Council now come to order. Welcome everyone. Thanks for your patience. Um we're gonna have an interesting time tonight. Hope you all have fun. Um I just wanted to make a note that July uh July is disability pride month. Um it's
uh July to commemorate the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act on July 26, 1990. Landmark civil rights legislation that prohibits discrimination opportunity access. So I just wanted to make that
quick notice of this meeting the Lawrence Township Council being held on Tuesday July 21st 2026 has been provided to the postings annual meeting schedule of the set council in accordance with section 13 at the open public meeting said notice was forwarded to the tronion
times the princet on December 12th 2025 and addition notice was posted on this board and attachment a honorable and sincere man always bearing in mind our toable
community. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Miss Farmer >> here, >> here. >> Mr. Kaki >> here. >> Here. about it here. Special proclamations, recognitions, and presentations. We have a special presentation tonight from our township planner, Elizabeth.
Come on up and give a little background for tonight. For those that don't know, she's our planner through the planning board and has uh gone through the
redevelopment. So, >> yes, >> welcome. >> Thank you. Good evening everybody. My name is just for the record once again. Um, so you Okay, I'll do my best to speak up for everybody. Uh so the purpose of of my attendance tonight is
to help the council as well as the public to uh evaluate one of the agenda items which is a resolution that would uh that would allow for the township to declare a particular property as an area need of redevelopment. And that property
of course is 3641 Lawrence Road. It's block 66 01 lot 2. And before I talk a bit about the specific redevelopment designation, I wanted to share some of the recent history and the catalyst for
what has uh led up to this meeting. And the catalyst is I guess it started back in 2025 when the township adopted its housing element and fair share plan. It as part of that process is laid out in act the fair housing act. that allows
for developers to file objections to our housing plan. One of those objectors was the uh the hopeful developer or the property owner for this particular property for the 3641 Barnesville Road property. They objected
to our housing plan and the township was able to settle with that developer. Uh we did so on February 11th of this year. Uh we also settled with one of our other objectors, Fair Share Housing Center on
the same date. And I mentioned both of these settlements because in both settlement agreements, it addressed this particular property in the same way. And that is that the township would allow for inclusionary development to occur on
the property. And as part of the zoning and the process for development of human housing, the settlement agreement, specifically the one with the property owner 3641, it provided that the township would
consider the property as an area in need of redevelopment. And after executing that settlement agreement and both settlement agreements, the township then began the process of of doing just that, of considering the property as an area
need of redevelopment. Specifically considering whether or not the property meets one or more criteria for redevelopment designation as set forth in the local redevelopment housing law. And that law dictates the process that we're in the middle of going through
right now. It starts with the council authorizing the planning board to conduct a study and to hold a public hearing on on the study considering whether or not the property meets the criteria and that was done by this council on February 3rd of this year.
The planning board then authorized me and my firm to conduct that to prepare that study. is referred to as an area need of redevelopment studies in times of preliminary investigation and that study was completed on April 1st of this year. We had a public hearing at the
planning board on April 20th and the planning board subsequently uh adopted a resolution on May 4th and the resolution found that there were two criteria uh the redevelopment law that this property met and therefore found that the
property did indeed qualify as an area of redevelopment and I I will say that the planning board's recommendations following board's finding and their resolutions followed my recommendations in the April 1st report. As I said, they adopted that resolution on May 4th and
the resolution specifically finds that uh the planning board found that the property met two criteria for an area needed redevelopment and recommended to the council to adopt a resolution designating the site as an area of
redevelopment. So while the planning board is obligated to to hold a public hearing and to have the report prepared, it is actually the council's role to designate the property as an area that redevelopment or not. And that's and
that's the purpose of tonight's uh one of your agenda items later in the meeting for one of the resolutions is to consider a resolution that would designate the 3641 road property again block 6601 lot 2 as
an area needed redevelopment. And doing so would be in would be consistent with the settlement agreement that was executed with the property owner and would also facilitate the settlement agreement that was executed with fair housing project as well. And I'm happy
to go into more detail about the property or the findings of the report specifically about the redevelopment designation. But that's an overview as to what the council is tasked with doing and and how we got here. uh given the
affordable housing case and the local redevelopment housing. >> Thank you. Um questions from >> Yeah. Can you thank you very much for for giving us an overview um and um speaking in layman's terms so we can all
kind of understand it. Can you go over the two criteria that it met? >> Yeah. So uh so before I do that, let me just for a little bit more context so the criteria makes more sense. This property is a little more than seven acres. It's at the corner of Lawrenceville Road, Province Fund Road,
and then I think as as most people know, it's the property that uh post the Google House on the site. Um and so there are two criteria there. There are several criteria set forth in the redevelopment law, but I think two that I referenced in the report as being
relevant and recommended in favor of the plan board agree. The first one is criterion A and that speaks to the condition of buildings. Specifically, it states the generality of buildings are substandard, unsafe, unsanitary,
dilapidated or obsolescent or possess any of the characteristics or are so like lacking in light air or space as to be conducive to unulive living and working conditions. So the report found
in favor of that criteria for a variety of reasons but including the lack of property maintenance leading to a state of disrepair of not only the home itself but also an accessory garage on the building. There was evidence of fire uh
uh fire code violations as well. There are also a number of substandard conditions that were actually identified by the township and is in a violations issued approximately 25 years ago that uh largely remained in place.
And there were a number of characteristics of the two buildings that were substandard, unsafe, and dilapidated as stated in the report, including for example uh cla and damaged roof in the accessory building, the garage, damaged roof, missing e on the
principal building, cracks in both foundation in need of stabilization, a structural support beam in the basement of the home that is not fully supporting the building, uncontrolled access to the basement and first floor. You can see evidence of uh vandalism and trespassing
on the property, number of broken windows, vine infestation, and debris throughout the site. And for all of those reasons, that's a summary, but for all of those reasons, the report found that it met uh criteria A in the sense of the buildings are substandard,
lapidated uh and that they led to this unh wholesome living and working conditions. The report and the planning board also found that the property met criterion D which uh is defined as buildings or
improvements which by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement design, lack of ventilation, lack of sanitary light or sanitary facilities. Excessive land coverage, delterious land use,
obsolete layout or any combination of those are detrimental to the health safety, morals, or welfare of the community. And the report found in favor of that criterion for a handful of reasons.
