Planning Board - Regular Meeting

okay we're on this is the pompin Lakes planning board meeting of February 18 2025 the following is is the agenda of the meeting to be held at the municipal building February 18 at 7:30 p.m. formal written advaned notice is required by njsa 10 col 4-1 at SEC has been provided of this meeting at least 48 hours in advance of today giving the time date and location and to the extent known at the time the agenda of this meeting such notice stated that formal action may or may not be taken the notice was posted on the bulletin board outside of the offices of the municipal clerk reserved for this and other similar announcements provided to the Suburban Trends the newspaper designated by the burrow Council to receive such notices and filed with the burrow clerk please stand for a pledge of allegiance I pledge alleg to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with libery and justice for all good evening all good evening uh first thing tonight we have Oath of Office to be given to John keing as the class 2 one-ear term ending 12 3125 Sean bsma alternate number one two-year term to 20 12 3126 and Chris Foster alternate number two to fill an unexpired term until J December 31st uh 2026 mayor okay guys you want to stand up ra your head we're missing one he's not here yet so I don't he's he's first meeting so maybe you got Pi okay I just texted um I State your names Sean

bozma do solemnly swear do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey I will bear true faith and Allegiance I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same to the same to the governments established and to the governments established in the united states in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people I will Faithfully I will faithfully impartially impartially and justly and justly perform all the duties of perform all the duties of planning board member planning board member according to the best of my ability to the best my so help me God so help me God thank you guys for your time thank you thanks mayor thank you welcome gentlemen sign you give it to me and I'll make okay okay first item on the agenda is a roll call may we have a roll call please yes Mr Simone here Mr Otto here Mr tro here Mr uh Dr pendexter here Mr Balby here Mr keading here mayor Sarah here councilwoman kilberg here uh Mr bzma here and Chris Foster is absent he's not in yet so he's not absent yet well okay I'll put a question mark okay and we have Miss Crystal okay good to go mhm okay okay regular minutes of the reorganization and regular meeting minutes for January 21 2025 may I have um a motion forther approval of that please motion motion by Mr tro second

second by Miss BBY any comments questions reservations all in favor sign by saying I I any opposed thank you thank you all right there's several correspondents here tonight first one is a memo from the municipal clerk dated January 22 appointment approved by mayor and Council of Chris wster as alternate number two second one Memo from Elizabeth bris notice of introduction of ordinance 2 2025 an ordinance of the buau of Bloomingdale in the county of fa sake and state of New Jersey amending chapter 92 zoning of the burrow of Bloomingdale number three Riverdale permit application from daral fski Engineering Associates uh number four is a memo from Elizabeth Brandis municipal clerk dated February 12 forwarding resolutions 25- 9596 and 97 approved by the mayor and Council for Award of contracts or professionals another Memo from municipal clerk ordinance number 2511 an ordinance amending the downtown pumpin Lake R development plan as codified in 19084 of the code of the burrow of Pompton Lakes and the last item is a newbie it's a uh application from colar engineering regarding Dupont place over acid Brook in Pompton Lakes for fresh qu wetlands and flood Hazard area application notice to neighboring land owners uh let's see okay so

tonight we're considering a u change to the Redevelopment plan that was recommended by them and went to the mayor council for first reading on the first reading it's merely a an approval to send it to the planning board which was required for our review to determine whether it's consistent with the master plan this particular application applies to a single property in the Redevelopment area consisting of 601 AQ Avenue which is the old gas station that's across the street from the shopping center since it was forwarded to us for discussion and recommendation and ours is a recommendation back to the council it is not a mandate uh what I'm going to do is have our planner discuss uh what went on with that and how it got here what changes are being requested and then after she's complete we'll have questions from the public and the members of the board and then we'll have a discussion and then finally we make a vote um if we choose to do there's a resolution prepared and that goes back to the council for their next meeting so with that said it's all yours okay um yeah to help to help everybody better the draft is um highlighted of what cers is going to be discuss discussing for 61 if you to help you out yeah so this um as background as to who has um responsibility over what in terms of Redevelopment plans um this applicant for 61 has been before the Redevelopment Agency for some time presenting concept plans um and having um multiple meetings

with the Redevelopment agency to go over what those plans involved and what sort of um amendments to the existing V2 Zone they would need the once the Bri development agency was on board the I wrote the Amendments as requested and the um Council then is responsible for adopting them or not um before they adopt them they send them to you guys the planning board for consideration as it relates to their master plan so I I'll go over with you what all of the amendments are but really what you should be commenting on in your recommendation to the council is if it is consistent with the master plan um if the council then um votes favorably and adopts these amendments you will see this again in the form of a site plan application just like any regular old site plan that comes to this body so um as part of the process that was before the Redevelopment agency I I um I didn't bring bring plans um because you're not reviewing the site plan at this point but it's a a multistory um multif Family Residential Building um with surface parking um however they did need amendments that includes um the permission to have ground floor residential uses currently um the Redevelopment um zoning requires ground floor commercial the applicant has um put forth the belief that because this is on the edge of the Zone um it and

setb um it's not an ideal location for commercial uses um there are also a number of bulk amendments that they are requesting um a maximum height of four stories and 50 ft and a minimum rear yard setback of 4T um they are asking for front yard parking typically parking is prohibited in the in the front yard because typically we are seeing ground floor commercial at the street front typical to a downtown um you know scenario which is not which is not what they are um proposing to do um there are some setbacks for that parking um that they need to have amended to allow that to come up to the lot line can we interrupt you just for one moment sure I'd like to get Chris sworn in so he can sit in on this hand stand up hand con I state your name I Chris fosta do solemnly swear do solemly swear that I'll support the Constitution of the United States that I'll support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey I will bear true faith and Allegiance I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same to the same and to the governments established to the governments established in the United States states in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people I will Faithfully I will faithfully impartially impartially and justly and justly perform all the duties of perform all the duties of office of planning board office of planing board according to the best mind voting according to the best mind vo so help me go so help me go congratulations thank thank welcome to the board thank thank you okay so um they're asking for um modifications to the parking setback so that they can bring it up to the lot

line um a a provision to allow parking to be satisfied offsite um and the parking requirement would be one space per Studio efficiency or one bedroom and two spaces for two bedroom um loading docks short-term loading um shall not interfere with any circulation that's typical um refu shall be screened or stored inside a building um and the unit size um Studio or efficiency shall be 500 sare ft one bedroom residences shall be a minimum of 625 ft² and two bedroom residences shall have a minimum of 940 sare ft um again these are all um standards that the applicant um and the Redevelopment agency to together agreed upon um I just put them into this format to to fit into your um Redevelopment plan within the zoning code um now also as I mentioned it's your responsibility to um determine if this is in keeping with your master plan so I did I looked at your 2007 master plan which is essentially um replicated in your 2017 examination um so two things that I found in there um is uh downtown revitalization goal is to revitalize the downtown business district through Market driven Redevelopment initiatives that will Foster private development and um then in discussion about downtown Redevelopment um there's um it's not a goal but it's sort of a vision that Redevelopment areas facing one another

on both sides of WQ Avenue will create a balanced unifying sense of place um so I I extracted that content from your master plan to um give an example of how these amendments um are consistent with your master plan um with regard to the changes that have being requested um you went over them but just to compare them for example um with the parking there's some offsite parking with this that they are allowed to have offsite parking okay I just want to make sure that people understand that part of this application includes insufficient number on the site supplemented by out offsite yes and then also can you give us the changes that were made in the square footage of the H living units to compare what would have been had this amendment not been requested to what is being requested let me I know that's in here let me find it I might have to pull up your code on my device [Applause] oh here here we are okay it otherwise requires a one-bedroom to have 650 Square ft and I have lowered that to

