A GREAT, GREAT, GREAT. ARE WE GOOD? YES. OKAY. [I. ROLL CALL] [00:00:04] GOOD EVENING. THIS IS THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD FOR MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. IT'S OUR REGULAR MEETING. IT IS MARCH 24TH, 2025. AND IT IS 7:02 P.M.. IT IS OUR INTENTION TO CONCLUDE THIS MEETING NO LATER THAN 10 P.M.. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT, NOTICE OF THE TIME AND PLACE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED AND SENT TO THE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED NEWSPAPERS. CAN WE HAVE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? DARREN CAMBIAS HERE. HERE. BATTLE. BLODGETT. HERE. HAMILTON. HERE. MATTHEWS. ROBERTS. HERE. SINGH. HERE. TAYLOR. TODD. GLOCKLER. HERE. KHAN. HERE. CASEY. HERE. SULLIVAN. HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. PLEASE JOIN ME IN SALUTE TO THE FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR ITEMS NOT NOT BEING THE KEY WORD ON THE AGENDA AND SUBJECT TO OUR DISCRETION, WE DO RESPECTFULLY ASK MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS AND OR Q&A TO FIVE MINUTES. AND WHEN YOU'RE UP HERE PROVIDING COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR AN APPLICATION, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME. FOR THE RECORD, IF YOU PREFER NOT TO PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE ADVISE WHICH MUNICIPALITY YOU LIVE IN. IS THERE ANYONE HERE FOR PARTICIPATION? FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA? OKAY. NEXT ITEM IS A PRESENTATION OF THE COUNTRY CLUB MEADOWS SENIOR LIVING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. [V. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN] MARCH 2025. AND I TURN THAT OVER TO MICHAEL. GOOD EVENING. FOR THE RECORD, MICHAEL SULLIVAN. CLARK TOWNSHIP PLANNING CONSULTANT. TONIGHT WE'RE HERE FOR A CONSISTENCY REVIEW FOR THE COUNTRY CLUB MEADOWS SENIOR LIVING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. YOU SHOULD HAVE A DRAFT DATED MARCH 20TH. IN YOUR PACKET. THIS REDEVELOPMENT AREA WAS DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNING BODY IN JUNE OF 2024 AS AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. IT IS BLOCK 4020, LOT ONE, AND ITS ADDRESS IS 22 SCARBOROUGH ROAD. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 23 ACRES, 20 ALMOST 24 ACRES. AND IT'S PART OF THE BELLEMEADE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A LONG STANDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE TOWN. THE PURPOSE OF THE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IS REALLY TO FINALLY IMPLEMENT ONE OF THE REMAINING PIECES. IT'S NOT THE LAST REMAINING PIECE, BUT ONE OF THE REMAINING PIECES OF THE COUNTRY CLUB MEADOWS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS SLATED FOR SENIOR HOUSING OF VARIOUS ILKS. BUT THIS PLAN SEEKS TO ADJUST THE ZONING SUCH THAT IT CAN REFLECT THE CURRENT MARKET. THE THE C.C.M. PUD PARTICULARLY THIS PARCEL HAS REMAINED UNDEVELOPED SINCE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWNSHIP IN 2014. SO THIS ADJUSTMENT IS NECESSARY BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER IN ORDER TO MOLD THE SENIOR HOUSING COMPONENT OF THIS TO SOMETHING MORE MARKETABLE AND TO ALSO REFLECT MORE OF A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING FOR HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE MONTGOMERY RESIDENTS. I'LL GIVE YOU THE THE COOK'S TOUR OF WHAT IT PERMITS. IT ALLOWS UP TO 196 OVERALL UNITS. 65% OF THOSE UNITS MAY BE INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS. 20% MINIMUM WILL BE ASSISTED LIVING UNITS AND 10% MINIMUM WILL BE MEMORY CARE UNITS. IN THE CONCEPTS THAT WE'VE WORKED WITH, THE THE OWNER WITH SOME OF THOSE INDEPENDENT LIVING AND ASSISTED LIVING CAN SHIFT THEIR FLEX UNITS AND SOME OF THE ASSISTED OR SOME OF THE INDEPENDENT LIVING ARE TRULY INDEPENDENT. THEY'RE ALMOST LIKE ATTACHED TOWNHOUSES WITH A COMMON CONNECTOR THAT CONNECTS THEM TO THE MAIN PART OF THE BUILDING. AND THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A GARAGE AND SOME PARKING. SO IT'S A IT'S AN INTERESTING CONCEPT THAT WAS PRESENTED. AND THIS PLAN REALLY REFLECTS ZONING THAT WILL ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN. AND FURTHERMORE THE PLAN REQUIRES THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS OR REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS HERE. SITE, PLAN OR SUBDIVISION, IF IT WERE MUST REFLECT THOSE CONCEPTS IN A. [00:05:02] SUBSTANTIAL MANNER OR THEY WILL BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. AND IF THAT WERE THE CASE, LET'S SAY THEY CAME BACK AND THEY SAID, OH, WE HAVE TO DO THIS TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING. THE PLAN WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK. THE GOVERNING BODY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE PLAN, REINTRODUCE IT AND AND GO FORWARD THAT WAY. SO THE PLAN REALLY BUILDS IN ASSURANCES THAT WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WILL BE CONSTRUCTED. OR ELSE WE'LL HAVE TO AMEND THE PLAN. THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS BY THE BOARD ARE TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN OR NOT. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT IT IS CONSISTENT. AND IN OUR IN IN THE PLAN, IT DETAILS THIS STARTING ON PAGE 20. IT TALKS ABOUT THE REEXAMINATION REPORTS WHICH CALL FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES, INCLUDING SENIOR HOUSING. IT'S ALSO DISCUSSED IN THE AMENDMENT IN 2014. AND FURTHERMORE, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE 2020 AMENDED HOUSING PLAN ELEMENT, WHICH CALLS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WITHIN THIS, THERE WILL BE 20 ASSISTED LIVING BEDS, AND THOSE ASSISTED LIVING BEDS WILL COUNT AS 20 CREDITS TOWARDS YOUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION IN THE FOURTH ROUND. NEXT ROUND. RIGHT. SO THAT PLAN HAS NOT BEEN BUILT YET, BUT WE ARE ALREADY ACCOUNTING FOR IT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE ADDRESS THE FOURTH ROUND. AND AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S WE'RE ON THE LOG FLUME TO JUNE 30TH TO GET THOSE PLAN ADOPTED. SO THAT'S THAT'S REALLY THE, THE OVERVIEW AND AND, AND HOW WE SEE IT AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. WELL, LET'S FIRST SEE IF WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS. OKAY. THEN QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. AND AGAIN, MICHAEL, THIS IS JUST TO CONFIRM ON OUR SIDE THAT AS FAR AS WE CAN SEE AND YOU TELL US THE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH BETWEEN THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE AND WHAT WE RECOMMENDED? YES. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ADOPTION OF A PLAN. IT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN. IT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE PLAN IN TERMS OF DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES AND PLANNING FOR SENIOR HOUSING. GREAT. AND COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT OF IT AGAIN? DID YOU SAY THERE'S ONLY ONLY 20, 20 UNITS OF THE 196 WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. DOES THAT IS THAT IS THAT A TYPICAL RATIO? IT SEEMS KIND OF LOW TO ME, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TYPICAL. IT'S A DIFFERENT ANIMAL. WE WE'VE IN THE FOURTH ROUND. SENIOR HOUSING DOES NOT WE HAVE A LIMITATION ON SENIOR HOUSING? IT'S NOT GOING TO BENEFIT. OTHER THAN THE 20 UNITS, THE ASSISTED LIVING BEDS. THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND THAT WAS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT. OKAY, SO SO WE CAN'T USE ANY OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR NONE OF THE EVEN WE WANTED TO LIKE IT. WOULDN'T THE SENIOR HOUSING THERE COULDN'T BE USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS. NOT IN THIS CONFIGURATION. OKAY. IS THE INDEPENDENT LIVING AGE RESTRICTED? THE ENTIRE THE ENTIRE IT'S ALL AGE RESTRICTED. EVERYTHING IS AGE RESTRICTED. YES. IT'S THE CONCEPT IS REALLY A CONTINUUM OF CARE TYPE DEAL. IT'S INDEPENDENT LIVING, ASSISTED LIVING, MEMORY CARE. AND THE IDEA IS THAT THERE'S A CONTINUUM THERE SO FOLKS CAN STAY RELATIVELY CLOSE TO WHERE THEY ARE AND HAVE A CONTINUUM. THEY USED TO CALL THEM CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES. BUT IT'S IT'S MORPHED A LITTLE BIT. AND THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PUD IDEA WAS THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD BE. AND WHAT IS IT CURRENTLY ZONED AS, OR WHAT WAS IT ENVISIONED WITH THE CURRENT, YOU KNOW, THE. WELL, THE YEAH, IT'S VERY SIMILAR. IT'S VERY SIMILAR. LET ME GO TO THE PLAN 74 OF EACH. INDEPENDENT 74 ASSISTED 174. THE EXISTING ZONING IS THE IS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. AND IT WOULD ALLOW UP TO 96 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, AND IT REQUIRED THEM TO BE IN FOUR BUILDINGS WITH 24 UNITS PER BUILDING AND A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY WITH 74 INDEPENDENT SENIOR LIVING UNITS, 74 ASSISTED LIVING UNITS AND 74 SUBACUTE CARE BEDS. THAT'S WHAT THE ORIGINAL THE ZONING IS TODAY. AS I SAID, IT'S BEING MASSAGED TO REFLECT CURRENT THE MARKET FOR TODAY'S SENIORS AND ASSISTED AND INDEPENDENT LIVING. OKAY. AND AGAIN, JUST TO REMIND THE BOARD, WE DID HAVE THAT HEARING JUNE 10TH OF 2024. YES, SIR. OH LET'S SEE. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED NOW. [00:10:03] ARE THE ARE THE ARE THE 20 UNITS THAT WILL COUNT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING? ARE THEY IN THE BUILDING THAT'S ALREADY BUILT OR THE ONE THAT OR WHATEVER THAT ISN'T BUILT? SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCREEN, THE AREA IN YELLOW IS THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. OH, OKAY. SO THE RED IS WHAT DOES THE RED STAND FOR? SO THE RED WAS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS IS A PART OF THAT LOT. IT'S IT'S NOT TWO LOTS RIGHT. BUT BUT IT MOST LIKELY WILL BE. WE'LL SEE WITHIN THE PLAN WE DO ALLOW FOR SUBDIVISIONS. I SEE. BECAUSE THERE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE A NEED TO SUBDIVIDE AT SOME POINT, RIGHT? OKAY. AND SO IT SOUNDS LIKE, AMONG OTHER CHANGES, YOU'RE REMOVING THE SUBACUTE CARE AND REPLACING IT WITH MEMORY CARE. OKAY. SO DOES THAT MEAN THERE'S NO NURSING NURSING HOME FACILITY HERE? IT IS NOT A SKILLED NURSING FACILITY. OKAY. I SEE. AND BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS THAT NOW, THIS IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED. I DON'T RECALL THE INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IT. OKAY. BUT YEAH, I KNOW MY LIKE, MY MOTHER STAYED AT A WHAT WAS SORT OF A CCRC, EXCEPT IT DIDN'T HAVE ASSISTED LIVING. IT HAD INDEPENDENT LIVING AND NURSING CARE, WHICH WAS KIND OF WEIRD. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS IT'S IT'S CONTINUING ONLY SO FAR, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE. BUT IF THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO BUILD THESE DAYS AND WANT TO JOIN. OKAY. THEN MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, IS THERE I MEAN, CAN'T YOU JUST CHANGE THE ZONING WITHOUT CALLING IT A REDEVELOPMENT AREA? IS THERE SOME REASON, OTHER THAN CHANGING THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS, THAT YOU'RE MAKING IT A REDEVELOPMENT AREA? WELL, I DON'T RECALL THE THE THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE OWNER. BUT THIS WAS THE DIRECTION THAT WE WERE GOING IN. THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUTE DOES ALLOW US TO BE MUCH MORE SPECIFIC. OKAY. AND I THINK THERE WERE CONSIDERATION ABOUT HAVING ASSURANCES ABOUT WHAT THIS WOULD BE. AND SO BY, THROUGH THE THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, WE CAN INCLUDE AND REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONCEPTS THAT WERE PRESENTED SO THAT SOMEBODY ELSE CAN'T COME IN AND DO SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT, EVEN IF IT MATCHES THE SAME UNIT COUNT. OKAY. AND. AND THEY CAN'T SAY, JUST SEND IT TO THE ZONING BOARD AND ASK FOR A LOT OF VARIANCES. THEY, THEY COULD AND I'M NOT GOING TO PLAY LAWYER HERE. BUT IF YOU WERE TO DO THAT AND IT WAS A VERY DRAMATIC CHANGE IN ZONING, IT COULD BE VIEWED AT OR VARIANCES. IF YOU HAVE EXTENSIVE VARIANCES, IT COULD BE VIEWED AS A DE FACTO REZONING, WHICH IS REALLY NOT PERMITTED. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO CHALLENGE THAT SO AND THAT WOULD PUT THE AND THERE'S A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY WITH THAT TOO. MOST DEVELOPERS WOULD NOT WANT TO PURSUE MASSIVE VARIANCES BECAUSE IT'S SO UNCERTAIN WHETHER YOU'D GET THEM RIGHT. AND AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO I DON'T KNOW, BE APPLYING FOR GRANTS OR, OR HAVE CONDEMNATION OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS. IT'S JUST BASICALLY A WAY OF REZONING IT VERY SPECIFICALLY. YEAH. OH, OKAY. AND, SARAH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU RECALL, WHEN WE HAD THE ORIGINAL HEARING, IT WAS PRESENTED TO US THAT THAT PROPERTY, THEY REALLY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT. IT WAS IT WAS IT WAS WEIRDLY SHAPED. IT WAS IT IT IS AS IT WAS ZONED. AND GETTING FINANCING ETC., WHICH IS WHY WE DID AGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE A, AN AREA FOR REDEVELOPMENT. OKAY. YEAH. IT'S DEFINITELY A WEIRD SHAPE. IT IS. YEAH. THEY HAD A FEW EXPERTS TO TELL US THAT. YEAH, I COULD HAVE TOLD YOU THAT. SHERRY, QUICK QUESTION. OUR SCREENS ARE NOT WORKING. IT'S JUST. OH, NO. OKAY. THANKS FOR THE CONFIRMATION. I WAS JUST LIKE. OKAY. THEY WANTED. THEY WANTED TO REBOOT THE SYSTEM, BUT I DIDN'T WANT THEM TO TOUCH IT WHILE WE WERE HAVING A MEETING TONIGHT. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. NO WONDER THAT'S WHY YOU SEE US ALL GOING. I KNOW, YEAH. I'M SORRY. UNFORTUNATELY. NO. THAT'S FINE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWNSHIP AS A RESULT OF THE COURT CASE THAT SPECIFIED WHAT WHAT THE SPECS WOULD BE. AND NOW IT TURNS OUT, FROM THE DEVELOPER'S POINT OF VIEW, THAT SEEMS TO BE INCONVENIENT. AND SO THEY REQUESTED THAT WE DO THIS REDEVELOPMENT AND THEREBY REVISE WHAT [00:15:06] THE DEVELOPER CAN BUILD THERE. SO DEVELOPERS GETTING AN ADVANTAGE. WHAT'S THE ADVANTAGE FOR THE TOWN? HOW DO WE COME OUT AHEAD? WELL, THE THE ADVANTAGE FOR THEM. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, THIS SITE CLEARLY MET THE CRITERIA FOR AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF ITS INACTIVITY FOR SO LONG, EVEN HAVING BEEN ZONED FOR SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN FAIRLY WELL PLANNED OUT. THE THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. SO WHAT THE TOWN WILL GET IS THE TOWN WILL GET DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO ITS MASTER PLAN, WHICH IT DID NOT HAVE. IT WILL INCREASE ITS THE AVAILABILITY OF INDEPENDENT LIVING AGE RESTRICTED UNITS. IT WILL HAVE SOME THE ASSISTED LIVING BEDS AND AND ALSO BENEFITS IN SOME WAYS FROM FOR THE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLIANCE. AND MICHAEL, AS YOU JUST SAID THIS, THIS KIND OF PUTS THEM IN A SPOT WHERE THEY, THEY PRETTY MUCH HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED TO DO. CORRECT. YES. THERE'S THERE'S NO THIS REALLY LOCKS THEM INTO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO. SO, TONY, I GUESS WE COULD SAY THEY CAN'T COME TO US OR TO ZONING AND SAY WE CHANGED OUR MIND. WE WANT, YOU KNOW, 107 MCMANSIONS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. NO, THEY WERE LIMITED BY THE BY THE COURT AGREEMENT. RIGHT. IT'S A 74 AND 74 AND 74, WHICH IS LESS THAN 196. SO WE'RE LETTING THEM DEVELOP MORE THAN THEY WERE DEVELOPING. OKAY. I'M SORRY. MORE THAN 196, BUT NOT MUCH MORE. YEAH. SO THEY WERE ALREADY LOCKED IN. IT'S NOT. NOT AS IF THEY COULD COME IN AND DO SOMETHING CRAZY. SO I, I JUST IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE DEVELOPERS COMING OUT WAY AHEAD ON THIS NEGOTIATION THAT IT'S NOT NOT A FAIR GRANTING OF BENEFITS TO THE TWO SIDES. AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT MAKING THAT DECISION. THAT'S A TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE DECISION, ACTUALLY. IT'S ALREADY YEAH, IT'S ALREADY BEEN MADE. SO IT'S COME BACK TO YOU NOW. REMEMBER YOU YOU LOOKED AT A INVESTIGATIVE STUDY REPORT THAT MICHAEL'S OFFICE PREPARED. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED IT BE AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. GOVERNING BODY HAS APPROVED THAT PLAN, BUT THEY'RE REQUIRED BY THE STATE REDEVELOPMENT LAW TO SEND IT BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD ONE MORE TIME FOR A REVIEW FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE MASTER PLAN. SO THESE ARE ALL GOOD POINTS EVERYONE'S MAKING, BUT AT THIS STAGE THIS IS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. SO THE ONLY QUESTION TONIGHT IS IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN. AND YOUR PLANNER HAS ADVISED YOU THAT IT IS. IT MAY BE CONSISTENT. I'M NOT SURE IT'S BETTER THAN. YOU MAY RECALL I VOTED AGAINST THE REDEVELOPMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE. YEP. OKAY. WELL SO THE MOTION WOULD BE TO AGREE THAT THE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN, AND WE SEND THAT RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT? IT AGREES WITH THE MASTER PLAN. SO MOVED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ROLL CALL PLEASE. TARA BLODGETT. YES. HAMILTON. YES. MONEY. YES. ROBERTS. YES. SINGH. YES. KEMP. YES. YES. LOCKLEAR. YES. AND. KHAN. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS A A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. GO FIGURE. AND, MICHAEL. THIS IS AN INVESTIGATION. I'M SORRY. I'M GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF ON THIS. OH, OKAY. LET'S WAIT. MARK. BRIAN, DON'T LEAVE YET. SHERRY, DO YOU WANT TO JUST PUT THAT ON THE NEXT AGENDA, OR DO YOU WANT TO DISTRIBUTE IT TONIGHT? OKAY, WE CAN DO IT FOR THE NEXT. THAT'S FINE. OKAY, BRIAN, NOW YOU CAN GO AHEAD. SORRY. OKAY, I'LL RECUSE MYSELF. THANKS. OKAY. THIS IS AN AMENDED PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. [VI. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN – INVESTIGATION ] IT'S A NON CONDEMNATION FOR THE KEPNER TRAGO REDEVELOPMENT AREA, BETTER KNOWN AS VILLAGE WALK. AND, MICHAEL, IT'S YOU AGAIN. OKAY, MICHAEL, SINCE WE ARE HAVING A HEARING ON THIS, I'M GOING TO SWEAR YOU IN. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. YES. THANK YOU. SO THE THE THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION IS DATED MARCH 6TH. [00:20:02] AND THIS IS AN AMENDED PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION THAT KEPT THE TRIGO REDEVELOPMENT STUDY THAT WAS DONE. PREVIOUSLY THAT WAS DONE IN 2018. NO, NO. I'M SORRY. IT WAS PREVIOUS TO THAT, BUT THE PREVIOUS REDEVELOPMENT STUDY IS BEING AMENDED. AND THAT IS IT'S BEING AMENDED BECAUSE THE STUDY AREA HAS BEEN INCREASED TO INCLUDE BLOCK 28007, LOTS ONE AND TWO, WHICH IS A PORTION OF THE VILLAGE WALK MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEEN ONGOING ALONG 206 WHICH IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO MONTGOMERY CROSSING. THE ZONING FOR THIS TRACT RIGHT NOW IS THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE, BUT THE OVERLAY IS THE PLANNED MIXED USE DISTRICT, WHICH EXTENDS FROM THE EDGE, THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, ALL THE WAY TO ROUTE 206 WITHIN VILLAGE WALK. AND IT ALSO INCLUDES THE CORNER PROPERTIES WHICH THERE USED TO BE A TEXACO STATION THERE. YOU MAY HAVE HEARD AND I HEARD IT WAS TAKEN. I HEARD IT WAS TAKEN DOWN RECENTLY. HIT BY A TORNADO, AND IT'S GONE. BUT. SO THANKFULLY. SO ANYWAY, SO THIS IS PART OF THAT PLAN. MIXED USE OVERLAY DISTRICT, RIGHT? THE THE LOT IN QUESTION ARE THE TWO LOTS IN QUESTION. THE PARCEL IN QUESTION ARE OUTLINED IN RED HERE. AND THE EXHIBIT YELLOW IS THE EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT AREA. RED IS THE STUDY AREA THAT'S LOOKED AT AS NOW AS PART OF THE EXPANDED STUDY AREA. IT'S 3.3 ACRES. AND WHAT'S NOTABLE IS 0.3 ACRES OF IT IS ALREADY IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THERE'S A THIN SLICE TAMWORTH DRIVE CORRECT THAT WHEN TAMWORTH DRIVE WAS PUT IN THERE WAS A TRANSFER OF PROPERTY, THERE WAS A SUBDIVISION AND SO PORTION OF THAT IS NOW IN THE, IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THE SITE IN QUESTION, I'M GOING TO TRY TO FIND A LARGER. HERE WE GO. I'LL ZOOM IN HERE. WE TALK ABOUT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE. THIS IS A PORTION OF THE SITE THAT RECEIVED SITE PLAN APPROVAL IN 2018. AS PART OF THE OVERALL VILLAGE WALK DEVELOPMENT. AND THIS PORTION OF THE SITE IS A MIXED USE PORTION OF THE SITE, MEANING IT HAS A RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AS WELL AS RETAIL AND OTHER USES PERMITTED THERE. AND IT'S A KEY PIECE OF THE OVERALL PLAN, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. IT'S AN INTEGRAL PIECE AS IT BUTTS UP AND MAKES THE TRANSITION BETWEEN MONTGOMERY CROSSING AND THE ROUTE 206 SHOPS. AND IT WAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED. IT'S HOW IT CONFIGURES TO THAT. SO THAT CONFIGURATION WAS WAS VERY IMPORTANT. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE. RIGHT. ITS CONSTRUCTION STARTED THERE. NOW IT'S REALLY BECOME IT'S BEEN CLEARED. THERE WAS A BUILDING THERE AN OLD COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT'S BEEN REMOVED. AND NOW IT'S CONSTRUCTION, STAGING AND SOIL PILES AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. AND THE REASON WHY THE THIS SITE IS SO IMPORTANT TO THE OVERALL PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IS THAT, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S PART OF OUR THIRD ROUND HOUSING PLAN. AGAIN, THERE ARE 11 AFFORDABLE HOUSING APARTMENTS, MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS HERE THAT WERE TO BE DEED RESTRICTED AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN BUILT. IT FACES TAMWORTH DRIVE AND PROVIDES A FINISHED EDGE TO TAMWORTH DRIVE IN TERMS OF NOT LOOKING LIKE A CONSTRUCTION SITE OR THE BACK OF A STORE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT NEEDS THE, THE THE DESIGN OF THE PLAN, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WAS THAT WE HAD BUILDINGS FACING EACH OTHER ACROSS TAMWORTH DRIVE. THERE'S ALSO A RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. VILLAGE DRIVE, IF YOU CAN SEE ON THIS EXHIBIT THE VILLAGE DRIVE WITHIN MONTGOMERY CROSSING HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED TO THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY, AND THEN VILLAGE DRIVE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED TO THAT FIRST INTERNAL INTERSECTION FROM 206. BUT THAT MISSING LINK HAS NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED. AND THAT'S A RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS SITE. BECAUSE OF THE GRADE CHANGES THERE. THE BUILDING THAT'S GOING TO BE PUT THERE NEEDS TO ACTUALLY BE INTEGRATED WITH SOME AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT THERE ARE ENGINEERING CONCERNS AND CONSIDERATIONS IN TERMS OF STRUCTURAL SOIL SUPPORT AND THAT ROADWAY SUPPORT THAT HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AS THE BUILDING IS BUILT THERE. SO HOW THIS GETS DEVELOPED IS INTEGRAL TO THE COMPLETION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. CAN CAN I STOP YOU THERE, MICHAEL? BECAUSE I MY RECOLLECTION IS A LITTLE FAULTY HERE. IT WAS BACK IN 2018 THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS. IS THAT RIGHT? IT WAS SOMEBODY SOMEBODY TALKED ABOUT 2020, 21, 21. OKAY. YEAH. I DIDN'T THINK I WAS ACTUALLY ON THE PLANNING BOARD IN 18, BUT I REMEMBER THERE WAS CONTINGENCIES ON THIS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WITH REGARD TO [00:25:01] VILLAGE DRIVE. AND I GUESS I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE COULD RECALL WHAT THOSE SPECIFIC CONTINGENCIES WERE. THE I THINK IT'S PERTINENT TO THIS DISCUSSION IF YOU OR OR ANYBODY ELSE HAS HAS THAT INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. I BELIEVE I HAVE IT HERE. YEAH. THANK YOU. IT WAS THAT THE THE IF SHE IF SHE HAS THE OCCUPANCY OF THE TWO BUILDINGS FACING 206, THAT'S WHAT THEY COULD OCCUPY ONE OF THEM, BUT NOT THE SECOND ONE UNTIL THE ROAD IS BUILT. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT THE ROADS WERE. THE. I THINK ACTUALLY, THIS IS FROM THE 2021. THAT'S THE ONE. YES, YES. THE APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED TO OBTAIN UP TO 50% MICROPHONE. SURE. OH, SORRY. THE APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED TO OBTAIN UP TO 50% OF THE TEMPORARY CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR PROPOSED BUILDINGS A AND B, NOT TO EXCEED 1300 CUMULATIVE SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING SPACE. NO FURTHER CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY SHALL BE ISSUED FOR BUILDINGS A AND B UNTIL THE APPLICANT HAS COMPLETED THE ANCHOR BUILDING. STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS NEEDED TO FACILITATE COMPLETION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. THE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AGREEMENT WILL INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN A NEW JERSEY LICENSE, P STRUCTURE REPORT AND CERTIFICATION FOR THE ANCHOR BUILDING, ITS ABILITY TO SUPPORT VILLAGE DRIVE, ITS CONSTRUCTION AND CONTINUED OPERATION UPON ACCEPTANCE BY THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER. THE APPLICANT MAY THEN OBTAIN TEMPORARY COS FOR THE BALANCE OF BUILDINGS A AND B WHILE COMPLETING THE REMAINDER OF THE ANCHOR BUILDING AND BUILDINGS A AND B. I'M LOOKING FOR THE DEFINITION. THEY'RE THE TWO THAT ARE IN THE FRONT. YEAH, THE TWO FRONT. THOSE ARE THE TWO FRONT BUILDINGS. YEP. SO THAT THEY COULD GET UP TO 50% OCCUPANCY OF THE FIRST TWO BUILDINGS. RIGHT. OKAY, GREAT. SO BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, THOSE ARE THE BUILDINGS OUTSIDE OF THIS? YES. OR THIS STUDY AREA? CORRECT? YES. RIGHT. RIGHT. CORRECT. SO, SO I, I THE REASON I WAS ASKING THAT QUESTION AT THIS POINT IS, IS BECAUSE IS THAT A CONSIDERATION DURING FOR THIS STUDY AREA. I MEAN OR. WELL BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT. YEAH. RIGHT. WELL IN LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS OF THE CRITERIA OF THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING LAW, THERE'S IF YOU READ THE REPORT THERE'S CRITERIA A THROUGH H, YOU KNOW, AND THEY RELATE TO OBSOLESCENCE, YOU KNOW, DELETERIOUS CONDITIONS. I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THAT CONSTRUCTION SITE, THE WAY IT'S LEFT IS DELETERIOUS AT THIS POINT. BUT BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS, WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING LAW, THAT YOU CAN DESIGNATE PARCELS OR LANDS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY MEETING THOSE CRITERIA, BUT ARE NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. AND THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH THIS IS THAT THAT VACANT SITE? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANYTHING ELSE. IT JUST INCLUDES THAT. IF WHEN WE EXPAND THE STUDY AREA AND I AND WE LOOK AT THE STUDY AREA IT'S NOT ON ITS FACE IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT, BUT IT'S NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECT OF REDEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S DUE TO THE ACCESS AND AND ITS ROLE IN COMPLETING THE TAMWORTH DRIVE STREETSCAPE, COMMUNITY DESIGN VILLAGE DRIVE AND COMPLETING THAT PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY. SO. YOU KIND OF LOST ME, HONESTLY, AND I APOLOGIZE. YEAH. SO LET ME SORT IT AGAIN. WELL, WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? WHY DON'T WE LET YOU FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THEN WE WE CAN ALL. PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'M SORRY FOR INTERJECTING HERE. I JUST TO FRAME THE VERY GERMANE COMMENT. WELL, THE POINT I WAS MAKING IS THAT THIS SITE IS CRITICAL TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SINCE 2018, WITH AN AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL IN 2021. THEY STILL HAVE NOT PROGRESSED THE TOOLS WITHIN THE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING LAW, WHETHER THAT'S A FISCAL TOOL OR OTHER TOOLS TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY FOR A BETTER OR MORE MARKETABLE TYPE OF USE THAT STILL ACCOMPLISHES THAT CAN BE USED. AND THAT FOR THOSE REASONS THE LAND USE LAW ALLOWS YOU TO INCLUDE AREAS IN A REDEVELOPMENT AREA THAT DON'T MEET THE CRITERIA, BUT ARE NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S MY OPINION IN THIS CASE, IS THAT I THINK THAT THAT AREA HAD WE LOOKED AT THIS INITIALLY IN THE INITIAL STUDY OF THE WHOLE KEPNER TRIGO [00:30:08] AREA. AND WE HAD PUT THIS IN THERE AND IT DIDN'T MEET THE CRITERIA. I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE INCLUDED IT ALREADY. I WOULD HAVE SAID YES. IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS STUDY AREA, THIS SHOULD BE IN HERE. IT'S LESS THAN IT'S A 10TH OF THE AREA. THE WHOLE KEPNER TRIGO REDEVELOPMENT AREA IS 30 ACRES. THIS IS THREE ACRES, SO IT'S A 10TH OF THE AREA. SO IF YOU WERE TO DESIGNATE AN AREA OR FIND AN AREA THAT IS, YOU KNOW, 90% OR 75% MEETS THE CRITERIA IN A LOT OF CASES, YOU WILL INCLUDE THAT OTHER AREA BECAUSE THE GENERALITY MEETS THE RIGHT REDEVELOPMENT CRITERIA. SO HAD WE LOOKED AT THIS BACK THEN, WE WOULD HAVE SAID, SURE, THIS SHOULD BE WHY WASN'T IT INCLUDED? I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T REMEMBER. WELL, THAT'S WHY I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT TO TO TALK ABOUT THIS AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING AND I MAY HAVE A MISUNDERSTANDING OF I'M STILL A LITTLE BIT LOST, BUT. THE REASON THAT WE MET IN 2021 WAS BECAUSE THE SEQUENCING OF THE DEVELOPMENT WAS TO DEVELOP THIS PARCEL FIRST, AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT. THEY WANTED TO DEVELOP A AND B, WHATEVER WE'RE CALLING THAT. THAT WAS THE AREA C AT THE TIME. NOT TO CONFUSE LETTERS, BUT BUILDINGS A AND B WERE IN AREA C SORRY. AND BUT THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN 2018 REQUIRED THEM TO BUILD WHAT I'LL CALL THE STARBUCKS JERSEY MIKE'S PROPERTY FIRST, THEN THE AREA IN RED AND THEN THE TWO BUILDINGS. AND AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT AGAIN UNDER CLAIMS OF MARKETABILITY AND FINANCING COSTS AND ALL THE HARDSHIPS THEY HAD TO ENDURE. AND, AND AND THE ONE REASON THAT WE I I'LL, I'LL SAY FOR MY OWN SELF THAT THAT WE WE DECIDED TO AGREE TO THAT WAS TO DEVELOP THAT VILLAGE DRIVE BECAUSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT THAT WAS NECESSARY TO THE TOWN FOR A FLOW OF TRAFFIC, FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT IT IS NECESSARY. RIGHT. SO WHAT WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY ASKING? WHAT? WHAT IS WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR RIGHT NOW? IF WE COULD JUST CLARIFY THAT. WELL, WELL, YEAH. TO SUMMARIZE, CAN I JUST I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL GET THERE, THAT THE WELL KNOW THAT THE 50% THAT'S IN THERE IS SEPARATE FROM WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT. YES. THEY I DON'T THINK THEY CAN GET MORE THAN 50% COS THEY CANNOT AT THIS POINT. CORRECT. WELL UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE IN THE REDEVELOPMENT STUDY WHICH I DIDN'T SEE, THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT THE DEVELOPMENT, THE SEQUENCING OF DEVELOPMENT. I MEAN, WHAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE, WHAT HE'S GOING TO OBTAIN HERE IS HE WOULD HAVE A PILOT, RIGHT? WELL, WE'RE NOT THERE YET. I KNOW THAT. BUT, I MEAN, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS JUST WHETHER TO DESIGNATE THIS. RIGHT? RIGHT. AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THIS SITE IS IMPORTANT NOT JUST TO THE DEVELOPER, BUT TO THE PUBLIC. THE VILLAGE COMPLETELY AGREE. AND, YOU KNOW, AND MONTGOMERY CROSSING. ET CETERA. ET CETERA. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, ON ITS OWN, IT DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA. HOWEVER, AS PART OF THE OVERALL REDEVELOPMENT AREA, KEPNER TRIGO, IT SHOULD BE INCLUDED BECAUSE THE STATUTE ALLOWS YOU TO DO THAT, THAT YOU CAN INCLUDE IT IN AN AREA REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. BUT THE AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT OR THE STUDY THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE ON DOES NOT SPEAK TO THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION STAGING AGREEMENT FOR BUILDINGS ONE AND TWO. WE ACKNOWLEDGE IT. I MEAN, THERE'S A THERE'S A THERE'S AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THERE'S BEEN THAT THERE'S THERE'S AGREEMENTS THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN THINGS THAT AREN'T GETTING DONE. RIGHT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO US NOW. THAT WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THIS IS NOT PROGRESSING. AND THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS FOR THAT. YOU KNOW, I CAN SAY THAT INTEREST RATES ARE HORRIBLE. NOW. COMMERCIAL RATES ARE TERRIBLE. LENDERS WILL NOT LEND ON RETAIL SPACE. THE BUILDING THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT HERE HAS A RETAIL GROUND FLOOR FACING THE PARKING LOT. IT'S A THREE STORY BUILDING ON THE 206 SIDE. IT'S A ONE STORY OR TWO STORY BUILDING FACING MONTGOMERY CROSSING. BANKS WON'T FINANCE RETAIL, RIGHT? IT'S A NONSTARTER. SO? SO THERE'S LOTS OF REASONS. NO, I GET THAT. I GET THAT, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A TABLE OF INTEREST RATES IN THERE THAT IS PRETTY SCARY. IT'S VERY SCARY. BUT BUT BUT BUT AGAIN IT'S THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE. OR I SHOULD SAY THE 50% CO IS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH. THAT'S THIS POTENTIAL AREA OF REDEVELOP. SEPARATE ISSUE. RIGHT. IT WAS NOT PART OF THE CONSIDERATION. IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER TO DESIGNATE IT OR NOT. [00:35:06] OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. AND SO BUT BUT YOU KNOW, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MASTER PLAN IS IMPORTANT, PARTICULARLY THE CIRCULATION PLAN ELEMENT WHICH CALLS FOR VILLAGE DRIVE. I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS THAT WE'RE ALL IN THE PLAN. YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN THREE MASTER PLANS THAT HAVE SAID THAT THE THE COMPLETION AND MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, TAMWORTH DRIVE AND THE RESIDENTS ALONG THERE ARE NOT LOOKING OUT AT SOME PILE OF DIRT AND WEEDS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. AND THERE'S ALSO AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT TO THIS, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. AND SO IF YOU ARE TO DESIGNATE THIS OR RECOMMEND DESIGNATION TO THE GOVERNING BODY. YEAH, WE WE CAN'T WE CAN'T DESIGNATE SIR. THEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA WOULD BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE THESE TWO LOTS. NOT THE ENTIRETY OF THE VILLAGE WALK SITE. ONLY THESE TWO LOTS, AND THAT WOULD GIVE THE ABILITY FOR THE TOWN TO REEXAMINE WHAT'S GOING ON THERE AND FIND WAYS TO GET THIS GOING THROUGH THAT. THE TOOLS, WHETHER THAT'S CHANGING OF SOME ZONING REQUIREMENTS, AMENDING, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY COME BACK WITH AN AMENDED SITE PLAN. WE DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THERE'S FISCAL THINGS THEY CAN DO IF A PILOT IS HELPFUL. BECAUSE WHEN YOU KNOW, ALL THESE THINGS ARE IN PLAY, BUT IT'S UP TO THE GOVERNING BODY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CORRECT MECHANISMS ARE TO HELP GET THAT GOING. BUT THE FIRST STEP IS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS AREA CAN BE ADDED. AND IT'S NECESSARILY NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE COMPLETION OF THE KEPNER. THIS WOULD EFFECTIVELY COMPLETE THAT ENTIRE AREA'S REDEVELOPMENT. SO. RIGHT. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. WELL, WE'LL GET TO YOU AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT. HOW'S THAT? OKAY. DO WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? PODIUM. GOOD EVENING, DEBORAH KEENAN. KEENAN. HELLO. HELLO, EVERYONE. MISS KEENAN, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM ANY TESTIMONY YOU GIVE THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO, THANK YOU. I DO. I THINK THIS IS VERY SAD THAT THIS HAS COME TO THIS. THIS IS A BAILOUT, IN MY OPINION, OF A DEVELOPER WHO HAS NOT COMPLETED. THERE IS A PLAN IN PLACE, AND THIS DEVELOPER HAS COME AND NOT FINISHED THEIR LAST PORTION OF THIS. AND WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS FOR YEARS, THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE OF THE WAY THIS WAS SEQUENCED. AND SO WE PUT THINGS IN PLACE AND THE PLANNING BOARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS HAPPENED. AND NOW THIS SAME DEVELOPER, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING DEVELOPMENT. IT'S BEEN STALLED, BUT NOT FOR FIVE YEARS, BUT IT'S BASICALLY JUST BEING STALLED BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER WANTED TO DO THIS SEQUENCE IN THIS WAY. AND WE THIS WAS AGREED TO A WHILE AGO. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN PUSHING BACK IN A LONG TIME. THIS, IN ESSENCE GIVES IS A BAILOUT OF THIS SPECIFIC DEVELOPER. THIS DEVELOPER HAS GONE BANKRUPT AND THIS HAS BEEN ABSENT FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. AND THEN WE NOW NEED AS A TOWNSHIP TO COME IN AND GET A NEW DEVELOPER TO COME IN. THIS IS THE EXISTING DEVELOPER IS GOING TO GET THIS AS A REDEVELOPMENT AND A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES, WHICH MEANS THE TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR SOME OF THIS PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES MEANS THEY WILL NOT PAY THE FULL TAXES. OKAY. I THINK IT IS TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE TO BE LOOKING AT THIS AS A REDEVELOPMENT AT THIS STAGE. IF THIS DEVELOPER HAS COME BACK AND USED EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE AND PROVEN THAT, AND IS NOT GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPING IT AND IS WALKING AWAY, THEN YOU MIGHT MIGHT TALK ABOUT IT, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. IT'S STILL BEING DEVELOPED. I THINK THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A TRAVESTY IF THIS MOVES FORWARD. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? BRETT PUGLISI, VILLAGE WALK UP. SORRY, SIR. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. YES. THANK YOU. SO BRETT PUGLISI, VILLAGE WALK IN MONTGOMERY. DEVELOPER. YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANYTHING I KNOW, MR. SULLIVAN MADE A NICE PRESENTATION. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO CLEAR UP, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO. MR. BLODGETT HAD BROUGHT UP THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE AB CEO. YES. THOSE ARE STILL IN PLACE. SEPARATE FROM THIS. WE RECEIVED OUR TCO ON BUILDING B, WHICH IS WHERE AT&T JUST OPENED LAST WEEK. PJ'S PANCAKE HOUSE SCHEDULED TO OPEN. THEY'RE BUILDING A CO RESTRICTION. NO ACTION THERE FOR THE TIME BEING. UNTIL YES, THE 50% OF THE STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS ARE COMPLETED. OF THE THE ANCHOR BUILDING TO FACILITATE THE COMPLETION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. WE ARE STILL THE DEVELOPERS HERE. WE ARE COMMITTED TO THIS PROJECT. WE HAVE TO DATE COMPLETED. ALL OF OUR OTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BESIDES THE SECTION OF THAT SECTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. [00:40:04] WE'VE WIDENED ROUTE 206. WE HAVE RECONFIGURED THE INTERSECTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE IN 206, INCREASING SAFETY AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY. WE COMPLETED AND DEDICATED BRECKNELL WAY, WHICH IS NOW ALLEVIATING TRAFFIC OFF OF 206. WE'VE INSTALLED THOUSANDS OF FEET OF PUBLIC SIDEWALKS SPECIFICALLY LEADING TO A PUBLIC BUS STOP. BROUGHT EVERYTHING UP TO ADA STANDARDS. AND WE'RE HERE, AS MR. SOLON HAD SAID SEEKING YOUR SUPPORT. WE APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE AND YOUR SUPPORT THROUGH THE YEARS AS WE'VE PROGRESSED THROUGH THIS PROJECT. WE HOPE THAT YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH WHAT YOU'VE SEEN TO DATE. THIS SPECIFIC LOCATION, AS MR. SULLIVAN HAD POINTED OUT, IS VERY DIFFICULT. THE THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE HAS PROVEN TO BE VERY DIFFICULT. THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES WILL ACT AS RETAINING WALLS TO FACILITATE THE COMPLETION OF VILLAGE DRIVE, AS WELL AS SUPPORT TAMWORTH DRIVE. ON THE ON THE WEST SIDE AS OPPOSED TO STANDARD CONSTRUCTION, THESE ARE 20 FOOT POURED CONCRETE WALLS WITH STEEL REBAR REINFORCED. THE ANCHOR BUILDING. INSTEAD OF A TYPICAL BUILDING THAT SIZE THREE FOOT FOOTINGS. THESE ARE 11 FOOT FOOTINGS. THE THE AS MR. SULLIVAN HAD POINTED OUT, INTEREST RATES ARE EXTREMELY HIGH. CONSTRUCTION COSTS WE'VE SEEN WENT UP TO ABOUT 40%. THEY'VE NOW PLATEAUED AT ABOUT 30. THE SPECIFICALLY CONCRETE AND STEEL. SO WE ARE HERE SEEKING YOUR SUPPORT AND YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR THIS AS A MEANS TO CONTINUE TO TO COMPLETE THIS DEVELOPMENT AND BRING IT TO FRUITION IN A PLACE THAT THE THE TOWN CAN CONTINUE TO ENJOY. SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT. BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT I CAN HELP CLEAR UP, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO. THANK YOU. QUICK QUESTION, MR. PUGLISI. YES. AND THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS FROM SOME FOLKS HERE. IS IS IT STILL TO COMPLETE THE LOOP ROAD? DOES IT STILL HAVE TO BE THE WALL? THE WALL AS PART OF THAT COMPLETED BUILDING? YES. SO THERE IS NO. YOU'RE TELLING US TONIGHT THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO COMPLETE THAT LOOP ROAD OTHER THAN HAVING IT BE THE WALL OF THAT BUILDING. CORRECT. CORRECT. OKAY. AND WE'VE ALREADY COMPLETED THE RECON SUPPORTING WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VILLAGE DRIVE. FACING VILLAGE CHOPPER THREE. THIS IS THE LAST, LAST PIECE OF THE PUZZLE. OKAY. EXCUSE ME. IF IF THE BUILDING WASN'T BEING BUILT, THERE COULD BE A RETAINING WALL THERE THAT THAT WOULD WORK JUST AS WELL TO SUPPORT THE VILLAGE DRIVE, RIGHT? I SUPPOSE. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MICHAEL. MICHAEL. ME HERE. SO WHAT WE UNDERSTAND AT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE IS THAT WHAT CHARBEL DID? THERE WAS A PORTION OF THAT WHERE THIS THIS BUILDING THAT WE THAT'S UP IN THE QUESTION, WHICH IS GOING TO BE WAS PART OF THE AREA OF YOU COULD BRING IT INTO THE AREA OF NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. AND THAT IS THE REASON THAT IF THEY STARTED COMPLETING AND I'M AND THIS IS I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. IF THEY STARTED COMPLETING PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND AND STARTED WORKING ON THE ROAD BEFORE THEN, THAT THAT OPPORTUNITY OF IT BECOMING AN AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE LOST. SO IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME. IF THEY STARTED BUILDING THE THE BUILDING RIGHT, WITHOUT US MOVING THIS FORWARD UNDER A AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT OR PILOT OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, A DIFFERENT FACTS, YOU MAY COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION, BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT FACT. OKAY. OTHER COMMENTS. THANK YOU. AND CAN YOU CAN YOU LOOK AT THE MIC? THE MIC. THE MIC. THERE YOU GO. YOU COULD PULL IT DOWN. YOU COULD PULL IT DOWN. THERE YOU GO. AND STEAL. I JUST WANT TO. I JUST NEED TO. I NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN. AND. DO YOU LIVE IN MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, MA'AM? YES. OKAY. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM ANY TESTIMONY YOU GIVE THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO. I'M HUNG UP ON THE PART THAT PAUL BROUGHT UP ABOUT IT BEING [00:45:05] SEQUENCED. AND THE TOWNSHIP, OR THAT THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T FOLLOW THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED FIRST. AND I'M I'M RATHER WONDERING WHY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. AND THEN I'M CONFUSED ABOUT THE FACT THAT BANKS WON'T FINANCE RETAIL. BUT THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS ALWAYS TO HAVE RETAIL. SO I'M CONFUSED ABOUT THAT POINT, AND I DO HAVE CONCERN. HOW IS THIS GOING TO BE PAID FOR THROUGH TAXPAYER MONEY. AND I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, THAT IT WASN'T THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN AND NOW IS COMING BACK, AND IT WILL BE THE TAXPAYERS WHO WILL BE PAYING FOR THIS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S MY CONCERN. MR.. LET ME TRY AND CLARIFY FOR YOU A LITTLE BIT. THE DEVELOPER HAD A PHASED PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY, AND WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING IN THE RED, I BELIEVE, WAS PHASE TWO. THE DEVELOPER CAME BACK TO US AND SAID, I'D LIKE TO ALTERNATE CHANGE THE PHASING PROCESS. I'D LIKE TO BUILD A TWO ALONG 206 FIRST AND DO THE OTHER SECOND. AND THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVED THAT, BUT WITH ONE CONDITION. AND THAT IS YOU CAN'T OCCUPY BOTH OF THOSE BUILDINGS NEXT TO 206 UNTIL YOU HAVE FINISHED VILLAGE ROAD. THROAT. SO WE APPROVED, ALTERED, CHANGING THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. BUT WE DIDN'T APPROVE. SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE DELAYED VILLAGE ROAD EVEN FURTHER. WE DEFINITELY WANTED VILLAGE ROAD. CORRECT, TONY. THANK YOU. MICHAEL. THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR YOU. MAYBE FOR MR. LISI. WAS WAS THERE A. BENEFIT TO SOMEONE BY NOT HAVING THIS AS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA? INITIALLY, NO, IT WASN'T CONSIDERED. THERE WAS NO BENEFIT TO TO NOT INCLUDING IT. IT WASN'T PART OF THE STUDY AREA. SO IT WASN'T LOOKED AT. OKAY. AND THAT WAS DONE. AND THAT WAS DONE WHEN I'M SORRY. WHEN WAS THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN? 2016. 