Uh the property had a faulty arrangement and design due to uh lack of driveway, lack of act property access from adjacent roads and that lack of accessibility to the site by emergency vehicles such as EMS and police
introduced to an unsafe nature of the property and also for the property to serve as an attractive nuisance with evidence being the uh vandalism found throughout the property. The report also found that there's a lack of act access to septic waste disposal since that had
been decommissioned on the property. And it further found uh similar to criteria A that the property itself is dilapidated in the sense that it has a number of uh holes in the building walls, broken windows that uncontrolled access to the dwelling as well as the
garage and that creates opportunities for trespassing, animal nesting as well. And there was also found a finding that the property is littered with uh dead and overgrown vegetation. And uh as I mentioned before, there's quite a bit of
uh vandalism and uncontrolled access to the site. And because of the totality of these dilapidated conditions, the unsanitary conditions, the faulty arrangement with the lack of access. Uh the result is that the property serves
as this delletterious land use that is detrimental to the healtha safety and welfare of the community such that it meets criterion D. And so those are the two criteria. I will say that the redevelopment law requires that one or
more criteria be satisfied in order for properties to be found in in need of redevelopment. But in this instance, there were two criteria identified and supported in the report as well as by the planning board's resolution. >> Um, I don't really have much else of a
question, but it I guess the thing is heard it out there. Um, this is this is who creates this criteria? Is it is it the township criteria? Is it a state criteria? Who sort of creates this criteria which you're getting?
>> So, the legislature created it when they prepared the local redevelopment and housing law. And so, that's the same criteria that would be applicable to any property in the township and any property in the state that was undergoing this process. And then the other piece you mentioned
earlier about having an intervenor property owner intervening I've seen and heard different people saying that there's a developer already done there's x number of units x number of parking spaces are there yet or is
this really what it says in in the on the agenda it's a resolution confirming that this is >> so the the design for tonight's agenda the only thing stated The only thing left on the agenda is designation of the property and that is
a separate process than adoption of the redevelopment plan which will uh presumably supersede the existing zoning property. The council's decision tonight does not directly impact the potential and the
future of this property. But I do want to I do need to recognize the fact that our settlement agreement with the developer is not simply that the township would consider the property as an area development. It does also talk about the future development of the site
which was for 110 units on the property. that decision making, the adoption of the zoning for the property or not will come in the form of a redevelopment plan if the site was designated as an area development and that would be the
necessary next step to fulfill the terms of the settlement agreement with the developer as well as with fair housing center. But for tonight's agenda, it is solely about the designation of the property since uh since it there's no
reference to future development in the redevelopment study or I believe in the resolution. >> So there's there will be multiple public hearings beyond this to start to address the redevelopment plan as well as any
sort of development that occurs. >> Absolutely. Okay. So, uh should the council find or declare the site as an area need of redevelopment, there would be a public process public hearing for adoption of a redevelopment plan and then presuming the developer proceeds
with a site plan application to uh receive approvals for development of the site. There would also be public hearings scheduled for that process just like any other site plan application that would appear. >> And you talked about this being part of our own. This is part of our fourth
round housing settlement that um that the states sort of and fair share housing require township to provide inclusionary zoning for a certain number of units distributed throughout the township. Is that correct? >> Correct. Uh Lawrence Township uh
participated in the process in order to protect itself from building litigation. We did so successfully in the sense that we were able to secure uh settlements and the preliminary approval from the court. And once we're able to complete
all of these steps in the process, including adopting the redevelopment plan, at that point we would be eligible for this final approval referred to as a judgment of propose or a compliance certification from the court, which is the final stamp of approval that Lawrence has done most necessary
program. >> All right. And last one, I apologize. I said I was doing one and that was the last one. But you mentioned building remedy. I see some new faces in the audience. So for those who haven't been to other meetings, what exactly is building? So, a builder's remedy is a it's a type of litigation that is set
forth as part of affordable housing here in New Jersey. And it is intended to be the stick, so to speak, if there's a carrot in the stick for affordable housing in New Jersey in the sense that municipalities that do not have an
approved housing plan with zoning uh that has been approved by by now the court. It gives developers and property owners the opportunity to file what's referred to as a builder's remedy, which is a a form of exclusionary zoning
litigation. So essentially, they are providing the builder is providing the remedy to the lack of affordable housing compliance in the municipality. And what it specifically means is presuming that the town is not participating, they're not compliant with their affordable
housing obligation, the developer can file litigation before the court to seek approval for a project that is significantly larger than what a municipality would have agreed to. And I the standards for what would be a
compliant builder's remedy are going to vary by municipality. It's going to vary by the character of the of the site in the surrounding area, but it is always in excess of what the municipality would have been possibly complicated
logically because it's a lot effort for a developer to go through the litigation process to get that approval. They can just simply get a guest from the town. They would have. But they secure approval for the from the court for a much larger development than what the municipality would have been comfortable
with. And it's much larger because the standards for what are deemed acceptable and appropriate are lower in the case of a builder's remedy than in the case of an injection or even any use fairings application that might
be filed in the municipality. It is hugely disruptive to a community because it's because the nature of the litigation, the typical size of the development as well. And for those towns that have decided that they would like
to not participate and go through this process, which is admittedly very difficult for towns, I will say that oftentimes one of the requirements from the court in addition to reszoning that
property typically is that the town must then go ahead and adopt the housing plan. So do the take the action that it was seeking to avoid. That's often one of the requirements after you go through the obtainment of buildings remedy the court says and now go ahead and do the
housing plan that you failed to do initially. So the builder's remedy is essentially a developer's uh opportunity to secure approval from the courts project that is much much larger than what it is would have
approved. Sorry that's the short answer. >> I appreciate it and thank you for your vote. Um, any last questions? >> My question, could you just explain what this objector objected to? >> Oh, sure. So, they objected to >> and filed a suit
>> that was mediated by a superior court. >> So, their objection addressed uh I said the objector was 3641 road essentially the hopeful uh developer and property owner for the property. The site was included in the
housing plan because they had approached the uh the township prior to adoption of the housing plan seeking uh a development that was actually larger than what's set forth in the settlement agreement. The township had declined uh
and instead had proposed zoning at a lower density of uh 10 units an acre in the housing plan for that property. They objected stating that the density set forth in the housing plan for their property was too low and I don't recall
exactly but but every objection I've seen issued for municipalities across the state address not only their concerns about their property but also anything else they could identify in the municipalities housing plan about all of the other things that the town in this
case large township had presumably hotel had done wrong in as part of how they would address their fourth round obligation as well as what may have been done potentially wrong in earlier rounds. Uh as part of the affordable
housing process, that objection was reviewed through the affordable housing dispute resolution program. Ultimately, that was a very exped expedited process for municipalities to work with their objectors to determine if the settlement
was possible. uh we worked with this developer during that process to determine if we could come to terms. We were able to do so in order and we did so in order to uh to avoid ongoing litigation about the
property that may result in additional density at this site and may have resulted in other zoning amendments necessary to address uh other concerns that may have raised affordable housing strategies and
earlier strategies. And that was uh that was a very common occurrence throughout the state. Most municipalities had at least one objection to violence to their housing plan. Almost most of those objections were settled. I'll say that vast
majority. >> No. No. Only questions from this is not this. No, this is a presentation pass. I mean, you're here, but this is for us. Any any other questions?
Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. All right, we come to we come to uh public participation five minute limitation per speaker and I will read my my comment statement.
The purpose of public comment period is for members of the public to inform the governing body of their views. This time is an opportunity for town council to listen with care. >> We can't really hear you. I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. Is this better? >> Yes. >> All right. The purpose of public comment period is for members of the public to
inform the governing body of their views. This time is an opportunity for township council to listen with care to the public and to consider what we hear in our deliberations. It is not a time for back and forth dialogue as it can be difficult for us to give accurate
responses on critical and complex issues on the spot. Rather, one can call or email members of council manager or clerk seeking additional information or response to an issue. We also like to read two excerpts from the Lawrence Township Administrative Code. Section
10-22, manner of addressing council. A person may address the council upon recognition by the chair. The person addressing the council shall write down their name and address in the signin sheet, step up to the microphone, shall give their name in an audible tone of voice for the record, and shall have the right to address the council for the
amount of time noted by the chair. No person having the floor shall be permitted to enter into any discussion either directly or through a member of the council without the permission of the chair. No question shall be asked the council person except through the chair. Section 10-23, the quorum at council
meetings. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who shall become boisterous while addressing the council shall forth with be barred from further audience before the council by the presiding officer unless permission to continue or again address the council be granted by the board of the council.
Welcome. Who wants to come up first? My name is Katherine Trener. Can you all hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay. And I have lived in this area for 50 years. Although I must say I don't recognize hardly anybody who's here tonight. And despite the fact that I
practice law around here for 56 years and recently retired. Um and I also think that um all the thing about um the builder remedy and the area in the um need of um
>> yeah I think that's all been knocked out by the case that came down from the New Jersey Supreme Court on July 16th 2026 the Montdale bail decision where the town of Montdale and a builder uh had a case together and with a decision but
you know I've been thinking about this and I kind of want to go back over what I think is the history of this area. Um, when we all got out of school in the old days, we were poor and so remember when you got out of school, you had to get an
apartment with roommates, that kind of thing. And then as we gradually did better in life with our job, my first job made $4,800 a year. Then we moved into a better house, a better neighborhood, you know, more land, more this and that. Um,
and so many changes have taken place. And in fact, um, and I live over on Po Road, actually, 233 Carter, but it's really PO road. I'm at the very back end. I moved there so my animals could go out the door and not get hit by a car.
But what I recently got was an offer to buy my property, 6.9 acres from a battery storage company, and they want to pay me a million dollars to to rent rent out my land for 20 years. That
would require a zoning variance. Are you going to permit this kind of thing to go in? Um, it seems to me that it's the same kind of violation of the the neighborhoods and the zoning that we have had that we want. That's our
American way of life, this upward mobility. And I recently met a man who runs a barber shop in Trenton. He's run the barber shop for 60 years. And I said to myself, this guy knows everything. He meets all the guys every every day of
the week. and he said to me that all the changes around here are a result of commercial aviation. Commercial aviation came in in the end of the 60s when regular people could start flying around. Before that, if you came to this
country, you had to come by boat. Um, and right after commercial aviation became popular or available, we had the Mount Laurel decision in 1975.
And I must say that um that case was handled by my former boyfriend back in the day who had just graduated from Sanford Law School and in fact he even dated as he claimed when he was living out there.
But the what they were talking about is should there be affordable housing um everywhere and you know we are all immigrants are the descendants of immigrants. The Native Americans who lived here were driven out
in the late 1800s by all of our ancestors. all the European immigrants who came here for the California gold rush for getting beaver fur that was all shipped back to Europe and also some of like some of my ancestors came because
of the potato family. They didn't come because they wanted to leave their countries. They came because there was opportunity here. And um unfortunately for the Native Americans, the European idea about land was
different from how the Native Americans thought of land. I this is what I've read. Um Native Americans thought all the land was out there for hunting and for food, you know, gathering food. But the Europeans said, "Oh, no. you got to have a little block for yourself.
Um, my family um moved to Westfield. I grew up in Westfield, New Jersey. We lived halfway out where the farm started and my parents were then able to get a nice house in the suburbs. Um, and all of the kids in Westfield High School when I went there were basically Protestant and
English-speaking and they were no longer immigrants. We're like most of us in my age group. We're like the third generation immigrants. A lot of you people are younger. So you may be fourth or fifth generation immigrants, but we're all immigrants. The facts now, according to um what I
read online is that 26% of people living in New Jersey and also in California are new immigrants. And 43% of the kids in public school are in here, 43% have at least one parent
who was foreign born. >> Thank you. I five minutes are up. >> I just I can't believe that. >> Can I give you You can wrap You have one sentence to wrap it up as a lawyer. I
think you can do that. I I just want to say that um the the case of Monarch communities versus Montbass states that an inherently beneficial project like senior housing will not be you have to
show that it will not adversely affect and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zoning plan. And I just want to make reference to I was in England over Christmas. >> Can I just do I have two sentences to go.
>> I can ask somebody else to finish this one. >> I will grant you the two sentences. >> Jakarta and Jakarta, Indonesia is the most populated city in the world. And what they've had to do is like you can only drive every
other day in your car because there's too many people there and it's overpopulation. And I'm here to say don't put don't put poor people the the apartment stage of life into the rich
neighborhoods. That's the American way. You want to grow up and move up and get a big house and stick with our plan that we have. And I don't think you can not follow it based on case. Oh, okay.
>> Mary Mele, 58 Carter Road, Princeton, New Jersey. The first thing I want to say on behalf of the North Lawrence Citizens Association, which about 80 people, we would like your resolution 259
uh referenced by Miss McManis to be cut from any kind of omnibus bill and voted on as its own resolution with a hand count so we can see who is voting in favor of that resolution. There will
be several more people tonight who will also make that request. We feel it's very important for transparency. Transparency is a word I'm going to refer to several times tonight. So I'm giving you a warning up front. So
firstly 259, please cut it from the pack. Please vote by hand and let us know who's voting for what. uh a couple in the boarding planning board meeting of April uh 20th I believe
I asked Mr. Ninsky point blank have you uh executed contracts or signed contracts on the development of both ETSs and Gulick and after a lot of heming and hoing Mr. Linsky, I believe
you said you had not signed contracts. Is that true? >> Yes, ma'am. >> First of all, I did not pem or haul and my response was accurate. >> Yes or no?
