All right, good evening everyone. It is now 7 o'clock on May 13, 2025 and I'd like to now call the Briel Planning Zoning Board meeting to order. If you could first please join me in a moment of silent prayer.
Thank you. We'll stand and salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. In accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, notice of this meeting has been given through the Co-Star newspaper issue of May 2, 2025. Roll call, please. Mayor Frank Guso is absent. Councilman
Elliot Cologne here. Karen Brisbane here. Uh Kevin Callahan here. Amber Fernacola here. Jay Jones is absent. Eric Luben here. James Polo here. James
Stenson absent. Karen Trainer here. And Dan Turk here. All right. Before we begin, um, I'll just announce that the continued hearing for 628 Higgins Avenue will not be heard this evening and it has been postponed
to our Tuesday, June 10th meeting, which will be at Burrow Hall at 7 p.m. First on our agenda this evening is the approval of the minutes from the April 8th, 2025 meeting of the board. A copy of the draft minutes was circulated to the board in advance of tonight's
meeting for review and comment. May I have a motion to approve, please? So moved. Thank you, Mr. Ter. Someone second the motion. I second. Thank you, Mrs. Fernicola. All in favor? I I
opposed. Thank you. All right. Next up, correspondence. We received a letter from Susan Stenson regarding the Mumford Holmes application. We also um received a letter from uh Mrs. coil. Uh that was
circulated to the board via email and we received a letter dated May 13th from John Tacini. Um also a belated um submission, so it's not on your agenda. Next up on our agenda this
evening is old business. We have consideration of the resolution for the denial of block 47.02 2 at lots 6 and 7 323 to 325 and 329 Fisk Avenue owned by Manisquan Shore Properties LLC to deny a
minor subdivision for three lots. Uh draft of that resolution was circulated to the board in advance of tonight's meeting for review and comment. May I have a motion to approve, please? I'll make that motion. Second. Thank you, Mrs. Brisbane. Thank you, Councilman.
Um just write that down. Uh Karen Brisbane, yes. Um let me see. James Polo, yes. James Stson is I'm sorry. Karen Trainer, yes. Dan Turk, yes.
All right. Yes. All right. Very good. Um next on our agenda this evening is new business. We have the presentation of the third and fourth round housing element and fair share plan presented by Kendra Ley.
Are you going to talk first, Jeff? Um first, uh we'll hear from um our affordable housing council, Jeff Serenian. Hello, my name is Jeff Serenian. My firm is Serenian Edwards Busach and Nolan just over the bridge in Point Pleasant
Beach. Hey Jeff, could you speak into the microphone so that you can be picked up here please? Okay, let me uh How's that? Better. Okay. My name is Jeff Serenan. Serenian Edwards Boozak and Nolan law firm across the uh the
bridge in Point Pleasant Beach. I'm an affordable housing attorney. My firm specializes in representing municipalities in affordable housing. I think we're at 99 municipalities. We're all over the state. So, we do this uh everywhere.
Um the the my my role tonight is to kind of set the stage for where we are in the process in view of legislation and then turn it over to Kendra Ley who's our planner who prepared the
plan. What's important to understand is that the rules changed in a very radical way last March. March 20th, 2024, uh, Governor Murphy signs a amendment to of the Fair Housing Act into law. It
made radical changes to the to the act and uh, uh, left all municipalities with uh, even uh, more ownorous obligations than they had before before the act. um the the key things about the act
because I could go on for many hours about all that's wrong with it, but what's you know, but it's a hand that's been dealt to us. So, we don't really have a choice. We have to deal with it. And what the act did was it established a process and it said uh you know stage
one of the process was uh it created a formula to determine the obligations of municipalities for round four and thereafter and for the so-called present need. I then said, "Dep affairs, issue a
report by October 20th, 2024 telling all towns what their number is based on your interpretation of the standards and what I call Fair Housing Act 2." Uh, it then gave municipalities
until January 31st to file a resolution committing to a number. And it wasn't like we could commit to whatever number we wanted if we didn't like the number that was generated by the formula. The the the standard was does it depart from
the legislation and the legislation was a straight jacket. So uh Bel like many municipalities didn't see the wisdom and spending a lot of money challenging the numbers because the formula was embedded in the statute. So uh but the good news
is we met the deadline of January 31st to adopt a resolution committing to around four number and the statute requires that you file that resolution and a declaratory judgment action within 48 hours from the adoption of that
resolution or you lose immunity and you're subjected to developers bring builder's remedy lawsuits. We know about that. three builders remedy lawsuits that have been brought against against Belle. Okay. So, it was important to
meet that deadline and the burrow met that deadline and have filed the declaratory judgment action. The next major deadline in Fair Housing Act 2 is to file a housing element and related
documents uh by June 30th, 2025. So, we're in that stage right now. We know what our number is under the formula in the statute, and we're striving to file a plan by that date. If
we file a plan by that date, we will be insulated from anyone else that might try to sue us seeking a builder's remedy. Uh, and we'll have a measure of protection. Uh and so uh what the bureau
has wanted to do for a while now as has the planning board is let's just you let's get a plan together and let's adopt that plan and let's comply. And so that's what we're doing. Kendra Lelly's put together the plan. Uh if the board
is satisfied with the plan after uh Miss Ley's presentation, after hearing from the public and they adopt it, I'm required under the statute to file that plan within 48 hours or again
lose, you know, lose immunity, be exposed to developers uh filing builder's remedy lawsuits. So uh but but the next step after that is uh it's also important that it goes to the burrow and
the governing body endorses that plan. There's some confusion in the way the law is written but you know the sounder policy is to have the municipality adopt a resolution endorsing it. So in the event that the planning board adopts
tonight, the plan would go to the burrow and the bureau would would have to consider a resolution to endorse it. If we do all that with then and we file all that with the program which is this new entity created by Fair Housing Act 2, we
achieve some measure of protection while moving forward. we still have to deal with these developers that that suit us. But uh but that is the process that's taking place in a parallel universe. Um and as if that was not confusing enough,
the Department of Community Affairs has proposed regulations that will not be adopted until after the plan must be submitted. And the HMFA has als is is also supposed to propose legislation or propose regulation that also will not be
adopted until after the plan is due on June 30th. Our state of work. Okay. So, uh you know, so so whatever ordinances and documents are attached to to this plan, you know, we're going to have to adjust once we know what the rules were.
sensible thing would have been tell us what the rules give us a chance to comply with it. But the state is operating in this way and in fact many municipalities have said well why don't you extend the deadlines so we know what the rules are before we adopt the plan
and everyone so far to my knowledge has been denied. So uh so that's where we stand. So with that I'll turn it over to Kendra and Kendra Kendra Ley. Ley, very accomplished affordable housing planner, is a court-appointed master in many
cases, highly respected throughout the state, will go over the plan that she presented or that she prepared. Thank you, Miss Lily. Before you start, just raise your right hand, please. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. All right.
Thank you. Please proceed. Thanks. Oh, I have a person. Great. Thank you. Thank you all for um joining us tonight. uh part of this presentation I had given a couple weeks ago. You're going to see some uh recurring information, but there is some new information. Um and I felt
like a PowerPoint presentation to help just walk through the housing element and fair share plan. So, a housing element and fair share plan is a plan is a part of your master plan. The planning board is the entity that's responsible for adopting a housing element in fair share plan and is it is one of two elements in part of your master plan
that's absolutely required not only per the fair ha fair housing act but per municipal land use law in order to have zoning in your municipality you must have a housing element and fair share plan. Next slide please. I know the date is May 13th not May 12th. Sorry about that. Um so what I'd like to go over I'm
not going to reiterate what Mr. Serenian had just talked about as it relates to um the Fair Housing Act. I may get into a little bit, but I'm going to try to move this along. Uh but I do want to go over affordable housing generally, talk about the obligation for the bureau,
talk about the housing element, and and specifically what's known as the fair share plan. That's the plan that will address the obligation. Um the the plan was placed on file about I think it was 10 10 days ago, maybe 11 days ago. um
sorry nine days ago and um it's going to go through the individual sites that are going to meet the the satisfy the obligation. I'm going to talk about a little bit about the next steps and then it's open for public comment uh as well as questions. So I'm here to answer questions. U part of my job is to
testify as a professional planner that has created the plan in in consultation obviously with the municipality and and the uh affordable housing committee. Next slide please. Um, so this is a little off, but that's okay. I I think you can still see it.
Uh, so so generally the Fair Housing Act, uh, defines what affordable housing is. And affordable housing is, uh, affordable to low and moderate income households. Uh, and that really is folks that make 80% or less of the median
income. So what you see up here is for region four which this municipality is in. We have six regions in the state of New Jersey. Uh there are this particular region has Ocean Mercer and Mammoth County as part of the region. In this
region uh the median income as determined by federal income limitations that are then brought down to the state level um is $104,000. So folks that make 80% of that or less are considerate moderate, low
and very low ve is uh 30 sorry 50% of the median income and very low is 30% of the median income. So what does that equate to? It equates to 130 to $230,000. somebody that is within the low to moderate income um uh range of a
twoerson family uh can afford anywhere between 130,000 and 230,000 home. They also can afford a rental unit uh that would be typically a one or twobedroom and that would be a th000 to $2,000 a month and that runs
from very low to moderate very low f people who are considered very low income um typically cannot qualify for a mortgage. So mortgages uh or forale homes are usually at the low and moderate income level. Rentals are from very low to moderate income. Uh just so
everybody's aware if you're thinking about well how how does somebody qualify for affordable housing? How do they go through the process? It is a state regulated process. There is somebody called a consultant that would be an administrative agent that will be hired by the municipality that will create a
waiting list of people who are income certified. So they have to provide their income sources. They have to provide some some u very general information. They are put on a waiting list. as units become available, the folks that are on that waiting list um are go through
what's known as a random selection. So, it's not first come first serve. Uh the waiting list is randomly selected and then the first person that is placed based on that lottery system on that list is offered the unit if they choose to move forward. They go through a very rigorous income certification process.