500 um it required a two-bedroom to have 950 50 and this was 940 um oh wait I apologize the one bedroom was seven I apologize the one bedroom was 650 650 and now it is 625 the 500 is for a studio efficiency unit which was not even um wasn't consider it wasn't considered yeah so the 500 is new completely right and you're saying that the one bedroom's gone from 650 to 625 yes and two bedom from 950 to 940 exactly okay uh are there any other significant deviations that we can compare or should compare I mean there's the height which is 50 ft here mhm and it was should have I should have made a side by side chart I will do that next time um looks like it was four stories in 60 ft no no no no no just kidding I apologize [Applause] [Music]

okay [Applause] [Music] [Music] they bu something that I'm going to have to pull that up on my device and you'll have to give me a minute sure and besides the uh um there's a lot of little things in here that change like the front yard parking I mean it's it's kind of a unique lot so it's not like you have a lot of flexibility um and and beside you know this is what's been approved so we're not really commenting on whether we like it or not we're just saying it's it's either consistent or it's not and uh the elevation changes um shouldn't be anything major and the square footage seemed to be more of a Dom Minimus change this isn't proved yet this is a recommendation yes whether it's consistent we're all all we're saying is is what's being requested here which was read by first reading right all right it's consistent so if we had a a requirement of th000 square ft and somebody was offering 100 square ft then it's not consistent we could say that to the council and they can choose to accept it or ignore it so we're not we're not approving any numbers here I'm just looking to see how much things changed by so we can make a fair determination of consistency does that make sense yes

that's correct it's a very limited thing that we're doing here it's just a comparison of consistency like like said has has the uh is the introduction of a new studio or efficiency space is that a large deviation as in that before that one bedroom is the lowest that an apartment could go to it's a change and and I was going to get to that one when we're done on this because we're not looking for changes from the zoning plan we're looking for consistency with the master plan so even if there was a significant change from the zoning code that's not that doesn't that doesn't mean it's inconsistent with the master plan there's two separate documents okay so I mean the master plan does not put forth bulk type standards it's it's more a vision as to the development of the downtown um and it would be one thing if it said um that buildings should be three stories and we're asking for 10 then that's inconsistent with the master plan but the master plan is not says nothing about what type of units or sizes of units so there's no just the fact that it's residential units as compared to for example manufacturing with like if they didn't want that in the master plan it wouldn't be there yeah but I mean it's just not even addressed in the master plan so it can't possibly be be inconsistent if it's not even mentioned okay well the height of um four stories in 5050 feet uh reflects basically four stories of residential units um that's not again inconsistent with what the master plan had in

mind when it said about residential multif family right certainly because the master plan is asking for multif family residential if we were putting some if if a developer was putting something in there that was all single family homes then we would say that's not consistent um because it's a different use entire um entirely whereas and one of the inconsistencies if you will uh that is being not any but one of the changes if you will is having no no commercial on the first floor right and that and that is that is something that you could comment on absolutely and and there again there's reasons given why they want to do that and as long as we feel it's consistent in general we can still say that this does not conflict with the master plan as we say it's not inconsistent not inconsistent correct I love the double negative all right but for now don't worry about it I apologize I should have had that front of me and it just didn't occur to me okay so that's basically the essence of it and um the property is unique um in that it sits uh basically landlocked between a Street uh two streets the wanu river and a property behind it so the site is what the site is and uh you've got the information in front of you about what is being changed requested to be changed and and for a recommendation so at this point I think I would like to get comments from the members of the board as to uh whether they have any questions and if Kristen can answer those um to

our satisfaction then we can go to the public and get a comments from them and then make a decision so does board member have questions regarding the U consistency with the master plan so I'm all understanding correctly about everything I said consistency for square footage is pretty close the consistency for the height is pretty close and it's really just the the retail but as chrisan was saying it's more of the Z that's more of the zoning aspect of it I'm just trying to this has a long history this this project took a while to form and I just want people to have an idea of what what they're proposing because it helps to put it in perspective but the main thing I guess on this one is is um is that there's uh no commercial I mean that's probably the main that is the main thing um the so really what's your looking at is I I'll I'll put it into my own words so I'm I'm not quoting the master plan here so so don't um don't use this verbatim but your master plan looks at creating uh an active vibrant downtown with mixed use with with residential and Commercial uses um in order to do that that is normally done with a mixed use building ground floor commercial and residential above or maybe some office um this applicant is looking to have a fully residential building that is set back from the street which um it is now your responsibility to say do those changes namely the fact that instead of being on the street there will be parking between the building and the street and the fact that it will be a multif family Residential Building rather than a mixed use building do those two changes deviate from the master plan to

such to such an extent that it is no longer consistent with the vision of the master plan or can they still work within that vision and in the broader picture still um further the goals of the master plan in terms of creating this downtown okay that's good summary yeah well you you're referring you're always referring to commercial use okay in the master plan and master plan in 2511 that the council just introduced right here in paragraph B which is 1984 uh zoning districts it it's talks about you know commercial but it also talks about quality Community facilities Town hasn't had a team Center or any kind of civic center since this place damaged this one we haven't had a teen center since the roof almost CED in on the building has there been an thought given to creating a first floor Community type floor you know some area over there for the community's use well first off the Civic Center we just got our permits today to start the Civic sener to back so the Civic CER will be back in the next month or two back to being a Civic Senate um a team Center the Recreation Commission at this time doesn't believe we need a team Center that's why they went away from the team Center they don't want to have a team Center anymore uh so there's no need for it at this moment just give you guys that information was that because of lack of use I get showing up that staff costs high costs and now I understand there's an agreement with Wayne well there's two separate things we do um uh Team dance once a month at the BFW that the BFW U lends us their space and we have a dance once a uh month for the kids Fifth Fifth Grade to 8th grade and then yes a new

