Thank you. >> In accordance with the open public meetings act, please note the following. All Bernardsville Burough Planning Board meetings will be held in person in the meeting 2026. The planning board meetings will begin at 7 p.m. Meetings will be
livereamed on YouTube with but with no opportunity for public comment on YouTube. Members of the public wishing to offer comments or ask questions will be required to attend meetings in person apparently. uh YouTube live streams access for all
meetings is uh YouTube at burnersborostreams. This link will also be available on the agenda for each meeting which is posted in the burough website burners.gov and on the burough hall public bulletin board at least 48 hours prior to
meetings. Notice of these changes has also been made emailed to the Burdensville News and the Courier News posted on the burough website and filed with the municipal clerk all on January 22nd, 2026. It's the intention of the board not to
continue any matter past 11 announced at the opening of each meeting. In addition, the board does not intend to begin a new hearing after 10 p.m. nor begin testimony of a new witness after 10:30 p.m. [clears throat] Any hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding. Any questions
or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision. A quorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. Roll call.
Mr. >> Here >> here. Okay. I saw you put out two of the mean two two two sets of minutes, but I didn't get a chance to look at them. Did >> Did anyone >> get a chance? >> No.
>> No. Okay. We should just defer that. >> Thank you. Uh, communications. Um, a letter from the D on suspected hazardous substance discharge. notification.
[clears throat] Anything on that? I didn't see it. So, it's about the gas leak on Climate Road. >> Maybe. >> I think I think that's was it. Yeah. >> And second, a letter from the burough clerk
on behalf of Burough Council to NJ DOT with resolution 164. Endor prohibiting certain left turn movements along Morristown Road Route 202.
So I guess exiting a property. Well, either I guess both, right? Exiting and entering. >> Um no left no exit. It's from the driveway. >> Yeah.
>> That's the name. >> Oh. Oh, the restaurant. Um, Walters. >> Okay. [clears throat and cough] required. >> Okay. So, they were looking for two access points, correct? That likely there
>> and now one of them may be constrained not to be able the exit may not be a left-hand turn. Whatever. >> This is where information. >> Yeah. No, I I know. Uh is is anyone So, is anyone here to
discuss anything that um is not in any way part of the agenda tonight? One. Okay. We got two swings at this. This is the first uh opportunity this. So, um
here is these people. >> Oh, it's not in the summary, right? We >> we mentioned I told you about it. I just want to let you guys know
using that website. It should be fast. He was working last council was posted. I guess the farmers market. It's got the recycling. It's got the styrofoam. It's all of that. So, and usable. It's much easier. I know you're posting your
notices legally on your public noticing other websites. >> It's summarizing the upcoming events as opposed to the entire calendar, right? It's the it's the homepage basically, right? >> And the town calendar. I
>> I think that I think the issue might might be in how the the meeting is classified in the system and if it's not connecting to the right classification, it might not be shown up. That's just my hypothesis for sure.
>> So, can we I I know you've got a million things to do. Can one of the things is prior to the meeting, can we be sure that it's showing up on the website? maybe a a you know check pre-launch check or something
cuz anything can happen. Thank you. Uh there anyone else that's here for topic unrelated to tonight's okay see none there's no new business right
we have the bills you want to approve of the bills >> uh first Denise there were no concerns issues rollovers anything like that with any of the bills. It's clean. Okay. Thank you. >> Go ahead. [clears throat]
>> Motion to approve the bills $5,622.75. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Yes. Miss Gallard, >> yes. >> Mr. Dillia, >> yes. Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, um the next elements of the agenda deal with the uh Essex building um which is on Claremont or the large parking lot is on Claremont and they've
had an approval to uh build um housing including affordable on that and um they are asking I believe their extension expired earlier this here and they're asking for uh an extension.
Um this had come up before but they weren't present. Um so we've put them on the docket for tonight chairman with your permission I can see it up and we do have a council I know here as well. >> That's fine >> as the board very much aware site plan
for benefits for a period post final period two years. uh you uh section 40 52A excuse me uh initial law provides
for three one year extensions thereafter uh and the applicant has requested you can make those request for extension after the expiration period uh and the dire question that's
after two one year extensions uh which would bring the applicants to January 23rd 2027 to protect his rights disappear by
tax right and the applicant would have moreension but that's applicant's account is one better than which is to recognize. >> Yes. And
>> you may proceed. >> My name is represent LLC with two partners. spirited buildings. Um they own the Essex
building to say commercial building with um or a mixeduse building mule on the first floor and um apartments on the second, third and fourth floors. Uh it has insufficient parking.
Uh they do own the lot across the street which is unimproved and lowest paved. Um it's block 75 lot six lot 76 lot four and five and 77 lot 5. They did obtain
approval from this board on June 26, 2003 to construct 27 units. Um, five of which are low and moderate. Uh, there are two twobedrooms, two one-bedroom
and one threebedrooms, and those, according to Mr. pigeon the burough attorney are included in the burrow's third round obligations.
Uh I have u the developers real estate u partner with me. Uh the reason why the delays occurred were um
illnesses that the two principles who are in the middle 80s suffered um that made the their ability to obtain financing for the construction of these units difficult.
Um the ethics building had been vacant because of co And uh by the time they got that straightened out, they weren't able to get financing. Uh because of illness, there's no other
reason for the delay. As you know, um the approval, they are still permitted to build [clears throat] this uh project. Uh we're asking for protection from change in zoning. That's the only
uh protection we need. Uh I doubt that there will be any because these uh this project is committed to five units which is equivalent to a special reason uh under the law. I have
uh Mr. Rhymer here. Uh he could show you the display of of the of the building and explain it. Uh I'd like to call him and have him testify. I'm not sure that that's
necessary to that expired and took six months. >> I I know I know the benefit of the burl with this development of this at some point. >> I think we understand it. your your
statement is that that labs you've been unable ju just what you said unable to get financing you had illnesses um to the primaries and even their family probably um and so and you're asking for an extension which you're
permitted to do and do we have any questions for applicants >> I just have one question about Well, the the key is and he's they can continue with the five units. I
believe there are other things too potentially, but it protects them against incremental zoning changes. If the units are what? >> Well, there be an explanation. Um, [clears throat] you know, it's third round. When did third round deliverables
close? It hasn't. still proceeding zone. Mhm. And approved even though it's third round engagement. My anticipation would be that um relatively brief delays getting to the
point of construction. >> Okay. >> And the uh it would be beneficial if these be granted. It might be a more precarious situation if the extensions were denied
and protections were not extended. But um that's the board to decide as to whether or not >> want to make sure we're not putting jeopardy in. >> Okay. >> I think the opposite we don't
share that. I'm sorry for the benefit of public was that the yeah >> I'll I'll repeat
>> that the the quite the opposite could be true that if it's not extended then the burrow under fair share could be at risk to say this is no longer a valid project because we did we took away the approval. So for that reason, I would
grant the approval. My understanding it is 6 months back. All right. They're going back to the date it expired. So it's in essence would be two a year a year and a half.
>> So be going. So the net effect is we're extending it into January 2027 >> for you to commence construction. So that's the in the desire. So I would I would move to grant the extension.
>> I'll take that as a motion. requested public hearing for that's what I'm thinking. I just want to check >> just out of curiosity. This is effectively seven months. This gives you seven more months to commence construction. Where where are you with
the permit process? >> The permit >> where is the financing? I mean, is this all the words? >> Okay. >> Yeah. Okay. Is everyone >> I'm good. >> Good to proceed to the next section
which is >> Did you get them Denise? >> Yes, I did. >> Yes. >> Miss Galler. Yes. Mr. Gillio. Yes, >> Mr. Graham. >> Yes, >> Mr. Mal. >> Yes, >> Mr. Moran. >> Yes, >> Mr. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, now we're up to the uh the main events uh the public hearings on the uh non-condemnation area in need of redevelopments. And first I'm going to
we're going to have Steve provide a bit of uh overview to the public on this process. >> Certainly Mr. Chair your request to do so. I know I was supposed to be brief and my response would give you a
relevant term. So, uh, but I do want to explain the best I can and a refresher for the board. And this would, uh, apply, uh, uh, equally to all public hearings that board is about to have both on the Church Street and
Marsbound Road non-conomation area in need of redevelopment. Uh, uh, as well as the Burns Avenue non-demation area in need of redevelopment. I am the planning board attorney. I am not development attorney. I'm not the burough attorney.
Um and uh but as planning board attorney and I do serve in redevelopment council elsewhere, I'm somewhat familiar with the process. Um and we have our uh our um excuse me our redevelopment and Durl
planner uh Codwell who is presenting uh the studies as the author of the studies as I understand it as opposed to our board planner fade here so that everybody keeps
roster uh the the um the planning board uh received via uh March 23 2026, the Burough Council adopted a resolution directing the Burough Planning Board to conduct a preliminary investigation of the properties identified in these
two separate nonmation area study areas. fallen. Um when the burough council does that, uh the planning board like in every governing body, planning
board, any municipality is directed to have those hearings. Uh the choice is have a hearing. Uh when the planning board has the hearing, uh they the planning board will make a recommendation. Uh the planning board does not designate
an area uh in need not uh they make a recommendation about council and then the B council will act with that recommend recommendation. um whatever the recommendation is that the council may approve it for the
United uh but it's the planning board's job I like to gatekeeper of the master plan uh uh and they have certain functions this is one of them uh having the hearing study area to decide whether or not
project should say uh development uh meets the criteria for designating in area. years. Um the way it works generally is uh after the planner makes a
presentation of the study if the study area uh satisfies at least one may satisfy more uh but at least one criteria under the local government uh housing lawyerly
uh section five correctly uh and uh presumably the recommendation I think that it's an area need of redevelopment and presumably uh uh not necessarily will agree. Um there uh is a public
hearing. Uh so I have to square in uh the planner. Uh I will square in anyone who wishes uh to speak with respect to uh the uh area need a redevelopment uh potential designation for each of the
sites. Um we have received as I understand it a few written uh uh submissions which have been passed on to the board uh through Florida our planning administrative officer. Uh and
so that is the process. Um everyone will be under 020 because it is a public hearing. Um and ultimately the board will with respect to each make it recommendation. Yes, it is an area of redevelopment and that's the
recommendation council or no it's not with respect to beach. Um but hopefully that gives everyone and that's one step process um uh ongoing the bureau it's not policy decision I
think that's important board uh but for public the board is not making policy decision should a project happen should it be here should it be there how should it be where should it be where are the impacts will there be
financing will there title payments in taxes, you know, all those things are not what is within the jurisdiction authority of the planning order for this particular function. It's definitely not one of 100.