So, and and so it's it's a lottery system. It's random selection and it's income qualification that requires folks to go through in order to be eligible to go into affordable housing units. Next slide, please. Quickly, um we are all here
because in 1975 uh the uh the Supreme Court of New Jersey uh decided something called the Mount Laurel decision. Uh basically Mount Laurel Township was sued because they were uh providing for zoning what
that was considered to be exclusionary. What does that mean? That means that they were only providing for single family homes. Uh and so that was prohibited. The the Supreme Court came down and said exclusionary zoning is prohibited. And oh by the way, all municipalities in the state state of New
Jersey must provide for a realistic opportunity for affordable housing within their their boundaries. Um that has been kind of the the main the main uh basis for everything that we've done since 1975. Uh prior rounds, third round and
now fourth round and probably into the future fifth round. Next slide please. Um I'm not going to go through this in too much detail as but the as Jeff had indicated in March of last year Governor Murphy signed legislation which is now known as the amended fair housing
act. The original Fair Housing Act was uh implemented in 1985. Um in this new act uh or amended act, the the legislation did a couple of things. It created an obligation. It basically said there are 80,000 units of affordable
housing that are needed in the state of New Jersey over the next 10 years. It then brought it down to the regional level. As I said, we are in region four, Mercer, Mammoth, and Ocean. And then it brought it down into uh each individual municipalities based upon the methodology that Jeff talked about. Um
and I won't get into the details unless people have questions. There's some very um basic information in the housing element fair share plan that goes through the methodology as it relates to the obligation. The other thing it did it it did create uh new compliance regulations. We don't have a set of
regulations, but it's in the legislation. Uh, and and there are some new and updated information. And again, that information is is in the housing fair share plan. I'll talk about that as we talk about individual um projects and and and how it relates some of these new
rights relates to those projects. And I think the biggest part of it was it set up this mediation program. So um it is a panel of seven retired judges. Those seven judges are basically responsible for dispute resolution. Uh that each
those judges also have a panel of about 10 what's called special adjudicators of which I am one of them. Our responsibility is as municipalities submit their plans to the program. Uh there is a there is a responsibility that they review those plans. If there
are objections to those plans, the program is meant is set up that within a very very short period of time about three months to try to resolve those uh any objections. Uh and so when we go through this process, planning board uh
potentially dos this tonight, it will be submitted to this particular program. Um and it will be on that record for anybody potentially to object to and and I'll talk about the next steps as it relates to that. Next slide, please. So this is the obligation. The
obligation um for the prior round which started in 1987 and ran to 1999 was 159 units. It was based upon a methodology at the time that was uh was accepted as part of uh what's known as the council on affordable housing rules. Uh the the
third round ran much longer period of time from 1999 to 2025. We are ending the third round in June. So June 30th ends the third round. we begin the fourth round basically July 1st 2025 it will run another 10 years. So as you see
these different obligations 159 195 and the fourth round 65 we are not only providing a housing element fair share plan for the next round for the fourth round but we are looking backwards and having to provide for um a housing element fair share plan that addresses
the previous obligation. All of those add up to 419. Next slide, please. So, 419 units in a town like Bel must feel very overwhelming when you look at that. How could you possibly
provide for 419 uh affordable housing units in a town that doesn't have a whole lot of vacant land? In the um second round rules by uh Council on Affordable Housing or COA, it allows for towns like you to do what's known as a vacant land adjustment. We do
an analysis of the true vacant land in the municipality and based upon that vacant land, we determine what your realistic development potential is. That's what the acronym RDP stands for. So you'll see that 419 is broken up into two pieces in that first column of
bubbles. RDP is 24. That's bas based upon your true vacant land with a specific density associated with that vacant land. It doesn't necessarily mean that that vacant land you have to provide affordable housing units on, but it does create the the the RDP
obligation. The the remainder is what's known as the unmet need. And so if you look at RDP, think about RDP as real units that you must address. You must provide for those units. You can't necessarily just zone for them and hope
for the best in the future. The unmet need, however, is a little bit different. This is something that you probably will never address. You may never get to that number, but you have to implement zoning and certain mechanisms that would help you get there, create meaningful opportunities
to get to that particular lum number. The unmet need, as you'll see there, is now broken up into two pieces. One is prior round, second and third round, 330 units, and that's because you had such big numbers in the third, sorry, in the prior and the third round. And then your
fourth round number is 65 which is looking forward the next 10 years. Next slide please. So this is your fair share plan. And by the way just just to let you know on page seven and in the appendix the vacant land analysis um goes through all
the properties that we looked at and which created the obligation of the RDP of 24. So, uh, I will go into more detail as it relates to this, but this is your, let's say, your fair share plan in one, uh, viewing, uh, station. And so, in the housing element fair share
plan, we have several pages that go through each of these projects. Um, but just to give you a synopsis of what's being proposed to the planning board uh, for consideration of adoption of the fair share plan, the 24 units of affordable housing are basically broken
into two pieces. the actual units and then their bonus credits. You get bonus credits for rental units. Uh and and so in this particular instance, these are the projects that are satisfying the obligation. You have actually one surplus credit with these projects. Um
it's gone through many many iterations over the past couple of months. Uh it includes uh 628 Higgins Avenue which is known as the M andD site across from the gym. Uh this has six credits associated with it and again I'll get into more detail with this in the next couple of
slides. The raen rachen road raten road mumford site is easier for me to say 12 credits are coming from that part particular project. Uh both of those uh projects are as a result of builder builder remedy lawsuits. And so uh these
are lawsuits that the municipality uh on the first side the 628 Higgins has settled uh redevelopment plan was adopted for that and with Mumford site uh certainly at the end piece of uh the uh negotiations of a developers
agreement. Um but that is part of the fair fair share plan. Uh 636 Borie Avenue. We've had uh a different iteration of this. I think the last time that I spoke here, we had a neighborhood meeting last week or the week before. Uh
originally we were looking at five units as multif family housing on this site. We uh I think the the affordable housing um uh committee as well as the planning board as well as the governing body heard those neighbor those neighbors loud and clear and took um very quick
and comprehensive efforts to look at other sites. Um, so on the Borie Avenue site, it is now uh going to provide two credits and I I'll get into what that will be. And then finally, there will be a project on the new municipal building site. So the municipal building um next
door will be torn down and new building will be built and next to it will be a five-unit multif family uh unit apartment complex. That's the RDP. The unmet need has four mechanisms. As I said to you, these aren't actual
projects. These are zoning mechanisms, overlay districts, redevelopment plans. The first two I'm going to I'm going to talk about quickly and then the other two we'll talk about as we get through the slides. A mandatory set aside ordinance is an ordinance that is is um
applied burrowwide. It basically says that if you as a a homeowner or a builder want to build five units or more, uh you go in for a use variance or or something changes with zoning. If you provide five units or more, you must
provide a set aside of at least one affordable housing unit per every five units. That's a mandatory set aside ordinance that then um allows for the municipality to capture affordable housing as municip as the municipality potentially approves five or more units on a on a property. The other item is
what's known as a development fee ordinance. So a development fee ordinance is required uh to be adopted in order to meet the unmet need. And that is basically a a fee that is charged on non-residential and residential new build. And so think
about a new house that's being built. Um, anywhere up to 1.5% of that assessed value of that structure goes to what's known as an affordable housing trust fund. That trust fund is then utilized to help provide for affordable housing. And so that trust fund is meant to
really create the funding source for future affordable housing. So it doesn't come out of the general fund, the general municipal fund. um that development fee ordinance uh requires a certain percentage uh on residential and then non-residential is a statemanded
mandated 2.5% of the assessed value. So there's a development fee ordinance in the appendix to the housing element fair share plan. Just so everybody is aware these ordinances are in draft form only. Uh per the fair housing act we are not
required to adopt ordinances now. We are to go through the process. If we get a judgment of compliance or an approval of the plan, we will then adopt ordinances after the fact. Um, next slide, please. So, the first uh project is 620
Higgins Avenue. Uh, you you all may be familiar with this M &D. Uh, again, this is across from the gym. This is uh site that was found to be in need of redevelopment. uh this is a builder's revenue lawsuit and had spent um probably close to a year negotiating
with this particular developer. The development the redevelopment plan was adopted in 2024. This property is approximately 1.3 acres in size. Town houses will be uh developed on this property. That's what the redevelopment plan permits. 20 units. There will be
three affordable housing units. These are rental units and you get three bonus credits because they are rental units. So out of the three, you're actually getting six credits for this particular project. And the density is is right around 15 units per acre. Next slide,
please. This is an example, and I think I showed this the last time of what of what this project is going to look like. It was part of the redevelopment plan. We spent a lot of time, the affordable housing uh committee spent a lot of time going through uh what they wanted to see
architecturally, layoutwise. They did not want garages facing the front. They wanted this a front-facing type of community with porches and engagement of the street. Uh and so this is just a representation of the type of architecture. And I think it's representative of the type of density
that the municipality is comfortable with moving forward with future projects um as it relates to specifically the Higgins Higgins Avenue corridor. Next slide, please. Uh this is the Mumford uh project. This uh particular parcel is
6.7 acres in size. A townhouse development is proposed including 25 units. There will be four townhouse units. Two of them will be family rental and two of them will be for what's known as special needs bedrooms. One of the
units will be three bedrooms, the other will be four bedrooms. You get credits for every bedroom with a special needs um project. Uh it is it is a need. It's throughout the state of New Jersey and the new Fair Housing Act has actually
given full 100% bonus credits for special needs units. Um, in this particular instance, uh, we are able to get a what's known as a set aside of 36%. A typical set aside is anywhere between 15% and 20%. So, it is a
substantial set aside on this particular property. Um, and the density equates to something pretty low as it relates to affordable housing in the state of New Jersey, 3.7 units per acre. A normal single family house development is about six units per acre. That's that's an
absolute requirement per the COA regs, but in negotiations, we were able to negotiate a density of 3.7 units per acre. Um, next slide, please. This is a concept plan that is uh proposed to be attached to the draft ordinance as well
as the the future developers agreement. Um what you will see here are six buildings. Uh to your left is Ra is it raen raen road? It's raftton Rathjen Rathjen Road. To the right is Route 35.
Uh you will see a a spine that comes through the property. There are six buildings uh four town houses each. The one the one building that's all the way to the right hand side closest to Route 35 is the affordable housing building.