2016. THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION. THE SHA BELL PROPERTY OR WHAT WE'RE CALLING IT. YEAH. I CAN PULL IT UP. RIGHT. THIS IS NOT THE FOUR CORNERS AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. IT WAS 2018. RIGHT. SO THAT WAS BEFORE THE OTHER 2018. THE OTHER AREAS OF THAT CORNER. YEAH. YEAH. YOU JUST ADD IT UP OR SOMEONE JUST HAD IT UP. OH. HE DID. OH, YOU MOVED IT. YEAH. I'M SORRY. THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. OH, OKAY. I'M SORRY. THERE YOU GO. THE PREVIOUS ONE IN YELLOW. THAT WAS 2018, WHICH WAS. THAT WAS THE 2018. THAT WAS THE STUDY AREA. THE ENTIRE STUDY AREA WAS DESIGNATED. IS THERE A REASON WHY A DEVELOPER WOULD NOT WANT TO BE IN A REDEVELOPMENT AREA? JUST IN GENERAL? NOT IN THIS CASE. YOU KNOW WHAT? IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT THE FACTS ARE. I MEAN, I'VE, WE'VE DONE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS WHERE WE'VE, YOU KNOW, LOADED ON DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR PEOPLE AND THEY WERE AGAINST IT. RIGHT. IT DIDN'T TAKE ANYTHING AWAY AND LOAD IT ON NEW DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BECAUSE YOU COULD DO THAT. IT COULD BE AN OVERLAY IF YOU WANTED TO. RIGHT. AND THEN WE'VE HAD TIMES WHEN THEY WEREN'T IN AND THEY WERE LIKE, HEY, WHY AREN'T I IN THERE? YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTOOD IT AND THEY THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE SOME BENEFITS AND THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES THERE. BUT ANY ONE OF THOSE TOOLS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUTE THAT A MUNICIPALITY MAY EMPLOY, IT'S THEIR DECISION AS TO WHETHER THEY EMPLOY THEM OR NOT. SURE. SO THEY BUT THE DEVELOPER INITIALLY MADE THE DECISION NOT TO BE PART OF THE AREA. NO, IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OWNER DEVELOPER, NOTHING LIKE THAT. IT WAS A MUNICIPAL DECISION AS TO WHAT TO STUDY. WHAT WAS IT? POSSIBLY A SUCCESSFULLY FUNCTIONING SHOPPING CENTER THAT NOBODY WAS THINKING OF DOING ANYTHING WITH? I DO NOT RECALL, BUT BUT I WILL SAY, I WILL SAY THIS IF IF A DEVELOPER GETTING PERMANENT CEOS AND BEING ABLE TO OCCUPY THOSE BUILDINGS IS DEPENDENT ON THEM DOING VILLAGE DRIVE AND VILLAGE DRIVE IS DEPENDENT ON THEM HAVING A BUILDING THAT IS SPECIALIZED IN ORDER TO FUNCTION AS A RETAINING WALL, AND THAT IS MEANT TO BE AN ANCHOR BUILDING. AND THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE THAT TENANT YET. BUT IF I WERE THAT DEVELOPER, I WOULD HAVE BUILT THAT BUILDING AS SOON AS I COULD. I MEAN, IT'S IT'S TELLING THAT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE FINANCING AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON LENDING. [00:50:03] I JUST KNOW WHAT THE DEVELOPERS TELL ME. NOT THIS DEVELOPER, BUT LOTS OF OTHER DEVELOPERS. RIGHT. BUT THAT IF IF SINCE 2018 OR 2021, THIS IS STILL SITTING HERE AND IT'S NOT GETTING BUILT. IT'S NOT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO CARRY THE COST OF THE LAND. THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. TIME IS EVERYTHING, AND THAT'S IN MY WORLD. WHEN I'M GETTING BEAT ON, IT'S BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS ARE LIKE, WE GOT TO GO, WE GOT TO GO, WE GOT TO GO. I CAN'T CARRY THIS LAND. SO FROM A MOTIVATION STANDPOINT, THERE SHOULD BE EVERY MOTIVATION IN THE WORLD FOR THIS DEVELOPER OR WHOEVER THE DEVELOPER IS TO GET THIS DONE, AND IT'S NOT HAPPENING. AND SO THE MUNICIPALITY THINKS THAT IT'S WORTHWHILE. THE GOVERNING BODY SAYS, HEY, WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING HERE. WE CAN'T. STATUS QUO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. YEAH, STATUS QUO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, RIGHT? WELL, I WANT TO I WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE ARE NOT VOTING TO APPROVE THIS. WE ARE VOTING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, TO KNOW. WE'RE VOTING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. YES. TO PURSUE A STUDY. TO PURSUE A STUDY. THAT'S RIGHT. NO, NO, NO TO TO ALLOW TO DESIGNATE IT, TO DESIGNATE IT AS A REDEVELOPMENT AREA. YOU ALREADY HAVE A STUDY IN FRONT OF YOU. STUDIES DONE, STUDIES THERE. SO WHAT WHAT WE WOULD VOTE ON IS TO SAY YES. TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE, WE BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR THIS TO BE A REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO EXPAND THE KEPNER TRIGO REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO BE EXPANDED TO EXPAND THIS PIECE. SO WE'RE NOT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE CAN ACCEPT OUR RECOMMENDATION. THEY CAN NOT GO ALONG WITH IT. ENTIRELY UP TO THEM. OKAY. NOW, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR. SO THE PREVIOUSLY DEFINED REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN YELLOW WOULD SUBSUME THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY IN RED. SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, THOUGH? BECAUSE THAT STUDY HAS ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED AND BUILT UPON AND ACTUALLY LIVED IN. SO I DON'T I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IN ACTUALITY, WHAT DO WE WHAT WILL WE BE ALLOWING. WELL, SO SO LISTEN, THIS IS MICHAEL'S TO EXPLAIN. LET ME LET ME SAY SO. IT WOULD NOT CHANGE ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO ANY DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS WITHIN THE EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THE CONSTRUCTION THAT'S GOING ON NOW IN THE MULTIFAMILY, THE STACKED TOWNHOUSES OUT AT CHARTWELL, THEY WILL CONTINUE. EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN BUILT. THEY'RE STILL FINISHING UP THE ROADS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I DON'T THINK THOSE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE FINISHED UNTIL VILLAGE DRIVE IS DONE. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE TOPPED OUT UNTIL VILLAGE DRIVE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THAT'S VILLAGE DRIVE. ET CETERA. ET CETERA. SO THE ZONING RIGHT NOW FOR THE AREA THAT'S UNDER STUDY TONIGHT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE EXPANSION AREA THAT HAS THE SAME ZONING. IT'S THE PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT AREA. IT'S GOT DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS. IT'S THE MIXED USE COMPONENT, RIGHT? IT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE TO CHANGE. AND IF IT CHANGES, IF IT NEEDS TO CHANGE FOR ANY REASON, IT CAN BE CHANGED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THAT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD BE AMENDED. IT WOULD NOT BE AMENDED TO CREATE MIXED USE ZONING IN MONTGOMERY CROSSING, BUT IT COULD BE AMENDED TO MODIFY THE ZONING ON ON THE VILLAGE WALK SITE AS IF NECESSARY. I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S HYPOTHETICAL. I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. THE ZONING THAT THEY HAVE AND THE APPROVALS THAT THEY HAVE STAND. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES AND 17 SECONDS OF YOUR FIVE MINUTES LEFT. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ORIGINALLY THIS PIECE WAS NOT PART OF REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY HAD AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER. SO IT WAS NOT IT WOULDN'T FIT IN FOR REDEVELOPMENT. AND THE ONLY REASON THAT YOU'RE NOW TALKING ABOUT IT BEING REDEVELOPMENT IS BECAUSE THOSE BUILDINGS WERE REMOVED AND THOSE BUSINESSES WERE MOVED IN DIFFERENT PLACES AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THIS SEEMS TO ME TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A SNEAKY WAY. IT'S IN THIS STATE BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF A OF A DEVELOPMENT. IT WAS FINE BEFORE A DEVELOPMENT STARTED TO HAPPEN, AND IT WAS JUST BECAUSE OF A PHASED APPROACH. SO THAT'S WHY THAT PIECE IS IS STILL THERE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. CAN ARE WE GOING TO DISCUSS HER? YEAH. LET'S DO. I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC OPINION? YES. SO MOVED. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. OKAY. NOW WE CAN HAVE OUR DISCUSSION. TONY, YOU. YOU MENTIONED THE STREET VILLAGE DRIVE AS PART OF THE JUSTIFICATION FOR DOING THE REDEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE AREA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT REDEVELOPING? YEAH. YES. SO I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU'RE USING THAT AS A MOTIVATION FOR DOING IT WHEN IT'S NOT IN THE AREA THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING. THE LINKAGE BETWEEN VILLAGE DRIVES CONSTRUCTION. [00:55:03] I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THE RETAINING WALL AND THE BUILDING, THE SPECIALIZED BUILDING AND HOW THAT RELATIONSHIP WORKS. IT'S PART OF THE THE CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. THEY'RE INTEGRAL. WELL, WHEN WHEN THE DEVELOPER APPEARED AND WANTED TO CHANGE THE SEQUENCE OF PHASES AND BUILD A AND B FIRST. HE ACCEPTED THE RESTRICTION THAT SAID, YOU CAN'T PUT ANY TENANT IN VILLAGE B UNTIL YOU FINISH VILLAGE DRIVE. HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING WHEN HE SAID THAT. SO THAT MEANS HE CAN GO AHEAD AND BUILD VILLAGE DRIVE. HE MAY HAVE TO BUILD A RETAINING WALL TO DO IT, BUT THAT'S PART OF BUILDING VILLAGE DRIVE. AND HE AGREED TO DO THAT. YEAH. SO WHY REDEVELOP. USING VILLAGE DRIVE AS AN EXCUSE TO DO REDEVELOPMENT? SEEMS TO ME STRANGE CONSIDERING THAT THAT'S NOT WITHIN THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED. WELL, AS I SAID, I THINK THEY'RE LINKED. I THINK THE, THE, THE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY IS INNATELY LINKED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE BASED ON THE SITE PLAN AND THE. AND THE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO TAMWORTH DRIVE AND MONTGOMERY CROSSING. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. WELL, WHAT WOULD BE THE CONSEQUENCE OF OUR NOT AGREEING TO THIS PROPOSAL? THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION, TONY. AND AND IF MR. PUGLISI WANTS TO COME UP AND ANSWER THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. WELL, THE ULTIMATE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT, AS MR. SULLIVAN HAD POINTED OUT, THAT A JOB LIKE THIS, GIVEN THE CURRENT ECONOMIC SITUATION WITH RESTRICTIONS, SEVERE RESTRICTIONS ON FINANCING CONSEQUENCES, IS DELAY OR INCOMPLETION. LIKE I SAID, WE'RE WE'RE HERE. WE STARTED THIS PROCESS ABOUT A YEAR AGO. I WON'T VILLAGE DRIVE. I WANT OUR TCO RESTRICTION LIFTED. I WOULD LOVE FOR THIS TO GET DONE. WE'RE HERE, WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TO KEEP THINGS ON TRACK, GIVEN THE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES, BECAUSE THINGS HAVE OBVIOUSLY DRASTICALLY CHANGED SINCE THE DAY WE PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND TO TODAY. IS THAT SATISFIED? SATISFACTORY? OBVIOUSLY. DRASTICALLY CHANGED, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THAT OBVIOUS TO ME. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN? AGAIN, INTEREST RATES ARE QUADRUPLED. CONSTRUCTION COSTS ARE UP 30%. FINANCING IS SEVERELY RESTRICTED FROM INSTITUTIONAL BANKS. OKAY. THANKS. NOW, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE WERE TO VOTE TO APPROVE THIS, THAT, THEN THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE ABLE TO GET SOME MONEY FROM THE TOWNSHIP IN TERMS OF REDUCED TAXES OR NO TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES FOR A FEW YEARS SO THAT THEY COULD BUILD THE ROAD AND THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC. PLUS, YOU KNOW, REMOVE AN EYESORE. I, I PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW, DON'T NOTICE THINGS LIKE THAT AFTER A WHILE. SO BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DO. SO IT WOULD BE A CHOICE BETWEEN MAYBE EVERYBODY IN TOWN HAVING THEIR PROPERTY TAXES GO UP AND EVERYBODY IN TOWN NOT GETTING TRAFFIC RELIEF WHEN THEY DRIVE THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION, ESPECIALLY AT RUSH HOUR. RIGHT. TO ME, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION TO ASK THE VOTERS. I MEAN, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE FORCED OUT OF TOWN BY THE RAISED TAXES. SOME PEOPLE MIGHT SAY, I CAN'T STAND THE COMMUTE ANYMORE AND LEAVE TOWN. WELL, I GUESS GOOD NEWS, GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS. WE'RE NOT ELECTED OFFICIALS, SO WE CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION. IT TRULY IS UP TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO IS VOTE TO RECOMMEND OR NOT. I THINK ALONG WITH EVERYBODY ELSE HERE AND IN THE TOWNSHIP ARE DISAPPOINTED THAT WE'RE HERE. I, FOR THOSE WHO ARE ON THE PLANNING BOARD AT THAT TIME, KNOW THAT I WAS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS AND THAT THE 50% WAS, YOU KNOW, SOPHIE'S CHOICE TO GET IT DONE. AND YET, HERE WE ARE TODAY, AND I THINK WE WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL ISSUES. [01:00:11] THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS. WE GET THAT. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE MADE A DECISION ON BACK IN 2021 BASED ON A SET OF FACTS. AND THAT SET OF FACTS POTENTIALLY SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED THE CONTINGENCY THAT INTEREST RATES MIGHT GO UP AND COSTS MIGHT GO UP. THIS WAS JUST POST COVID. SO WE KNEW THAT THE WORLD WAS, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY GOING TO BE AFFECTED FOR YEARS. SO. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. I DID JUST WANT TO CLARIFY NOT NOT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT I'M COMPLETELY WELL VERSED IN, BUT THERE ARE STILL PAYMENTS BEING MADE. YOU KNOW, IF THIS REMAINS UNDEVELOPED AND THERE ARE NO TAX PAYMENTS BEING MADE WITH DEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE STILL PAYMENTS BEING ALLOCATED TO THE TOWNSHIP. SO WE'RE CLEAR AND GOOD POINT. AND MAYBE. YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYBE, MICHAEL, IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE US A 45 SECOND. NOW, THAT MIGHT BE TOUGH. EDUCATION ON WHAT THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUE WOULD MEAN FOR A PILOT IN TERMS OF REDUCED FINANCING COSTS. ARE THERE ABATEMENTS ON TAXES? NOT FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, BUT JUST IN GENERAL WHAT AN AREA FOR REDEVELOPMENT WOULD GIVE US. WELL, WOULD GIVE A BUILDING. I CAN TELL YOU GENERALLY HOW GENERALLY CORRECT A PILOT WOULD WORK. BUT YOU KNOW. AND IT'S EVERYTHING IS NEGOTIABLE, RIGHT. IT'S ALL NEGOTIABLE. IT'S BASED ON PROFESSIONALS WHO REVIEW THESE THINGS. BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT THERE'S A DEVELOPER GETS A REDEVELOPER, GETS A LOWER TAX PAYMENT, AND IT'S NOT CALLED A TAX PAYMENT. IT'S CALLED AN ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE. AND THE TERM FOR THAT IN A REDEVELOPMENT AREA COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 5 TO 30 YEARS. OKAY. AND THAT'S NEGOTIATED. AND MAYBE THERE'S THERE'S STEPS IN IT RELATED TO WHATEVER. BUT WHAT THAT MEANS IS ACTUALLY THAT THERE'S MORE OF THAT ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE THAT'S ALLOCATED TO THE TOWNSHIP THAN WOULD BE UNDER A NORMAL TAX SITUATION. OKAY. BUT THAT'S ALL, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBERS AND AND WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GETTING FOR THAT NEED TO BE REALLY RELATED TO SOME PUBLIC BENEFIT. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS OF MOST PILOTS ARE THERE BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER IS DOING SOMETHING AT A BASELINE. AND THE TOWN THAT THE TOWNSHIP NEEDS, THE TOWN WANTS. WE WANT A ROAD, WE WANT STREAM RESTORATION. WE WANT THIS OR A BIKE PATH. AND THEN THE COSTS GO UP AND THAT'S WHAT THAT IS USED FOR. SO IN GENERAL TERMS, THAT'S HOW A PILOT WOULD GENERALLY WORK. OKAY. BUT I'M NO EXPERT. RIGHT. GOT IT. BUT IN THIS SITUATION THE TOWN IS JUST LOOKING FOR THE DEVELOPER TO DO WHAT THEY HAD SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO. SO, RIGHT? YEAH. AND PILOTS ALSO HELP A MUNICIPALITY WITH THE TAXES COMPARED TO THE TAXES GOING 70% TO SCHOOLS. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THIS, BUT ANYWAYS, I GET THIS DISCUSSION IS GETTING INTO A LOT OF THINGS, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOU KNOW, AS WE KNOW, OUR TAX BASE IS 70% TO THE SCHOOLS AND PILOTS, RIGHT, ARE DIFFERENT IN THAT THEY GO TO THE MUNICIPALITY. SO SO THERE IS A BENEFIT. THERE IS DEFINITELY AND THAT'S THAT'S POTENTIALLY. YES. RIGHT. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION ALONG THOSE LINES. AND FOR MICHAEL WAS THIS DO WE HAVE A FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THIS AREA, THIS RED AREA NOW OR IS THAT. YES, YES. SO AND I'M NOTICING THAT THAT THE, THE RED DEFINITION OF THIS BOUNDARY, WHICH I, I, I BELIEVE IT PROBABLY WAS DEFINED FIND IT AS PART OF THE SEQUENCING PLAN. CAN THEORETICALLY, BECAUSE WE HAVE A FINAL APPROVAL, CAN THEY EVEN ALTER THAT PLAN TO BUILD A RETAINING WALL, WHICH IS POSSIBLE, OBVIOUSLY, TO BUILD A RETAINING WALL TO BUILD VILLAGE DRIVE. BUT CAN THEY EVEN. SO I GUESS WHAT I, WHAT I'M ASKING IS, CAN OUR RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER THIS AS AN AREA OF DEVELOPMENT HASTEN THE, THE THE AMENDMENTS TO THAT APPROVED PLAN? WELL, THERE'S A LOT THERE'S A LOT TO UNPACK THERE. RIGHT. YEAH. SO BECAUSE THIS AND YOU CAN SEE IT, YOU CAN SEE HOW THE BUILDING COMES RIGHT OUT TO VILLAGE DRIVE. RIGHT. RIGHT. AND IT ALSO COMES OUT WHAT WAS CALLED THEN THE INNER LOOP ROAD, WHICH IS BRECKNELL WAY, THE BUILDING. BECAUSE BECAUSE IT'S TIED TO THE ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION. THERE WAS A CERTAIN ASSUMPTION ABOUT FLOOR AREA AND NOT JUST THE RETAIL SPACE, WHICH IS ON THE GROUND FLOOR ON THE STREET SIDE ON THE 206 SIDE, [01:05:08] BUT ALSO THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS WHICH ARE ABOVE ON THE TOP TWO FLOORS. RIGHT. AND SO IF YOU ARE TO MODIFY THAT, YOU COULD MODIFY IT TO A POINT WHERE YOU ACTUALLY MAY MODIFY THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS THERE. AND IF YOU MODIFY THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS, YOU MAY MODIFY THE PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THERE, WHICH WOULD LINK INTO THE 2020 HOUSING PLAN. SO THERE'S A THERE'S REALLY A CHAIN OF THINGS THAT COULD BE IMPACTED BY ANY CHANGES TO THAT SITE PLAN. I'M NOT SAYING IT CAN'T HAPPEN. I'M JUST SAYING IF IT DOES HAPPEN, ALL THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED. BUT TO PAUL'S QUESTION, IF I DIDN'T ANSWER IT, I'M SORRY. I TALKED FOR A LONG TIME. I THOUGHT I ANSWERED IT. SO THERE'S LOTS OF VERY BECAUSE I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I GET THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT. ONE CHANGE COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING. I CERTAINLY GET THAT. BUT WOULD THAT CHANGE RIGHT? THEORETICALLY, WOULD A SITE PLAN BE CHANGED IF A RETAINING WALL WAS BUILT AND THEN THE BUILDING WAS BUILT NEXT TO THAT RETAINING WALL? I CAN'T ANSWER IT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE ENGINEERING OF THE WALL. I DON'T KNOW THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILT. LIKE I JUST COULDN'T ANSWER THAT. OKAY. AND I WISH I COULD. NEITHER CAN WE. SO ONE QUESTION. SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS AT THIS POINT, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT APPROVING IT. WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE IN THAT CASE. AND THE DEVELOPER PAUSES. ANY ANY WORK ON THAT. ARE THEY STILL PAYING TAXES ON THAT LAND THAT THEY OWN OR. NO, THEY'RE PAYING TAXES, BUT THEY'RE NOT PAYING. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LAND VALUE AND A AND A BUILDING VALUE, SO THEY'RE ONLY PAYING ON THE LAND VALUE. OKAY. SO WHICH AS WE ALL KNOW, IS QUITE DIFFERENT, RIGHT. SO YEAH. SO OKAY. SO THAT'S THE OTHER THING TO CONSIDER AS WELL. THAT'S CORRECT. BECAUSE THE LONGER IT TAKES TO GET THE BUILDING BUILT, THE LONGER IT TAKES FOR THE TOWNSHIP TO GET THE INCREASED TAX BASE. OKAY. SO DO I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY THAT WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A PHASE TWO THAT INVOLVED RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND RESIDENCES ABOVE. YES. AND AND NOW THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T WANT TO BUILD THE RETAIL UNIT. I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS. ALL I UNDERSTAND IS THAT THEY'VE GOT AN APPROVED SITE PLAN, AND THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUTE CAN BE USED TO HELP FACILITATE GETTING IT DONE, BUT NOT GETTING THAT PLAN DONE. GETTING SOME DIFFERENT PLAN DONE. NOT NECESSARILY. IT COULD BE THE SAME PLAN. WELL, IF IT'S THE SAME PLAN, WE DON'T NEED TO DO A REDEVELOPMENT SITE. WELL, THERE'S LOTS OF THERE'S LOTS OF TOOLS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT ARSENAL THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN USE. SOME OF THEM ARE ZONING, SOME OF THEM ARE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC PLANS, AND SOME OF THEM ARE FISCAL TOOLS, LIKE A PILOT. SO ANY ONE OF THOSE TOOLS OR A COMBINATION OF THOSE TOOLS COULD BE USED HERE? WE DON'T WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE, BUT PROVIDING ADDING IT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA EXPANDS THE TOOLKIT OF THE MUNICIPALITY TO HELP MOVE THIS THING FORWARD. AND PILOTS CANNOT BE APPLIED TO EXISTING PLANS AS OPPOSED TO REDEVELOPMENT. WELL, YOU CAN ONLY DO TAX ABATEMENT AMONG OTHER PLACES WITHIN A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITHIN A REDEVELOPMENT AREA. SO, TONY, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD GIVE THE MUNICIPALITY TOOLS TO WORK WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. AND THE ONLY REASON WE ARE GETTING THIS OPPORTUNITY IS BECAUSE OF SHARBEL. ON THE OTHER SIDE AND WHERE THESE WOULD OTHERWISE. IF THIS WAS MAYBE SOMEWHERE ELSE, WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO THAT'S WHERE THIS WHOLE IDEA OF ASKING THE PLANNING BOARD TO WORK WITH US. SO WE HAVE A BETTER TOOLKIT, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT, FOR THE MUNICIPALITY. WHY WHY DOES THE EXISTENCE. THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD POINT. YOU KNOW, I IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, BUT I'M WONDERING WHY THAT'S THE CASE IS BECAUSE THERE'S AN EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT AREA ABUTTING THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. YES, I, I, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR MICHAEL, BUT I ASSUME THAT'S WHY. YES. BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS THAT REDEVELOPMENT AREA, WHICH I GUESS NEARLY COMPLETED. THERE'S STILL SOME THINGS GOING ON. IT'S BEING EXPANDED. YES. SO THESE TWO LOTS ARE REALLY NOT A TO STAND ALONE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THEY'RE KIND OF BEING SUBSUMED AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA NEXT DOOR IS BEING EXPANDED. AND THE REASON THAT'S LIKE LEGAL, I GUESS, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, IS BECAUSE THERE'S THIS SLIVER OF PROPERTY THAT WAS EXCHANGED. [01:10:07] IS THAT OR WHY? WHY? WOULD I THE ONLY REASON MICHAEL WOULD BE DOING IT IF IT WAS ILLEGAL, I DON'T THINK NOT ILLEGAL. I'M SAYING THE REASON THAT WE'RE NOT JUST ANALYZING THIS INDEPENDENTLY KNOW WHY IS. WELL, YOU YOU REALLY CAN'T. BECAUSE YOUR PLANNER HAS, HAS STATED IT DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA IN THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUTE. THERE'S I THINK A THROUGH H. AND THESE ARE ALL DIFFERENT CRITERIA. MAYBE IT'S HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED IN OVER TEN YEARS. OH, IT'S IT'S SO YOU'RE SAYING IT DOESN'T MEET THE. NO. IT DOESN'T. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS TOTALLY CLEAR. RIGHT. THERE ARE THE CRITERIA THAT DESIGNATED. IF YOU MEET ANY ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA, YOU MEET THE CRITERIA FOR REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THE STATUTE ALSO SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE AN AREA THAT IS NOT MEET THAT CRITERIA, BUT IS NECESSARY FOR THE EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA, THEN YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT AND DESIGNATE IT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S A GOOD POINT. SO AND YOU YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT. I MEAN, WHAT WHAT THE REDEVELOPMENT STATUTE SAYS IS THE DEFINITION OF A REDEVELOPMENT AREA IS EITHER PROPERTY THAT MEETS ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA OR THAT IS NEEDED FOR EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT. IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE NEXT DOOR WHICH IS NOW THAT WHOLE AREA IS BEING EXPANDED TO INCLUDE THESE TWO LOTS. SO LET'S USE THAT WORD EXPANDED. IT'S EXPANDING ON THE BASIS OF. SO IF IF THIS WAS A STANDALONE PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA. ABSOLUTELY. BUT THIS IS NOT A STANDALONE. IT IS ADJACENT TO AN AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD ENABLE THE COMPLETION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA VIA HAVING THAT LOOP ROAD GO THROUGH. IT WOULD ALLOW IT TO BE EFFECTIVELY REDEVELOPED. BUT AS WE'VE ALREADY SAID, THE THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT EVEN CONTEMPLATED AS A PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. SO THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED. THAT REDEVELOPMENT AREA. YES. IT WAS NOT ALMOST INITIALLY NOT. YES. IT'S NOT ALMOST. WHY THAT I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU. REDEVELOPMENT? YES. YEAH. THE YELLOW ONE. YEAH. THERE'S STILL TWO PIECES OF HOUSING GOING UP THERE, RIGHT? THE STACKED HOUSING. AND THERE'S STILL ROADS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN COMPLETED. IT REMAINS UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITHIN, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT FINISHED. THE TOP ROADS AREN'T TOPPED. OKAY. AND VILLAGE DRIVE IS A PART OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT AREA. SO ONCE THEY BUTTON UP EVERYTHING THEN IT WOULD BE IT WOULD VANISH TO BE A REDEVELOPMENT AREA. IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T THINK THEY CAN UNTIL THE VILLAGE DRIVE IS COMPLETED. UNTIL THE VILLAGE DRIVE IS COMPLETED. RIGHT. THAT GOES INTO THE. IS THAT CORRECT, MICHAEL? I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THAT'S CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY WOULD TOP THAT OUT UNTIL IT'S IT'S ALL CONNECTED AND COMPLETE. BUT IF PAUL IS SAYING IF IT WAS ALL DONE, IF CHARBEL HAD ALREADY BUILT AND GONE. YES, THEN IT WOULD BE HARD TO PIGGYBACK ON SOMETHING BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DONE DEAL AT THAT POINT. SO THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. AND WE ARE THANKFUL TO OUR PLANNER FOR LOOKING INTO THIS AND FINDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, HEY, THIS CAN WORK. SO OTHERWISE IT WAS IF IT WAS DONE AND THERE WAS NO OPPORTUNITY, THEN OF COURSE IT WOULD BE A STAND ALONE. IF I'M EXPLAINING THAT AS THE PERSON WHO ALWAYS TRIES TO BE KING SOLOMON. I VERY MUCH WANT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE TO HAVE THE TOOLS AT THEIR DISPOSAL. HOWEVER, IF WE ARE, AS A GROUP, GOING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, I THINK PERHAPS A RECOMMENDATION COULD BE FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT UP A RETAINING WALL BEFORE YOU MOVE AHEAD WITH ANY APPROVAL OF REDEVELOPMENT. I MEAN, IS THAT A IS THAT A VALID POSSIBILITY? IS THAT A YOU'RE SAYING RETAINING WALL, NOT THE BUILDING WHICH IS THERE RETAINING WALL IF THERE IS GOING TO. I THINK IF I COULD REPHRASE, IF THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME KIND OF REDEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND THERE'S TO THE BENEFIT THAT A CONDITION OF THAT CONSIDERATION OF REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE TO EXPEDITE THE VILLAGE DRIVE CONSTRUCTION VIA A RETAINING WALL. AND THEN WE'LL JUST DEAL WITH THAT LATER. RIGHT. AND IF I REMEMBER THE INITIAL CONVERSATIONS, IT WAS THAT THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST PIECE OF THAT BUILDING THAT WOULD EVER BE [01:15:09] BUILT. YES. WE ALL WANT VILLAGE DRIVE. AND WE'LL LET MR.. SPEAK, BUT OF COURSE, THE FASTEST. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, DO WE HAVE TO REOPEN PUBLIC HEARING? WE ALREADY CLOSED. REOPEN. OKAY. REOPEN. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. SO TO YOUR POINT, IF THE REDEVELOPMENT ZONE WAS GRANTED IT WOULD BE SIX OF ONE, HALF A DOZEN OF THE OTHER WITH A RETAINING WALL VERSUS THE BUILDING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE OF A PROCESS LIKE THIS NORMALLY TAKES. BUT THE TIMELINE THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO GET TO THE POINT OF, SAY, BUILD A RETAINING WALL VERSUS THE TIMELINE OF THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO SAY BUILD A BUILDING WOULD BE THE SAME. ONCE GRANTED, WE'RE WE'RE READY TO GO. IS THE BOTTOM LINE JUST FOR YOUR HEAD? I ANTICIPATE ABOUT SIX WEEKS OR SO TO FRAME AND POUR THE WALLS OF THE ANCHOR BUILDING, AND THEN MAYBE ANOTHER 6 TO 8 WEEKS TO COMPLETE THE THE ROAD. SO MAYBE 3 TO 4 MONTHS FROM SHOVELS IN THE GROUND. SO, LIKE I SAID, WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S VIA A SEPARATE STANDALONE RETAINING WALL OR THE BUILDING ITSELF. DOESN'T SEEM TO REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE AS GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I MEAN, THE AREA OF REDEVELOPMENT PROCESS, MAYBE THAT'S MICHAEL CAN. YEAH. THANK YOU. MICHAEL CAN SPEAK TO IF WE CAN HAVE SOME GUARDRAILS SO THAT A TIME FRAME FOR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT OBVIOUSLY IS THERE. BUT AS HE SAID, ONCE THE OAK IS THERE, THEY'RE SAYING SIX WEEKS FOR THIS AND SIX WEEKS FOR THAT CAN BE AS A PLANNING BOARD, HAVE THAT PART OF OUR. SO MY INTERPRETATION OF THAT STATEMENT IS THAT SIX AND ONE HALF DOZEN THE OTHER. IT'S EITHER RETAINING OR BUILDING AND DON'T REALLY CARE. RIGHT. KIND OF LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY A, A A A NEED FOR A PILOT PROGRAM OR SOMETHING THERE. SO JUST TO THAT'S MY CONCLUSION FROM THAT STATEMENT, IF THAT'S THE CASE. AND THAT PUTS AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYERS OF MONTGOMERY, WHICH IS NOT OUR CONSIDERATION. IT'S NOT OUR NOT OUR CONSIDERATION, NOT OUR CONSIDERATION. BUT IF IT DOES, THEN THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE COULD THEN. DEMAND AN ELEVATED IMPROVEMENT, SUCH AS ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR SOME OTHER CHANGE THAT IS ACTUALLY A BENEFIT TO THE TOWN. SO IN FACT, IF WE DO RECOMMEND THIS TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMUNITY, WE COULD EXPEDITE THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS A BENEFIT TO THE TOWN AND REQUIRE ADDITIONAL WE COULD SUGGEST THAT THEY REQUIRE SUGGEST THAT WE AS A WHOLE ADDITIONAL CONCESSION, THE TOWN COULD BE BETTER OFF. SO I GUESS MAYBE I'M MY THOUGHT PROCESS IN THERE, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS THE RIGHT THING FROM A JUSTICE STANDPOINT. FOR FOR ONE THING, BECAUSE WORDS WERE SAID, AND I THINK WORDS ARE IMPORTANT AND PROMISES WERE MADE AND THEY'RE NOT BEING KEPT. BUT THIS OUR RECOMMENDATION IN THE AFFIRMATIVE COULD ACTUALLY BENEFIT THE TOWN IN, IN A LARGER WAY THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW, IF THE COMMITTEE FOLLOWS OUR RECOMMENDATION. BECAUSE REMEMBER THE COMMITTEE, IT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE COMMITTEE CAN CHOOSE, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN OVERRULE THAT AND SAY, WELL, WE'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE. SO BUT TO PAUL'S POINT, THE SUGGESTION CAN BE MADE AND WE SHOULD, AS A PLANNING BOARD, MAKE THAT SUGGESTION. RIGHT. ONE POINT THAT I DON'T KNOW HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP IS THAT IT'S NOT A GREAT PRECEDENT. THERE ARE THREE OTHER LOOP ROADS THAT ARE ALREADY PLANNED IN THIS TOWN THAT HAVE BEEN BEGUN BUT NOT COMPLETED. TWO OF THEM IN MONTGOMERY PROMENADE AND ONE DOWN FROM 206 TO CHERRY VALLEY ROAD, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST PART HAS BEEN BUILT BY THE PEOPLE WHO BUILT THE ELECTRIC SUBSTATION, AND THE SECOND PART HASN'T BEEN BUILT. AND JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE. YEAH. WELL, I MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THAT IS THAT THAT WE DO NOT MAKE PRECEDENT HERE. WE'RE NOT A JUDICIAL BODY. RIGHT. SO BUT AND I BUT I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH YOU, SARAH. AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT. IT GIVES A LITTLE BIT MORE NEGOTIATING LEVERAGE FOR OTHER DEVELOPERS. BUT WE WE HAVE TO WE WOULD HAVE TO INDEPENDENTLY EVALUATE ALL REQUESTS. SURE. YEAH. THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY. RIGHT. SO TONY, DID YOU HAVE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE ORIGINAL PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WERE ACTUALLY TWO BUILDINGS. [01:20:04] ONE IS CALLED THE ANCHOR BUILDING, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS THE ONE WITH THE TWO STORIES AND RESIDENCES ABOVE. TWO SEPARATE BUILDINGS. AND THE ANCHOR BUILDING WAS THE ONE THAT HAD THE RETAINING WALL. NOW, I DON'T RECALL IF. YEAH, TONY, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED BACK IN 2021. PHASE ONE WOULD BE BUILDING C AND D, WHICH ARE NOW COMPLETE. PHASE ONE WOULD BE BUILDINGS A AND B, WITH CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS ALONG ROUTE SIX SIGNALIZATION AT ROUTE 206, PROPOSED VILLAGE DRIVE, AND CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE TO A POINT APPROXIMATELY 50FT BEYOND THE PARKING LOT DRIVE AISLE. THEN PHASE TWO A WOULD BE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANCHOR BUILDING, AND THEN PHASE TWO B WOULD BE THE MIXED USE BUILDING. SO I THINK OKAY, SO THE ANCHOR BUILDING WAS IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT TIMING HERE. CLEARLY HE WANTS THIS BUILDING TO LOOK DIFFERENT NOW BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO HAVE RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR. SO HE'S GOING TO REDESIGN THIS BUILDING, HAVE TO COME HERE TO GET APPROVAL FOR THE NEW DESIGN. IT'S GOING TO BE SIX MONTHS BEFORE THIS HAPPENS, PROBABLY. AND IN THE MEANTIME, HE'S GOT AN EMPTY PLAN. HE'S GOT AN EMPTY BUILDING B THAT HE HAS TO LEAVE EMPTY. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE TO ME. I AGREE. IS IT TRUE THAT THEY WANT TO NOT BUILD THE COMMERCIAL PART OF THESE? THEY DON'T WANT TO BUILD THE RETAIL BECAUSE BANKS AREN'T FUNDING RETAIL BUILDINGS. IS THAT TRUE? IS THAT THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT I'VE HEARD. I SEE THE ORIGINAL PLAN IS NOT CHANGING. CORRECT? NO. OKAY. THE ORIGINAL PLAN ISN'T CHANGING. NO NO NO NO. I. WELL, YOU'VE YOU'VE GOT AN APPROVED. YOU'VE GOT AN APPROVED BUILDING PLAN. YOU HAVE AN APPROVED BUILDING PLAN. BUT IF THE GOVERNING BODY AND YOU DON'T WANT TO CHANGE IT. BUT IF THE GOVERNING BODY ADOPTS THIS AS A REDEVELOPMENT AREA, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, THEY HAVE NUMEROUS TOOLS. NOW THEY CAN REZONE, THEY CAN AND NEGOTIATE WITH THE CURRENT OWNER. THEY CAN DO A LOT OF THINGS. WOULD THAT REQUIRE AMENDING THE SITE PLAN OR COMING IN WITH A NEW PLAN? YES. BUT THAT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT CHANGES COULDN'T BE MADE OR WOULDN'T BE MADE. SO FROM FROM THE BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS WHAT WHAT YOU APPROVED IN 2021. BUT PART OF THE TOOLS THAT REDEVELOPMENT GIVES THE TOWN IS THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE. I DON'T THINK THAT THE PEOPLE WHO INVENTED THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AT THE NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE HAD DESIGNED IT AS SOLELY A MATTER OF PROVIDING NEW TOOLS FOR TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. THE, THE THE ADVANTAGE OF NEW TOOLS IS IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF REDEVELOPMENT. THE REDEVELOPMENT, EXCLUSIVELY TO PROVIDE THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE WITH NEW TOOLS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. I. MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT OUR PLANNER HAS SAID JUST THAT. WELL AGAIN WE CAN MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE AGREE TO AS A BOARD. SO. I MEAN, AGAIN, WE ARE NOT ELECTED OFFICIALS. AND WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THIS RENEGOTIATION TAKES PLACE, THAT THAT'S NOT FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO SAY. SO WE WE'VE GOTTEN ADVICE FROM OUR PLANNER THAT THIS IS A AREA THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED FOR REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE OR THE ALLOWANCE, THE FACT THAT IT HAS A PROPERTY JUST ADJACENT TO IT, WHICH IS ALREADY DESIGNATED. AND IT. AND TO TONY'S POINT, YES, THERE'S A TOOLBOX, BUT WHAT ARE WE USING OUT OF IT AT THIS POINT? IT'S JUST AN OPPORTUNITY. AND THERE'S THE BENEFIT OF THE THAT THE DEVELOPER'S NEGOTIATORS TEND TO BE A LITTLE MORE SAVVY THAN OUR OWN ON OCCASION. THAT IS