Arrangement is being worked out with way YMCA right now to use their building at the residential rate in W for our pres so at least they have a place to go if they are so so I just I'm trying to understand this all so this property needs if I'm not mistaken nine different Varian so who if if you don't give who gives those variances the assumtion it was the planning board it's not variances it's an amendment to the zoning all nine of them yes this is the the document that was distributed is an amendment to the zoning code but why is it an amendment to the zoning code well to the Redevelopment plan sorry but but why is it an amendment to that if I were a homeowner and I wanted to do this on my home in town I'd have to go for a variant and I'd have to notify everybody within 200 ft of my property to to say I want to make these changes are you okay with it Mr neighbor are you okay with Mr neighbor you know that's that would be the the route that I would have to take as alar so it kind of seems to me like that should be the same route when the guy from the car wash came and he wanted variances instead of us creating an amendment to the code we made him go through very this is a Redevelopment plan not just the code so it works slightly differently yes but we don't have to amend or the council doesn't have yeah I mean it's up to the council it's um they can say go this route instead the council can say no okay yeah I don't I guess I was under the assumption that it would come here and you would take each one individually and no the the only thing that this body looks at is consistency with the master plan that's it very limited capacity it's just consistency that's it that's what we're here to decide today and then at some point if

everything goes through they come back here for site plan review however the site plan review is also a limited process on the planning board so for example we can't turn around at the pl at the if they came back here we couldn't turn around and say no we don't want to have um the elevation be that high or you know we want 10 units instead of 15 un we won't be able to change that the the limitations on the planning board after a Redevelopment change is going to be limited to the functional part of the property so it's either all or nothing this is a recommendation board so they're going to make a recommendation that's all the best they can do recomend but I mean so if there's nine different see I was under the assumption and I heard the word I went to Redevelopment meeting so I know that the word variance was being thrown around if there was nine of them it's not like they can say well we don't like this one and we're so we're going to say yes to eat and no to one they would either it's all or nothing well the the governing body could look at this and say we're not comfortable with this and we don't want to we we we want it to be either not adopted or modified that could be the governing body could do that but not us but not us but there's there a big difference between a property that's within one of the Redevelopment areas and a regular property where Tim or I live that that's really the Crux of it the planning board process for normal projects doesn't go to the council doesn't go to Redevelopment agency it comes here we get to take it from beginning to end and it can be appeal depending on what we decide but other than that you know the decisions are all made here we're

allowed to Grant certain variances here some of the variances have to go to the zoning board so other than Redevelopment areas what you're talking about that's what happens so you don't really have a say in any of this in the Redevelopment areas which includes all the middle of town and there's the other areas on the ex on the ex U extended limits of it on those properties we do not have the same level of approval that that is done at the Redevelopment agency so when it comes to us it has is right to say preapproved conditions if you want to call it that that we can't change other ones though we can say well you know you guys proposed an entry onto the street but we don't like you know the width of it or we don't like the landscaping or we don't like the fact that um you know there's a site problem we can bring those things up but we can't change the basic concept of the building so the number of units the height of the building the square footage of the units those are all predetermined that's only Redevelopment that that's has yes well because yeah yeah I mean if it's helpful I can specifically read to you the section of the statute 40 a Col 12 a-7 um subsection e which is specifically what we're doing this evening that would be helpful to everybody to hear if you have any questions about you know the the verbiage of the statute let me know um prior to the adoption of a Redevelopment plan or revision or Amendment theto the planning board shall transmit to the governing body within 45 days after referral a report containing its recommendation concerning the Redevelopment plan this report shall include an identification of any provisions in the proposed Redevelopment

plan which are inconsistent with the master plan and recommendations concerning these inconsistencies and any other matters as the born deems appropriate so that's all we're doing it's basically you know all or nothing like you said and we're just looking at you know are these consistent with the master plan that's it and this recommendation one way or another that we're making to the council you know they can either take it or leave our recommendation but this is just you know prescribed in you know the law that this is you know a function of the planning board which you know the governing body can consider take it or leave it and I'm sure the Redevelopment agency during its extended process because it took quite a few meetings right during they've gone over a lot of these things and I'm sure there were proposals that were not approved or not agreed to and other things that were agreed to there was some discussion about some of these reasons for the U for the variances that they have proposed um let's face it the site like as I said earlier it's an awkward inconsistent site in the sense that it's bounded it's irregular it's in an area where there's uh control by the county by the burrow by the state because of freshwater wetlands um it's kind of like an eyesore at this point I mean it's been basically unkempt for I don't know how many years and um you know we've got this nice shopping center across the way okay so it's a way of helping that area it's really going to be a matter of opinions as to whether this board is okay with it ultimately recommending something back to the council and whether the council is in favor of it and you know I don't see anything in there that's jumping out and saying oh my God would they approve so

um I think you want more further discussion I I certainly would in entertain additional comments or questions from the board members may I may I add some but just as long as it limits to what you said yes which is again just looking at the consistency between the master plan and the ordinance Redevelopment plan changes um also the planning board has the ability to alongside of making a consistency determination to also make some additional recommendations as well that have to be you know the whole board has to agree to them so they can be sort of additional pieces you know say okay we find it consistent but X Y and Z you can also you know there are some some recommendations that you all would like to make and agree upon it can't just be a recommendation from one specific member it has to be you know the whole planning board agreeing to that recommendation that will be included in the resolution you know determining consistency or not okay so would I be able to make some I don't want to say comments but just kind of restate my understanding of of what we are doing because I do have have uh a kind of flowchart and a series of things that I think that this board is going to be looking at and I'm just uh trying to say this in the air that way I you know get a sense of if I'm on the right track am I allowed to do that okay right um so it it seems like just not a vend diagram not not a not a vend diagram it's it's not exhaustive by any means but it it seems to me like the the process that we're looking at here is we do understand that this is a a special case lot we understand that we're trying to make some exceptions to make something get done to contribute to the master plan but I I think the two questions that we are looking at is one is this lot actually a special case do we think that it is you know something

that uh you know we have to kind of make an exception for you know to get a vision pushed through you know we we could uh talk about that the Reg shape stuff like that and then two do these recommended changes comply with the uh the vision that is given in the master plan and then of the changes in that second part you know if we if we decide that this is a special case this is something that needs to be amended here are the things that I've heard from everyone else that jump out to me and you can let me know if I'm missing anything or misunderstanding anything uh the first thing that I see that jumps out is that there is no first floor commercial space we are looking for a vibrant unified downtown usually that involves a decent amount of people living in the space that is made up with the residential but we do not have anything you know for the community at the bottom it might be out of the way so we might not need that anyway two we do not have any alternative Community oriented space that would take up the space of a commercial space on the first floor we brought up the idea of a teen center or another Community type thing this would be purely residential um third we have lots of small variances uh to you know the heights uh different things those seem to me to be mostly compliant with the vision of the master plan but that is up to debate and then the last thing that I can think of as a large variance is uh the explicit inclusion of economy or studio type units uh as we've said there was nothing that was specifically excluding that in the master plan