So two units will be family rental and two units will be for special needs. Um you will notice that there are there is parking behind the building there's garage parking. Uh these are two-story buildings and uh there is as you can see
there in the green that surrounds the project that is the existing wooded area that will be preserved and then the additional larger um circles that are darker green are proposed buffering of of the development from the surrounding community. Um there I know that there
have been some questions especially from the governing body. uh they will comply with all updated stormwater regulations per New Jersey DP. In addition to that, they are um proposing a basin to the bottom right of this concept plan that
will provide for a hund the 100red-year storm event um containment of storm water management coming off of Route 35, which I don't think necessarily is up to code as it stands today. Uh in addition to that, I think there was some concerns or questions about um lighting. this
will be dark sky compliant. So, as it relates to looking at affordable housing sites, um the the council on affordable housing rules say that there are four things that you have to look at when you are approving a site where or a mun or a planning board is approving a site and
they're called the ables. It's are it it's available, it's suitable, it's developable, and it's approvable. And in the housing man fair share plan for each of the sites that we provide, we go through how each site meets that particular requirement. Um, and so
that's the base information as it relates to when we're looking at sites, does it meet these four criteria? Because any court of law is going to ask me that question and anybody objecting to it is going to be looking at does it meet the these particular requirements. So, quickly, and I'm not going to go
through through each one of them, but available means that there's no title issues that would preclude affordable housing. Um, suitable means that it has access to appropriate streets and it has compatible uses surrounding that property. What compatible uses typically
mean is that you're not citing affordable housing next to the dump or next to a factory or next to something that could create major negative impact. So when we're talking about compatibility, that's what we're talking about. Developability or developable
means that it has adequate sewer and water infrastructure. That's that that it can tap into and has that capacity. And then finally, that it can comply with all outside agency approvals. That's the that's the approvable piece of it. Um so in this particular
instance, there are wetlands on this property and and I just want to make that clear on the record. I think in the housing element fair share plan I mentioned that there were not there are wetlands on this property and it's on the southwest side in in this uh view
it's to the top left uh you'll see a big kind of open green area um the the developer is not impacting wetlands but they will be impacting the wetlands buffer and have to get a DP approval what's known as a buffer averaging plan
um it's it's a I would say it's not an automatic But it is a permit that is given quite quite often. Um so in this particular instance uh they would have to go through the not only site plan approval with the with the board but any outside agency approvals including D uh
in order to uh be able to provide uh this inclusionary project and and when I look at developability meaning outside agency approvals that we're not I'm not looking at something that would impede future affordable housing. this concept plan uh is put together in such a way
that they can uh move forward and receive approval of this knowing that DP they would have to do a buffer averaging plan. So that is considered to be developable. Next slide please. The Burie Avenue uh project has switched a bit. Originally we were
talking about five rental homes on this property working with a nonprofit. uh we have pivoted based upon neighborhood um uh conversations and and I appreciate everybody that is here from Borie Avenue who came to the meeting. Um and I think
that we we took your um your uh concerns very seriously. We looked at several different options uh for taking those five units off and we'll talk about that in a second. But on this particular property there will be what's known as an attached single family home. So if
you can think of it, it's a side by side. It's two single family homes that will be for sale um that are connected to one another and two families will live in that. This will be a 100% affordable housing projects mean meaning both units will be affordable and we
will work with a nonprofit uh developer to to build those particular two homes. Next slide please. We did look at um so what do we do with those other units those those five rental units because uh
part of the plan uh not only do we have to meet the overall obligation but we have specific what's what I call micro requirements we have so many family units we have to provide and so many family rental units we have to provide so we still have to provide a certain number of family rental units we looked
at a couple of things that were suggested during the neighborhood meeting we looked at the rescue squad squad. Um the ambulance um is it rescue squad? First aid building. First aid building. Thank you. Um and uh received word back that and and in writing and actually they voted on it that they were
not interested in moving from their site. So that was not a possibility. We also looked at um another burrowowned property. Uh we the engineer had gone out the next day to see if it was viable. Uh and uh it is not. So, we looked at another burrow owned, small
burrow owned property. Uh, and we looked at a piece of property across the street from here known as the cat house. And, um, I think one of the things that was of concern to the municipality was the only way we could get that is through eminent domain. And that is not something that the burough council wants
to to move forward with. So, that was not part of I mean, while we considered it, it was not the solution. The solution was looking at the municipal building. Um the engineer and myself had looked at uh the proposed building location, the new building location and
how a five-unit uh building could fit on this particular site and we found that it can fit on the site and so we are proposing five family rental units on this property. Uh we again we will work with a nonprofit developer. It may be the same one that would be doing the
units on uh Borie Avenue. uh it's it's it's easier financially to com combine a bunch of units together and try to maximount maximize the amount of grants that you can get and low interest loans that you can get from the state of New Jersey. Uh so this may be a combination
of of what's what we call scattered sites uh with a nonprofit and it meets the minimum uh family units required. Next slide please. This is a quick out uh um concept layout of the proposed plan for the municipal
building. Union Lane is to the right. Route 71. Uh Union Nav is to the bottom of this page. So, it's it's skewed a little bit, but the old municipal or the existing municipal building is where the parking lot is on the right hand side of this um of this concept plan. The new
municipal building sits in the middle of this parcel. And then the five unit is highlighted in yellow. That is um G a very general concept plan but it would have separate access and be not connected uh with the municipal building. Next slide
please. So that deals with the RDP as I said all of those projects meet all the requirements. You have actually one surplus credit that actually just goes to your unmet need. You you can't take advantage of that and put it to another round. That goes to your large number obligation of unmet need. The third
round unmet need. One of the ways that or the way that we're proposing to uh address it is through a redevelopment plan of Higgins Avenue. This is about a half mile u from Route 35 to Ashley Avenue. It encompasses approximately 30
parcels, 14 acres in size. Um it does include the High Tide Builder Remedy site. Uh we can't necessarily ignore that site. Uh so what we have done is we have included that in this future redevelopment plan of an entire corridor
and the planning board has been talking about looking comprehensively at planning instead of sightby-sight type of of mechanisms and looked at um you know supporting the master plan which which basically says that this particular area is really meant to be a
main street theme. So, in supporting that, a redevelopment plan, uh, there's two pieces to it. We look at, we do what's known as an area need of redevelopment study, and that will be done in the next couple of months, and that determines what parcels within the
corridor meet that criteria um to be deemed an area needed of redevelopment. Um, and then a redevelopment plan will be put together and and that is essentially a zoning ordinance. We are looking at permitting mixed use as well as multif family as well as town houses
um in the Higgins Avenue corridor and probably densities that would range between 12 and 15 units an acre which is similar to the density as I me mentioned to the at the uh M andD site. Next slide please. And finally the fourth round
unmet need. So the Higgins Avenue redevelopment goes to third round unmet need. This is a fourth round unmet need. they have to be separated. The fourth round has different regulations, different rules that we have to abide by. Um, the Route 71, it's hard to see on this, I apologize, but it's they're
in blue, kind of in the middle of that screen that runs diagonally from bottom left to bottom right to top right. This is approximately 15 acres in size. This is what's known as an overlay zoning district. So the base d the sorry the base zoning whether it's B1, B2,
whatever the zoning is on these parcels remains as is. I own a business in that location. I can expand it. I can change it to permitted uses within that be that business zone. Um the overlay is just simply an option. If I want to develop multif family housing or mixeduse
housing, I can take advantage. It gives me another option to to develop under. And we are looking at 10 to 12 units per acre. Same thing permitted uses would be mixed use as well as multif family. Uh and the biggest piece of this of an overlay zone as well as the
redevelopment areas any development spec specifically residential would have to provide a 20% set aside of affordable housing. That's the whole idea of u providing additional density is that you give an option to provide for residential development. uh that
increase in density uh requires a set aside of affordable housing. So that's the how the municipality can create what I call meaningful opportunities to capture future affordable housing into the future. Next slide
please. This is just a reiteration of what we just talked about the fair share plan. Um I would say that it has gone through several iterations and collaboration in a very short period of time. Um just to give everybody a sense the third round uh for the most part
took years at least two to three years to negotiate settlement agreements. We are doing what we had done in the third round in three years in basically a several months. Um and so in this short period of time, you know, kudos to the municipality for um really moving
forward and putting together what I would say as a professional planner in the state of New Jersey that's been doing this for 30 some odd years, a robust and comprehensive plan. Um not only does it look at individual parcels, but it looks at corridors for future redevelopment. It addresses the
obligation um certainly permit promote smart growth and uh redevelopment of a commercial district. Next slide. The ne the the master plan and housing element. I wanted to give you this slide just so you get a sense of what's in the plan that's before this
planning board. These are the required elements per the fair housing act. There is an appendix that has um updated census information on the housing demographic and employment analysis. um all of the arms that go from uh nine o'clock all the way around to about 1:00
is in the in the what's I call the fair share plan and then the trust fund spending plan and resolutions and draft ordinances are in the appendix of the plan. So as you're if you decided that you wanted to read through the entire thing all of these elements are certainly in there some are in the body
and some are in the appendix. Next slide please. So the next steps are um submission to as Jeff had mentioned to the superior court or the pro it's the program within 48 hours of planning board approval. That's an absolute requirement otherwise you lose immunity.
Uh June I think it's June 23rd maybe it's different but I had June 23rd on my calendar where the burough council will meet to endorse the plan. They may be able to do it sooner than that. I'm not sure but that was what was on my calendar. And then what happens after that? There is a 60-day period from July
1st through August 31st that anybody can object to the plan. Um, a developer, uh, Fairshare Housing Center, which is a a non-forprofit organization that represents the interests of low and moderate income households in the state of New Jersey. If somebody objects to
that that our plan, um, there is a three-month period of time where there's negotiations with whoever objected. Uh and then out of that comes a recommendation from the program. Hopefully it can be mediated and resolved and we get we can move forward
and get approval. Um if it is not we will then go to court and mediate in court uh at that point. So it it's a very kind of like um harried process and then there's another Harvard process and then there's potentially a process where
we could sit in court for a couple of months as well. Um, I will I will say to you that things could change. This is just a this is a master plan. This is not an ordinance. This is a plan that can change over time. It could change because of objections. Um, I'm not suggesting that somebody necessarily
will object to it, but if somebody does and we have to negotiate and settle on something different, we will be back before this planning board with a an amended plan for public uh comment and and review. Uh I also will tell you that there is typically uh opportunities uh
there are opportunities for all of you to um provide not only public comment tonight but on each of the projects that you solve the individual parcels there has to be site plan approval. So they will come to this planning board and go through the normal process of site plan
uh approval that uh is required by municipal land use law. Next slide. And I will be quiet and um yield the mic to all of you for questions and public comment. Before you yield, Kendra, I just want to
correct one thing for the record. You had talked about uh the plan being on file. You submitted it on May 2nd, so it was on file 11 days prior to uh prior to tonight. Perfect. Thank you so much. Thank you. I would also just add Kendra gave some
examples of incompatibility. Another example was given at the last public proceeding when Kendra laid this all out by the uh representatives of the neighbors to the high tide site and and and they made a
compelling case for incompatibility. Uh that was another example. All right. Very good. So for those of you who have not attended a planning board meeting before, let me review the procedure with you so that we are all on the same page and we can proceed accordingly. Um in the notice for
tonight's meeting, um we we'll be hearing people for three minutes at a time. Okay. So there's a lot of people here. We want to make sure that we hear from everybody. First, we will take questions. So if anyone has questions for Miss Ley, hold on, Sarah. I'll get I'll get to you. I'm going to go through
the procedures first. Okay. But I promise you'll be first because you raised your hand first. All right. So, going back. Um, first we will take questions for Miss Ley. All right. If you have questions, you may come up and you'll ask your questions. We'll take you one at a time. We're going to ask that you give us your address, your
name. Um, for the record. After that, we will hear public comment. All right? And then after that there will be discussion from the board and the board will make its comments um and we will um then put
this to a vote before we hear from p the public will take questions from the board. All right. So um Councilman Cologne, do you have any questions for Miss Ley or Mr. Serenian? I do not. Miss Brisbane, do you? No, I do not. Mrs.
Fernicola? No, I don't. Mr. Turk, no I don't. Mr. Callahan, I do not. Mr. Polo, no. And Mr. Luben? No, I All right. I also have no questions. Sir, you can come up to the microphone right here and say
your name and address, please. Uh, Mr. Clark will take your information. John Tacini, 815 Rathton Road, Briel. Um my question is uh relates to block 6202 uh lot 3 which is the raften road
property. Uh I would like to know if you believe that storm water runoff and uh motor vehicle traffic uh could have an impact as far as uh
suitability uh and compatibility in the neighborhood. So, as it relates to storm water, um, as I indicated, the applicant must meet the stormwater regulations per D. Um, I know that, uh, this was a project that's been
before the board as a single family residence. I know that the, um, board engineer has reviewed it. Um, they have, uh, provided information. Uh, and maybe Al can talk to this, but from my understanding, they have to meet this New Jersey D new regulations for their
property. Um, and they have to meet the 100red-year storm for the storm water coming off of Route 35. So, I'm going to change my question perhaps. Do you accept that storm water runoff onto a neighboring property and motor vehicle
traffic relate, we'll say, to suitability and compatibility? They they relate to developability and developable means that um they have to meet all outside agency requirements, rules and regulations. D would be one of them. And then as it relates to uh traffic,
anything going on burrow owned roads or county owned roads have to meet their those ordinance requirements. So the answer is yes. Storm water runoff. Thank you. Yes. You are familiar with the property. You've seen the property. I'm going to ask that this be marked for the
uh record. Sure. We'll mark it. We'll mark it as P1 public one. Can you just tell us what it is? I've provided copies to the board and I'll show to the planner this photograph I represent to you that it
shows storm water fairly and accurately. shows storm water flowing from lot three onto lot two. This is a fence belonging to Mr. and Mrs. Coil who are adjacent. They own lot two. You accept that? I I
it's not my responsibility to accept it. But you do not know that I've not been in that site and I'm taking if you're providing testimony. I think you have to be sworn in. I'm just asking. Do you know? I don't I've not been to that site now. You haven't seen? Not on August
4th, 2024. Thank you. Okay. Um the development would strip the land. The land lot three is densely vegetated. You would agree it it is wooded. It is. It is wooded. Would you call it densely
vegetated? I I don't know a tree survey to to Would you agree that the vegetation absorbs storm water and holds soils? So I am not a storm water um you do not know. I I'm going to answer your question. I'm not a stormwater expert.