It is essentially simply uh after hearing from the planner and everyone else who wishes to be does it satisfy one or more of the criteria that it did under the revelment housing law. Uh does does it constitute
an area needed redevelopment or not? That is essentially if not entirely the function of the board. Everybody has different functions. This is one step in a multi-step process. So we probably
one key point I want you to explain to them what happens if we approve and what happens if we don't approve. If you make a recommendation that on both of the study areas are indeed areas of either redevelopment,
the governing body can accept the recommendation or not proceed for you. If the planning board finds that one or both of these study areas are not in words of opinion satisfying
one or more of the criteria uh under housing law the constitution area needed redevelopment and makes recommendation that one or both of the study areas not governing body accept that recommendation
>> or not recommendation. So ultimately um it'sable whatever the board recommends may not be accepted by the governing body. They're not the governing body not bound by the recommendation. Hence
that's why it's recommendation not a but the board is bound to conduct the study and to continue the process once they are directed to do so by resolution in the governing body which
they were on. >> Yeah. One addition I'd like to mention that the planning board although it's stated in the process that the planning board did not select these areas. Um they were selected by the council. Um
that's okay. It just we the official process is it's supposed to originate at request. It's supposed to originate from the planning board. Um that didn't happen. those those steps were um circumvented um uh whatever expedited
the town council basically did the analysis and made the preparations and we've participated already in discussions about these sites because ordinances were changed etc etc. So in summary the key is in this discussion in
this uh we have to realize there's an opportunity to express an opinion in the recommendation in our recommendations and there's certainly an opportunity for the public to own record
making statements. There's opportunities for the press of course but the council is not bound by our decision as and I want to be sure that people do understand that. Um as an example there was a previous sub
significant application for which we denied uh in need of redevelopment but we were overridden. Um, so I guess these these projects both have
significant public uh interest and we we have a couple of choices. Um, you're all here. One choice would be to take a motion to postpone these, to not deal with them at all tonight. But
you're all here and that is something we can do. Um the other thing is we can it may be that one application is less of less concern than another
application. We can we could proceed with that and we can choose which one to deal with first because some of you may say, "Well, I'm only here to look at that application." Um, [clears throat] as far as I know, and I'm going to ask, there has been no citizens committee
formed by the town council to constructively discuss and optimize these applications. Is that am I just did I miss something or have citizens committees been formed on these projects?
I'm sorry. Just so I'm clear that the J managers are the just to be clear that the not applications they are public hearings that need to be thought of but not application. Very different an application.
>> Yes, [clears throat] correct. >> Sorry. Um, >> has has a citizen committee to your knowledge been created by the council? >> No. To your knowledge, no. Right. >> Okay.
>> And just just to be clear, this is a record. I know few times you said we've denied this and that. I know what you mean, but the purpose of the record we recommend is deny
you point out we only have recommended. >> I don't think there was confusion in the public spark, but fine. Thank you for clarifying that. >> Okay. So, we're here to serve the public and I
want to do what I want to be sure that we craft this night's activity to satisfy uh as many as possible in including the kind of quandry for the points that I've just mentioned.
Um, I'm going to ask the board if just amongst ourselves, is there any interest in entertaining a motion to postpone these um this presentations
till September when people are back. >> There's obviously a lot of people here. Yeah, they've made a great effort. >> Guys, for the record, somewhere in the hallway there are maybe there aren't any. >> Please feel free to come in and there
may be a few members in the public. >> My my preference is to proceed. >> Yeah, >> proceed proceed. >> Proceed. Yes. >> I think >> proceed. Proceed. Okay. Just want to
there if we open the public hearing do we have to close it tonight? >> Depends on how far we get. >> Good question though. What's the answer? The answer is we can carry >> right. And if there were if every one of these people were gonna get up and try
to speak, we'd run out of time. So, um, >> we're allowed to >> we're allowed to start and carry. >> Okay. No, good question. All right. So um it's the opinion of the the straw poll here in the board that we should
not postpone these processes until uh September one of them like just dramatically more interesting than others and would does the public have any interest in the
order in which we handle these two not not application these two activities there's the uh church street um area and then there's the um Bernard's word >> church street church anyone anyone
voting you'd like church street first I think that that meant anyone who wanted uh the quarry u >> Bernard's Avenue first. One, two, three. Okay. So, it's like everything
democratic, it gets muddy small. All right. Well, we will uh we will follow uh the agenda then and we'll handle church uh first and um
so I think we just invite Jessica to present. Correct. out one of the hearings. Uh the uh we do have the notes because I wanted the record to reflect that our board did not
heard the evening uh that uh public hearing. Uh and uh the both notices were provided at the latest page. But uh um but uh at least uh 10 and 17
days prior to receiving both hearings uh was provided uh on behalf of the board. Uh and I'll square inwell right hand raised. Oh Mary you swear to God
is truth the whole truth. Thank you. >> I just want to be sure everyone can hear her. That's that's all. >> Okay. Municipal. Hopefully you can all hear me. Uh just so you understand
that I'm going to share my screen. um showing so that you have some visual acquaint anything like that study. So there may be a little June 30th 2026 study.
>> Yes. >> Okay. And that's a church mark down road not correct. >> Okay. So this is this is a study. It is uh June 30th June 30th 206
is for 10 Church Street block 66 lot 10 8 Church Street block 66 lot 11 30 Morristown Road which is block 66 lot 122 Morristown Road which is block 66 lot 14
and 137 Anderson Hill Road which is a portion of block 66 22. So what you're seeing before on the screen is the cover page of the report. We highlight in yellow with a Google
Earth photo. So you can see all the last together. This one should open. So I'm just going to describe the properties uh in detail. So block 65 is
kind of straight. It's a uh roughly rectangular shape oper um sort of starting in order from lowest to highest. Um make sure you can see the area so you
have um some visuals. So it's a about a third of the acre has two two buildings on the property. Uh they total about 3,35
square ft. uh roughly 12 parking spaces uh six adjacent to each building on the property and in uh building one which is the building closest to Church Street you have three onebedroom apartments and
in building two with church street you have a um a clinical care studio commercial unit a small management office on the first floor and then on the second floor I find better apartment
on 8 Church Street which is block 66 lot 11 and it's on this lot um just south so north is page and south bottom page uh this property is.17
uh it has a building sorry and the first the building on earth that was inspected around 1500 Uh the building on about 890 ft. It has 1,8
and it's uh two twobedroom apartments um with about four or five apartment spaces on the property. 20 more block 16 block on the corner here
street. Uh that property is um also about 3 acre building on 22 block 14. Um that is just to the west of
the corner there. Uh that is the location of the Columbia base that was built in the mid 1970s. It's a twostory frame building. Um 3,68
ft with 35 spaces. And then going to the top of the study area or north northern parcel that is what we're calling 137 Anderson Hill Road. It is a portion of the entire
library property. Um just the portion that's on the western most side and includes the parking lot um to the west that fronts on Church Street as well as some big space property. Uh this is
under just under acre.93 acres. Um and roughly half of that area and just under about 20,000 square feet is uh open space and the remainder of
the lot is parking for the library uh and burrow uses. We go through some of the uh local redevelopment housing law map also of the area
showing the study area and lots of lots of map and we also go through history and we looked at photos of the site. I
also researched sandb and confirm when the construction was roughly built and how the property got involved over time. You can see in 1930 that their development
uh on block 66 block 14 12 are all developed. However, on the Columbia bank property on lot 14, that was not the bank out that moving over to the second historic
earth. The first one was from 1930 and the second one's 1987, you do see now that the bank has been constructed. all of the other um parcels in the um zone because those were built in the study area. Those were built in
the the turn of the century in the early 1800s to 1900s. Those are in place. And then you can see going down into the other historic areas that would roughly go into place right around 2000 when the
parking area um for lot 22 is constructed and from that time the study area has been relatively static in terms of development of the area.
We also look at um land uh value to improvement value uh ratio to determine um it's a way to look at the study area to see
um full economic productivity of the property. And what you look for, particularly in downtowns, it's more than a 2:1 um ratio. But in this case, uh for downtowns, you you would want more, but
at least a 2:1 ratio. And for this um study area, you can see that block 10 is the only one needing a 2:1 ratio for the land value to improvement value. Can you just explain for the benefit of the public
show? >> So it's the improvement value. So what you look for is a higher value property that shows an economic productivity of
property. So we want to see at least two to one but even more than that particular downtown area of Oregon. So on lot 10. So it can allow.
So we also looked at top based on mix and water nature of the property. We also reviewed our environmental strength and found a lot less compat. We looked at surrounding the
neighborhood contacts of the study area and to the northwest coffee shop um and very off square. You have an art
cheering services and then you have church streets and then you have actually uh pretty close to the bathroom We're looking at the property which as you know has been
recently done by the housing plan recommendation and governance body on March 9th 2026. Uh resone the property to AH for all five of the Boston districts. Uh
the four local unit uh recently uh the property was downtown uh for district which was 35
and acre and also included a variety of of >> [clears throat] >> So before I go into So, we did aerial photos of we all build except
four take photographs inside and outside of >> uh South facing side of building one of you can see the entrance to B with this is the
east side of the building lot. You can see some of the damagation deterioration unemployment building um air conditioning no air conditioning units um
basement also um unit A uh window basically on the south um you can see on the windows.
This is a picture of the upper on the south side of the [clears throat] building one. asked me not to go out. Yes. of the fracking.
This is a the staircase going down from that deck. Uh also quite some of the trim windows a building. You can see chicken and
interior the hands. This is again on the broken diagram on the back of the Another girl facing west. This is entryway
deterioration steps. It's been Going to the interior unit. You have a chipping paint and wear the front door. Uh we have the bedroom
a lot units because older units um older buildings are kind of chopped up into apartments. You often find that the furniture uh storage different things are in front of the windows. block.
Um also sometimes block exits um just because you have um the kitchen here. It's a very narrow crowded kitchen access right here.
This is due to an example of the state law by the entrance statute. This entrance on the porch. A very narrow um
you can see where the hating across the door here. Uh and in many regions you would have one kitchen and function
unit without you have language which is not locked. Uh so uh here's the bedroom [clears throat] example. We have a window facing paint. A lot of mold around the window.
Here's the entrance to see again wood entrance. Here again [clears throat] up to the second floor. You have wool paint on the window in the
bedroom. You have cracks ceilings. And then moving on to building two as I mentioned. But you can see as well some of the
exterior office. Moving on. 11. Here's the front of the principal. You can see the front of the building. looking to the rear of the property.
You can see the back of the property there. Very few windows on this commercial sign. Um, this has a third eye on staircase
to allow access to the second floor. There isn't interior. Uh, this one requires elaborated um unsightly and um appears to be safe.
other entrance. Um, let's see. Unit A on 11. We have concrete. We have damage to the wall here. Interior
the bathroom. lacking in window some over. So you can see the cracks in the plaster and the ceiling where it was placed over. This is the staircase.