>> Ma'am, >> you I am allowing you to ask a question. He is allowed to respond. I'm not going to let me characterize something. So, I can either >> we go back to the tape. Just give me a yes or no. >> Now, you know what? We're going to skip
Mr. Winsky. Thank you, M. >> That's the transparency we're talking about. That's the transparency that we don't have with Mr. Ninsky, who I understand is signed to a fiveyear term when he's supposed to be working at the
will of the council. Interesting. doesn't have any qualifications in city planning. Interesting. Let's close them cost a million quarter of a million bucks. Let me go to board. Number two, >> they're not personal attacks. They're
facts that speak to transparency which we the citizens of Lawrence feel is grossly deficient. With this board, we're feeling and we've said it times again, you're giving us lip service. You're not you're making decisions and
you're not sharing them with us. When I call Mayor Mike Gali on Monteale, he returns my phone calls. >> You don't. >> And I've asked you to and Mr. Lewinsky
doesn't. And I've asked him to. No, >> we all want transparency and we want to know what you folks are doing and we don't feel like we're getting it. I apologize, Arthur. I love you, but we don't feel we're getting
transparency. Let me go to my point number three. Miss McManis, when you were determining 210 units at ETSs and 10 units on the corner of Province Line and uh Princeton Pike, which is a highly
trafficked thing, why don't you just stick those 10 affordable units over at ETSs so we could fight one battle here based on round four and don't put 110
more families on a corner that is highly trafficked. Traffic to Route One at rush hour every day. We don't we could do with less 110 less families bleeding on our school
system, bleeding on our police, bleeding on our fire, and and destroying the neighborhood. Let me remind you, there are no sidewalks. How do these people get their groceries done? There are no sidewalks and there are no buildings in
this town higher than two stories. And what you're doing is once again you're doing what Katherine says. You're urbanizing our buolic neighborhood, which Professor Isaacs addressed so
carefully that we want the character of our Bolic neighborhood to be undisturbed so we can enjoy what we earned to live in Lawrence. If you put those 10
affordable units from Gulik into ETSs, we could fight one battle and we could save the uh the property at ETSs for something less than 110 more families draining on those
resources which our taxpayer dollars pay for. I I don't know about you, but my taxes are very high on 10 acres. And I'm sure most of you have very high taxes. My neighbor with 10 acres, her kids are
on a wait list. >> Yes, dear. >> This is a public meeting. This is a public meeting >> and I'm speaking publicly. I'm not hiding what I'm saying from you like Mr. who attacks me after I leave the meeting. He's done it three times.
You can replay your time, darling. >> So, good evening to everyone. >> I'm sorry. Good evening to everyone sitting on on the dis. My name is Philip Chester. I live at 33 George Street.
So, I'm here this evening uh to talk about a proposal in reference to a village corn which would be pavilion that will be located in Village Park
here in Lawrence. So, I am a lifetime Lawrence resident. I'm a proud retired detective from Lawrence Township Police. I'm very proud to say I'm the first known African-American detective in 100 plus years of Lawrence Township Police Department.
>> All right. I volunteer in New Township and Lawrence Township for over 40 years. I currently uh volunteer with the recreation advisory committee and I am also commissioner of the Lawrence Township Corn which has been in existence for six
years now. So uh in 2018 I had a bicycle accident where I broke my collarbone. So, I broke my collarbone and went over to a friend's house and some of my other friends were hanging out. We were playing cornhole. I had
never played before with my I broke my right power and I am right-handed. I uh during the break I picked up a bag and started throwing left-handed started hitting the board and I asked who had next and I wanted to play because I am very competitive and have been
throughout my life. Uh during uh co 2021 and in my position sitting on the advisory committee I thought about uh talk starting corn in Lawrence Township. Therefore, uh, as I sit on that committee, um, there's a botchi court
that sits over in Veterans Park. It's the Beniori Bachi court and, uh, had surface on it that was clay and it wasn't very conducive for boti, but I thought maybe we resurfaced it through the recreation department, we could have
a multi-use of it play cornhole on as well, which was accomplished in 2021. Um and you know it was a way for people to get outside during that time frame. We had been on lockdown wearing mask and you know everybody knows what co was
about. So it was a way to get outside. Um governor released that people be outside and hang out with each other and have a good time and that open up that possibility which we did. Um the first season we had eight teams
and uh actually uh during that time frame there's a tornado watch today. Well, July 29th of 2021 that he had a tornado during our championship round was
playing there and we completed that round because we wanted to play formal that day. Um several of the challenges involved with setting up on court that's not conducive to cornhole is um it takes about uh half an hour to 45 minutes to
actually set up. Um the court you have to play on a staggered court as far as where you position the boards on the court. Um we're not playing on a for a court that is designed and measured for corn holes designed and measured for box. There's a low ceiling which some of
the players in here that have come out tonight hit frequently born bags. I have to use duct tape to map out where 27 ft which is the standard in between the boards. I have tape up patio bricks to anchor the boards and it reminds me of when I was a
kid pick up basketball games or baseball games with first base was pan second base and so on. So, so I just I just want to say that um national polling has 50 to 70 million
participants involved in cornhole. Uh all ages and genders and backgrounds can play this. We've had surprise birthday parties. We have people come there playing with slings. People the age groups from 8 to 85 years old. Um the park it needs the glass needs some
aesthetic aesthetic improvements and we're planning on the space is not the use of the cornhole. Um I I offered you guys buy this proposal and I just would love to see this come to fruition. I don't five minutes is not enough time to
say a special presentation but uh I'll come back and do that. But this is my elevator pitch to try to get this through. There's a lot of information contained in this binder and I just hope everybody needs it and and
if you want to talk about it further, I have full conversation about it. So I just appreciate having this opportunity to come out and do this. There's a lot more to it. >> I appreciate Mr. Chester. I appreciate it. It's very detailed and thorough and I think it's food for thought for both
council as well as the recreation. Yeah, >> thank you so much for presenting. I was on the um advisory council when the cornhole was started. You built an amazing program and this if everyone
could see this. He's put this together. We all have one. It is amazing. Um, being on the committee for eight years, I've never seen anything this thorough and I really appreciate this and I look forward to talking more about it. >> My name is Pepper Evans. I live 102
and I come in peace. I'd also like to say up front that anything I say tonight is just my opinion and not from any other position you might I am a threeyear member of the Lawrence Cornhole League and um one of the things
I' I'd like to make sure people understand you might not think a glamorous woman such as myself belongs on a foreign page but in fact I go and I have fun. And one year I came in 11th
place out of 12, but still. But the point is that I go out there and I have fun and I have fun with people I know and people I've never met. And one woman said she's been in Lawrence for 50 years and she doesn't know anybody. I've been in Lawrence over 50 years and I
know almost everybody. So it's when you reach out and you're part of something bigger than yourself, it it's really exciting. And I think about the opportunity for kids, any kid to play cornhole. They can play very young. They need no money. They need no equipment.