Um I think that uh we can indicate that keep going that we can indicate that uh the applicant has to meet stormwater regulations and that's per COA council on affordable housing rules as to what can be considered developable. Okay, that's how I can answer. You are
proposing 25 town houses. Some of these questions might be more appropriate for our engineer. Well, our planner has proposed 25 town houses for this lot. Would you agree that that means there going to be 25 or more motor vehicles coming from these these
dwelling units? There is more likely than not to be have more than 25 25 to 50 to per Mr. Tina, your three minutes has expired, so you can just finish up. Thank you. Um I see one other hand over here. Madam, come on up. I saw your hand
next. Uh, my name is Jerry Coyle. I live at 811 Raftton Road in Bel. Um, I submitted Miss Coyle, if I could ask you please to speak up because we want to make sure that everybody can hear you. Okay. My name is Jerry Coyle. I live at 811 Raftton Road in Belle. I submitted a
video to the engineer and to the council for you to review of what happens with the water when it rains. And this is only one particular night, August 4th, 2024, and it shows how my property is flooded. Mrs. Coyle, do you have any
questions for Mrs. L? My question to you is if they were turned down for building 11 homes there and there was a problem with the water, why now can they build 25 town homes and there's going to be no problem with the water? Um, I I don't know if they were turned down for 11.
They were not turned down. uh they have a pending application and then they withdrew it because they've pursued the application for the builder's remedy instead, but they were never turned down. There was never any ruling. Okay. So, what in turn happens to me when my
property is flooded because of you're saying that you know the storm water regulations and have you personally walked the property? I have not personally walked the property. Has anyone on the board personally walked the property? No, no one's walked.
Okay. So then you know that there's a water problem there. I don't know if there's a water problem. There's interesting topography there, but I can't necessar I wasn't there the day that the picture was taken. Um I was not there the day that photo was
taken or the video was taken. Um there is, you know, interesting topography on the property. Uh but where that wa the genesis of the water that was flowing across your property, I'm not aware of. And that video was not clear enough to be able to depict where uh that level of
uh or that volume of water was coming from. Well, the volume of water is coming from the rafting road woods and it shows it as we walked into it and filmed it and it actually shows a stream. Are you aware of a stream on the property? No, not necessarily. It's been
talked about. It has. Okay. But no one's acknowledging that. That's not my place to acknowledge it. D has jurisdiction over this property. Okay. So then I'm going to ask everyone in the audience please to not shout. Mrs. Coyle, it's her turn. And Okay. And if you'd like to
ask questions, you can raise your hand and we'll take you in order. Okay. So, the house on 801 Schoolhouse Road owned by uh the Savages uh Beth and Sean Savage that was sold to Mumford Enterprises so that this whole project
could take place. I don't know the ownership situation at the moment. Well, they sold a parcel of it. Well, there may be a contract purchaser. It may not they may not have closed on the sale. So I don't Is it So am I right in saying that without that sale this would never take place. These
homes couldn't be built. They'd have to acquire it through a contract to purchase. So either they're a contract purchaser or they're an owner. I I don't know because they don't have an application in front of us right now. Okay. But my question to you is without that parcel without that being sold would they be able to build on this
property? Was that they had to buy that parcel to build? So the way we understand the at least the application that came before the board that was under review when it was a subdivision uh they were it was a there was a bit of a land swap between the Savage property
and the Mumford Homes property. So because of some irregularities with the property lines the So but I believe it's just a land swap there's a contract purchase in there but it's still probably like a over a 6 acre parcel as
it stands without the land swap. So there's still developability of that lot. The like the uh Savage lot is not necessarily the key to that property. It's six acres with access to Ratchen Road that could be developed without the
the Savage property in a different albeit in a different fashion than what's laid out, let's say, on the exhibit that was provided. But, you know, the math probably changes a little bit, but it doesn't necessarily it's not a go no-go thing if the Savage
properties evolve. Okay, my last question is if you could just finish up because we your three minutes is up. Okay. I just want to ask you, how much do you cost think the cost will be to fill in that property with dirt and get it ready for the affordable housing? I mean, how much do you think these uh
town houses are going to sell for? I have no idea. You have no idea. All right. Thank you. All right. We'll go over here. I see a gentleman with his hand up. Come on up. We'll take your name and address, sir. Aaron Moss, 614 Borie Avenue. Um, I'd
like to start by saying thanks for hearing us at Borie Avenue at that meeting the other night and changing the plan. Um, based on our concerns, uh, that said, I have a few questions about the plans. The real realistic development plan is 24 units, but the
amended plan is now 25 units. You have a surplus unit. Yes. That's the on the municipal lot presumably. Correct. And that has to do with the five units being more financially viable. Correct. Okay. Um yeah. So based on Mr. Serenian's
comments and what you can read in, you know, political newspapers, there's a lot of the laws seem to be in flux. There's a lot changing at the state level uh in a short maybe in a short period of time. I don't know. But um if the plan is adopted as it's presented
here, what is the timeline for implementation of the projects? So um the Borav project specific and the municipal they with 100% affordable housing projects um you have two years from the point where your plan gets approved. So assume you get your plan
approved uh beginning of 2026. It would be a two-year period of time that you would have to have a shovel in the ground uh to for the pro for the 100% projects. Thank you. Uh would the bureau try and you know maximize that timeline just to see if anything would change
with regards to the the law? Well, those are existing rules that require the 2-year period of time for 100% project. If the rules change um that would be the only way that we would get any um additional time. No, no. I Yeah, I got you. But I'm saying maximize the two-year period, you know, in the event something were to change in that
two-year window. I guess the the last day of that two-year window two years that that time. Yeah. For a developer to to pick a developer and have the developer go through the process of uh getting funded and putting a shovel in the
ground. So, we can expect that if it's adopted and approved by all the the parties that, you know, basically it will take that full two-year period for it. Is changing, but sure as hell isn't changing in our favor. Yeah. I mean, I don't know. I got to
read more about it for sure, but you know, I think maximizing that two-year window would be behoove everyone involved in this. Um, if the fourth round were to somehow be ended or changed in some capacity,
can the plan be rescended once it's approved by the courts? It all depends on how the laws evolve. For example, I was involved with uh legislation. I'm a member of the New Jersey Institute of Local Government
Attorneys. They created a subcommittee on Affordable Housing to deal with Fair Housing Act 2 because it was so ownorous. The committee drafted legislation that contemplated rooting the numbers in reality instead of
fantasy. And um that legislation provided that if it was enacted into law, the Department of Community Affairs would have to rerun the numbers and towns would have 90 days from getting a new number from the DCA
to comply. So if that law was signed into law, there'd be another bite at the apple. But um unfortunately I'm not seeing a lot of uh traction for that law because ultimately those in power at the top of
the food chain would have to agree that we got to give towns relief from these ownorous requirements and so far no one's budging. Right. One more question if you will. Um just finish up quickly. Yeah, this is it. Uh so in the
redevelopment zones along Higgins and 71 is I think you mentioned so I guess there to be 20% has to be set aside for low income or affordable housing I should say. Correct. Yes. And that's deed restricted. That's deed restricted and that's a good point. Um affordable
housing is considered to earn a credit if it meets the income qualifications and it's deed restricted for a minimum of 30 years for low and moderate income households. Um, just to correct you, the Higgins Avenue is redevelopment. The 71 is an overlay zone. They're they're just
a little bit different, but they're not both redevelopment areas. Okay. So, the like existing businesses along Route 71, uh, for example, like Jimmy's Cacina, could they just turn and sell and become housing after this plan is adopted? When the ordinance is adopted, after the
ordinance is adopted, they would have a choice of their existing zoning or an overlay zone. And right now, they can't they can't sell and become housing. Correct. Based on the zoning, not without a going to get a use variance to do that, boy. All right. Thank you. Sure. All right. Any other questions?
Um, in the back. All the way in the back, sir. Hi. Uh, Mike Danach, 633 Rank and Road. Um, just one question and I apologize if it's already been answered, but with regards to the Wrathen project with presumably 30 to 50 extra
vehicles, have they done traffic studies on that yet on how it's going to affect the town? Because there's a lot of kids in that area and there's already more traffic going through every day. So, I just didn't know. So, not there has not been a traffic study for the housing element and fair share plan. Uh, there's no requirement for that. Uh but for site
plan approval, if a traffic impact statement is required per for site plan approval, any traffic impact statement would say what the offtrack improvements would be needed in order for them to um provide for safe access um or safer
access in accordance with burrow owned or sorry burrow ordinances as well as I think count there's a county road somewhere in there as well. Um ju just so everybody's aware these are concept plans. These are not site plans and so concept plans and ordinances create the
opportunity for site plans to occur. So on all of the properties, these are conceptual plans. They are not full site plans. So to answer questions about stormwater impact or traffic impact that's not required until it goes to site plan approval. This is what creates
the um initial step that allows for somebody to come in and provide for affordable housing. So when it does go to that if if it came up and they found a conflict is that something that could amend the project? Um in this particular instance it would be a permitted use and per municipal land use law and I'll
defer to the attorneys on on the table here. Uh they they would have to deal with any required offtrack improvements that are necessary because of any increased traffic and that would come from the traffic impact statement as well as coordination with the the bureau engineer, board engineer and county
engineer. Okay. And the access for that is going to be on Rathen and Rank and not 35. Correct. Correct. All right. Thank you. All right. Very good. Um, ma'am, come on up. Miss um, sorry, I forgot your name. I I was going to say
Virginia. Virginia Loftton. Come on up. I forgot your last name for a minute. I'm sorry. Virginia Loftton, South Street. Um I have a few com or questions actually throughout this whole affordable housing when we started to become aware of it.
It's always been presented to us as that these are not lowincome families. These are people who are fire or police officers and teachers. However, reading your plan almost every single page references low income and some cases
very low income. So, are we now planning for low and very low income? Yeah. So, the the income distribution for affordable housing projects, uh, 13% have to be very low. Um, let me back up.
50% can be moderate, 50% have to be low. Of of the total amount, 13% have to be very low. That's a requirement. Okay. Um, on page 15, there's a statement that says the bureau will adopt a resolution of intent
to bond for any shortfall in funding the municipally municipally sponsored affordable housing program. We're putting out a bond that tax payers are going to fund. No. So, that's that's a resolution that's intent to bond. That is not an actual bond. that basically
says if the 100% projects have um can't find full funding for their project, the municipality is basically the b the backs stop for for funding if they can't get federal, state, county funds in order to to develop those properties.