TRUE. YEAH. YEAH I WOULD I WOULD AGREE. OKAY. SO DO WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. [01:25:05] AND IF WE DO WHAT DO WE WANT THAT RECOMMENDATION TO BE. OR WE CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT IT'S THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR I'M SORRY OF THE GOVERNING BOARD. WELL, BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO EITHER RECOMMEND OR SAY WE WE OR WE DON'T RECOMMEND BECAUSE OKAY. YOU CAN'T SAY WE'RE NEUTRAL OR YOU RECOMMEND WITH A LOT OF SUGGESTIONS. AS PAUL SAID, WITH GUARDRAILS, WHEN YOU SAY WHEN YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION CHAIR, WHAT DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY? SPECIFIC VERBIAGE AT THIS POINT TO TO TO RECOMMEND BECAUSE THAT MIGHT OR. IF THE GOVERNING BODY DECIDED TO MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU RECOMMEND OR NOT. THE NEXT TIME YOU WOULD SEE THIS AGAIN WOULD BE IF THE GOVERNING BODY WENT AHEAD WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION. AND THEY THEN IT WOULD COME TO YOU FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE MASTER PLAN. SO THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY. IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ATTACH TO YOUR RECOMMENDATION, THIS IS WHEN YOU SHOULD DO IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU AGAIN. IT'S GOING TO BE BACK WITH THE GOVERNING BODY, AND THEN THEY WILL DECIDE WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE DEVELOPER. IF THE DEVELOPER NEEDS AMENDED SITE PLAN OR SOMETHING, YES. THEN IT WOULD COME TO YOU IN THAT FORMAT, RIGHT. COULD WE RECOMMEND THAT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE GO FORWARD WITH THIS PROVIDED OR ON OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THE ROAD, AT THE VERY LEAST, IS BUILT NO LATER THAN THE END OF THIS YEAR? AGAIN, THAT COULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION. SURE. YEAH. I MEAN, IS IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. WE COULD RECOMMEND. SO YOU'RE SAYING YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS CONTINGENT ON THAT? THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD RECOMMEND. MEANING IF THE ROAD WASN'T BUILT IN SIX MONTHS, YOU'D SAY, WELL, OUR OUR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL THEN. WELL, I THINK COULD IT BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AS THEY BEST SEE FIT? AND OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO HAVE THE DEVELOPER COMPLETE, AT THE VERY LEAST, THE THE ROAD OF VILLAGE WALK BY THE END OF 2025. I MEAN, WE WE AGAIN, WE CAN'T SAY THIS AND YOU MAKE CONCESSIONS ON TAXES. I MEAN, THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW, RIGHT? RIGHT. I'M THAT'S WHAT I'M CONFLICTED BECAUSE THAT IS MY MOTIVATION IN SOME WAY. I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU. I LOOK, NOTHING PISSES ME OFF MORE THAN THE FACT THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS BECAUSE WE TOOK THREE HOURS BACK IN 2021. COMING UP WITH A PLAN. BELIEVE ME, I GET THAT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT MAKES THE TOWN BETTER? WHAT? WHAT'S BEST FOR THE TOWN? AND THAT HAS TO BE DECIDED BY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ELECTED AND ROAD TRAFFIC IS IS A CHALLENGE IN THAT AREA. SO THAT WILL BE A RECOMMENDATION SO TO SPEAK. YEAH. AND BRECKLAND WAY HAS REALLY HELPED THE TOWN. IT HAS REALLY HELPED. 518 ALL THESE LOOP ROADS WILL WHICH AND THIS THIS IS THE ONE LOOP ROAD THAT IS THE ANCHOR FOR EVERYTHING. SO. YEAH I THINK WE SHOULD. AND SHOULD WE ALSO PUT IN OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY PRESS THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD THE RETAINING WALL WITH OR WITHOUT THE BUILDING IN ORDER TO GET THIS DONE BY THE END OF THE YEAR. YEAH. YEAH, I THINK SO. YOU WOULD NEED THE RETAINING WALL FOR THE ROAD. SO. YES. AND SINCE IT'S SIX ONE HALF DOZEN, THE OTHER WHICH ONE THEY BUILD? LET'S GET THE WALL BUILT. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES, THE. DEVELOPER IS HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO BUILD THAT RETAINING WALL BECAUSE HE'S FORGOING THE RENT ON HIS BUILDING. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUSH IT ANY MORE THAN THAT. HE'S GOT TO MOVE. HE'S MOTIVATED. HE DOESN'T NEED US TO TELL HIM, AND YET HE'S NOT DOING IT WELL. SO TELLING HIM TO DO IS GOING TO MAKE HIM DO IT. I DON'T THINK SO. AGAIN, WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT. WE CAN'T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO. WE CAN JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. RIGHT? YEAH. THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE TO ANCHOR IN SOME OTHER INCENTIVE OR DISINCENTIVE. IF THERE'S A DELAY. SO, YEP. THE INTENT. THE DESIRE IS TO MOVE THE CONSTRUCTION. [01:30:07] YEAH. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO, I THINK, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MASTER PLAN OF THE TOWN IS ADHERED TO AND IMPROVED UPON. AND WE'RE AND WE'RE BASED. YEAH. SO I THINK I DO THINK THAT THE RECOMMENDATION TO GO FORWARD IS APPROPRIATE WITH THIS, WITH THAT CONSIDERATION AND THAT IT WILL BE UP TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE, WHICH I THINK WE CAN PUT IN. THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO ENSURE THAT THE VILLAGE DRIVE IS COMPLETE AND TO ENSURE. YEAH. AND WHAT'S THE DATE, DAVE? YOU SAID NO LATER THEN. I MEAN, I WOULD SUGGEST BY DECEMBER 31ST OF THIS YEAR. I MEAN, WE'VE STILL GOT TEN MONTHS LEFT OR NINE MONTHS LEFT. I MEAN, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT A DATE IS SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY, UNLESS THERE IS ANOTHER DATE THAT'S ATTACHED TO THIS. I MEAN, I KNOW WE HAVE LIKE THERE'S LIKE CONDITIONS ON APPROVALS FOR TWO YEARS. IS THAT RIGHT? OR IS THAT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT APPROVING ANYTHING. NO. NO BUT BUT WE DID AND YEAH. SO WHEN WHEN DID WE WHEN WIN SPECIFICALLY? DID WE APPROVE THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN 2021 AND HOW LONG IS THAT VALID FOR? WELL, IT'S VALID FOREVER AND FOREVER ONCE THEY START TO WORK AT IT. SO THE APPROVAL LOCKS THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD IN THE AND ACCORDING TO THE ZONING AT THE TIME. SO IF YOU MADE ZONING CHANGES WITHIN THOSE TWO YEARS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRIOR ZONING. BUT SINCE THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED BUILDING, ZONING CHANGES WOULDN'T MATTER UNLESS THEY CAME BACK FOR AMENDED SITE PLAN. YEAH. I'LL DEFER TO YOU TO IF YOU THINK THAT A SPECIFIC DATE IS. UNLESS YOU WANT TO MAKE IT EXPEDITED. YEAH. WELL, WHY DON'T WHY DON'T WE OR I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE. RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING BOARD. I'M SORRY, TO THE GOVERNING BOARD. THAT THEY GO FORWARD WITH THE AREA FOR REDEVELOPMENT. WITH TWO CAVEATS, REQUESTS, I DON'T KNOW, WHATEVER THE WORD IS THAT A THEY DIRECT THE DEVELOPER TO HAVE VILLAGE ROAD COMPLETED WITHIN 12 MONTHS OF TODAY. THE END OF THE YEAR AND 12 MONTHS. AND THE SECOND THING THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S DECIDED, AT THE VERY LEAST, A RETAINING WALL IS BUILT. EITHER A RETAINING WALL IS BUILT OR THE BEGINNINGS OF THE BUILDING IS BUILT IN ORDER FIRST, IN ORDER TO COMPLETE VILLAGE DRIVE WITHIN THAT 12 MONTH PERIOD. YEAH. YEAH. SARAH? YES. GOOD WITH THAT. WELL, I. I HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER THAT'S FEASIBLE. I WOULD THINK IF THEY BUILD THE RETAINING WALL, THEN IT WOULD BE THEY WOULD LOSE SOME SPACE IN THE BUILDING. I MEAN, IF THEY BUILD THE RETAINING WALL SEPARATELY. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. YEAH. MAYBE THEY WOULDN'T WANT TO BUILD THAT BUILDING THEN, I DON'T KNOW. WELL, IT'S UP TO THEM TO WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE. YEAH, I FIGURED IT WOULD BE I WOULD BE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE THAT THEY THAT THEY FIND OUT WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT, YOU KNOW, THE THE ROAD OR THE TAXES. WELL, JUST, YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE BARELY, YOU KNOW, CLINGING ON TO STAYING IN, IN THIS TOWN. AND I'M SURE, I'M SURE, THOUGH I'M SURE THAT THE MAYOR HEARS FROM SOME OF THEM, AND IT'S HEARTBREAKING AND, WELL, PERHAPS, PERHAPS INSTEAD OF KAREN, CAN YOU TALK INTO THE MICROPHONE INSTEAD OF DIRECTING WHETHER THEY SHOULD BUILD THE RETAINING WALL OR BEGIN THE ANCHOR BUILDING? I BELIEVE THE DEVELOPER HAD INDICATED. OR THEY COULD GET STARTED RIGHT AWAY. RIGHT. OKAY. SO MAYBE YOU WANT TO SHORTEN THIS TIME PERIOD FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMPLETION OF VILLAGE DRIVE. AND AS YOU SAID, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION. RIGHT. SO INSTEAD OF 12 MONTHS, MAYBE IT SHOULD BE LESS THAN 12 MONTHS. THAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THIS IS THE IMPROVEMENT OF TRAFFIC IS REALLY THE PRIME MOTIVATOR. I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS, IF CIRCUMSTANCES WERE DIFFERENT, PERHAPS YOU WOULD NOT SUPPORT THIS DESIGNATION. [01:35:05] WELL, PERHAPS WE CAN CRAFT IT THEN THAT IT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE THAT THE THAT VILLAGE DRIVE IS COMPLETED BY DECEMBER 31ST OF THIS YEAR, AND THAT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ANY AND ALL CONCESSIONS THAT THE BUILDER COULD PROVIDE IF GIVEN THIS DESIGNATION. AND THEN THIS WAY, IT YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE TO SAY, WELL, LOOK, IF WE GIVE THIS DESIGNATION, WE ALSO NEED THIS IN ADDITION. SO AGAIN, NOT FOR US TO DECIDE FOR THEM TO DECIDE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WELL, LET'S SEE HOW EVERYBODY VOTES. DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? SO MOVED. SECOND. OKAY. ROLL CALL PLEASE. WE'RE APPROVING THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE. KAREN. YOU WANT TO? YEAH. YES. YES. ALL RIGHT. SO THE PLANNING BOARD IS RESOLVING TO RECOMMEND TO THE GOVERNING BODY THAT THE MICROPHONE. OH, I'M SO SORRY. THE MOTION IS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE GOVERNING BODY THAT THE STUDY AREA BE DESIGNATED AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. THE PLANNING BOARD FURTHER RECOMMENDS THAT THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE PRESS THE DEVELOPER OR DIRECT THEM TO COMPLETE VILLAGE DRIVE BY THE END OF 2025, AND THAT THEY FURTHER RECOMMEND THE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE SHOULD CONSIDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL CONCESSIONS FROM THE DEVELOPER WHICH WOULD BE OF BENEFIT TO. YEAH. AS THEY SEE FIT BENEFIT THE TOWN? YEAH. YEP. AND THE ONLY THING I'LL SAY IS, IN ANY NEGOTIATION, THE BEST OUTCOME IS WHEN NOBODY'S HAPPY. SO. ALL RIGHT. ROLL CALL PLEASE. DARRAH. BLODGETT. YES. HAMILTON. OH, SORRY. MONEY. YES. ROBERTS. NO. YES. CAMBIAS. YES. LOCKLEAR. NO. KHAN. YES. OKAY. THE RECOMMENDATION PASSES. THANK YOU. EVERYBODY. OUR LAST ITEM IS THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 10TH, 2025 REGULAR MEETING. [VII. MINUTES] DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE? SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND FOR THE MAYOR. ROLL CALL PLEASE. CLOUDFLARE. YES. HI. YES, HONEY? YES. ROBERTS. YES. YES. CAMPUS. YES. FUTURE MEETINGS. SHERRI. DO WE HAVE AN IDEA ABOUT PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS FOR APRIL? WE WILL HAVE KAREN. I'M ASSUMING WE'LL HAVE THIS RESOLUTION, AND THEN WE HAVE SKAG, SO WE'LL AT LEAST HAVE RESOLUTIONS ON THE 14TH. YES, IT MIGHT BE REALLY SHORT. YEP. AND RIGHT NOW, I THINK THE APRIL SITE PLAN SUBDIVISION IS GOING TO BE CANCELED. OKAY. SO FUTURE MEETINGS AS OF RIGHT NOW WOULD BE APRIL 14TH, 2025, PLANNING BOARD AT 7 P.M. AND POTENTIALLY PLANNING BOARD APRIL 28TH, 2025 AT 7 P.M.. DEPENDING ON NEED. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? WE ARE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.