The upper unit as you can see it's quite elapinated. The railings are um it's kind of like copper ice or [clears throat] something. Um onto the side unstable
axis. You can see it's quite steep going down. There's evidence of traumatic damage [snorts] on this exterior. um staircase as well. You can see that.
This is the entryway area. The bathroom ceiling of unit had some serious mold issues and paint. There's also evidence of inside
of traps. So being used for at least for a long such um And then south
It appears to be some water. Moving on to 66. The principal structure. You see an aerial photo of this. Uh you have to be um right on the
outside. I think again is saw terminal. site. Uh we have an effect [clears throat]
showing heration. The resident body interior beyond the exterior interior of the antiques have a lot of
running office space as well. That was sort of the machine in relatively good condition. Uh the rear doesn't mean also once again
This is the um exterior of the main thing upstairs. And the rest are supposed to be there as well as significant or unique spot.
Uh there's some cracking on the wall on the second floor. And [clears throat] then moving on to the basement of this. This is the second floor office area. Uh
just quite outdated and staircase. basement uh which the pipes in the basement froze at some point and a lot of basements on on the basement floor or use
you can see that everything was torn out. >> This is an Exit from [clears throat] where in the basement also shows water in the same.
This is also some old office space that is no longer being utilized. And this is our former conference in the basement. So moving on to seven
We can see that being attempt It's time. I mean, it's not really the criteria criteria starting with criteria
and Um called uh central standard unsafe unsanitary or offensive or possess of such characteristics
or are it light air or space as we conducive to unhome that period there are a lot of words with Thomas uh and followed by the word war and then more words with commas war
being his junk. Am I correct that uh it's possible that one more of the lots within all lots within the study area might satisfy one of those many subcategories
and in that in and of itself satisfy criteria a doesn't have to satisfy all of them >> that corrects then you can have an invitary condition or off or any of those characteristics
for the lacking in the air space it can do to unlimit. So when you're looking at criterion a that um it's a bad situation for the people that because
so we looked at lesson one to kind of so break it down uh based on real estate professional definitions or what creates something.
So there are three types of obsoletence but functional osolescence occurs when the form or function of a building no longer meets the needs of oration of tongues. So examples of functional obsolescence are
elastical fixtures, inadequate patient compression of materials that require maintenance unable. Economic obsolescence is also known as external obsolescence
is an impact on the value and usefulness of the property due to external factors. So something from the something happens around the property or to the property that creates an economic hurdle and that can be something like changes in traffic
patterns like all of a sudden topic in the area or something like thatation says um no changes or construction projecting along the under
occurred propert because of critical deterioration of the buildings on site. And you know, the idea behind that, especially when you're looking at commercials uh or multif family use, it has to do with the idea
that the property isn't generating enough income to then have someone an owner reinvest into that property to bring it up to where it will be deteriorated or dilocated. That's called
uncurable obsolescence. So the youth aren't generating enough income to cure that obsolescence. So those are the types of osolescence if you looked up for the study area and we
definitely found functional obsolescence throughout the study area because of the particular 10 11 and 12 all the build up structures
that they do so and you saw that in the roads. You also have economic obsolescence because property has been raised up not just the development but through the reselling mix 2020 of
the downtown core which looked at up to 35 properties property new law and then there we saw the deterioration going on property all the are occupied
But what it appears to be is that they're not generating enough income to then reinvest in those bathrooms, even the bank property. And so no one sticks the exit, no one stakes those uh interior bathrooms, you know, and the
exteriors of the property and the interiors of the units are all lavad and in poor condition. So in my opinion the entirety of the redevelopment area displays
obsolescence. And then you go to the second part you have unsanitary um set the standard unsaved as I mentioned several entry uh deaths for
unsaved situations actually want us to walk on a lot photos uh lacking in light. Uh several units have uh very few windows um because of the lamps and space uh
furniture and storage uh box light and with respect to uh the building of the bank itself. Uh you have a great deterior a great deal of deterioration not at the main level
in the second level opposite as well. For all the study finds that the general health area substandard unsanitary evidence and the best at least one of
each of those characteristics and they also lack light, air and space as we conducive I hear Anthony. interpret again essentially the same criterion that criterion A you have a lot of different
terms that have different meaning. So again criterion being you do not have to necessarily satisfy each and every terms that have meaning al criteria for some criteria criteria if
you don't have it satisfy all of them combination I think Yeah. So there's a criteria sound, but [clears throat] A focusing on the building and they're
to the future. Criterion D is focusing on a lot of the same issues, but it's looking at whether or not that community uh and it's also looking at buildings and not buildings.
A focus on criterion we also focus on improvements to the site. So with respect to that we've already talked about uh the buildings being dilapidated obsolescent we saw
overcrowding in the apartments uh on lots of 11 and 12 uh we also see a faulty arrangement in design of um particularly in bank property where you don't have ADA accessibility
uh you show um physical there whether or not correcting issues on on the property and you also have some issues with modernization of the facility functional officer
banks banks aren't set up that in the study um accessible access to the layout of the property. Um each of the properties set on the bank um going into block two in the back have
separate entrances. We talked about Um in terms of the fur for the tablet Let's look at the master plan. There are several.
>> Did you just say weekend element update and uh there's five reports. Uh, one is to promote the downtown as a commercial and civic center of two to enhance the physical
characteristics of the downtown. Three, to encourage architectural design to create atmosphere downtown. uh reviewing the state of um structures and the improvements of the study area
uh we found that these properties aren't neglect serving that purpose and therefore that's an attachment to the general welfare of the page down the meeting
in the study area. There's also criterion which is designation is consistent with smart grows. So the designation of the learning criteria consistent with smart growation. So we listed uh you know what smart
growth principles are in general a mixing of land uses compact community design walkable community and so on. Uh the study area is situated in the downtown. It's a walkable
neighborhood and improvements seeing utilities services. Um, and the burrow of downtown is also located in January of 2026 with the definition of this area
development area. uh also focusing on spell near proposing to focus below regulation from smart and then the designation of this area
would come of those uh small road criteria goals. There's also a section of redevelopment law called section three which is initi which allows the inclusion of parks necessary for the effective
redevelopment of the area. A redevelopment area may include buildings or improvements which themselves are not detrimental to the policy or welfare but the inclusion of which is necessary with or without changing their condition or the
effective development of the area which they are. So the idea is that for some reason um the board or the council were to find that perhaps one of these parcels did not meet the criteria. There's still a reason to include all
the parts of it on the study area in my opinion and that's because each lot within the study area they're interconnected specifically on a corner lot with high visibility of two and a half acre block that would
be um a cohesive developable area such that I think all of a hinder investment revitalization efforts for development strategy for this highly difficult location in downtown.
So in conclusion, the study found that block 66 lot 10 met criteria A H and section 3 block 66 11 criteria A
H and section three block 66 bacteria A D H6 for in your presentation rather than just reading it. >> There you go.
Thank you. >> A section and 66 H. Therefore, the study recommendation to the council with the entirety of the
area notation. Am I correct in my understanding that one of the criteria under excuse me uh example
Criteria D satisfying all five of the last study area that alone would be sufficient for a study area. >> Yes.
And um if you know is there a general rule written or under that if the only an if not required to have a separate and independent criteria along with in order
to come to a conclusion that a study area may constitute an area needed by other binding other section H
of the other study area at least one separate independent criteria if not more than one separate type of criteria uh that leads you to your employer that the entire study area constitutes an
area in your profession as license [clears throat] conclusion of your uh initation so that members of the board, members of
the public may ask questions of the expert uh as well as uh public uh may may public comment testimony. So we have same um
for the MC today the redevelopment attorney's not here that most times back to you. >> Okay. Um any um comments amongst us on the board? >> Not right now.
>> Not right here. here. [sighs and gasps] >> Um, any comment from our uh player? >> No, I um >> No, it's an okay answer. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Thank you very much. My policies are
progressive. >> No, actually part. >> Okay. So then the next thing I have is procedural. Uh we have the opportunity to have questions and comments
combined or we can have a question section followed by comments section. And does any I don't think any of us care either way, right? Um, how many would like us to do
questions first followed by comments and how many would prefer to have them combined? One trip to the >> Great. Uh, I think we'll combine them. Um, Denise, I think we're also We may need
the three minute timer. Denise. Denise. Yeah. Um I >> Mr. Mr. Chair, at the risk of members of the board perhaps um less than uh the the uh if you're contemplating three
minutes is that uh three minutes combined for questions and comment >> no per person each >> per for each >> yach >> each person each I please if you're making >> let's just see how
I just get >> uh three minutes is what I'm going to run with. Yeah. Combine. >> The other thing is I I a lot of you must have similar feelings. So if all you want to do is say I agree somebody else
who's already spoken. Please just say that um I agree or support that position. Don't don't read >> statement which case you may speak on it not only that but also specifically
speaking what is relevant for this proceeding. not some of the other things. >> That's really important. It's really important to keep in mind what we can actually act on what's before us today.
Um and and that is pretty scope limiting. So um let's uh let's try try a few whoever wants to be first. And do we want them standing at the podium Denise? >> Um yes please that they can be
All right. Well, close to the edge. Okay. Just stand in front of the mic is what you want me to do. >> Okay. >> And just raise it. You raise it a little bit. That's all. Sorry 21 report.