That's a requirement for any affordable 100% affordable housing project. And the reason behind that is because it's not inclusionary. Inclusionary development has market rate units that subsidize the affordables. When you have a 100% affordable housing project, the subsidy
comes from other funds of which one of them is the municipality has to be the backs stop for it. So when you say municipality, you mean all of us as taxpayers. Municipality. Correct. Now that being said, uh as you will remember, I said that there is a development fee ordinance that will be adopted which goes that money goes into
an affordable housing trust fund which you then can pay yourself back from that fund. Um, is that for every development or just um multifamily units? Is that for every house that's built? You have to put money into that fund or for any any new um residential homes or
non-residential improvements. Okay. Um on this the only thing I would point out is there are a group of developers that specialize in 100% affordable projects. So when you select a developer, you're
looking for a developer with a great track record. And if the developer is successful in the future, as he or she has been in the past, it could really reduce the fiscal exposure of 100% project. So at the last meeting, you
brought um the um Chris Puglesi from the other housing, right? and you said that it didn't make financial sense for them to develop a project under five units or they couldn't get funding. Um but now
we've gone on Borie Avenue to two. So who's going to fund that if we can't get We haven't picked the developer. However, um I I do know that that particular organization is interested in doing the five units at the municipal building and would also do those two units because they they can combine that
together in one application as a scattered site um okay um application and and it increases their chances of getting money. Okay. And you can just finish up Miss Loft in your three minutes is up on your chart on page seven. You have a couple of lots that I have questions on. One is 616 Union
Avenue. Did you mean Union Lane? Uh, I don't because Union Avenue there's it was a doctor's office. I don't know what it is now. Okay. Then it's probably it's I'll across the street from the school. If it's a vacant lot. Yes. Is that what you're looking at? Yes. Is the Yeah, it would be a vacant lot. Isn't that
privately? Is that owned by the municipality? No. So, a vacant land analysis looks at vacant land. It does not have to be municipally owned. So, it's So, again, a realistic development potential is based upon the vacant land in the town at the time I do the analysis. It doesn't matter if it's private or it's public. it's vacant and
available for future affordable housing. Um, you don't have to build on that necessarily on that lot, but it does create that realistic development potential number. Okay. I I have a couple more questions on this chart. 403 Higgins Avenue, is that the grass lot that doesn't include the Whiskey Lounge
property or it's both lots. So, it's somehow went from 104 down to 20 as far as the RDP. So, a density has to be um applied to a property and that's the density that we apply to that property to equate to a realistic development potential. That's not what's going to go
there necessarily. That's what think of it this way. It's a calculation that creates a number, but it's not actually a project. Um that is going to be proposed there at this point. And just more one more, can you tell me where Route 70 and Tamarak Drive is? what what what that property is that you're if if
there's a map that goes along with this in the appendix and it will show you each of those properties. Was that posted online? I didn't see it. The appendix should have been I didn't I don't it it it the appendix is part and parcel of this. So yes, it's there's a there's
a whole section of mapping that goes along with that. I'm not sure it's posted, but I printed everything from this and there's no map. So Oh, I'll make sure that check and see if the appendices are it should have been on file. I don't know if it was posted on the website, but it should be. It really should be.
Miss Burke, come on up. Hello. Hey, Burks. Peter Lane. Just to confirm, um, I I printed it from the website. It was not attached. So, we were not I'm not sure if we were given anything. that if we didn't get the maps to go along with it. Um, I have a question. You talked about a supportive
and special needs and seven bedrooms. Is that a group home that's proposed? It's actually two townhouse units. One will have three bedrooms and one will have four bedrooms. And it's it's essentially known as a group home. We call it supportive and special needs. So, unrelated adults, special need adults. Correct. It's adults, not children. We
have to educate. Okay. Okay. I just wanted clarification on that one. Thank you. All right. Sir, come on up. Uh, John Deo, 613 Borie Avenue. Uh, just a follow-up question before about the municipal building with the five and the
two on Borie. At the last meeting, they spoke about that if was going to be on Bory, they would actually take care of the property. Correct. So would that be the same if they go in unison with the two on Bory and the five? So the two on Bory are actually for sale homes. So
they will be um provided to folks and they take care of their own properties. They take care of their own property. Correct. Okay. Uh and then just one follow-up question before about the the Mumford and no entrance off of Route 35. Is there a reason why there's multiple entrances off of Route 35 on the right
hand side going south? The schoolhouse bridge is going to be taken down in the next couple years. So, all that traffic is going to now have to go up and down um uh Rank and Road. Is there a reason why we're not looking at a at least a one-way entrance off of 35? I'm not
saying come out on 35. I'm just saying why isn't there thought of an entrance off of 35? Well, I mean there was discussion with Mumford about that and they were going to approach uh DOT about that, but um I
I want to say indications were that DOT would that that there's not adequate right of way there or um you know like geometry is an issue. Um and but there's an entrance. So that other that other property just right connected to it
there's an entrance there. That's at a different grade though. that's like at grade whereas the property falls off pretty quickly from the state highway onto the Mumford property. So there's more to it than just you know having a an opening in the curb. Yes. So
ultimately it would be a state decision though if that was going to be allowed or not. Okay. But I still think as a town we should pursue that. If they say no, they say no, that's fine. But I I think with the amount of traffic that you're looking to put over there, especially with the schoolhouse bridge being that's going to be closed for a
minimum of a year, if not longer, um you know, that's uh you know, just something to think about if and again, entrance only. I'm not thinking both ways. I'm thinking entrance only I think would definitely help out the traffic on Ranken Road. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions, sir? Come on
up. Uh George Tibo. I live on 636 Susan Lane. Um I was president of the board of ed when we expanded the school back I don't know 15 20 years ago. So I have a vest vested interest in what goes on in here and the little little people that
run around here. If you drove past here last week when it was sunny, you saw 40 50 maybe even 60 bicycles. What uh my question is is is first off is what level of or what factor was
safety in the Wrath development and for that matter for the municip municipal development which is a butts up to the school safety factors it relates to traffic little kids riding their bikes to school not traffic little kids riding
their bikes to school as it relates to what specifically uh the number of cars that would be added when when Mumford first came with 12 houses that was 24 cars. Now you're talking significantly more there there
was you stated there was no factor appropriated to the to the new development in terms of cars. So no there there's not a requirement per the council on affordable housing rules the affordable housing rules as it relates
to safety but it does indicate that any um municipality sorry any project would have to have access to appropriate roads and as I indicated that there has to be a traffic impact statement if there are improvements that are necessary because
of the additional traffic offsite sidewalks curbs bike lanes that type of thing it would be um the require requirement to provide a prata share from the development to uh those improvements. Okay. Okay. I um I I I
find it hard to believe that adding that amount of those amount of cars uh to rank and road and then to schoolhouse road would not have a significant impact on the safety of these kids. Okay. So, I go back to what was uh uh recommended
earlier. have all the access out to 35 and none on rank and road. That would make it that would eliminate the safety concern I have. And not only is it from my experience as president of board of ed, I have two grandkids that live on
ranking. So I have a personal interest as well. So I'd ask the board to consider that. I understand the pressure we're under due to the state. Okay. But you have to look, I urge you, drive by this school on a
sunny day, look at those bicycles and then imagine adding 35 to 50 cars to rank in schoolhouse and right next door. What happens then? Thank you. All right. Thank you.
Does anyone else have any questions? All right. So, oh, one more person. Go ahead. Good evening. My name is George Murvine. I live at 825 Club Road. Just want to say thank you very much for your presentation. I have some questions. Uh
I'm not an expert in any of this, but I have some general questions I'd just like to see if I can ask. From what I'm understanding, if the planning board approves of this fair housing uh plan, there's still
not exactly 100% of any of those projects could could take off and be and be developed. Is that correct? Because we have to do all these site plans and traffic studies and environmental studies. Is that correct? So the again
the plan creates the basis for somebody to come in to come for site plan approval. Can something change and happen? Absolutely. It happens all the time, right? So, um, if we had to change the plan to accommodate whatever would would potentially happen, the plan would
have to be amended and we're back before the planning board with a public hearing and opening it to the public. So, it again, this is a this is a housing element fair share plan that's to cover 10 years. There's a lot that happens in 10 years. Um and so we are putting our best foot forward with the plan that um
meets the the regulations, meets the obligation, but it's not uncommon that something may change. All right. So of all the plans that you presented tonight, the only project that's really moving forward is the M andd project. Is that correct? Well, the M andD project has zoning implemented and they I think
they submitted for a site plan at this point. They're much more further along than um any of the others because they came in first with the builder's remedy lawsuit. Okay. Because they had the builder. Okay. So that one probably will move move forward then I would imagine. Okay. But the other ones may not move forward. Uh even though the planning
board may approve of the plan. Is that correct? I would say it's it's unusual that if somebody spent the money and time to go for site plan approval which requires a lot of of financial resources to do that they typically will move forward. Okay. Uh regarding the Bor uh
Buri Avenue property who owns that property the municipality. Municipality. So technically everyone here owns that property. Is that correct in in certain? Sure they do. We pay our taxes and we own that property. It's part of our assets. So my question there
is then why won't the board or the town council um put it up to a referendum whether or not that property should be sold. Right? It's our property. We should be have the right to say what we're doing with that
property. All right. So, um, is that something that we can have a conversation about or does a planning board want to talk about that? The town has a responsibility to adopt a plan, file that plan, and seek approval of that
plan, right? With our with our property, however we can do it, right? And there are and as Kendra indicated uh the Mount Laurel subcommittee looked at every possible iteration and this was the best plan for your community that we could
come up with. Okay. We didn't have the freedom. It would have been great to say we don't need this, we don't need that. We didn't have that luxury. We had to meet that number uh to be able to have a chance of getting our plan approved. And
let me be clear, we submit this plan. If there's a lot of objectors, they could make it they can make it worse. You know, this is our best foot forward. If if a developer with deep pockets comes in and and and you know, like we're
fighting about high tide. We want 101 units on that site. We have it in at like 20. Sure. I don't know that we're walking into the sunset with high tide. You know, uh and so uh you know what what the public needs
to understand is we don't have a free hand. We have to operate within the context of the laws that are given to us. Yeah. I think what the elected officials have to understand as well that you have our best interests and we have a right to say of what goes on in the municipality and especially with the
property that the bureau owns. Well, and I think that's why you're here tonight to give those comments. I I do want to make one point on 100% projects. Um they are 100% projects as I indicated because the municipality is a backs stop for it and we find funding elsewhere. If it
became an inclusionary project, those seven units would turn into 35 units somewhere else because it would have to be inclusionary. So, one of the benefits of 100% affordable housing is that you're reducing the total number of units that would be built within the municipality. So, as the affordable housing committee looked at the numbers
that we had to meet, um, affordable housing, 100% affordable housing projects were necessary to help reduce total number of units across the entire burrow. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I think I Oh, one last I
thought that was the last person. One more person. Come on up. Tom Mueller, Brown Street. Uh just have a question about the uh High Tide site. I know that the redevelopment plan still has to be established, but it's clear in the fair housing plan that you're
proposing 12 units per acre. Uh can you write into the plan that that would be for purely residential project? Because for instance in if the redevelopment plan included a commercial component plus the 12 units would be extreme overdevelopment there. Or if the current
restaurant owner who's spending a lot of money to open that restaurant wants to keep that restaurant then build 12 units on the other half of the site. Uh that would also be overdevelopment. So is there is it possible to write into the plan that what what you mean is a 12unit
purely residential project and not a 12unit mixed use project. So that's that's going to be up to um the governing body and the planning board as to what the details are of the redevelopment plan. I mean we can take that under advisement um and determine
whether it's all multif family or if it's mixed use and if maybe it's mixed use in certain areas and multif family in other areas. Just just to clarify though, I know Kendra said this before. Uh right now the recommendation in this fair share plan is to create this zone
which might be a redevelopment zone but to make it a redevelopment zone a you'd have to have a redevelopment study and b you'd then have to adopt zoning and the zoning would then do the things that you're talking about. What can you do in that zone? And both of those things
would come before the burough council and the planning board at a later date. This is just the concept of could we put a redevelopment area here that would have this type of uh uh development. Great. And just last question, is there
an issue with the public notice that the all the appendices were not published on the website? As I understand it, the well there was no legal requirement that it be on the website. The requirement was it be on file at Burough Hall and that notice be
sent to adjoining municipalities, the county planning board and the state office of planning advocacy. And my understanding is all those things were done. Uh we went above and beyond by also putting it on the website. So if it was not if that part was not on, I apologize. It should have been, but uh
but it's not a notice issue because it was not a legal requirement that it be on the website. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Uh gentleman over here. Sorry, I used to be a little quicker. Uh 624 Harris Avenue, Jim Manion. So, uh I've been to some of the
meetings, not all of them. I read a lot of the stuff. Was on the planning board some 20 years ago when Simco was put in. Question. I think that I heard recently that there is no there is no COA trust fund existing today. Is that true for this municipality? There would
not be. No, you did not have a development fee ordinance. You didn't have a a plan prior to this. No COA fees being collected all these years like Okay. How much does that play a role in us not participating in the push back other towns are doing where other towns are saying? I'm not describing it uh
legally, but where they're saying, "Let's just push back and wait till Murphy leaves and see what happens." Well, they'll they will lose their immunity if they do not submit their plans in time. Uh and then they're open to builder's remedy lawsuits. And builders remedy lawsuits. Am am I
correct that that's specific to af to to affordable housing? Yes. Not just other builders who would sue because they didn't get what they wanted. and take it to the state. It's specific to uh a developer coming in and
saying that you do not have a certified affordable housing plan. I'm providing for a substantial amount of affordable housing that comports with sound planning and therefore judge um give me what's known as a builder's remedy lawsuit specific
for a specific piece of property. Okay. So if we So if we had a trust fund, if we had money, would would would the board be inclined to be looking at joining that class action suit? Are other mun municipalities are pushing back? You're talking about the Montail
litigation, correct? Yes. Okay. Montville is one of our clients. We couldn't represent Montil in that litigation uh because we had a conflict, unfortunately. Uh but I can tell you that they have not been successful. uh I think 17 towns joined together, put
their money in a pot, uh made a lot of good arguments, attorney did a good job, uh but they have not been successful. And you can't use the trust fund to fund litigation. So even if we had a million dollars in
there today or $10 million in there, it couldn't be okay, let's take some of that that money and fight. If you if they if the town wants to fight or if anyone wants to fight, talk to your legislators. I mean, the
problem lies in the legislation. That's where the problem lies. So, if I were to summarize this, we're being pressed by the state. Yeah. And that means Governor Murphy signed into law an abomination.
