do this. You have to do this is the direction you were told to go. That's all I can other single. Yes, we have scattered site redevelopment programs. Many towns do that. It's it's it's quite common and that gives the township a lot more flexibility when they go out, you know, to to to negotiate with out of structure.

So, the mayor made a motion and I think it was seconded and thirded. Right. You locked yourself in. Yeah. So, I think we had our discussion. So, um all in favor? Okay. We'll do roll call. Baskerville. Yes. Mayor Baskerville. Yes. That was fine. Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Campbell. Yeah. Councelor Demato. No. Miss G. Ain Mr. Graham. Yes.

I I can't get from the law. I can't see how it needs a definition. No. Um Phillips wallet. Yes. Chair. No. One, two, three. Five. Yes. So it passes. All right. Do we have any committee reports? No. Okay, great. Uh, do we have bills? I didn't see any bills. No, I do the bills. That's okay. The attorney, we may not have an attorney.

11:00. I would move to adjourn. Second. Bye. All right. Have a good night everyone.