>> I do. >> I see questions and comments with those. >> Thank you. I'll start with a question of comments and end question. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Uh I offer this with respect. Thankful public service is not always a thankful job. Um, in reference to the study that was
cited, um, I'd like to count through the idea of obsolescence. In 2025, the attendance at our 17,000t library was over 94,000 people. We track it every day with door counters, and in 2026, we're tracking to exceed over 100,000
visits. This is far from obsolete, and this library is a considerable investment in this town. Some days we exceed 500 people for no apparent reasons. Some we exceed 800. Um some of those days have been Makers week events, the green fair, the mini golf fundraisers, the power and internet
outages and perhaps most importantly election day. There were as in the posted document um there was the idea for a need to redevelop and needs in these directions made assertions that the portion of the lot in question isn't important to the library and downtown operations. I don't
know. Um, maybe some of these assertions were bluffing. Um, maybe some of them were drawn from a parking study that not that only examined the library lot prior to the library's over. I think this picture is misleading. I would plead that the parking is
important to the library operations. We share this lot and it isn't exclusively for the library. the coffee shop Sam reports park at the library and people [clears throat] do as they should. Um more shops are supposed to come at the Palmer development. The parking need is likely to increase. Um New Jersey
doesn't have a standard for how many parking spots you need for a public library, but we're 17,000 ft in Connecticut. They recommend five five spots per 1,000 square ft. Um losing 11 spots would be damaging to our community. my circulation supervisor and
I did our own parking study. Before the library even opened, there were only 11 spots open on Tuesday or Wednesday. And then later in the day when there was activity, there was only two spots open in the entire lot during children's story time and leading into the next children's story time. Later that day when absolutely nothing was going on,
there was only six open spots. So I already told you about the statute. Um, I would like to encourage you to preserve access to all parking offered to the library and not to remove access through the loss of spots or through any monetary or technology hurdles to using them. They're a critical asset to the
burough's public library which serves all segments of this community through diverse services and resources. We're not a business, but we're an economic asset if we're a considerable investment. And my question is a point of information of what time that picture was taken with just the blue. >> Um, yeah. So,
I have been to the site at least three other times as well. We did a parking study at the downtown in 203 in December. We also visited the site in April uh 24
2025 as well as the site visit. Uh and we also looked at Google forms a human degree um starting February 2020 uh October 2021 June 22 April 3 and all
these cases we had four months Sir time so there's there's fluctuations and the idea is that the functionality and my opinion is not optimal. What does
it mean that the consequer? And just to be clear, area and you can see parking are libraries all >> just how many parking spaces are in the uh section that is under the review. >> Uh you can look it up separately. Let's
let someone else come down. Okay, come on down. >> 13. Mhm. >> Do you know off hand how many are in the main parking lot to the library that are not in the study area? >> I think that's an important I think
that's an important statistic. >> What was the number again? I'm sorry. I haven't >> 38 >> 38 >> are in the study area >> spaces. I'm sorry. Not the whole study area. Just in the one just in the parking lot >> the library lot.
38 spaces. Okay. Next. >> Next person. >> Yeah. >> I apologize. I'll do my best to be quick. Well, first of all, everything.
>> Oh, sorry. [clears throat] >> I do. just everything that you mentioned that's not included in your study the only thing including study that you parking lot the only thing I will be discussing today it's the only thing fair is that
any discussion the pictures in your studying parking lot were taken Friday April uh 13 days correct you know what holiday. >> Correct. It was Good Friday. Do you know the library was open that day?
>> The library was not open that day. Do you know the schools were open today? The schools were not open that day. Do you know of any of the local businesses due to the holiday due the school closure? Due the library closure. Do you know of all the local that day?
>> I did not. Would you admit that the parking lot would be a lot the parking lot question it would be a lot easier if the school closed and if the library closed and clos your testimony that the library being closed would not affect whether the
parking lot would be left empty serves various purposes. So there visitors, library employee employees t some of the structures just leave.
>> Why would you choose that particular [clears throat] day to take photos of the library closing? without >> um would you agree then though that your conclusion now that you've learned that the library and the school were closed that your conclusion that the parking lot is in I want to quote you or misp
it's empty most of the time would you would you agree that inclusion is wrong >> yeah also >> well but again I place the objection on the record. I want to know only valuable fixes. Those are the only fixes included in your
report. Correct. At least that's only in your report. >> Okay. Thank you. Did you reach out to anyone from the library? >> Are you aware there's some Summit Health medical office? >> Did you reach out to anyone from Summit
Health? Did you know there's a diagnostic? Did you reach out to anyone who did you reach out to community in crisis located across street on church street to ask any did you reach out to any of the shops in
town? Did you reach out to any of the restaurants in town? Did you reach out to any of the school district and are you aware that the school again Mr. Chairman I apologize
for question. Um, would you agree that generally speaking that a lack of available parking can discourage people from using things like a shop like a library like medical? >> Would you agree that the lack of available parking would discourage? For
example, if I want to do a library, would that discourage me for you to do a library? So then when you're taking into account what the detrimental effect on the general welfare of the community are, are you taking into account
this? [clears throat] It's not in the study that you're not necessarily studying. >> I'm focusing on the part of the study where you say something is a death or mental effect on the criminal community.
Sounds like the study is leading towards that mental effect community. Correct. >> It's underutilized. I'm sorry. My >> Please go on. Please
make a final comment. parking lot. But I do understand there's also that opening. I'm only specifically going forward. specifically you said parking lot intuitive to be used in your correct >> because we have
one last study law by the library and everything else that is detrimental to the general publicity. You already sworn, right? >> It was just a >> combination.
>> And not to repeat what Carolyn said. describe what why is the parking lot in um antiquity is the word you use that isn't going to Oh. Um, anyway,
I I read her text. People should read her textbook what she wrote. Um, so I represent some of the friends friends of the library and treasure and I'm I'm a citizen and I go to library. I walk through that lot every single day
once and twice. All right. So on my guest it's between 50 to 75% full every day of the week between and they speed function.
That tells me that enter the next one. If you're coming up route 202, you can't make a left at Anderson. So, you have to go to church here. Otherwise, you have to drive all the way around Claremont.
Having two entrances that she said wasn't a good idea is doesn't make any sense to our plan. And you need both entrances. [clears throat] There's no street parking. If you can't
find a place to park the library, you can't park in that training and the school board to move train times against the classroom time, but they need to cut through that and that needs to stay open
to the public so you can make the train. The school is moving up five minutes later to help that, but they have to run to make class and make some days. It's so congested. We have FedEx trucks, UPS trucks, landscaping
trucks, on a threading truck, sterile medical truck. You can't even drive around the parking lot. So, in closing, this is vital. This parking lot has to stay. I understand what you're saying about it may not have to be changed
or this plan shouldn't be in this plan. There's no point being this plan when this future develops. Thank >> one comment between us and that is I think there are two issues that are raised. There's access and there's
parking. My understanding of this project and what we approved is that access will still be part of this proposal. There will still be access from church to the library. It is not being blocked. That's
separate from parking. But access has to be provided. Otherwise, the application is got a problem. >> Well, first of all, it's not an application. It's no stop. It's a study, right? It's not a plan. So, we're not
there yet. >> No, no, no. >> I say that, but I think >> I just need to clarify >> redeveloping concern with what I think whether or not it meets certain
requirements to be redeveloped. It does not redesign the parking lot. It does not eliminate any of the buildings. It does not say that a bank won't be there or housing won't be there. None of that. That is all for later when the town
develops a redevelopment plan. I will gladly agree with you that access, parking and all that stuff needs to be adequate, needs to be protected, needs to be sufficient, not just to support whatever project goes there, but to support the downtown, support the
businesses and support everything else. But we are limited in whether or not right now today, and that's all >> I'm talking about previously. >> It doesn't matter previously. It's talking about today for this. >> I understand. I'm comfortable.
outside. In essence, uh to simplify it as much as we might want to consider what might be coming in a potential development
project after this board decides whether or not the the study area satisfied one or more of these criteria. considering what might be coming onto this property is not part of the
relevant analysis >> today for this >> correct I'm trying to do is and I agree with I agree with you I'm going to stop but I just want people to know >> get now is not the time to worry about access there's a time to worry but not
this time and and they're two different things there's access and parking I just want to make sure But sometimes the board has a certain authority and is supposed to look at a certain set of relevant facts and what we think
might be coming down the road might not be might not be relevant Even though we might want um that that might be something process
there are attorneys here. >> All right. Thank you. >> Sorry. >> Okay. [clears throat] Reese 11 Blazer Drive about >> so firm.
I'm sorry I haven't received anything. >> This is going to be fairly brief since several library members involved people have already spoken. But um I'm I'm I'm concerned about what will
become the eventual use of lot 22 out of all of this. The study itself says, "Primary ingress and egress is off of Anderson Hill Road. Has a uh traffic study of any kind been done to count the entrances and exits from both the Church
Street entrance and the Anderson Hill Road entrance? If not, I recommend that it should be done in order to not uh fib and say something is the primary ingress and egress. If it's not, uh Anderson Hill Road is uh heavily trafficked. It's
very difficult to get in and out of that and anyone living east of the library is going to come in church and I think it's very important that that data be um known in order to correct that
inaccuracy if if the primary egress is not in fact from the Anderson algorithm um then that needs to be reflected as if it's false um and I I think for safety reasons and so many other reasons. It's
very important to make both those methods of ingress and ebris and I think it's important to know how frequently they're used. Chris Shank 36 Old Road >> S C H E M C.
>> Thank you. You swear best. >> Thank you. Good evening everyone. I'll do my best to uh stay on track here. I'm going to cover quite a few topics. Um I've spent quite quite a bit of time reviewing both the redevelopment investigation, the housing element, fair share plan, and the uh anarch study that
put today. Um I want to be clear that um my comments are not in opposition to affordable housing redevelopment or transit oriented development. By no mean am I against that report in this specific context. My concern is whether the record before the board tonight provides sufficient support for the findings the board is being asked to
make. Um as stated there is no project before the board tonight. As you know you guys are making clear there's no site plan, no architectural plans, no redevelopment agreement, no pilot proposal before the board. So I want to keep that clear. Glad you made that clear. I think we all
need to make sure we keep that clear tonight. But at the same time um the redevelopment investigation the study that we are talking about for you guys to make this determination does not appear to include any real traffic analysis any actual parking utilization
studies any fiscal impact analysis school impact analysis any infrastructure capacity analysis to any degree. The housing element adopted earlier this year already identified this location and prior as noted in 2020 um or
redevelopment designation approximately 96 unit concepts what we have shown right what I'd like to know is what information did this study produce that was not already contemplated in that housing element and then use re-examination the report also sites deteriorated
conditions aging structures visual observation um as part of criteria Okay. Can anyone identify any building code violations, fire code violations, unsafe structure determinations, engineering evaluations, or health department
findings that support those conclusions beyond visual observations? What quantitative evidence exists that these properties are legally or structurally deficient rather than simply older buildings requiring maintenance and
probably a visiting from somebody in our town to make sure that they are compliant with housing codes. Finally, many of the concerns residents have raised over the past several months and even years, as you well know, involve traffic, parking, infrastructure capacity, public assets, and the broader
community impacts. that those are precisely the areas where I didn't find any supporting analysis in the record before us tonight. Good planning is built on understanding these problems, evaluating alternatives, measuring impacts, and weighing the trade-offs before these decisions are made. Yet,
constantly, Bernard'sville and its residents are often asked to react to these proposed pollutions before underlying impacts fully quantified. Appreciate your time this evening. I really hope we take the time to learn the details, the real metrics and real
data before we start creating more problems for ourselves. Jeffrey 18 got to refer to testimony but I believe it's truthful. >> Yes. >> I'll agree because I was going to say has already been said. Um I do think
that some of the comments were based on opinion rather than fact. for example, say that the bank is quote set up in an oldfashioned way and quote well any bank that has still has tellers is an oldfashioned way. So um I think that's an opinion not a fact. I think many of
the opinions were set up particularly as they pertain to the bank and to the uh parking lot of the library to include them into the a broader picture in order to facilitate development in that area. There's no question that the three turn
of the century buildings uh that residential are disgraceful. That zoning problem the landlord will be held in account. That doesn't necessarily mean that the greater area of need of redevelopment should pertain to the bank area and to the library parking lot. Um
I think it is disingenuous to say that we can't guess ahead uh to how that parking lot would be used. My one question I have here is uh um or actually my comment I should say had to do with the open space which is the
portion of lot 22. So that's burrow owned. Um I know for a fact because I sat on council in 2019 2021 and we looked at that property for the potential for a pocket park. I want to make a comment as a member currently of the environmental commission and
chairperson of the green team that not every open space has to have an economic purpose and to say that what was the word that was used uh that it was underutilized that that ignores the purpose of open
space. So I think that relates to this whole study flaw in regard to the parking lot and to the uh portion of uh lot 22. Thank you >> Jessica. My understanding is that lot which we're
talking about the parking lot lot is in fact deed restricted half an acre of it is being not half an acre is it's deed restricted and cannot be developed >> the No, there's a deep restriction on that.