You show up with a good attitude and grow back and and really it's not much more than that. It doesn't take anything more than that for people to have fun. And uh anyone can come up there. Uh there's been a waiting list every year
since the first year to be on the coin roll and I can't think of another way to get you outside and away from your computer then um I did talk to the superintendent of Lawrence County Public Schools and she
asked me to submit her statement. Anytime we can encourage adults and students to get off their screens and get outside is a positive thing for the physical and mental health of all. The district would love to see more engagement in our public parks and since
cornhole has been quite a hit, its continued expansion is positive for all. Um there are scholarships for cornhole. There are professional cornhole players and there are people who underwrite cornhole uh
activities. So, there's a lot of potential for our little cornhole leaf to grow and I hope you'll think ABOUT your proposal, but I just Hello. Well, my name is Maria Pico and I live at 4465 Promised Line Love Road.
Uh, Mr. Mayor, committee members, I'll bring it back to the subsidized housing. Um my husband and I made the investment to move here and yes after school um we could afford the taxes, the property taxes of course in this area and we love
our neighbors. We love our amenities here in Lawrence. And when I first moved in, I enjoyed jogging around the trail near the George Shire apartments before they started developing and I soon
stopped the the safety. I didn't feel safe going there at 6:00 in the morning or late at night. Um the people around it. So, Mr. Mayor, committee members, I like my
friends and neighbors here in Lawrence. I don't know what 200 plus um new neighbors, their friends, their extended families will bring to our community. So, I ask you not to allow that in our community.
Thank you. John Greg, 657 Rosedale Road. Thank you. I'm speaking in opposition tonight to resolution 259, which is a resolution um which is designating certain real property located at 3641 Lawrence Road as a
non-commendation develop redevelopment area. Um this is an area of need of redevelopment. Um, I listened to Miss McManus's presentation and the way this whole
thing is being conducted to me, it smells like a rat and the rat is not in house. One of the things that it seems like is a concern is uh for Lawrence Township that he's breaching a settlement contract that was entered into in
February of this year. That settlement contract was a result of litigation that was evidently initiated in December of last year um and relates to um putting in actually taking out the
Gulich house and putting in um a housing project of around 110 units. Evidently, the difficulty that we're told is that if we don't do everything in the power of Lawrence Township to facilitate the settlement that was entered into in
February, which to me is a backwards way of doing things that we could run into a problem with the builder's remedy threat of different type of lawsuit which could have a worse outcome. I think the whole process was not transparent. The time
for everyone to have understood what was going on was December through February, the time that the settlement was entered into. And I understand that this was a legal process, but I think most of the people in this room were completely unaware of what was going on. And that the settlement that was entered into
with the 3641 Lawrence Road organization is essentially a developer that we're enriching by putting in this townhouse complex there, but also sort of solve some other problems that the town had had. But I concur with some of the other people who have objected with the lack
of transparency of this process. And I also urge the members of the council who are voting on this re resolution also vote independently and move this particular one out from the group of other things that are there. Thank you very much.
Hey, we will be pulling the resolution out separately so that we can have debate and you can see how >> Hello, welcome. >> Um, I'm Stephanie Weding. I live at Nine Players Lane. I've lived in Lawrence for
22 years. And I'm not speaking just on behalf of myself, but on a large group of neighbors in the area around the public house. Uh and there are several points that I'm going to read uh into the record. Point one is that the zoning change to arise from the redevelopment
plan represents illegal and unconstitutional spot zoning. In that it is creating an artificial zone change solely for the benefit of a single land owner contrary to the existing zoning uses in this part of the community. The
designation will allow vastly increased density in an area that is zoned for and considered as a matter of policy to be a rural and ecologically sensitive area. Planning area three in which the planning goal is ecological preservation
not increase commercial density. The redevelopment ordinance and designation is a part of an intentional effort to allow the land owner to avoid the burden of seeking a use variance that would normally be required in a change of this nature. By this device,
the land owner is free of the difficult burden of satisfying the positive and negative criteria that are necessary for use variance in violation of a municipal land use law. The zoning change that will arise from the redevelopment designation alters
fundamentally the community zone plan and that this property is adjacent to and or is in the vicinity of a preserved area or an area deemed environmentally sensitive and should be subject to a use variance proceeding so that the negative criteria as to the ecological impact can
be tested and proven especially since property has reforested and has acquired new ecological qualities. The proposed redevelopment designation is without factual and legal basis since there is no generality of structures or features that are blighted, but only a
single historic building and outbuilding occupying a fraction of otherwise untouched and undeveloped land. None of which is blighted or otherwise meets the requirement of the redevelopment statute. Other
reasons advanced for the redevelopment designation are invalid under the law, including the claim that there are no curb cuts, no access to the street, that the lack of access to Lawrenceville Road or Province Line Road reflects a faulty arrangement and design, that access is
limited for police and EMS vehicles in an emergency or in the event of trespassing, that a lack system and has overgrown or dead vegetation, all our unsupported claims. claims by the made by the preliminary investigation and that are pretextual reasons
or that are easily cured by ordinary maintenance or by ordinary updating such as by merely creating a driveway cut along access roads. To the extent the structures are not repairable, they occupy only a small fraction of the site and can be taken
down if necessary, but the remainder of the site is not blighted and contains no features that prevent development under ordinary zoning or that cannot be achieved via conventional use during this process. In short, the requirements of the redevelopment statute are not proven or shown by preliminary investigation.
The redevelopment designation is intended to allow a vastly increased density in a part of the community that is adjacent to the Kings Highway historic district and that will impair an encroach on the district in violation of New Jersey law and in violation of Mount Laural doctrine. In addition,
since the housing project is a municipal project and that is designed to satisfy the township's housing quota, the encroachment is municipal action that must first be approved by historic sites council on notice to the public. Mount Laurel doctrine also prohibits destruction of forests and natural areas
by proposed inclusionary developments and the reforested area on the property will be destroyed by the proposed development. >> The designation is contrary to and inconsistent with the master plan that seeks to maintain preserved and environmentally sensitive areas in the
township and to protect such areas from intrusion and harm from adjoining developments. The redevelopment designation is the product of an illegal promise by the township in its settlement with the developer to introduce and approve a redevelopment ordinance in zoning, a pledge that
abregates the council's legislative independence and is illegal. And finally, in addition, the township planner is a member and employee of the same planning firm that conducted the preliminary investigation. As a result, the township planner was unable to function as an independent advisor to
the planning board in its review of the proposed redevelopment designation. This conflict of interest lingers the redevelopment designation invalid and illegal. We object to the proposed zone change and ask that it be voted down. Thank you. Make sure everybody can hear me. Okay.