however I wonder if bringing up something like this it was a it was a kind of omission that was you know that wasn't on our minds so I'm wondering are these you know smaller units the changes to the unit size you know going to change the vision that we envisioned for the master plan again I understand that as a board we are only giving a recommendation and the recommendation is limited to whether or not this complies with the master plan uh however again that vision is for a Vibrance and a unified and a you know sense of Oneness within the downtown and these are the different things that I think that we are looking at thank you mayor just want to add and I'm sure you're all aware of that we were redoing that whole corner right we have the county project going on as as we speak there they put a shovel in the ground Building 55 units with office spaces and Doctor uh space on the bottom uh we're we doing this they're going to actually share some of the parking I think with uh with this uh County project you know so we're trying to beautify that whole Corner make it grow into a nicer looking area as I think somebody mentioned it's sitting F you for 20 years as an eyes sort to the community right now well the other one other thing uh I should mention is the Redevelopment plan calls for residential over commercial but on Lakeside Avenue we approved fairly large project which is all residential and again there there's logic to where the the uh retail ship should be and where it shouldn't be and I think maybe that might have gone into this because it's it's like if it's going to be retail who you know right across the

street you have like 18 stores or something and if you put a small store here with limited parking you're going to basically have U limited availability for commercial use so there there's a lot of pros and cons and you have to balance the two nothing's perfect God only knows and so and there was retail just what you're talking about Lakeside comment had retail and the development board decided not to put the retail back there just from what you're speaking Yeah so um anyone else have questions or I'll open it up to the public the uh the ordinance is that is that just going to pertain to this zone or this specific property not even to Zone just this property but why and this is just a a a question that I have why do we have a six page which is numbered wrong at the bottom of the pages by the way so we can't label page one of one two of two three of three I don't know what you have cuz mine doesn't have any numbers I have a the resolution Council pass that's six pages five pages and it's you know this section of it while it is highlighted here and we're told that we're only commenting on this is only a very small portion it's all it's all article 19084 so the article is being amended even though only so when the council and this is just for my clarification we're discussing this but when the council votes they're changing everything that's in here no the only the only stuff that's getting changed is

highlighted that's why I gave you the graft because it's easier to look [Applause] [Applause] at if you look here at number seven it says with respect to block 7,000 Lot 4 that's all existing and that's not changing well it say shall be further modified as follows that's existing code it's not being Modified by this amendment say shall shall that's what your code [Music] says the only part the only section of code that is being amended by the current ordinance is article 19084 B 4 and and it says shall be further modified on before before as well as on the preceding sections because it is modifying B um just B1 B B1 B2 and B3 so each of them and in the one before that that you asked about is A7 so it's modifying A1 a A1 through A6 um a six has the same language A5 has the same language it's all modifying the

language that precedes it so so in a nutshell so they're modif they're making modific no this happened long ago in in other words seven which you rate which you RIS yeah I it has a it has a parenthetical comment after it saying that that happened in 2018 would I be able to make uh unrelated comments before anyone else chimes in or we give it to the public just wait we're still on this I didn't know if we were or not that's why I asked I I think what Kristen is saying is what you see highlighted which on on our sheets are gray um is the changes okay and and so we either say that the changes are consistent with master plan or inconsistent with master plan and that's it right exactly that's it so what did you want there Sean um yeah going back to uh the thing that's in the gray and whether or not it is consistent with the master plan's vision for a unified down town um I'll just say yes I I want to go is the a special case again in the the format that I brought up if it's been sitting absent for 20 years that does bring uh bring Flags to whether we should make an exception to this we've seen the success of the Lakeside property um so I hope that my framework wasn't a little bit too harsh on this um the main things that I would think of for this recommendation uh are if there is

any possibility for um doing something with that first floor or if that's even better and then the only other thing that I'm just seeing right now is uh front yard parking shall be permitted I do not know um if that is you know new to this area or if that's something that is pretty common in the downtown uh but I'm wondering if uh the the parking you know take away from a unified uh walkable feeling those are the only questions and I do not have any um conclusions well parking again you know you go by what's there and just visualize take the building that's being proposed and bring it to the curb line and then park in the back of the building that's what the uh current ordinance is basically saying no parking in the front because all the buildings are lined up along the road on monu Avenue it makes a lot of sense but because this is a pocket it's a little pocket in one spot to bring that building out to the front is going to look odd is a good word maybe and my own personal opinion since we're just throwing things out there I think it would be worse to have the building up front and to let the building you know stand in the back the other thing pushing it in the back does is it reduces the height image from the street M so instead of putting yeah you know you've got a lot that drops down you're going to be pushing it back I 60 ft or whatever it is 50 fet um it it makes more sense and I'm sure that's why the Redevelopment agency recommended this because of the uniqueness of the site and we all have to consider uniqueness I mean it's

actually part of the whole zoning process um right acoss the street in leadle you might want to call it front yard parking but you have head in parking to want to qav where all the EV stations are it's the same thing okay yeah true all right so um anybody else on the board have questions Mr chairman if you don't mind yes sir um so again Bas I'm just going to give my opinion on whether it I I would like just I would like this to be more of the question period I I'm getting Sean some latitude here but I'd like this to be more of the questioning of Kristen or the mayor or the councilwoman who might have some insight and then at some point we discuss it so if you're if you're going to discuss it with respect to why you would or would not want something to happen I'd rather wait okay you questions let's bring them up yeah no no questions it's just uh I'm going I would like to make a change that that my recommendation is if this board votes for and in favor of it one recommendation changes I'm not in favor of the single 500t uh suits okay um right now we have on the same side of the street opposite side of the river you do have a place that has no commercial and single uh we'll call it sweets in there that's not consistent with our master plan it's there because of history but it's not consistent so if there's a way of putting our two cents in saying well we'll approve it but we're not in favor of that now the question is is that something that we can do and then or is that when we put it all in favor it goes to the mayor council it comes back and then when they apply for their building that's when we

say no no single streets when does that we approve it make me make excuse me make recommendations okay you would need to find a way to link that to the master plan though showing why a studio is not is inconsistent with the master that you can't just say we don't like it we could say that it's the residential is inconsistent because it has no commercial yes so if we're going to approve of that because of the particular property we would say that yes I'm okay with just like web built over by the U army or the U subv asan Army single and double um one apartment bedroom apartment what do the so what what don't understand the L what we're saying is is is the studios what we're trying to say is we think the studios are inconsistent with the master plan how so what I'm saying we just do it's not it's it's you have you have to tie it to Something in the master plan do we know how many studios there are by the way well it is but we're trying to move away from that that's the point I'm just trying to find out whether there just a couple that are just a couple whether it's a predominant number that's right I think it's only a coup it's only a couple I'm sorry yeah but that's what we're I think as as a planning board that's what we're trying to move away from all right whether it's in the master plan or not um it doesn't matter at this point we're we're going to start revie reviewing the master plan this is something we'll look at um but I do think it's it's moving away from what we really want okay is that fair enough because I think not in the master plan yeah the inconsistency I think is is what what the purpose of attracting what are you going to attract by having a uh one bedroom and two- bedroom versus what do you attracting for a suite so what the consistency is we want residential will allow but we're going to say certain residential but the