Yeah, I agree. I mean it for 30 years or 40 years I think now we well for eternity if that legislation isn't changed if someone doesn't wake up and say this is insanity then that legislation will control the future of this state for for
time in memorial and someday we'll all look back and wonder when did we take the wrong turn and it was when that legislation was signed into law. I know my time is up. I just want to look at the board and kind of see their reactions. the I feel that this type of legislation, we all think it's great to,
you know, we'd like to be on on board with affordable housing and help people and so on, but it seems like it's forcing the hand to develop properties, overdevelop properties, and Rathon Road in my in my mind is one of them. U I think Bory peeling back to two is a lot
better, but I'd like to see it go away all together. But look, it's hard to disagree that affordable housing is a valuable and important thing to do. It's just a matter of striking a balance. And that legislation was a complete imbalance. Someone put the thumb on the
scale and they ignored legitimate municipal interest. It was all about developers making money and nonprofits on paper having big big numbers that they could say look what we did. But at the end of the day, how much housing we get is going to be a function of the marketplace and how much money there's
available for. How many last question how many actual families do we feel would benefit at the end of the day that are going to get to live in Bel through this? Well, I'm curious about the real the net. The net the net is I mean you have
19 units that over the next however many years will become available for 19 families as an as an absolute and then you have zoning that would potentially allow for above and beyond that. Thank you very much. Sure. All right.
Thank you, ma'am. Come on up. Hi, I'm Christina Hathaway, 925 Cole Drive. I have a question. This fair plan that you've proposed, is this including the whiskey lounge piece of property? The fair share plan includes the uh Higgins Avenue corridor redevelopment
area and so that would include and that includes that property. Yes. So according to but not in the density that the developer is proposing in their builder's remedy. No. Right. But in this build a remedy suit that he has and according to what you told me at one of
the council meetings that we have until June 30th and at any point before June 30th the judge could come with a a judgment which could be in his case. Can I just finish? Sure.
Be in his favor. In conjunction with that, you also mentioned that the planning board does not have any jurisdiction over the zoning of that whiskey lounge because of the builder's
remedy suit. So if he decides to have four and a half stories with the third and fourth floors overlooking and having unobstructed views of not only the river but also the Atlantic Ocean, which he can
then sell at fair market value and just have the first floor with several 15% of the units being for affordable housing that We the or the planning board, which is
us because you're representing the town, has no say of how high he goes because of his suit. And this is all part of what you're going to be voting on this evening. I I I think you're misconstring what's being voted on.
What's being voted on is not to authorize that site to be developed at four stories with 101 units, but it is for a redevelopment. It is for redevelopment at 12 units an acre. Okay, that's a hell of a lot of lot different than what the developer is proposing.
So, he will not be able We don't look we're in a lawsuit, right? The developer can ask for whatever he wants in a lawsuit, right? We can say whatever we think is appropriate in the lawsuit and ultimately a judge calls it. So, and she
calls it because we had no master plan in place. this master plan. Now, every site, let me finish. Every site must be suitable, must make planning sense, even a builder's remedy site. So, if we get in
litigation, we're going to be taking the position that 101 units on that site is a perfect example of bad planning. And what we have is is an example of good planning.
I can't control how the judge rules on that. I can only advocate for what we think makes sense as a community and what my expert, Miss Ly, can support. And she is drafted a plan that contemplates a very low intensity of
that site. Okay. So my last thought though is if the judge rules in favor of him because we did not have a master plan in place and he doesn't get 101 units, he gets 65 units or about then
when he proposes four 4 and a half stories according to you then the planning board has no leg to stand on. It goes according to what the judge decides. You didn't hear what I just said.
I just said we're in litigation. The developer is going to be seeking to build the Empire State Building. We're going to be seeking to devel to limit that site to a reasonable density. Okay? I'm not advocating for the Empire State Building. To the contrary, I'm advertise
advocating for sensible zoning and the and the judge will be the one to decide. The judge calls it. Okay. And she has court blanch on everything. The judge has to make a judgment. Okay? The judge, you know, you you'll put facts in front of the judge and we'll put facts in
front of the judge. If this thing doesn't resolve itself that we think makes sense, they'll put facts in front of the judge that they think makes sense. The judge will have her own expert and turn to her own expert and say, "What do you think?" And the judge will call it however the judge deems
fit. And then we'll come back to the planning board for approval. If the judge enters an order and says this is what I'm going to permit on that site, then our choice is live with it or appeal it. Okay? So, it doesn't but the answer is it does still come before the
planning board. But the judge, if the judge rules and that ruling sticks, then that is the zoning. It took away our zoning power and the judge did the zoning and then it comes in as an application and we still look at all the other things, traffic, storm water, all
the things that you usually look at, but the zoning is whatever the judge said the zoning is. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. I saw another hand, sir. Come on up. Hello. My name is Richard Degrude. live at 9:15 Riverview Drive. And uh I have
only a few questions. One on this plan that was submitted, the M &D housing, they were given three units and I thought you said that one out of five units had to be
affordable. So why three and not four? This that was part of the settlement agreement with that particular developer because it was a builder's remedy lawsuit. So when I said one out of every five, I really talked about generally inclusionary zoning um and thinking about total number of units. The
requirement typically is 15% set aside for rental units and 20% set aside for um for sale units. That's the normal set aside. Some developers give more. The Mumford project is at 36% set aside.