There's there's literally deep, >> you know, I'm not saying it shouldn't be included. I'm just I'm just saying I believe for a fact there's a deed restriction on that particular piece on the I guess it would
be the north side of the the driveway and it although it's included in the study actually nothing could be built of it. Michelle Conover C O N B E R 16 B Avenue >> actually had a question about a few
things that Chairman Graham said. Am I allowed to to address something that he said? I just want some clarification like point clarification type thing. Okay. come up with these redevelopment um initiatives I'll call them.
[clears throat] >> Um and you said that the areas were selected by the council. >> Correct. >> But you said it's supposed to be initiated by the planning board but somehow that got circumvented. >> Yeah. >> So my question is was this process done properly in your opinion? And if if the
planning board is supposed to be the initiator and they were not and the council was the initiator, >> right? >> Is this the proper way to even have this plan come before you? >> Both plan both >> and go ahead.
You can answer the um my understanding but here the study areas uh certainly can be chosen quote unquote
uh by the governing body in their resolution. ution directing the planning board to have a hearing to decide whether a particular study area or study area it's just another one
uh uh uh are the uh areas need to be redone or not. So short answer is I my understanding the governing body did it correctly irrespective of whether respectfully our chairman agrees
>> add to the get some time back it's important for the public to also understand that I'm going to put this in layman's terms but we're here predominantly because of the state's affordable housing
situation. You've been forced like all other municipalities within the state >> to figure out, >> right? But to figure out where you can put more housing because we have a lack
of housing. Okay. And part of what was in the fourth round loss was also to find areas that can be rebelled. Okay. And so I may or may not be
stepping out of place here, but hypothetically a lot of towns out of their way from the m municipal governing body perspective to find areas where they could be redeveloped in addition to a lot of other area and a
lot of other criteria. And what areas that could be reszoned in order to capture more housing withinity. Right. >> Correct. So while it wasn't this board's
specific um I guess or it wasn't them who was you know finding those areas because it was municipal governing body who who found this ah-9
ah-10 um I just want you all to understand that there are a lot of move pieces which came to you know fruition in order for the specific redevelopment area to be identified.
You can identify areas through a master plan reexamination process as well and that is typically when a planning board would identify areas that are appropriate for things to be redeveloped
or for affordable housing for example. Um, and I think that might be what the chairman meant when he said that the planning board is typically the one who finds places. >> Yeah, it's just the first few phases are
if you did a re-examination at that time, you would be one of the objectives would be to identify future opportunities for space. It kind of just due to the pressure that's applied by the state. It just sort of kind of started in the middle. I don't actually
have a problem with it. Uh starting in the middle. Um >> so I think that was what >> to your knowledge. Um has it happened like this in the past with other areas that have been declared redevelopment zones? Yeah, it's kind of out of the scope of this, but
>> um to answer that question, traditionally the municipality makes that decision, meaning the council may council traditionally in almost every town makes that decision and sends it here for the hearing. So, and then it goes back to
them idea. That's okay. So, I would also then like to make a comment about the citizens committee that you mentioned because I personally I've been in this town for 24 years, but I also went to New York City. So, I've been in this area for almost my
entire life. And one of the things that I do find is that the citizens don't feel like they're involved. They don't feel like they're given the opportunity. And if there's a way to pursue that with you guys or the council or whatever, I would love to have that be in the future
of any other types of these types of things because I think it's a valuable way to get the public involved and also allowing us to feel like we're kind of have a say in the future. >> I would say go to the council meeting and and suggest it. But my rationale is
in somewhat selfish because I don't want to have to spend six meetings into midnight fixing developers plans that need to be repaired with, you know, 100 odd, you
know, things. I don't that we ought to be able to solve those structural operational design problems before the plane gets to us so that we can just handle minor exceptions and whatever.
And that's not what typically happens. And I would encourage the town to impress upon the council that you would like to have citizen participation in
the brainstorming for these ultimately these applications that aren't baked yet. You know, they're they're still being constructed. It should not, in my opinion, just be between the developer and the town. >> Yes. >> And it should be the citizens uh that are involved in this. That's but the
right approach is to go to the council and express your own opinions >> for now. Now >> there's just so many people here that have Okay. [clears throat] Yeah. comments
just be I think everyone knows where I think that's a very comment that you made that you don't know where second is Columbia bank is a special place for the community I don't know how
many of you know that they give a lot of donations to nonprofits. I have to bang the two nonprofits there just because of this because I'm older. Manager was really nice and said anytime you need something just text me ahead of time
I'll come up. I said I'm more than de and get in there with no issue. That bank has employees that will do anything for anyone. This is a rarity in this day. So, just to say that their ramp isn't good for someone who's older or
that they have all these insulation problems, maybe we all could help them because they give thousands and thousands to non. God bless them. Harry Hazelton, 397 Mine Brook Road.
[clears throat] >> I did. >> Uh, I'd like to start with a question for uh Jessica. Um, we were all subjected to a litany of photographs of
deteriorating conditions in several of the buildings, both the board and the members of the public. Um, I would would you say that having the buildings get to that condition and having those issues is
something that should be corrected and by the landlord and should not have gotten to this point. >> That's not how we in this study. And one thing I've mentioned under physical
operations issues and that said the properties aren't bringing in enough money to cure the issues that are happening. >> I would suggest that that's a that's a that's an opinion. And when you don't see that
is when there's not going back to cure issues, the redevelopment developers other tools to help incentivize reinvest. >> I'm not getting to speak much in my time.
>> But we can restart again. >> Could you could you see that that could you see that have Could you see that having category A uh really presents a perverse incentive for landlords to not take care
of their properties because if they don't they could then have an area in need using just that one category by letting their property deteriorate. We saw we've seen we've been here before. We have had areas in need before. We have had the planning board say no to
areas in need before because of parking striping and minor issues on the outside of buildings and had that overturned by the council. So I I feel like there is a perverse incentive in in uh category A and that many of these things could be
and should be fixed by the landlord and we should have inspections. I'm getting inspected with my garage apartment every single year. I could never be allowed to allow things to get that way. There's evidence of stacking. It's illegal to have people living in the basement. That
should that's all a burrow issue and it should be addressed. Uh and on top of that, I'd like to make a statement. Uh the woman in blue said that everyone from the east would be using the the the church street access to the library. I'm
going to tell you that everybody in the west is using the church street access to the parking lot as well because I live in Twin Lace on 202. When I come up, I can't make a left turn at Alcott Square. So, I go through the light and
make a left on Church and a left into the parking lot. If I didn't have that access and it seems to me like that lot is sticks out like a sore thumb. It's not related to any of these other lots at all. It doesn't belong to the same person. It belongs to the burrow. And if
I didn't have that access, I would have to turn uh on Quimby Lane and then on Mill Street and then make an impossible left through the traffic on Anderson Hill Road, hang a quick right into the parking lot that would probably be fil
which would be filled because many of the burrow offices are there. So, east or west, we have to have that for for our library. We need that parking and we need that access. We need that for our high school as well and our high school
students. So, thank you very much 150 Mount Harmony Road. >> Yes. >> So, two quick questions. One is right next to the firehouse is that lowincome housing being built that ugly structure that
>> okay what across from the playing field sort of what is that building is that more lowincome housing over there >> I grew up in Bernardsville from the time I was 14 I moved back years later so 69 so a lot of years here I don't agree
with this fair share BS I'm really disgusted with all this lowincome housing and I want to make a comment. In 2016 when Trump ran it, he said they're trying to wreck our zoning in the nice areas and I agree with that. They're
trying to change the flavor of our area. The traffic cannot handle it. The traffic is hideous. When you go when I come in from working in the city, you can barely get through town and we're going to put 101 units in that area. Are you kidding me? So, I think it's a
travesty. I'm not for all this lowincome subsidies. I'm 69. I'm going to be paying for all these people to have breeders to have more kids in the school and my taxes are going to keep going up. I think it's a travesty and I want it for the record. I'm disgusted. I'm going
to probably have to move out of this area. testimony. >> Thank you. So I have um I guess a comment and rhetorical question. Is that um just in terms of comment I guess I'm looking at this a lot in terms of comparison and I take Miss Fe's comments
apart about you know the big picture what it is that the the gun to the heads of the both the council and to the plan board to to some extent as well. If you look in the 2025 housing element fair share plan and the proposed mechanisms
4.3 section 4.3 there were four areas that were identified. There was the Corey 65 Claremont Road and then the two that are before the board this evening and I think you we can all agree and you can see from the testimony and the commentary we've heard tonight that
nothing says anything unoccupied. It's all being used. It's entirely occupied. It's these apartments are people's homes. You know, there are families living here. Um there's a small business, a bank. You've heard a lot about the parking. I remember, you know, the Columbia bank, I think, was a
trick-or- treat site a couple years ago. The trunk or treat rather is a community space. And I don't want to repeat just sort of fully endorse Dr. hand comments about the open space and the importance of that woodland that's right there um near downtown. So I in just in terms of
comparison [clears throat] to the other areas that the council has designated as being of interest for the affordable housing um um I admire I guess I guess is the better word I can think of um politely um this is a real outlier and I
think that is um has to be considered and then in terms of comparison my rhetorical question is you know this is I've in my day job I've seen quite a few of these redevelopment studies as well and I'm employees um frustrated by the lack of what I'll call comps, right? Um
someone said during the presentation, someone said, "Oh, it's dilapidated." And I heard [clears throat] compared to what compared to law, you know, and I I don't I don't fault um Miss Caldwell. I don't know fault the process, but it is frustrating to look at this study and
these these criteria in A&D are so subjective and there's nothing compared to what you know, you know, it's chip paint. I heard the word chip paint several times, you know, so you know, the only thing that seemed to have any sort of standard to definition was obsolescence and you know that was was
very very ugly. So I strongly encourage a bird planning board to be exacting and really take a look at this um and think about these criteria and whether they apply. Thank you. I do.