master plan does not say that so what does the master plan say right now it doesn't say anything about it doesn't say anything about limiting different types of residential units it says um Meed no it not they're not in there well they have to be in there it says something else for footage that's zoning ordinance and that's that's really what comes from the Redevelopment agency so let let me understand just so I'm understanding what people are asking where is the issue and not that I care one way or the other where is the issue with a studio apartment to fit the square footage that's left in the building in order to get someone else to live in there I mean it would be dead space if we didn't do that would be not used well being not being beneficial to seeing what the site what the uh floor layout plan is I wouldn't be able to answer that but because it's been already proved by the Redevelopment agency I don't think we have the ability to say no you can't put a 500 s footer in there we can we can certainly opine as to whether we think it should or shouldn't be there but it can't be more than a how a simple recommendation uh Kristen or or Alex yes a simple recommendation but that's it consistency I mean we can talk about all these things we don't like but ultimately it's looking at the master plan and seeing if there's consistency not in consistent technically not inconsistent but we could say if they want to it would be nice to only have one in two days sure right you can you know including you know your your report which is the resolution ultimately that's going to be you know um eventually passed and that the council's and governing bodies going to consider it if you want to have a you know recommendation at the bottom you know we don't like X Y and Z you can but it doesn't matter in terms of ultimately what we're doing today is making a recommendation as to whether or not it's consistent and I believe that you can have some extra comments if you want but

you know we're saying that it's not inconsistent but it's not consistent either if it's never been done right I think that's kind of a double negative there so I think it's so right yeah because it's not it's technically not inconsistent the statute requ that we show that it's not inconsistent cor that we show that it is consist correct that's I can read the statute again if You' like no I understood it the first time I'm just trying love me talk down what what we should what we should be focusing on is not interpreting um what was specifically approved but whether the approval of this request for zoning which is outlined with these highlighted areas is inconsistent and if if somebody said they wanted to have a different use um you could you could make that statement but residential is residential whether it's I understand 500 square fet or 1,000 sare feet I think the issue is if you don't have the plan you don't know how many units there are in there it's irrel it's irrelevant here why people are wondering why people don't want that but it's irrelevant here here this does me see Redevelopment agency is the one that said this is what we're recommending you guys sent it here to have our comments I thought that when we were sending it here we were sending it here because you decided on this stuff I didn't realize that you weren't deciding on this stuff no Redevelopment agency decided it subject to the council's approval stop Council says okay we have a first reading and a second reading you had a first reading and the law requires that it comes here to the planning board for determination of whether it's consistent or not then it goes back to you guys and the council

then has its discussion and they can you can say yeah I'm not crazy about this or that but overall it's fine I'll approve it or you could turn around and reject it I mean it's a council and just for your purposes for the planning board what we will be doing when we do read this at the council we will have our planner there we will have our uh development executive there and we'll have uh and if you want me there I'll be there as well it's up to you person will put the pilot together so any of the questions the council has would be answered by those Personnel that are there the experts that are dealing with that and then the council has to look at overall what they have there what's being proposed and if you find that you know you're okay with it then you you vote you vote an approval if you're not okay then it goes back to square one or maybe two I think this is a step I'm not understanding why this is even a step if you don't really have to say under the local Redevelopment law it's just essentially a part of the statute and and you know that's that's what the law says and ultimately this is all that we're able to talk about tonight is just consistency you know so the legislature dictated so in fact the the uh resolution that we passed more or less has to be approved here if we find that it's not inconsistent and that's that's what has to be we can't arbitrarily say you know what I don't like the 500 foot units I'm voting against it that would be challenged you you're almost obliged to approve not approve to recommend that this be considered by you guys because it's consistent and then what happens on your end is up to you all you got seven people up there you all have I'm sure pros and cons but that that's where we are I got it I'm not the

only one asking the questions no I'm but you you know you're say you're confused about the process I'm not I just don't understand why this is a step if it really doesn't because it's the law because it's the law ordinance yeah we don't have a choice in certain things and uh even even when it comes to our own applications when they come to us there's certain things that we are required to do so I have a question if we didn't have a Redevelopment agency would it just come here probably yeah this would have been the whole step somebody else would act as a Redevelopment agency some entity would be wouldn't be planning and zoning sometimes the mayor and Council some towns have the mayor and Council act as as the Redevelopment entity on an ad needed basis when the Redevelopment agency was uh brought up many years ago um the B the burrow took on a a very large responsibility and um it was to develop what you see going on and one can argue whether or not something is should have been this or should have been that but there's been a lot of positive stuff that's come out of that Redevelopment agency I think my question was only I want to know how like how the process works like I thought that when it came here you decided on each individual thing I didn't realize it was all or nothing and I'm just trying to wrap my head around CU and everybody's talking about it but you really don't get to vote on it so I'm just trying to and what we talk about is essentially either we do or don't comment back comment back so we you might get something back that says the planning board found that this is consistent with the master plan we think you should consider a or b and that's the extent of it right I mean that's all we can say is you might want to consider so if

somebody here um and we all agreed on something because it couldn't just be one person so if the board agrees to approve it approve it to recommend it and the board agrees to recommendations to say you know we would like to see something else done or something in addition to or instead of it's not binding it just comes to you with a this is what we saw so what is what would the what would happen if we agree that it is inconsistent with the master plan because there is no retail on the first floor then which is a legitimate inconsistency and if we decide that it is inconsistent with the master plan what are those steps well it'll be challenged only because I'll tell you right now you've already approved it we have approved it no the town has approved this exact thing with no so commercial that goes to that that's not accurate it wouldn't I that I don't think that that's accurate which is it the town hasn't approved it I just because something happens on another site doesn't have bearing on this site no what he's saying is the Redevelopment agency approved it the Redevelopment agency agreed to it there's not an approval process so if you submitted that it was inconsistent with the master plan then the same thing that happens if you say it is consistent you would send that by way of resolution to the governing body and they would take that under advisement just advisement yes yes now um we can only give recommendation correct that's it I think we take anything that's what it is can only do recommendation yeah you can only but the Redevelopment agency does not