Okay. So the M andD then is the 15% those are rental they're rental correct. Okay, Mrs. Sweeney Serenium. Serenium. Um my question for you is you mentioned before Governor Murphy signed this into
law and then the gentleman over there when he came up he said you have to push your legislature legislators. I said that as well. Okay. No, no, I know you said that. So, when Murphy leaves office, can
a new governor undo his law? I've been doing this for 40 years. The pendulum swings. Uh, I think we've reached an ex an extreme point. I think the pendulum will swing again. I think there will be
retribution for this law because it's so grossly excessive. But we don't have that luxury right here. No, we don't. We have a June 30th deadline and we can't drag our feet. No, I
understand that. I I understand that fully from the last and from this. Um but because uh the our town as citizens, voters, and when was when were plans put in? Three,
four years ago, you said um that's for the third round. So the third round they're, you know, it's been going on for a long time. So for the prior 40 years as as voters, as council members from 1980 to n to 2000, we just ignored
this and now we're left with this is what you're saying because there's always a requirement that you had to comply. Um I think well let me let me just couch it this way. I think a lot of towns on the Jersey coast um over the last 25 years
had not thought that they would be ripe for redevelopment built. There was plenty of land in suburbs. You know, there was plenty of land on the inland side as that has been gobbled up. Your town, these these coastal towns, these smaller vacant land towns, redevelopment
is where it's h it's where it's at for developers. And so you we are seeing the pressure now. and that's where they're going to make their money. I understand that. Yeah. Um but the obligation's always been there and it's been there, but we're we're trying to deal with an obligation from 1987, too. So, the round
three numbers of 150 or 40 or 60 units, those are still going to go in to place. They're still standing unless something happens. Uh those are those are existing numbers that will not there's nothing happening with those obligations in
place. I know after whatever is done there really is no room in this town unless somebody buys a house and knocks it down and they say, "Oh, we'll put up 20 units." It's legitimate to know that the next round you may not have vacant
land to do a vacant land analysis and everything will be an unmet need that you and you may not have any other place to zone for at that point. There is a section in the Fair Housing Act that basically says if you have you have exhausted all efforts for overlay zoning
in in your towns where you think develop redevelopment is going to occur, you can say why you wouldn't be doing another redu overlay zone. Um, so that's but it's not here now. Right now I would say 10 years from now maybe you're in that situation. So but wait till Murphy
leaves exhaustion of land at some point. If you could just wrap it up you there really is an it's it's already exhausted. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Are we finished with questions? All right. We are. So then now we will hear comments from the public with
respect to the plan that has been presented. All right, I'll take you one at a time. We're going to come on up. Mr. Burke, I'll take you first. Hold on one second. You'll come on up. You'll say your name, your address, and you can give comments. If you're going to provide testimony, we're going to need
you to be sworn in. Okay? And um that will be uh until everyone has had a chance. We're still sticking with three minutes. and then we'll hear comments from the board and then we will hear the application. All right, Mr. Burke, come on up. Good evening. Dan Burke, Cedar Lane,
page four, second uh table. It's titled, the table is titled affordable gross rents per region 4, but the the uh paragraph above it which describes it says it's sample rents and sale prices. I would suggest you might want to take the sale price comment out of it. Page
four. Page four, sir. Second second table. Table two. Table two. The second table. Right. It's titled in the table affordable gross rents region four. I'm sorry. in the in the paragraph above it which describes it, it says sales and sample rent. You might want to take out
the words sale. That's all. Okay. Well, sales are down below. I I it's it's but it doesn't it doesn't reference that. I mean, again, I'll leave it to you. You make make your you know, on uh page 11 regarding the M andD property
first paragraph consistent with surrounding neighborhood character. I'd say that's that's a reach. I don't think anything about the M andd um proposal is consistent with uh with anything in the in the surrounding neighborhood. So um again, I'll leave that as a comment. You
can do it with with what you will. On the uh Mumford property, uh in addition, the developer is providing 36% set aside. It's a 25 unit. Four units are being set aside. uh the way your characterization is is
each bedroom of the of the two units that uh uh make up that 36%. I'd suggest that that statement is um a mischaracterization, but I'll leave it as you will. Um the Borie Avenue
property development of the uh on page 15, development of two family home shall comply with existing R3 zoning. If it's two units on a single property, it doesn't comply with zoning. It would require um an ordinance change and the question would be would you do spot
zoning and spot zone just that? Are you okay by answer? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'll leave it at I'll leave it as a comment. I would suggest that that that statement could use some rewriting. Um on the Union Lane property, um it's
actually Union Lane, not Union Avenue. Union Avenue is Route 71. You said it's at the intersection of Union Avenue and Route 71. I would suggest it should be Union Lane and Route 71. Uh, where do I find that? It's it's the the part that talks
about the barrel proper the barrel hall property on page uh 13 second line the first paragraph. Union Avenue and Route 71. Union Avenue is Route 71. It should just be changed to Union Lane, please, if you will. Um page 15, two
family homes units for sale. Uh oh, I'm sorry. I already did that one. [Music] Uh, Higgin the down on page 19, the Higgins Avenue redevelopment quarter. You might want to make that the proposed
Higgins Avenue. The way I read it, it was as if it already exists, but I'll leave that to your discretion. Also, I'd make a comment as to what may or may not be included. what you put on the I mean again since since the public wasn't privy in the you know the online to the
appendixes what was put up tonight uh showed a couple properties that um uh went off of uh Higgins Avenue and went back and had budded uh Uklid uh was it Uklid Lane or Uklid Avenue but it didn't include all the properties on Uklid. I
would suggest that it would probably be appropriate to include everything that abuts um Uklid in that in that proposed redevelopment. I think it would fit well, but I'll leave that to your thoughts. Thank you, Mr. Dick, if you just wrap it
up. Yes, sir. On um uh on page 21, Bel ordinances advance multigener general generational family continuity goals. Again, I'd suggest that's a reach and then some. Um, on
page 22, my last comment, first parag first line, COA subsid, you reference COA's substantive rules. COA doesn't exist, therefore they have no substantive rules. I'll leave that to you if you feel it's editable. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Burke. Anyone else have any comments with respect to the
application that's being heard this evening? Sure. Come on up, sir. John Tini, 8:15 Rathjen. Um, I'm addressing my comments to the
Rathjen Road property, which is block 6202, lot 3 that is steeply sloped and well vegetated. I think we can use common sense, good common sense to know if that vegetation
is removed and replaced with substantial imperous cover of a street, 25 town houses, driveways, all of that. It will cause more offsite runoff which in the
previous applications by Mumford were not shown to have been uh well managed. And that's Mumford reduced an initial application from 12 homes as you remember to 11 and then adjourned the application again. Uh
and here we are looking at the criteria from the planner. I have not heard who owns title. Uh Mr. Mumford or Mumford companies may have a contract or may have had a contract. So I don't know
that's available. Uh is it suitable? um not in that neighborhood where you're going to cost 25 or more, maybe 50 vehicles if you say two per dwelling unit in a quiet intersection. Is it
developable? You have a stream entering wetlands. We've already marked P1, which is shows the runoff, the storm water from lot three onto lot two to the coil property. and I ask that that be
part of this record. So it it is not uh compatible in terms of motor vehicle traffic or storm water which is already overwhelming and flooding the neighboring property. Uh so I would say to you before we're downstream I know we
keep hearing about the planning board later will be presented with site plans and so on. This property is there's a reason why it's never been developed. It's steeply sloped with a stream entering wetlands and during storm water
incidents it overruns the uh the next the adjoining property and 25 to 50 motor vehicles as Mr. Thbold said is unsafe at that intersection. Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Jini. Any other comments um with respect madam come on
out. I'm uh Betsy Bower. I live in Barkley Woods at 5 Hickory Court 5A. Uh and I am also commenting about the Rathon Road uh to uh support what he just said. I live at the very end of of my street uh of
Hickory Court. Uh and it goes very steep slope down um onto what I believe is his property. It may bay back up to your road on the intersection of Rasten and and Ranken. And I see I've only lived there for a very short time. I'm there
seasonally, but I see that there's a great deal of erosion to the point where cars can park for guest parking. Uh there the street the road is starting to slope down into this runoff. I'm very very concerned about the environment
there. It's a very sensitive environmentally sensitive area. There is a a big drop and there is the stream back there. I just it's not suitable for tearing down all these trees and developing on that. I would ask that all
of you walk that area or come drive to the dead end where I live and you can see the the erosion there and how I think it would be dangerous to further erode it. At least what's existing there without excavating could help support
it. Still needs to be built up. But you need trees and roots and shrubs and natural growth uh to maintain the landscape and it is eroded already and any development there will really seriously eroded more. Thank you. Thank
you. All right. Uh Virginia, come on up. Virginia Loftton, South Street. Um, I I just have a couple of comments. Many of us just started hearing about this affordable housing stuff. I would make it a stretch to say
it's even been a year. Um, we just got the first plan, I guess, two weeks ago or the or the presentation at the at Burough Hall at the last planning board meeting. And in that very short amount of time,
we got a number of very creative ideas from the residents who were at the planning board meeting. Those ideas actually resulted in some changes to this plan, including the changes to Borie Avenue and the putting the affordable housing at the municipal
building. I would like to say, imagine what we could have done if we had all known about this for a year. But it feels like this has been secretive and nobody has been sharing information. And I have to say I'm surprised that nobody on the planning
board has any questions about this plan. It's it's very concerning. Nobody on the planning board has been to Rathjim Woods and taken a look Yeah. at what that property is. So I am disappointed. And I don't
know, Mr. Clark, did you say you are not legally required to post those appendices online? There's no requirement to post anything online. But you know that residents have been asking meeting after meeting after meeting to please make these plans
available to us. We go to planning board meetings and the the proposals are all turned away from the audience. we can't see. And if you can't make time to go to Burough Hall and review these paper
copies, then you don't get to see it. So, that's not okay. You're hiding information from residents. And the one thing I will say about the March 23 housing element plan that was adopted by
the planning board, I'm pretty sure nobody knows about it, but I do think it's important to memorialize that while the plan was adopted, the bureau did not submit the plan to superior court. And that makes us
uh subject to developers who are praying on us now. That should have been done. So, I think it's important to make sure that everybody knows that they didn't do it's a failure of leadership in this town. Okay. Um, oh, ma'am, come on up.
Jerry Coyle, 811 Raptin Road. I have pictures here of flooding in my yard that I'd like to have the lawyer document. And I'd also ask all of you to come look at the property. It doesn't award 25 town houses. And if you see the
wetlands and you see how sloped the property is and you think in your mind how much it will cost him to develop that property and how much money he'll have to charge for those town houses while he's ruining all the street
because the water runs right down Wrath Road, goes right into a stream behind the golf course. And Miss Coyle, you said you've got some photos. How many when are the when were the photos taken? uh the night of August 4th, 2024. And all the photos are the same date. Yes,
these two photos are the same date, but I did submit a I did submit to the engineer and to two people on the board. I did submit a video that we took during that storm and we did walk out into Bill Rafen's property or Mumfords, I don't
know whose it is. And we walked along the stream and we went all the way out to Route 35. So, we'll mark your photos as P2 and P3. That's the next two sequential numbers. You didn't give them to me. I'll mark them and keep them for the record. Thank
you. That's the same picture. Excuse me, Council P. It's already We understand, but miss somebody else has submitted the photos and so we'll mark them and keep our record. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Tini. Do you think this is all three pictures of
the same thing? Those are the same picture. Okay. Everybody on the board has a copy. All right. Thank you, Mr. Tina. Thank you, ma'am. Come on up. I am Tony Skeleo, 844 William Drive. Can you spell your last name, please? Pardon
me. You spell that. Just spell your last name. S C E L F as in Frank O. Thank you. All right. Uh, I'm not necessarily a big environmentalist, but anyone who lives in our neighborhood knows we have fox, we have coyotes, we have deer
walking up and down the streets, and with the development of this property, those animals are going to be displaced. That's all I have to say. Thank you, Miss Skele. Anyone else have any comments? All right. So, the comment
period is then is now closed. We'll now take comments from members of the board. Um we'll start first with Councilman Cologne. With respect to everything you've heard tonight, this will be our last chance to hear from the members of the planning board with respect to this
application. And then after that, we will ask for a motion to approve. That's um uh a best practice for planning boards. If we don't have a motion to approve, then we won't have a motion. Okay. Councilman Clone. Yep. Uh I think there's been a lot of uh work on this.
Um there's also been a lot of great comments by the community. Um I mean we're all a lot of us who are here uh were there um prior to being here. So I I think there's a lot of empathy in in in terms of what we feel, how we feel,
and what we're trying to do within the parameters of the law uh with the precedent that's set uh by the state and the rules that are set by the state. But I thank you for your time because it is I know many hours you're here um and frustrated and I can empathize. So thank
you Mrs. Brisbane. Um I agree with everything that's been said and I'm glad that has been emphasized by both Jeff and Kendra that we are having this forced down our throats by the state of New Jersey. This
isn't something that Belle wants to do. I don't think any one of us in this room wants to see uh any more development than what should be happening in town and we are seeing it. We have fought applications that have come in. People have taken us to court and we have lost.
The judges have decided what's going to go on and tiny little Belle. Um we are working as best as we can. We've hired these professionals who know much more than we do about the law and what is legal and what can be done. I think they've done a great job. We're doing
the best we can with what we have. I personally do not agree with what's being done, but our hands are kind of tied right here. So, uh, I would be for approval of this, uh, housing element and fair share plan. All right. Thank you, Miss Prison. Mrs. Fernola. So, I
love this town dearly. I grew up here and I raised my kids here. They go to this school. So, I empathize with the bikes. They ride their bikes. They play in Ravage Woods now. Um, so it's, you know, upsetting to see a development come in and bulldoze, you
know, my kids playground and make it unsafe for them. So with that being said, I'm also, you know, realistic and knowing that if we don't implement a plan, then we just are vulnerable to other lawsuits where we completely lose control of everything that we work so
hard to keep. So, um, but thank you for all coming out and speaking and I do struggle back and forth because I lot I know a lot of you. So, but we just have to do what's right for the town as a whole and not think about just ourselves.