>> Thank you. I just want to go very quickly. Um I've uh I've been here a bit maybe more than most recognized everyone but uh you know in this town we've been here for you know 13 years and uh I've seen some
disheartening things um but a lot of good things as well um especially at this board. Um but one of the most disheartening things I've seen um is at this board tonight and it makes me really sad and that's that stopwatch. Uh, I think it's embarrassing that our
council does it. Um, playing run out the clock on the public input. Your public service. You said it, Mr. Chairman. [clears throat] Makes my heart sink. Anyway, uh the I don't you [clears throat] have a you
have a 30some page uh report um exclusive of exhibits not not anywhere near possible to address the questions that this very serious questions that this um uh [clears throat] hearing tonight is supposed to address in that
amount of time. Um but I'm going to uh I guess skip uh questions. You can dive right into comments if I have time for but quickly to Mrs. Excuse me, Miss Fa's point. Um, yes. Um, part of the round four plan is, uh, is identifying redevelopment areas, which we need to be
careful with, you know, turn out. When you say redevelopment, it's small R redevelopment. Means there's something there. We're going to put something else there. Does not mean area in need of redevelopment because you can't pass a statewide statute that says you need to identify areas in need of redevelopment when there might not be areas need need
of redevelopment in your town. are very specific statutory criteria that you need to meet. So they're saying you need to hey focus development no more no more sprawl don't take you know these uh these massive estates or farmland as we see in some of the some of the portions
of the state and um you know create town developments you like with finger um you you can take your sewer service area and and build up and that's fine and that's what we did and so I was part unwilling
but you know part of the the round floor um process and we presented um the the burrow not the bureau presented um to fair share to the developers hey you know like they they they settlement they
walked out a settlement and they said you know here's what we're going to do and and it is it's it's that you know um 96 units with 19 affordable law I'm not sure that the final um agreement said they had to be age restricted or whether it was they may be age restricted but I
think they're hearing about Um the you know the point is you know that we said we would do that. The court entered an order saying you need to pass resolutions uh zoning that implements
the requirements that you agreed to in your um settle in your fair share settlement in in your plan that can continue. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Um, and we did that. The board um, reviewed it and and you know,
you you said, you know, okay, here's the implementing ordinances. They're in place. They're the H9 ordinances. They're in place. The court, we submitted, Mr. provision submitted into the court said, "Judge, in fulfillment of our obligations under your order and
under the Fair Housing Act, here are the resolutions that implement our agreement um that we need to do to satisfy our constitutional affordable housing obligations." The court looked at him, said, "Great, that works. Here is your certificate and judgment of compliance
and repose. You did it. AO9 is in place, right? This [clears throat] is superolous to that. You don't need to say it's an area in need of redevelopment or not because it's going to be redeveloped pursuing to that um you know that zoning that the
developer agreed to. This is you know what we need to develop this property. No more financial incentive is needed. The market rate units will subsidize the 20% affordable that we need to set aside. That was settled. That was agreed. That's it. So, you know, in uh
Miss Caldwell's report on page two, she she cites the local redevelopment housing law um and and the purposes thereof and and it says provide a process for addressing the underutilized, untenable, vacant, and abandoned properties that without public
effort are not likely to be corrected or amilarated by private effort. We've already found out a judge has said this is going to be redeveloped or developed redeveloped small R you know pursuant to your zoning that you have in place. The the local housing redevelopment law this
turns it on. The local redevelopment housing law was passed so that community could could find blighted property as it used to be called and say you know what look we nothing's happening without this. We need to have some government intervention, massive government intervention, serious government intervention, long-term
taxpayer, 30 years, you know, giving private property to private owners in order to, you know, allow for this these developments happen because we don't they're just going to continue to deteriorate. Everybody's going to get, you know, it's going to be detrimental to the whole community. It's bad news.
So th this is a solution looking for a problem. We're looking for the tax breaks. We're looking for the ability to give away property without public bidding. And so, how are we going to do it? Well, the only way you can do it is through inherent need of redevelopment designation. And so, you you you're trying to nail a a square peg into a
round hole. And it it it's it's absolutely contraven is the opposite of what the local redevelopment housing law was supposed to do. You're taking a property that does not need any additional incentivization as you know has already
been ruled and saying well here here you know here's what we're trying to do. We're trying to lease and convey property having go through uh public bidding grant long-term tax abatements and titles. It it's it's really I think perverting and abusing the local
redevelopment and housing law in a way that it was never intended to do. Um, I guess I'll I'll stop there. Thank you for your time. Thank you. James Cavanaaugh, 36 Maple Village Court.
>> You swear to God, the recurrent test about is not. >> Yes. Uh it's nice going later. There's a lot of other things I was going to talk about already mentioned. But uh I did still have one question. With all the building that's going on currently, the
three new uh housing move elements and then this potential for it. How's our sewer system going to the rest of our infrastructure? These are rhetorical questions, right? >> Yeah. As mentioned the soul authority the
planning board has is decide whether or not criteria housing law study are directly satisfied one or more that may be a question governing body
another night even tonight perhaps and and again one question comes up is when we first started the present presentation, it sounded like it was mostly economic. We weren't making enough money with that property. And then after the presentation,
uation uh presentation, after listening to everything wrong with everything, I come down and bulldozing. Um I I I think when we do
project we have a firm hand of exactly why and what we want to try and accomplish and and and the reasons is it because we needables or is it because these have become uninhabitable and not able to maintain
so as we said there's probably a lot of work to do I I would uh listen to Steve and um raise your question about sewer long-term sewer planning with with the council directly. They have to deal with
it all the time. There are lots of expenditures that they've gone through recently. So, they would have a good handle on >> what they've done just they would just know. So, deeper. Would you would you like to
Julian 36 Village Court? >> Yes. >> I guess my frustration is My frustration is who's protecting the citizens of New? We have an aging population. We have been here for years. I could see developer with a lot of
money and the taxpayer having to put the bill for the sewer system improvements. It's happened time and time again. If the library loses those spots, Summon Health leaves,
um, Quest leaves. That's detrimental to our community. There's so many empty part uh business spots throughout the area. They're going to just go somewhere else. They're not going to put up with no parking. And I find it almost fraudulent that these were picked to do the studies when businesses were closed.
I mean, we're not being honest or fair to the citizens of Burnsville. We did very hard to make this a wonderful community. That high school depends on that bargaining. If you have a play at the high school, we need that parking. If there's games, we use that parking all the time. This is part of our
community. And somehow someway to make 20 spots of low-inccome housing. We can put 20 apartments there. Just put 20 apartments there and that's it. And call it a day. We meet our requirement. you know, why do we have to have a 100
units to have 20 units? I'll just I'm gonna play devil's advocate just so and I and I well I just want I also want to talk about the chair per might be outside this
>> concern about um I know I'm concerned about the the sanitary sewer and I want to make everyone aware that I don't disagree with anything that Mr. Dove said about um the way that this
law was created um in terms of the tools that it was supposed to bring about and the way that it is of a developer as a part of this and that is done through what's called a redevelopment. agreement on this
citizens. Well, I would hope that the municipal governing body would do that for you, but that's something there's more power given to the municipality through this law to ask things like that of the redevelopment.
Um, and that's all I wanted to just bring that to the the spending a lot of money for 20,000. Well, that was about that 100% affordable developer like you have
with the the property across the street and the other two properties that are being developed. the redeveloper I think >> yeah the only way that you can make the program is if you have a lot more market rate
apartments to pay for the the center of town is so crowded you can't get through I just 110 is just it's not a legal Yeah, it's a full and our neighborhood that
business forest and iron just don't think it's going to work. >> Either one5 pretty he was a little tweeting [clears throat] out. >> Yes. >> So, so building on
>> building on what he was saying about kind of this designation in my experience and I came from another hand I I left that because this kind of thing is happening constant redevelopment being forced upon us because of the low-inccome housing issues. Uh, in my experience, what I've done is
redesigning designations are used by developers to remove the zoning restrictions and protections that keep the town the way we want it to be. Uh, and it's often kind of a bait and switch uh, situation where they we agree to remove these protections by designating it that way before we know what's
planned. And that's that's on purpose. They don't want us to know what's planned beforehand. So, we remove the restrictions that would keep that from ever happening. And then what ends up happening is once those restrictions are gone, developers come, they propose things that none of us would like would have gone against right from the
beginning. Um and then negotiations on the developers and I've seen this time and time again. I literally left my last post of this. I was fighting constantly. I hired a lawyer. I hired environmental people to to fight this thing and stop things like
this from happening. But that's this is the bait and switch that we're looking at right here is let's designate it first. Don't worry what's going to come in here and then don't worry it'll be great and then all of a sudden it's not great. It's exactly what we didn't want to happen and that's why those restrictions are in place to protect us in the beginning.
Okay. Uh the the next I will ask a question here. So Alison you know obviously we do have some pressure from us from the state. Is there anything we can do? And it's my last point the same way. We had tons of low housing, but it wasn't designated. Is there any way to say, "Hey, we have
tons of low housing for family." We solve this and say, "Hey, let's let's figure out how we're going to be able to designate some that exist today and constantly building more low housing because it doesn't currently fit the definition." Is there any way to change the definition of some of the housing we
have? to be a qualifying affordable unit. There are a lot of criteria short of walking you through the housing plan. >> Have you considered that? Are we working
towards that? We have ongoing residential housing council the governing body nor are we about are we addressing at least directly responsibility planning board in this one function which is does it or
does it not meet one award right here >> in any way find ways to not have to build affordable housing because we would have it. >> So my understanding is part of the fourth round plan um was payments to keep some affordable housing as
affordable. So we built affordable housing years ago. That time period had expired and I think part of the plan was to repurchase. Right. Right. Correct. So, so we have we have we have
existing affordable housing um by the right aid and and the CBS, right? Um that time period of affordable housing has like a 30-year time period or a 20-year time period. They will come in off and if we didn't move to extend it, they would no longer be counted. So, the
town did do a great effort and we will pay for that, right? We'll take that developer and we'll say, "Hey, keep them >> Yeah. keep keep them affordable but didn't come with any market rate. It doesn't come with any set aside. So that effort was done by the town to your
point to try to keep >> uh that's they're working through that process, right? They have to buy the credits back from that gen the person who owns it. So but that is part of the part of the plan. >> Okay. Correct. But they still have to execute.