have approval Authority in terms of what the project is going to be they are only recommending as well and uh and the Lakeside property that is the example of one that is a purely residential property yes for what so just I know everybody knows this but we had the old Salvation Army there that was retail with some other shops next to it when that Builder came in that was torn down and they put retail they got rid of the retail put first we were residential in mil that's happen for what it's worth it's a it's a gorgeous property and I I remember seeing that when it was built I think it's a lot better than the Salvation Army but I'm not sure that that is consistent with the master plan and the the vision that that we have so yes it makes it makes sense that it's a property by property thing okay and just for your um understanding when because this red velopment plan Dr 1 and dr2 are both very big Redevelopment plans it is almost inevitable that every big project that comes in is going to see amendments so um that doesn't mean that we can't scrutinize all of them in the way that we are tonight but because each property is perhaps topographically or geometrically or whatever unique um this this process is something that is okay I'm going to open it up to the public unless bill just one other question and has nothing to do actually whether we approve this or not um it it but anyone who's at the Redevelopment uh agency when the things were being discussed they talk about off-site parking you give me a clue where that is cuz there's nothing there so the offsite

parking is going to be worked out with the county that the way I understand it the countyy is building the county project there and on the bottom that's in the back well but on the it goes all the way down to the recycling center so they'll be on the recycling side you have the walk block so you got to walk down so it's okay and and that's not definite yet that there's like a two-part to this where if they get the parking yeah I don't know where they are in in the process but it depends on how many spots they get on how many apartments they build the agreement was I think 17 to 21 with the Redevelopment agency depending how many spots they buy from the county um okay at this point in time I'm going to open up the meeting to the public for any questions that you guys may have um if you care to comment please come up to the microphone I need your name and your address and so technically we don't need to square them in I don't know this isn't a hearing necessarily um this is not like a section hearing so I they're not professionals or anything so right right I don't think so okay you okay with that anyone care to comment question no all right I'm going to close the public session okay so back to where we started tonight's resolution is we send back something to the town saying to the to the council saying we find it's cons consistent or inconsistent if we find it consistent but we have a concern about something we can find that and just simply say you know we we we we suggest that you consider it um is that essentially the end product you okay with that all right to get there to get there uh we've had substantial discussion on it

um I will just summarize my comments by saying you have a a um unique situation here the uh the items that are being requested to be changed are not and I'm not going to use the word consistent or inconsistent they're not dramatically different than most of the other Lots there is a reasonable explanation for why uh for example the parking is in the front not the back there is a reasonable explanation as to um the size of the particular units in there and and that's subject to council not us um so you can't say that because you don't like the square footage of the units that it's not consistent so because there is no square footage in the master plan so we have to just be careful that if we say it's inconsistent there has to be a very specific thing that's not not consistent and if we can't do that then I think we should make the um the approval of this and then comment on it if that's what you want but I my own opinion is I don't see anything in here that causes me to say it's not consistent with the master plan so at this point what I would like to hear is uh if somebody wants to make a motion that's fine somebody wants to discuss it that's fine but remember we're just making a recommendation to the council Bri want me to make the recommendation that we uh that we they approve ordinance 24 and go forward with it yeah with the conditions that you know we'd like to hold on the condition

conditions there's no conditions it's just a follow a recommendation about the square footage of the studio apartments make a recommendation I think we can right we can you can comment yes you can make so if we could stipulate that that would be great and they can either accept it or exactly so um what is your specific um a motion so you've made the motion except to say that it is consistent okay I need a second second second who was that okay SE all right um discussion on the motion voting tonight uh am I voting tonight alternate uh what do we have what he's first alternate but we don't have anybody missing from the board right so we need somebody else to Second so somebody else has to Second it then I'll second it then okay Paul Paul Balby seconded it it was the first I'm sorry uh that was uh ran motion to for the recommendation approval to to find to find that the um the plan is consistent with the master plan the the ordinance would would say that it is that this project is consistent with the master plan like not [Music] inconsistence good so far yes good so far okay comments back to the council can come from us if the board agrees so the second part of this would be if somebody wants to add to that somebody has to oppose that at least in my opinion second it and vote on it correct yes okay over to you all I recommend that we propose that the residential Living Spaces in the building be no smaller

than the one proposed one bedroom um what's been so that that's the uh 550 ft when is it 6 625 625 625 yeah yeah 62 right instead of 650 okay so there's a recom there's a a motion to include that I'll second that if you need okay so yeah so we have Bill and we have John Katy and the motion for that is to add a comment to the council saying that we're not um what's the word you use Bill we're not um in agreement about the size of the small units we just recommend the units be no smaller than the one bedroom that's okay so that becomes the second you're okay with that yes okay so comments on that before we vote Yes I I would actually argue that even though I did want to bring it up as something to think about uh this is kind of the question of you know is something allowed biom Mission or not allowed biom Mission and I personally think that since nothing was stated in particular that it is by default compliance with the master plan we could maybe recommend to the council to look at it and see the particular reason why these spaces need to be smaller But ultimately our job is to see if this is consistent with the master plan and I think that because this was omitted um It Is by default compliance and and that's what we voted on so you're correct we did vote on that we did approve it and now we're at a point where if the board chooses they can with comment send it back to the council with a determination of

consistency with the master plan and comment understood Alex that works for you does yes I just have a question about that that I would be for the attorney because this came from the Redevelopment agency does this have to go back to the Redevelopment agency then so the next the next step at this point again since these are just you know it's an ultimate recommendations the council can accept or reject it but the statute itself the report which is ultimately the resolution there's any and any other matters that the board de it's appropriate so these sort of comments again these can be included in the resolution for consideration by the governing body but to my knowledge no at this point governing body says all right we want to look at that do that has to go back then to the Redevelopment agency correct they can't make the change because they don't have plans and seal things right it would have to go back to the board to do that I would have to look into that I have not seen that happen I don't know off the top of my head I'm guessing it would so I'm not makes sense it it certainly wouldn't hurt I'm not sure if it would have to only because say there was a scenario where the developer a was fine with it because they had to redo all of their math um so who knows if if that would even be fine with it but if the building did not um have any change in density or appearance I'm not sure to what extent the Redevelopment agency would necessarily they might change right theoretically it could change the number of units but if they got rid of studios and replac all the twos with threes or something perhaps it would be the same number of units like I don't know I would have to look at plans and it's a jigsaw puzzle right it it would

certainly probably be advisable to send it back to the Redevelopment agency and if the changes were negligible and the both the developer and the Redevelopment agency perhaps would be on board it would be a very quick process um that's a best case scenario though I'm not sure how realistic that scenario is so just so the board is aware we we kind of shy away from three from the Redevelopment sign shy away from three-bedroom units because it does bring more children into the school system so that's why you'll see most of the buildings we build are one and two B bu bedrooms three bedrooms only because of co- obligation there has to be some certain number of Threes but we're not building threes because we don't want to increase the number of students so just keep that okay so anybody else want to comment before we just take a vote on that motion by Mr pendexter okay uh I need a roll call vote uh now we didn't do a roll call vote on the other one yet so let's do a roll call vote on the first one consistency I'm sorry ultim consisten yes start do roll call that and then we'll do a second roll call vote on this um recommendation so this is just for the consistency determination which Brian uh motioned in second by poll Mr Samo no wait a minute that was motion that's the second one the the first one oh that was the first one yes okay that's fine yes sorry Mr s yes ma'am Mr yes Mr trust no Dr pen Dexter yes uh Mr Balby yes Mr keading yes I now mayor yes Council kilberg no um do the alternates now vote no well