>> My name is Martha Friend. I live Thank you. I live at 976 Lawrence Road. So, I guess I'm South Lawrence. Yes. I say that because there does seem to be a group here that is speaking for all of Lawrence. then please don't speak
for me. And in fact, I want to remind council who I respect greatly. This group, I won't say this group, the folks here that are against Lulu House
future and the possibilities for that. But they don't speak for all of Lords. They speak for themselves and the people on their email list, I guess. But I want that to be really clear. We know people show up when they're angry, when they're
frustrated. That's when they show up to meetings. So, we have a large crowd here, but you don't know who's sitting in this audience and how they might feel. So, I just want you to know there's folks who are at home, I want to apologize if anybody who's listening to
this and hears people casting aspersions on the folks who live in affordable housing in those 10 groups. That's horrifying. And that is not what the people who the people I know here in Lawrence feel people need housing and
don't I'd like to just be clear. For 30 years I drove past Bulick House on my way to work there and back there and back there and back. So I know about traffic. I know about traffic. I also have and I'm going to be quick
because five minutes goes really quick. three minutes. >> We have some folks in town who see this as their emergency, right? There have been things on Facebook urgent alert. Um, and you read through it and they say, "All of Lawrence, there's something happening that we all need to be
concerned about." But in fact, it's just one seems to be some neighbors um who are concerned about it. There was somebody who tried to run for counsel and he said it was just because of this because of this issue. Like there are people upset. Okay. and they have a
right to be upset. What I would ask you to do is listen to your experts. We can all be passionate about things, but that does not make us experts. We are um I have worked with Beth McManis her through master plan work
that the council that the town has been working on for years. Um I know she is an expert. She would never want ill will for people who live here in Lawrence and do something shady. That's offensive to imply. Thank you for the work you guys are
doing and actually I'm glad you're going to vote independently. I I trust you're going to vote for all of Lawrence. More housing. You would never do something that was not good for this town. I trust each of you. I know your people have cared.
Thank you for thinking about all of your when you vote. There was a comment made by a prior um member about our planner, Elizabeth. She's been our planner for seven or eight years. We appointed her to be the
planner. She is our professional planner with the education, certification, and experience to do the job of a planner. This is exactly the type of work that she was hired to do. any inclination or
any insinuation that people seem to grab onto that there was some nefarious conflict of interest needs to be rejected immediately by everyone in this room and everybody that's listening on my feed. We cannot allow our
professionals to be mistreated and mischaracterized. I'm sorry. It offends me. Attack me, okay? I'll get upset and it'll be a big thing, but she does good work. She's supposed to do the job that she did and she made her recommendation
based upon all of her education and experience and certifications. There was no conflict of interest. There was nothing nefarious. She did the job that we asked her to do. >> Hi, my name is Natele. I am a I live at 129 Review Avenue. I am a lifelong
resident of Lawrence Township all 20 of my long years. I wanted to point out some information that I feel is lacking in this conversation. I'm not here to sway on whether we should or should not have additional housing. I am more concerned about the historic properties of this
building. I was one of the founding members of the Lawrence Junior Historians, a subsection of the Lawrence Historical Society. And I'm here to talk a little bit about the history of the house. It is it was built in 1855 and is one of the few remaining structures in
Lawrence Township and in our wider region of Mercer County that shows exceptional Italian revivalist architecture. And there's I think only one other house in our town that shows that. Outside of that, as it was pointed out, the house
itself only takes up a small portion of the overall property. And if it were to be amended, that house and property subsequently needs to be redone. Be it that the house itself is saved or uh um
excuse me like renovated to ensure that the historical attributes of the house are maintained. I also agree with the other people who brought up the map. It is an extension of two different um protected areas, both the um Kings
Highway historic district. Even though there is only a 30-foot BM on the property, I do think this house is characteristic of the exact thing that historical district is trying to preserve. And also the Larensville Hopewell Trail. It runs right alongside
the property. And I do believe that maintaining green space in our already declining green um township is necessary. It is healthy. It also ensures wildlife is able to um survive in excess in our um land. Um the
historical house is also a continuation of multiple other historical properties in the area. There is a Gulich house on Raymond Road in Kingston. There is the Kingston Ulick Grist Mill and subsequent Gulick properties in Princeton and the Dirk Gulick um house up I believe in
Middle Sex County or Yes, I believe so. Um and this house if preserved would be just another continuation of that long-standing history that has since spanned over 300 years in our area. Our history is a finite thing. We cannot change it. We cannot preserve any of it
that has already since been destroyed. It is important to me that we maintain the property, not necessarily to benefit either the people who want to maintain a more secluded uh neighborhood or those to industrialize it to the point where
it is inaccessible to um animals and the wildlife in the area, but rather to ensure that the historical property is preserved on account that it is significant as it is one of the few remaining properties of its kind in All
right. Thank you so much. Before you sit down, I had a question for you. Someone who's very interested in history. Thank you for being It's great to have people in the township history of the town. I hope you can
still hear me. >> I'm trying. I'm sorry. Um, have there been previous uh over the 30 years that this property owner has owned the house site, um, have there been previous attempts that that you are aware of that
to try to and do you know what those what happened to them? >> Yes. So, actually there's been numerous attempts. There was the historical building survey done in 1987 that designated the house as being possible for um acknowledgement on national and local registers. It was then
subsequently designated as a local landmark in 1990, which is significant. And in 2013, an individual named James T. Callahan was putting together a petition to ensure that the property was acknowledged on the national historic property list. However, it fell short
due to the fact that the property owner would be the ultimate uh final say on whether or not the property would be uh designated. There have also been some 30 years of back and forth between the township and this house. When I say it
was purchased, I believe in 1995 by the current owners from Bristol Marqu who had sold off the property and they have submitted four master plans for redevelopment. And the first three maybe four included a assisted care facility
with plans, some of them to maintain the house. And they were rejected by I believe the historic preservation office each time for oh historic preservation office and also the township. I'm not necessarily sure which. Um for multiple reasons and
I believe that is the extent of all of this. Thank you. No problem. I appreciate ANYONE ELSE? It's only three minutes. You get two extra minutes. >> Yes, please.