>> They still have to execute. But >> but to your but to your point they they took the affirmative step not to lose some because then they would had to make up more. >> Yeah.
most enforcement build and no one carries. I'm just gonna do a quick statement of the yard. Uh the house is older. It probably has some feeling paint by their
considered underutilized. Well, I bought that house for a reason. I wanted an underutilized land. I didn't want to help the government have a problem, right? and and that's the environment I moved to this town for and I think most of the people who live in this town like the environment the way it is. So pulling that underutilized doesn't fit a
high density definition of maximizing use of land is I think 133 Claremont Road to give the truth. truth truth and not the better truth and allow him. >> Yes, I do. Thank you. I will be brief. I
feel like tonight was um a presentation on code violations and a need for the slum lords to take care of their buildings. I think it's ironic that in order to improve and maintain the historical nature of Buritzville and its
charm is that we're going to remove homes that were built in 1890. So, we're going to preserve the historical nature of the town by tearing down homes that were built in 1890s. If the criterion that were demonstrated in that proposal
uh represent homes that should be torn down, uh I have to be honest, I think most of our homes would be torn down. I have moss. I have peeling paint. And there was a bug in my kitchen today. [laughter] >> Um and struggling with the fact that,
and I'm I'm going to try and quote you as closely as I can, um, lack of repairs could be evidence of an inability to reinvest in a property. I'm curious if to, you know, that landlord have any money in his bank or he's just choosing
not to repair something. You speak with a tremendous amount of confidence and conviction. Yet almost everything you said tonight can be easily contradicted and was actually opinion based on an outcome you're hoping will be in your
client's favor. So you can be very forceful. That doesn't mean what you're saying is actually true for and I find that sense. Uh, second round for anybody if they want. I don't want to suppress anyone, even Aaron.
[laughter] >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. I just wanted to uh because I didn't get say it before is uh is the moral hazard concern but the last speaker and um Miss Hazelton I think is
a really big um concern here like the the purpose of planning and zoning and what everyone up here volunteer and is on this board to do is to help our town improve right like use
the expertise that you have to you know aid need the burrow in, you know, making the making the downtown, making the the whole burrow a nice place to live. But when you have situations where and these are all cold, I have the property mains
code chapter and like, you know, yeah, you have uh prohibited conditions. I'm not going to go through them, but obviously you can't have insect infestation. Um, you need to keep your sideways, steps, driveways in good repair. We need to not have peeling
paint, broken glass, missing substantially. Um, you know, Miss Cwell has been out to this property now a few times, like she said, from 2024, you know, two and a half years ago until until now. And you have a landlord
who's going with you, saying, "Don't go out there. That's that's dangerous." Like, come on. That'll be crazy. But that's his property that he's letting people live in. A and the the report that you wrote back in 2024, January 2024, you delivered to
the burough c the the bureau administrator. You delivered to the council and you cited evidence of unsafe, unsanitary conditions not commensible with wholesome living that are detrimental to our community.
Did anyone from the council from the administration, did you advise the zoning officer whose job it is to make sure that these um property owners are providing livable space for Burnsville
residents, our neighbors? How how is that allowed to happen? And then to come back, you know, to two and a half years later say, "Oh, it's still still there." Well, yeah, because nobody told them to do anything. Nobody called up the the anybody even like say, "Hey,
Mr. Mr. Cer, hey, you know, your propertyy's not safe for people to live there. You told me so yourself. Can you fix it?" And why? Because then you wouldn't have 33 pages of why this needs to be a, you know, area you need to do. And, you know, again, condemnation, not
condemnation. And like that's why this is just it's an abuse of what the what the law was meant to do. Um if this was a common [laughter] development, it wouldn't be me. It would be their lawyers coming in stomping their feet waving the papers and saying, "Are you joking?" And and
you bet that that property would be takes before your hearing. [clears throat] Um but when it's a non-condemnation area redevelopment, I'm not going to lose. They can cut they can sit back. You know, you you you open the door to big tax breaks. You know, it's a pilot
agreement. It's a moral hazard. You're incentivizing people who are supposed to be taking care of people live in their homes in their in their rental unit. You're subsidizing them to make those properties unsafe, invalidary, unhygienic.
So that you're encouraging that your your bureau to do that. So then they get massively financially rewarded. 30-year tax breaks worth tens of millions of dollars. And so the burough council can can can take the can take the pilot revenue and and change the school district.
>> Sorry, I got Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your second question. Yeah, you can [clears throat] >> again Chris Shank um and thank everybody for today. Thank you all. We will not
complain with chairman here for obviously taking time tonight. I know this is an intense issue. Um I may cover some stuff that I think we've already discussed, but three points that I think came up today that I really again just kind of want to talk through. Again, I I think as I've been mentioned by many
people, your expertise is what we rely on. This board obviously comes to us with that that foundational knowledge that we rely on to make these decisions to help us guide us make these plans. Obviously, our our great attorneys over here, Allison, you had mentioned I think there's a great word, understanding,
right? Understanding complexities of the affordable housing is extremely challenging. Most individuals around here do not come prepared with the amount of paperwork that you have in your hands, right? Amount of just details that you have to find. And I think that's what we get so frustrated.
And you even, Mr. Chairman, alluded to was the process that is in place for so many of these issues is a challenge for even you, right? The framework isn't there. And I think that that's what we all react to. I I know Sloan talked
about it, right? The understand what it all means. Um, and I'm not saying that we're going to find that out in a 2hour session here. I think it's going to take a lot of time. Um, but obviously there's a lot of emotion. There's a lot of just, you know, pent up aggression. People have their own thoughts about this, but at
the same time, I think we all want the same results. We all want a town that is beautiful, safe, that we all enjoy being a part of, that, you know, makes home for everyone. And I think it's also something I the public needs [clears throat] to understand. And using
the word low income is is just it makes me upset because if you look at the rules, if you look at region 3 that we're in, you know, the the income that you need to have to be able to live in these units is not low to any standard in the United States of America. You are
actually well above the poverty line. You probably make more than my myself. All right. And that it makes me upset dealing with a doctor that is 30 40 years old. It's putting Yeah. 50 years old. It's putting on you. We have to keep coming back to these plans, these
procedures, all these things just to go in another circle, another cycle. And we just seem to get stuck in. I think what residents want today in the future going forward is to break that cycle is to be allow allow for you as a planning board to have a framework that you can operate
from. And I think what we'd like to see is a little more guidance, a little more input from you and how we can go back to the governing body, hold them accountable. How do we get a citizen commission in place? How do we do that? Because I think a lot of people here just don't know what to do. They want to
do they want to be involved. Everyone here cared about this town. care about our families. We care about the people that are community members and I know I do. That's why I'm here today. Um, and I think that that is what we're seeking is just more guidance, more access to information. I think that's what made
that report and I know you spent a lot of time on that and I don't think it's fair for us to judge your your you know finish just a minute or so. I don't think it's fair for us to to attack you just doing your job. I think all of us understand we all live in a professional world and we get, you know, things that
we have to do that maybe we don't necessarily agree with or outcomes that we're just not in charge of. But I think what we'd like to see reports that are generated and things that are decisions that are made is that they are stand up to to credible real facts, right? Real
quantified, like I said earlier, quantifiables, right? The fact that you had the metrics, you learned that when you talked about the days that you counted, that's us frustrating when you have those metrics, but they're not being
given to us, right? It makes us feel like we're coming to solutions or we're seeing things put in our face that we are just all of a sudden being like, well, Right. But I think it's more important that we we really do as a community find a way
to break that cycle, [clears throat] create these frameworks for you guys to do your job, make it easier. I don't think it's fair for you guys to have to sit here till 10:00 at night. I know most of us probably don't want to be here either. Um, and I think we're all again just seeking guidance and obviously we want to have that input, but um, as you can see, we're still all
here and still really care. I thank you for all that you guys are doing really. Yes, >> I know you're I know you know, but actually I was going to thank you as well, too. Just it's very hard to be there listen to all this. I'm sure many
comments you want to stick a poker in your eye. So we I think the town knows people like you who step up and do public services and the democratic people. So thank you. My question is um and and I and this is not a rhetorical question. I I don't know. But I think it's important for us
to consider what are the ramifications of calling an area need of redevelopment, non-condemnation area needed redevelopment. Since we've talked about that it goes the decision [clears throat] then goes to the the council about whatever that developer's
plan is. Does calling this an area non-condation area needed redevelopment hamper the ability of the council to insist on certain things? Does it obligate the council to allow the developer to bypass some of the zoning
rules? What are the ramifications of doing this? >> It's actually the opposite. Okay. >> Right. explain. >> Not a problem. So to to start I think we're winding down on the public comment. So just to deal with
some of it. So the original zone in back in 2020 for this right had 35 acres uh 35 units per acre in the downtown corridor and that was done as a result of a citizen committee. Right? There was a group of people came together and they met. They met often and they worked with
the council, they worked with the planning board and they recommended that zoning for the center district, right? The downtown district. Uh the affordable housing came, they put another overlay over that. So the property is already zoned for what everyone's worried about,
right? Multif family housing property is already zone, right? it it's they can come tomorrow tear down those buildings and build housing per unit. Mr. Duff talks about how this becomes an abusive process because if you go through this and to get to your point doctor is the
town then has additional tools at its facility. Yes, there are additional benefits that the developer will ask for. He will ask for a pilot. I'm sure he will. Whether he gets it or not, it's up to the council. He will probably ask for other considerations. He may say to
the town, "Hey, it's going to cost me so much. Give me the parking lot for freight." I don't know, right? But that's what the developer will probably do. But the town also gets additional tools. The additional tools that the town gets is to get to say, "Hey, we
want the building to look different, right? We have generic zone in there, but how many parking spaces, where the access driveways are, what the design are, what the unit count is, what the unit mix is, right? maybe 101 units, but
is it 101 twobedrooms or is it 101 single bedrooms? Age restriction, all [clears throat] those other things that our current zoning doesn't have in place, the redevelopment plan, which is the heart of the matter. That's where I would bring out the pitchforks and the knives and the and stakes. I really
would, right? Because that's where the deal gets done. That new redevelopment grant. Apparently, I'm out of time, though. I don't have to ask. But but to your point, right, >> you answered the question. >> But all of what I just said has no
bearing on my decision on whether or not the planner and I based upon her testimony believe that this area meets that criteria. Right? That's all the important stuff. The narrow question before us today, >> but it doesn't because it doesn't in the
sense that by law >> by law it doesn't. He's going to tell me I can't consider any of >> Sorry. >> Yeah. I mean, that's the challenge. I know what the next question is. I know what the next hearing is. I know what the next conversation will be. I got to
deal with the one in front of me first. >> That's that's really the frustrating part on this. >> We see this bifurcated into two questions. One is the the dilapidated buildings. think anybody's arguing about that and the other is the inclusion of other
space through which there is some subjectivity in terms of the interpretation of its obsolescence or its economic vitality >> meaning the question then what's the obligation of the owner to remediate something which is easily remediated we we said
let's compl that doesn't that doesn't take anything >> so the point is is if you look at it two separate conditions, one is we're now incorporating that somewhat artificially the parking lot in the bank in order to make it more expensive for the developer
make a bigger unit. >> That's that's fully necessary. So if we So that's why I think looking at what the plan is going to be and by the way we already know we see pictures you know what the plan is going to be that's important
looking at the evidence uh presented as to whether or not the study area satisfies one or more criteria. that portion of what you said is absolutely relevant to materialize what they're
going to do. uh it's all effectively that to do most but but objecting or even knowing quote unquote what's going to happen in the future with plans for the future
regrettably perhaps they are constrained to have to simply look at the evidence and decide does it satisfy one or more or not. I think the question at hand was how did the study area use your term the study area get defined in the first
place because I don't think about including the other area into the study area seem to be intended to come toward about where the repeats at 75 Burners Avenue
attorney got a test Glad to get >> I do. Thank you. Please excuse me. I just have a question in regards to the structure of the meetings this evening. We talked a lot and this by the
two projects on the site on >> on the dock. At what point do we say okay we've defined all the definitions. We've defined all the terms. We've decided if it's an access road, driveway. We understand that. You know, I was born
and raised in this town. I still live. And now I'm living in property where they're making opinions. They may be making opinions. And I want to know at what point do we move from one property to the next or is that going to be pushed to the next meeting?