Thank you, Mr. Turk. Yeah, I would um it's not a scientific word, but this sucks and none of us like it. And you can tell by our faces and our expressions and our demeanor that we're not happy about this. My wife is born and raised in Balsh, grew up on Valley
Road. Her brother lives on Riverview. Um, five the woods at the top of my street at Tamarak that was taken out. It's five big beautiful homes there to Mumford built, but not our neighborhood didn't want that. Very much concerned about the
water. Okay. We hope it's been mitigated. We'll see. Um, but this is this this is very frustrating and um we're all we all live here. Um, we volunteer for this planning
committee um because we care, because we want to make sure things are done correctly, that no one builds a Walmart downtown. Okay, to be extreme. And that's why that's why I'm on this
board. Um, because I care and I have the same vested interest in this town uh that you do. Um, but I am very unsatisfied with the decisions we have
to make. Although I'm very proud of the work that the attorneys and our professional have done to guide us through this. So when we talk about money being spent, did we dip into a thing? Let me tell you, your taxpayers
are being spent. And I don't know where we would be without the professional uh uh support that we've gotten from these people that we've hired. Uh they truly are professionals. It's seasoned
in this obscure uh uh situation or whatever you you want to call it. Um so the uh I will say uh I have walked the property.
Um, I'll do it again. I haven't gone to Hickory, but I made a note and I'm going to look into that. Uh, I made a note about Route 35 and we'll explore that. And
um I can assure you that all of us will do everything possible when it comes before us to approve what they're proposing to build that we do everything that we can to uh
address everybody's concerns and first and foremost the water because that's real. And so they're going to have to present us with solutions and not promises. So, uh, I I just wanted to
share with you, uh, thank you very much for your time and your concern. Uh, and I just again wanted to share with you that we're sitting here very frustrated ourselves and uh, and again, we're doing
all we can to fight, you know, the whiskey project. We're fighting that right now. We're in litigation with that because we're not happy about that. Okay. We've retained lawyers to do that. Um so,
um I just wanted to share that my thoughts with you on that. Thank you, Mr. Turk. Mr. Callahan. I too am a resident here in Bel only for nine years, not my entire life like some of you. But in moving here to
Bel, I have to tell you, many years ago, my wife and I drove through Bel 1970, and we looked at a lot that was for sale on the Masquamine River Country Club for
$34,000, Bacon Lock. We realized that we would have nothing left to build the house on because that was our budget. I've admired Reel for these many years and now my wife and I
live down off Green Street. And I drive down 35 many times to get off in Griel, right past this property. And I recognize how steep it is there. The speed of cars doing 60 miles an
hour. The thought of having a turnoff, I I can't see that. But I express my fellow board members concern for this proposed development, the plan. We have to do it. We're not happy about
it, but we're going to make it work so that it's legally done and we get the best outcome from it because we love living here. My office is in Seagar, but I have a six-minute commute every day. I'm really
spoiled and I want to keep living here and be proud of Riel and the professionals that we've hired to fight these fights for us. They're doing a great job. All right. Thank you, Mr. Callahan. Mr. Prio,
[Music] thank you. Uh, I agree with my fellow board members. Uh, this is a very unfortunate situation. I'm a newer board member, but I'm here because I want to help the community and give back and do what I can to make it better. We're
going to need to fight. When RAFT comes in, for example, we got to fix the storm water problems there now and the traffic. So, I will be focusing hard on that to make sure whatever comes in, we're going to do our best to make it better. The redevelopment plan on
Higgins, the overlay zone on 71, those are concerns. We got to make sure if we're going to do those things, we got to do them right. So, it beautifies our community, even if we're stuck with this obligation. So, thank you all for coming out. I will do my best as will my fellow board members to make this unfortunate
situation as best as we can moving forward. Thank you, Mr. P. Mr. Luben. Thank you. So, I think the word is this sucks. Um, and I'll probably see some t-shirts around town that have that. Uh, where's
the gentleman over there who um talks about the bikes on Schoolhouse Road? I live at the bottom of schoolhouse road. I have two young girls in school here who just learned to ride their bikes. I ride with them every single night. I walk them to school and hug Miss Terry
every morning on the corner. I do go to Wrath when I was better shape. I can get up the hill. But I've seen that area too. I'm also a business owner here. I'm a litigator. Just opened up a law office on 71. Um this I've only been on the planning
board a little bit. This is a hand we're dealt and it stinks and you have to choose your own destiny or gets chosen for you. But as um was just mentioned, we'll do everything to make sure when it does come
to site plans and everything else that everything is taken care of, everything's done the right way, the town is protected, and you know, I would want it to be as it is the day I moved in, but you got to face reality. And reality is right now we're being stuck with the law shoved down our throats.
And if we don't take action and we look forward, not backwards, something worse is going to come. So I echo everyone's feelings and I wish my kids could grow up in Braille the way it was when we moved here 8 years ago, but it's going to be a little different, but hopefully
it'll be better than uh better than it is if we don't choose. Thank you. Um I want to thank everybody who's here for coming out um and for coming to the meetings um really in in force. It is um
encouraging to see how many people care about Bel as much as those of us who spend time volunteering for the the town up here care about it. We we care about this town so much. Um I've for those of you who don't know me, I've been um
volunteering for this planning board since 2018 and I became the chair in 2020 during co um we had our meetings on Zoom. Um and um and it feels a little bit like that again tonight. It's because we are streaming this on
YouTube. I want to thank you guys, everybody here for um your civility as well. This is a difficult situation. Um, everyone here has been um, expressing their opposition or their feelings and their questions with great respect for
the process and for those of us who are volunteering and I really uh, have to tell you I appreciate that because it is difficult to sit up here when we are faced with such difficult circumstances. Um, I first learned that there was um no
affordable housing uh set aside that meets the town's or that meets the state's regulations in I think 2022 at the end of 2022. So, you can imagine how surprised I was when I learned that um
we promptly while I was chair did try to take action in 2023. And I appreciate that Miss Loftton raised that during her comments because this board did take prompt action um and uh for reasons that
are um primarily uh uh concerning litigation. Um I I don't want to talk more about that because I do really value um making sure that our town is in the best position that we can be in
going forward in a very adversarial process. It is not just um you all who feel like this is adversarial. Those of us who are sitting here helping make the best decisions for this town that we care about, the best decisions for Bel,
we feel like it's adversarial too because we have these lawsuits that we are helping to defend our town against and we are ensuring that the direction of the town is being maintained um in the best way that we can as everyone has mentioned under difficult
circumstances. And I do truly believe that the plan that we've put forward this evening um makes the best out of those difficult circumstances. Um I I don't want anyone to think that you haven't been heard.
Um, we've, as you've heard tonight, we made very swift changes to this plan since we first presented it at the first information meeting because smart active members like of the public like you came
out and gave great ideas. I think that the amount of change in this plan though is limited because we really do have very limited number of um I'll say options available because we do have very little land that's in Belle Burough's control. And so, um, I really
want to commend Kendra Ley and Jeff Serenian for the great advice and guidance that they've provided to us and David Clark and Al Hilla, um, all of this time for providing us with the legal counsel and the engineering expertise that we really need to help guide our town forward. We are just
volunteers, but I promise you, we volunteer with our whole hearts because we live here, too. And we want this town to be just as great as you all want this town to be. So um with that I want to just um encourage you all through this
process to continue coming to our meetings to make sure that your voices are heard. We do listen to you. We want the input. Um I will talk to any of you any time really that you want. Um and um
and I hope that you stay um um as active and um civil as you have been tonight. I want to thank you all. Sure. Go ahead, Mrs. Bristol. Uh, I just want to let you know that our applications are on the website. Was
commented that they are not, but they are. Once we get the approval from our board engineer that an application is ready to be heard, it is all put on the website and if you go on the website and look under planning board, you will see the current applications. The maps, the application, and the engineering report
are all shown on that. But I just wanted you to know that in case you were not aware that you do have that right to look at all of that. So with that then um are there is there any additional things um missile that you'd like to add? Yeah, we just there were a couple of changes um that were mentioned and I
just want to read into the record the changes to the um housing element and fair share plan that I'm going to recommend that we that you make before you vote. Um page [Applause] 12 under the Mumford Homes project. The
bottom bullet point or it says the site is developable. Uh it indicates there are no wetlands or category one streams. I'd like to amend that to say that there um are wetlands in the southwest corner. uh they are not being
disturbed and the applica excuse me the developer will need to get a buffer averaging permit from New Jersey DP to disturb the wetlands buffer. Uh everything else remains the same. The next change would be on page
13 which is under the municipal building project. Uh, as was indicated by the gentleman that came up here, uh, instead of Union Avenue on the second line, it should say Union Lane. So, I'll be making that change. And then there is um, one other
change at the bottom of page 20. This is under the fourth round unmet need. Um, the last sentence currently reads, "If however a court determines that the adjusted number is unmet need, the burrow is complying through the proposed
Route, sorry, Route 71 overlay district." And the language that I would like to change it to is in any event, the burrow is addressing its unmet need through the Route 71 overlay district. Um, the other thing that I wanted to
bring to the board's attention is that in the appendix, all of the or ordinances are draft and I will put a watermark on there that that says they were all draft. So, that will change in the appendix. And I believe that's it. All right. Mr. Cernian, do you have any
other suggestions or um for amendment before I ask for a motion to approve? I don't. Just in spirit what Miss Ley just said. Uh should the board uh adopt this, there's a draft resolution the for the for the burrow to
endorse. I I would that is just a draft. I would make that more enhanced to it doesn't change anything. They're just drafts. But it the whole the bottom line is we have to endorse and I would just add more language to
the draft resolution. Okay. David, do you have anything before we go forward? Uh no. As Jeff said, I did prepare a proposed resolution in the event that the the board wanted to vote tonight and wanted to vote to approve.
Um there was a version in the morning that I circulated. Then there was a revised version in the afternoon. That's the one that I think we should be using, the afternoon version that I sent to Karen and to the board members. Uh and uh if there are any further supplements
to that, uh we will add it. But otherwise, uh uh and I guess the only other thing is uh we'd be looking to approve the housing element and fair share plan uh as circulated uh to the board, but with the amendments as recommended by Miss Lily through her
testimony tonight. Okay. And so, um, in accord with David's recommendation, may I have a motion, please, to approve the May 2025 third round and fourth round housing element and fair share plan that we've been discussing tonight with the amendments that Miss Ley has outlined.
Um, and for approval of the resolution as well. I'll make that motion. Thank you, Mrs. Brisbane. Will someone second the motion? I'll second the motion. Thank you, Mr. Turk. Councilman Elliot Cologne, yes. Karen
Brisbane, yes. Kevin Callahan, yes. Amber Fernicola, yes. Eric Luben, yes. James Polo, yes. Karen Trainer, yes. Dan Turk, yes. All right.
Thank you very much. Um, we're on our agenda. We're going to the next item, which is other business. Does anyone have any other business that they'd like to bring before the planning board this evening? All right. Seeing none, u may I have a motion, please, to adjurnn? I like to make a motion to adjurnn. Thank
you, council. Will someone second the motion? Second. Thank you, Miss Fernola. All in favor? I. The next meeting of the board will be Tuesday, June 10th, 2025 at 7 PM at Belal Burough Hall. Thank you. Ants.