So, you don't have to say this. My name is right around the corner. moved in 1972. I'm glad this young man who I was very proud to call one of my own wellspoken talked about uh in the
master plan the reject there was a rejection for a nursing home. I don't know exactly when the year was but I remember coming to township meetings. If you can't put a nursing home in because of the the impact on the area
then why would you put 110 units in there? And then the other THING the other thing is the two criteria and I didn't put my hearing aid on so I'm not sure everything that your first speaker said but um if the two criteria
are that the place is dilapidated um it's like saying well the property owner didn't take care of their property so we're just going to you know say forget about that and we can just build whatever we want.
>> I mean, you have a master plan. Um, I don't I don't understand why this keeps coming up and get getting resurrected. If if this if the property owners bought the property in 90 1995 and there was a master plan, they
already knew that it wasn't a facility that could be put up there. And it's just been causing more legalities over the years. And I mean, you know, I'm not very well spoken. I'm not a lawyer or anything like that. I
just don't feel like it's it's the place to be. I I don't have any problem with it with with the mountain world decision, but I don't see how you can have 110 units on seven acres. And I mean I live I lived in on that
property when it was a we farm and there's a development there. I don't have anything against low income housing. It's not going to impact me. I'm 84 years old and it doesn't much matter. But it's going to impact the neighborhood. I mean if I cannot get out
of my driveway at 4:00 and if Canal Road gets flooded province line is just backed up all the way almost to 206 to to Princ. THAT'S YOUR >> HI, my name is Lori Evans and I'm
resident here. Um, and I agree. I have no problem with low at all. Uh but why do we need 110 units just to accommodate 10 low income properties?
Why can't we just put 10 low income units on those seven acres so everybody gets a little house? I mean, doesn't that make sense? And I don't know what's going on with BTS at this point either, but I was told that that was, you know, that land or
something like that. So, I don't even know what's going on with ETSs and that's not far from where I live. So, that really concerns me as well. Um, and and can I ask a question? Am I am I allowed? You can ask a question. Okay.
So, is the ETS deal done? Is it going to be? So, how many Okay. So, how many apartments are proposed there? I know this is not, >> you know. No. So, so the woman that was here earlier, she says, "Oh, it's
dilapidated. We've got to tear it down. There's vines growing everywhere. And we're going to take those seven acres and we're going to put 110 units on those seven acres." I mean, most of us here live on an acre.
>> Well, a lot of us do. A lot of us do. And this is farmland. And to put you farmland, >> it's beautiful here. This is why we moved here. It's beautiful here. And all you keep all you keep seeing are these
developers coming here to town to Princeton to Lawrenceville building these enormous complexes and getting a 40year tax abatement which I don't understand either. You've got 110
families moving into a 7 acre area and this gentleman at the end, you know, I don't know who this woman is, but I think there is a conflict of interest between the planner and the fact that she has something to do with the people that are going to be running her. That
is a conflict of interest. So, um I guess I guess I'm trying to say I agree that we should put in low income housing, but why do we have to include it in a 110 or 500 unit
property? Well, okay, it's the law that we have to have low income housing, but it's not the law that you can build. It is the law that okay you can build 500 units right and those 500 units you have to have what
>> 20%. Okay so let's take let's take the 20% and build something for the 20% My name is Howard. I promise I won't take five minutes. Thanks. I think the last time I spoke to a group of people, I was in eighth
grade. So, if I sound nervous, I am nervous. You're doing great so far. >> All right. Uh, and I'm not contentious. I understand why we're here. I've been a resident for 38 years living at 41 Fox
Drive. People will say to me, "If you could live anywhere in the New Jersey, Pennsylvania area, where would you move?" And I go, "I wouldn't move." In fact, seriously speaking, if any of you, I mean this from the heart, would like to come to 41 Fox Croft and have lunch
or dinner with me, sit in the backyard, you know why I love this township? It's phenomenal. It's just a wonderful, gorgeous place to live. I like it so much that a couple of years ago, my daughter finished school, wanted a house, and we bought her a house at 13
Fox Crockton. It's It's just a great neighborhood. So, I thank the township for maintaining the property so well. I wouldn't want to live anywhere else if this is utopia to me. I think there's two issues. I think one issue has to do
with a property that you identified as being dilapidated and the question really becomes what what it would entail to fix the property so that maintain the code the standards that you want and the second one I believe if I understand
correctly I'm sorry I'm a novice on this is the requirement of the state or the federal government that we have a certain number of affordable homes. I see those as maybe two separate issues and certainly we don't want a dilapidated property in our township as was identified at the start of the
meeting. So is it possible to just fix the property so that it meets the the aesthetic value of the neighborhood and consider affordable housing separately? I mean I know we have to do both for federal government purposes. I believe
I'm not an expert but I see the issue also as the last person pointed out and you see my final point about traffic and when when I go to work and I travel on Province Line Road especially during nonsummer periods it can take 20 minutes
to get from 206 to Princeton Pike. 20 minutes and that's both ways in the morning and in the evening. How many hours am I spending a year sitting in bumper to bumper traffic? That will only get worse as the
area continues to develop and we put in more properties. And it's really you sit there, you want to look at your phone, you look at the car in front of you, it's bumper to bumper a little bit better in the summer when people are on vacation, but also um Princeton Pike,
same thing. Boy, if you're on 95 and you watch the traffic in the morning and evening exiting Route One and now Princeton Pike, it's horrendous. So, from a quality of life standpoint, which we all care about and one of the reasons we're here is what's the impact on the
traffic and and to me that's critically important as you're sitting in that car every day both ways wasting time. So I thank you all for your service and for your commitment to the community and I thank everybody for attending this evening as well. I probably won't speak
again for another 40, 50 years. >> You have to wait till the second one. Anyone else for public comment for this one? >> All right, going once. Going twice. I'm going to close public participation review and revision of the agenda. Or do
we want to take a break? motion to just we don't need motion. So we'll take a break for five recess for five minutes. We'll be back. them to know this is still
me or I know. Good. How are you? How you doing? Good. How you been, man? Still looking good. >> I see you. We did a great job. I remember putting
fires in Mr. Good night. >> Sorry. Good night. Tell you what, that's great. to the correct like that.
Let's see what There's no way to hit me. Okay. Sorry. I picked up please for some of my the audience. >> We are on agenda item number
and the changes agenda was prepared last week. A matter has come upation and we might have a very brief close session with coun with a council briefly
discuss. All right. Moving on to item number eight. Do I have a motion for 8A? >> 8A special meeting6. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Mr. >> Yes. Number nine and we're rejecting the bids. Got a motion for 9 A. like to move 9 A on a date to master building design for rehabilitation to perform 57 Avenue. >> This is a part of our affordable housing
rehabilitation program and the amount uh for the bid is $24,735. >> Question farmer. Yes, >> Mr. Leo. >> Yes, >> Mr. Kaki. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. A motion for 9 authorizing awarding of this facility painting and rem rehabilitation at 718 Avenue. >> Second. >> Second. >> This is for a rehabilitation program.