>> We'll try to close it here and try to address it. >> We haven't gotten to that second item yet. really sit here and then >> the second one. >> We'll start it. >> We're trying to get through it right
now. >> Try to cover what's on the docket. I'm talking the chair is allowing for whatever I recommend to the board because I read what was in the report. You can pick say
no to everything say parking lot and everything else. My recommendation is I read this before. The only part I do not agree with is her analysis of the parking lot. Makes no sense. Her analysis
makes sense, >> not the parking lot. >> Your name again. >> Um Dwayne Ke. Um the Palmer property across the street is going to be developed supposedly. How many units are going there?
>> So, we're going to have 68 there, 90 right across the street. >> How is our surving body? No, there's not. But you should bring that up in front of the council.
[clears throat] >> No, we're just trying to get a clear picture. >> No, I just had a question about the low whether the new the challenge is >> Yeah, that's fine. The challenge is I don't serve the public. I thank you
for your opinion. >> We both do our job. >> Sir, go ahead. Last call. >> Um, stay on topic. >> Sure. The floor is yours. So I'll stick with here.
So I'm curious if peel and paint is a remediation properties were done would you withdraw your recommendation? Honestly >> that's all I need to hear. I think that's all we need to hear on that piece. Um, and I will say absolutely
land talked about the experience I've had in the past. Landlords absolutely start seeing this trend and start using this on their behalf and they go, "Okay, I'm going to let my properties go into decay." Then what they do is they let them go to the point where they claim hardships. They go to remediate one.
I've now milked this property for 20 years. To remediate what it should be, it's going to cost so much money it's unreasonable. I have a hardship. You got to help me. And then they end up winning that case. what is acceptable, what's not acceptable, what we should give, what we shouldn't give. We will lose every time.
Right? I'm sales. Like these people are professional negotiators. They will beat us every time. You will get what you do not want if you open this up and give them these rights and kind of take down the laws that are protecting us. >> Okay.
closing the uh questions and comments section and um you have a I'm sure have a resolution ready >> we did circulate a resolution the board
can decide whatever it decides as no doubt they make a recommendation for the governing bids uh you can recommend whatever you recommend whereas are there um and before it is as part of the public business in
the bureau and in accordance with the law. You can have discussion >> and legally I think you picked this up but if it satisfies at least one if not more than that criteria that is
the chart I think is you emphasize >> the chart's helpful >> pro probably the my conclusion is the driving force is um actually section three um ends up being
um co pay attention to that >> but you are um namely that okay I've got x number of parcels you know but they're all part of one thing and even if one parcel is okay
uh because it's a total uh total package that that has weight um we're going to have a discussion or you can comment as you make your vote. Um, anyone want to generally comment? >> Well, I just want to put one thing out
for discussion >> with everyone here. Um, and I will remind everyone that aside from one of us, all of us are appointed. We are not elected officials and much of the concern needs to be addressed through
the elected officials. But parking um I I Several things I can take exception with, but even the parking study that the town I agree um is inadequate. Although I did
walk the properties on Monday and when I was there I was the only car. But I know that parking is an issue. But at the same time, if we pull out the parking lot,
does that make a difference? And does that make the project even um possible or impossible if that's not included? >> I I don't think that's your option. Your option is you can take some of the X's out of her grid according to your belief
and then assess the end result of that grid and you would vote according to that grid. if we're trying to stay on target. So, you would say, "Well, I'm going to drop the X out of the parking lot, right?" You know, I don't think you
can't remove it from consideration if that's what you're asking. >> Well, I'm saying, >> but you can say, "I don't agree." >> You say, "I don't agree that there's an X in row D of parking." I don't think that's been proven. But then you still have to look at the whatever the whole
grid is and then make uh use that as a piece of your conclusion. I I think and the other >> if if our recommendation you know deviates from what was agreed to in the
fair share plan and the council you know agreed with that you know took our recommendation what would be the next steps from there? Would that put the burrow in jeopardy from a >> We're just giving them advice. >> It's a formal step. We're responding as
we should and it's our advice. Uh we have an opportunity to comment back to them, but it's it's their decision whether to agree with us or not, whether to proceed with an AI, you know, a not ours. We we don't have veto power. We're
not stopping anything. We're just perhaps saying, "Hey, wait a minute." You know, we say no. >> Recommendation and it's based on the evidence, >> right? >> But they they can they're in control. They're they're
>> not the recommending make that determination. The purpose of this is to for a full public hearing longer than you would get at the council 3 hours in on this topic which is a
substantial amount of time in some respects for what government spends on these things. Um, you know, I I do side with the planner, right? I mean, yeah, the buildings aren't completely contaminated and
everything else, but um, they really don't serve an economic purpose or they don't really fit in the in the overall long-term goal that this town has had and visions for downtown. They're not laid out right. They don't
fit in with the other aspects. not they've always been underutilized or always been afterthought in how they're laid out or whatever. Um the parking lot does concern me in some respects. I get comfort that the
town does own it, right? So it's not like some private person gets a windfall or whatever. The town still has the ultimate decision whether to include it in any future or part of it or anything else. [clears throat] Um, I got to have some trust in that
that going to really weigh the factors, right? The library is one of the jewels and essentials, right? And anything that detriments is detrimental to access or use of that I think has as an would be horrible, right, in some respects. I do
believe though that, you know, the buildings are not of equality or the standards that we all want in our downtown. And um the bank is a 1970s building. It's fine. It operates. Um
it's really not what I think. The properties are already zoned. I know it's not a factor, but it's just out there that I I think this this moves that along, right? They were zoned for five, six years, and nothing has
happened. The audible has been in place and nothing has happened. I think one of the reasons or purposes of an area in need of redevelopment is to try to kickstart that a little bit more. So, I'm inclined to vote yes. >> I agree with what you say. The parking
lot's the only area that you know I struggle with, but >> yeah, overall the other that the other buildings is really much question for me. Can members of the public hear okay people can speak up and Mike I think are
just >> we will so I would say you the parking lot's the only area that you know that I you know struggle with but as a whole you know I mean fine to agree with the recommendations.
Yeah, I think um so lots 10, 11, and 12. So the apartments um I think you know we have to evaluate them in the state that they're in right now and I don't disagree with a lot of the comments around they probably should
have been kept better. Um but the way that they are now they they meet these requirements. I uh the the bank uh I I think there's a bit of obsolescence there definitely. Um it's I agree with
you. It's it's probably not ideal for what we want in downtown. Um but the parking lot and I was going to use the exact same language. The library is a jewel to this town. It's probably like the the number one thing that I think we should really be thinking about in that
area. And um I would hate to see arcing access anything of it jeopardized. So that's >> you guys have said everything that I was going to say. >> Um and in my opinion the burden of proof was not established for uh lot 12 uh for
either A or D. Um I also believe the burden of truth was not established for the bank for uh the D category and of course it was not established uh the D category was not established for the
parking lot. Uh nonetheless it's borderline in terms of the A and D uh check boxes not related to space but just on sheer numbers. Um, H is sort of a kind of a bonus thing as
uh Steve was trying to allude to. It's kind of a a interesting characteristic, but the big thing is we need we need to pick some place to develop uh to redevelop. um this seems reasonable that it's a
location that's central that's um satisfies a lot of the conditions that um our state wants us to deal with. But it's all in how it's implemented and how it's architected and things. Um it clearly there has to be access to the
library as part of whatever this is um as part of what ultimately happens. And there also needs to be, it's in the zoning, but there needs to be some retail on the first floor. You can't just have residential slammed up against
Morristown Road because that violates the vitality uh options. And so all that's the it's in the details, right? But that's beyond this phase. So I the the entire projects needed to get
the density. You need the parking lot area to get the density to even be tolerable. To get a density of 38, which is close to 35, you got to have that green area as part of the project, it has to stay green. And you you need the
the area that the parking lot is covering. whatever purpose you obviously access but however the parking stalls are going to be arranged and um what technologies can be used to optimize parking you know shared parking
and so forth there's a lot of stuff that can be done um so I am inclined to even though it's it's a tossup once you take the items out that um I'm inclined to uh to approve the area native redevelopment
any other Okay. Uh then I guess we'll call for a motion >> and uh we can go right to a resolution. motion
on resolution decision uh to find that planning board accepts and adopts the recommendation study and hereby recommends that study area be declared nonation
study bear notation applicable ordering now circulated a few days ago. >> Yeah. All the fine print that scrolls by the screen.
>> So I take a a motion from anyone >> or not. >> No, I'm sorry. Um, I'll move it that um board hereby recommends um that the area um of the Church Street
redevelopment area be declared an area needed redevelopment for the reasons set forth in the planners report >> and and uh would you be also moving to adopt a resolution granted memorializing?
>> Yes, sir. That's what I was reading. I'll second roll call. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, great. Can we take a we >> we can we can we we should just kind of collectively decide first of all and then the board are you okay I think the
next one actually should I think it's easier but >> um are you okay with starting it we still can and I'd prefer to get it out of the way >> I I'm okay >> let's see how it goes
>> and and so we'll take a five minute break but we >> so we Will we will resume and at 25 after 10 according to that clock. Uh give me