talk you're a chairman but say no no alternates don't vote you should have nine votes there have one two three four five six seven eight should no should be should be nine right one 2 eight then one ultimate ultimate yeah that would be sure yes somebody missed who's missing no we we still have an open position oh yes the the business right yes so that we have nine and you counted Sean Sean is the ninth y okay okay second motion was to make a recommendation comment back comment back to council right on the agreement um for the size or bedrooms um and it was motion by um oops uh Dr pendexter and then second by John and Mr Samo yes Mr Oto yes Mr tro yes um Dr pendexter yes uh Mr Balby yes Mr keading yes mayor Sarah no and uh councilman gilberg yes and one last V is uh Sean no no okay that should complete this part of the application process and now it just goes back to the count

with our warm regards so the resolution that was brought up is no because you have you have to reward it right re it uh no wait a minute well just has to be added with language yeah the comment yep so do you want to we might as well be able to do the resolution yeah hold on let me just see everybody has a copy of that put that in your packet is it add on to the [Music] just ched that revision right yeah I'm just trying to make sure can just yeah adopted in his current form adoped in his current form period and just say um the board also wants to yeah comment yes with we can say yeah we can leave this as is and I think we just say um keep it completely as is and then just add in addition the comment we'd like the we'd like the governing body to consider these the square footage of the um Studio Studio unit to be no yes to be no smaller than sixer of 25 I'll try write that out in addition you're still missing one board

member no we are we have not you had Amory passed away yeah we got two you had you had Rich foro Phil and Steve St buil yeah but if you filled a regular position with well all I'm saying is I was we should have nine members total with the a we have nine members here you should have 11 members with you if you can't we're 9 + two alternates it 9 plus 2 N or seven 7 plus two 7 plus 2 2 3 4 and we have eight here tonight s eight we have everybody here that's what I'm saying we're missing a board member yes Sean should be sitting over there but he's up here right now because of the next empty C yes I there's the board member missing okay well according to lizz's list that's not OB we have to double check that so I there was no missing plan I kept okay there there is an mtyc Steve left he moved out rich foro rich foro left passed away he only replaced two positions open position right here okay look my little diagram oh I on a slide allows a planning board to be seven members or nine members it's up to you usually no so we have 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 eight votes and then nine with uh alternate right so it was nine

total seven plus two the zoning board has tell CHR to vote ver is not on this vote no I know just saying [Music] M don't leave okay I'll have you read it sure okay this is going to be the resolution that goes from the board to the council can I you please let me read sorry the whole thing yeah short to make um this is a resolution um D resolution 01- 2025 resolution regarding consistency of proposed ordinance 25-11 with master plan whereas the burrow Council has referred ordinance 25-11 an ordinance amending the downtown Pompton Lakes Redevelopment plan as codified in section 19084 of the code of the burough of Pompton Lakes for review by this planning board pursuant to njsa 40a col2 a-7e for review and identification of any provisions that are inconsistent with the Burrow's master plan and other any other matters this board deems relevant and whereas the planning board has reviewed the afores said draft ordinance and considered the matter at the public meeting held by the board on February 18th 2025 now therefore be it resolved by the planning board of the burough of pton lakes on this 18th day of February 2025 that the proposed ordinance 20 25-11 is consistent with the Burrow's master plan and it is the recommendation of the

planning board that ordinance number 25-11 be adopted in its current form without Revision in addition to the planning board's finding of consistency the board Desir the governing body to consider the square footage of the smallest unit to be no smaller than 625 Square ft anybody have any questions on that yeah isn't it one statement cancels the other because it says without revision and then we have a comment that says we're no we can't revise it we can't revise it this is just a an extra comment for the governing body to consider but we've made our recommendation of consistency so again this is just a little something extra you know that we're letting the governing body know that we and we have Council and a mayor council person and a mayor here I'm sure will be able to say at that meeting that this is why so yeah okay so um I need a vote a motion to to U pass the resolution right yes okay so uh I need a motion for approving resolution as Modified by our attorney I'll make the res uh the um motion motion okay Brian second I'll second it Bill pendexter any comments uh okay the only I do have comments on particularly on the reol or just just whether you're okay with the resolution nothing else nothing else so that means that I I for instance wouldn't be able to comment that they should also look at this other thing for instance okay okay so with that we have a roll call vote Please Mr Simone yes Mr AO yes M uh Mr tro

no Dr pendexter yes Mr BBY yes Mr keading yes mayor Sarah yes councilwoman kilberg yes and Mr bzma yes thank you okay that completely concludes the uh application tonight and on the agenda there are no other applications no conceptuals under unfinished business um appointment of open space committee representative um does anybody want to volunteer to be the open space committee representative yeah I kind of inject myself into that at the meeting the other night okay thank you unknowingly but I'm glad to do it okay the Paul yeah yes Paul uh the representative to join the master plan committee is not sorry you have to vote on that since it's an appointment no okay just he's just volunteering he's that he's just being a good old guy good old guy you didn't realize what I was doing when I was I'll a good boy how's that great okay representative the join the mass plan committee and this is not the board committee this is a municipal committee so I'm going to appoint myself to that because I would like to be on that what what I'm sorry Master Plan committee this is the one that Kristen is going to be so let's discuss that a little bit okay well wait a minute well there's no there's no committee yet really no this is master plan this is not the design no no no I'm not talking about design we're not in I we shouldn't be talking about this okay well whatever

with the master plan committee on here is for what review which is right now so John and myself okay so because it was John rich and myself okay so I'm gonna that's my mistake sorry um so I need another person to join John and Tim on the board's master plan committee I'll do it Brian can you clarify what the what that committee does it's you were you were on a phone call with us the one night when we were here it's master plan review but you don't need a master plan for two more years that's what I'm trying to say there's no reason to have it we're not in we're not talking about we're not putting money towards it there it's not even up in in conversation it's not up for two years I know that I I agree but we decided last year to put together a committee to get a head start on it you so Mr chairman and I believe it started with Steve VL he's the one that said you know looking say for example at the zoning map that's in there it's it's outdated and when we had an applicant come to the board and ask the question they said well you can't deny it because in your master plan that zone is zoned for the what he's looking for even though we all disagreed with it so he said well going forward if you disagree with something on it change it now don't wait till an applicant comes and then it's too late so so it started by saying let's just review and make sure it's updated and is the zoning map still the way I'll use the words it's consistent with our master plan the the zoning map and the master plan are two separate things like we can update the zoning map um basically can update the zoning map when when you need to um if it's a correction you certainly can if it's a change to the zoning it's slightly more cumbersome to do outside of pairing it with a master plan but it

is possible right and that's what it's going to be very lengthy service so that's why we figured we'd Le meet once a month and once every two months just to kind of get familiar with it so that when it does come and it's two years from now we'll be ready with some changes or recommendations that we have the other is what you recommended was in the Redevelopment in there there's recommendations that were left off in 2017 do we still want to keep those or are they going to be changing at if you guys want to meet for two years before we work on it be my guest but I just don't I don't want you to think that your master plan is up for Renewal yet um but I did see the last meeting Tim and thanks for bringing the some of these things up there might be a difference of opinion of if it's going to be reone or a brand new one absolutely you could you could either have a reexamination or a full-blown master plan with our which are two very different um Scopes and different heavier lifts you know a master plan is a significantly heavier lift than a re-examination um so if if if you want to take two years to prepare for that be my guest I just want to make sure we all understand what what that the actual date of you being due for a new master plan or reexamination is 2027 it's more 2027 so it's not well it doesn't have to I don't think it has to be like um 10 years to the month it has to be within that calendar year as far as I understand it so I don't it doesn't matter if you do it in January or December so we have two years which includes a Year's worth of work on your part or 6 to8 months on on your part yeah to put the plan or re-exam together a a reexamination is 6 to 8 months a

master plan is more than that that um but if you if you had a goal of let's just say December of 2027 um that's something that we should talk about mid 2026 or well we would talk about it in early 2026 to talk about the budgets but I mean it's still a little ways off but it does if you depending on what month you want that to be ready to go public sure if if you want it to be in January then we would certainly need to start effectively a year earlier than if you wanted it to be in December that's absolutely ACC and I'm of the opinion that we don't help ourselves by pushing it off to the end of 27 that's just my opinion it it it it it could go either way because if you do it on the early if there's something that is pressing um say there's some change either locally that you need to get ahead of or globally so a lot of towns made made changes in the aftermath of covid because commuting patterns and such had changed so significantly for them so if there's something that's pressing you might want to do it sooner if there's not something that's pressing it might behoove you to wait a little bit to make sure nothing comes up along the way because the the worst annoying thing that could happen is you adopt a master plan in June and then in like July you know we have covid 27 and weird things start happening and we wish we had folded that into the master plan so it's but it's the same thing as adopting something in December of 27 and something comes up in sure March of 28 you something that's completely right no of course there's always a chance that something could

happen right after you've done all of the work um but if you do something in December of 27 and something happens in 28 you at least have the excuse that well well we had to do it in 27 um and the other thing to keep in mind from our town perspective it's a very questionable thing especially if you go with the new one you know we'd have to put major PLS together to make that happen this is not just a kind of let going to do this kind of thing this is very expensive proposition yeah it is important that you Talk Amongst yourselves and and you you know I can confer with you but as to if you need a full-fledged master plan or just a reexamination also there's an Master plans have elements so there's like the land use element which is one of the required elements um but then there are some um optional elements um some related to sustainability um and you know open space and things like that and sometimes what a town might do is say well we're just going to do the reexamination but we'd like to create a new element around this topic and that's how we're going to spend our money so it really not a bad idea to talk about your priorities if if you're if you're meeting now talk about your priorities and figure out um how you want to focus the effort when that time does come thank you if if you all are are willing to meet periodically you know John and and Tim and and Brian then um I still think it's advantageous to while things are fresh in your mind something happens in town and it may oh you know like the the car wash and know thinking back having that not excluded from our Zone we had to approve it because it could be challenged so at least that sticks in my mind as a

um something that could change and and I'd like to make sure that we consider you know just as we go along if you find something just jot it down on the note and then when we sit down with you guys to talk about the actual plan maybe some of those notes and then events over the next 12 months will dictate which way we go I don't want to predetermine it yep but I also don't want to assume we're going to do a reexamination and then find out that we need to do a full plan and we started too late so well one of the one of the things we talked about in the thought process was again budgets always issue but we have a plan and we have an amendment so to speak we have the first reexamination to the plan then we're going to have a second reexamination or the Second Amendment to the plan so now you know somebody wants to do something in town they got to look at the plan then they got to look at re-exam number one look at re-exam number two see what changed here what went from here to here we went backwards and maybe we put something back in So for ease of interpretation and consistency a new master plan will probably waed about that's not inconsistent with my thinking but whether or not we have the funding to do that is well that's that's why I kind of wanted to spark it because I just don't want to find out that you know all of a sudden there's no money to do what we really should be doing if we determine that it's a full master plan I don't want to surprise the burrow with you know you got $100,000 extra put sitting around I don't know not so um all right that was part of the the thought process to start now yeah so

just I I would like to continue the process of us doing it and I we we each I got you copies of the books book that's about the master plan um the master plan is kind of aluminous uh but do we have any extra copies of the actual master plan in the office no Rich did he give you his back I thought he give you his back then one night I think there's a there's a PDF of it do you have a PDF I have a PDF of it okay that might be good to have PF I'll give you my book either I do have an extra one for Rich I forgot did he give it back to me I don't remember he did he did if he did please give it to Brian and in the meantime if you can get the PDF maybe it's better to deal with the PDF and then U go from there so at your ler gentlemen I have a PDF as well okay IAD uh let's [Applause] see and that's that's it for tonight uh open this meeting to the public once again if there's any comments on this this or anything else seeing none we close the meeting to the public uh anybody have anything else to add for tonight if not I'll take a motion to adour one question on an unrelated topic what's going on with that property on H the one that built the with the w any updates on that yeah the uh they've worked out in agreements with the engineers it's just getting them back to do the uh written agreement but it's their Engineers who are going to be responsible for making it right and signing off on the wall and if there's ever issue it's their signature it's on the wall so yes they are worked out of the agreement and working towards making it happen Okay and while we're talking about it I know some people are talking you know if you've driven by the old

cgam building they are putting new steel in now they started working on the back of that so that that is moving along um so they actually started building that like I mentioned just today I got an email that the permits for the Civic Center were approved so they will start rebuilding our Civic Center now hopefully within month or two we should have our building back with a storage area upstairs W's lock room for our police officers a new uh new two new rooms kitchen whole okay anything else Tim that was it anybody else have any questions no okay I'll take a motion to adjourn please motion motion by Mr tro second second by Mr BBY all in favor any opposed nobody ever opposes I don't understand confused about the number because if I count that means there be 10 people nine two Al five six s 7 plus U2 is n and two alternates that's 11 are we saying we have 11 on the board yeah you could have 9 plus two that's I just want to make sure that's what we're saying 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 that's what I'm saying I hear 10 how many how many are members not the ultimate there's seven members plus the class huh we Clos the meeting right plus 1 two three four five there's five members right at this time well six no there's not there's six oh six sorry six which there should be an odd number so we need seven we're missing one member we're missing yes we're missing a member we have two alternates it's 11 total I want to make sure we it's 11 not 10 I right now 10 that's what I'm counting it's basically seven class 4 members great right so

it's okay