The amount of the bid is $25,100 to sals. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. Authorizing the facility
rehabilitation at 293. >> Again, this is for a rehabilitation program. The total amount is $12,500. >> Questions? Any questions for >> M? Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kaki. >> Yes.
>> Yes. Yes. >> Authorizing awarding a bid to unlimited builder construction to perform rehabilitation at 34 Slack Avenue. >> Mr. >> This is for a rehab program. $29,860
is the amount. >> Mr. >> Yes. Mr. >> Yes. Mr. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Do I have a motion for >> authorizing 26-05 2026 Eldidge Park pedestrian
improvements to TC Landscape Construction Group? >> Mr. This project arises out of a a grant that we received from state of New Jersey and we have um bid bid out the job and we received an acceptable bid
and the amount is $318,265.50 50 cents. Again, this is for using grant funding. >> Any questions? Questions from the public? >> And this is the perimeter. This is for the perimeter. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. Any question? >> Sorry. Oh my god. I just want to say growing up and having played in that part. I'm very excited to see what comes. >> It's gonna open it up for for more people access to anybody that wants to
use it and enjoy it. It's going to be there. It's really important that >> Yes. >> Mr. Santos. Yes. >> Yes. I have a motion for 9
authorizing awarding of bid 26-125 and video to trust fund improvement pike pedestrian safety at Earl Asphalt Company. Second. >> Yeah, this is for another phase to the improvement of the Brun uh streetcape
and this involves um improvements relating to increasing pedestrian street safety in the area. questions from >> we have public participation after my question. Uh so we have so um
if I could uh have more detail about um what improvements to pedestrian safety since it's a very interesting topic for me because I live there. Yeah, I certainly I don't have more to share with you tonight, but if you were to email me, I will provide you with a copy
of of the contract. >> Okay. >> Okay. I believe it's and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. But I believe it's um some flashing signals and some other >> I just don't want to say anything, but that I don't want to say anything that's not accurate. So, it's all things related to pedestrians. So, I'm not
sure. because it's a contract. >> We can help that. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> I will say that I would appreciate not
hearing comments from the audience. >> Thank you. Number 10, introduction of ordinances. Do I have a motion for 10? >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry to interrupt, but attached to the agenda is a complete list that you all have received and
review that details 24 items that are involved in this project. So, they are available and I'll be able to share that with you directly, >> but I could go over there right now if you wanted to.
>> Exactly. For clarity, Miss Carter, once we pass a bid, that's all public record, correct? >> Yes. >> And so if it's passed, it's something that it's easily obtainable. So
>> yes, >> but it's not it's not being done in the darkness. It's not unavailable. All right. Introduction 10A ordinance number 2520-26 ordinance amending ordinance 2449-23
by the township of Lawrence County of Mercer state of New Jersey in order to revise the description of the improvement area improvements to municipal buildings employee renovation. >> Yeah, this is not an expenditure of new funds. This is a redirection to encumber
funds to address uh the break room downstairs that I think has never been improved and is not not being used currently. We have uh employees that are cooking in individual offices and just not being able to congregate together in
an area and this has been a longstanding situation and we wanted to address it this time. Okay. Miss Farber. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kaki, >> yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. Motion for 10. >> 10B. Ordinance number 2521-26 bond ordinance amending bond ordinance 2211-15 by the town of Lawrence County state of New Jersey in order to provide the description of the improvement in various park and recreation facility
improvements to include LED field lights retrofit. Yeah, this this just relates to uh directing funds to uh retrofit lighting throughout all of our parks to make it more sustainable >> and efficient. Thank you,
>> Mr. M. Farmer. >> Yes, Mr. Leo. >> Yes, >> Mr. M. >> Yes. >> Yes. 11 adoption ordinances. Motion for 11. Next move 11 A, ordinance number
2519-26, an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of certain real property on Landover Road for open space purposes. >> Yes, Mr. >> This is for the town to acquire 36
Landover Road. This is the small little white schoolhouse across from the large neighborhood center that we um approached the longtime property owner uh with the vision of creating um
preserving its historical value to the neighborhood and making it a museum um for everybody to enjoy. Currently, it's not been in use for years and years and years. And this is just 20 days from now once it's published, we'll be able to start
working through the process of um investigating it to make sure it's what we think it is so we can move forward. It will be a tremendous addition to our community. First of all to have a museum and also to capture the history of that
neighborhood and all that it >> any comments or questions Miss >> Mr. >> Yes. >> I have nothing to report. >> We'll have a brief discussion session.
What's your >> just two items? Um the league this year will be November 17th through the 19th. So um they have they just started their early registration process July 1. Let
me know if any of you want to attend council me please and I will register you and that's and then the second thing is I put down here the board of election we have this
up on the website they're recruiting for an election board um workers recruitment day celebration August 20th it's going to be new week at 5:00 p.m. But this is just like if you know anyone interested
along is always useful and helpful. Also there's going to be a photo I think I sent you all on it. Please let me know the day that you can attend so that I can kind of Any
unfinished business, new business, old business? Um I know I had in the past discussed um my desire to revisit and committees. Um so let me know um how your feelings are functioning whether you need to change
parts of the ordinance to allow you to have more members less members change the name of September and be ready for when we start to start with that call for
the last one. And Mr. Cyc just so you know, I'll tell you publicly and out there. Um, I will be sending you an email to so that we can understand as council what are the legally required committees. I'm sure we
need to have a planning board and a consort. Um, but there probably others that I'm unfamiliar with that we need to keep hold of. And so I think that helpful for us. I'll move on to public participation. Three minute
Mary going to ask the question I asked at the beginning of the first public participation. Are there any contracts presently being executed or negotiated with
developers for either rule or ETS? Mr. Winsky contract. >> I understand that there are development contracts with developers for both properties
moving ahead without regard to what's transpiring here in these meetings that we, you know, we're hoping you're listening, but we don't feel that you are. I have heard that two contracts have
been signed. One for one for ATS and developers are ready to bring in. >> Well, Miss you know the developers. Could you share them with us publicly? >> I'm sorry. >> Could you share the developers that you >> I don't want to be sued for interference with somebody's business.
But yes, >> it's not it's not just I. It's people on road know this. They know the they're waiting with the shovels. that this is a done deal and for since March,
you've been telling us it is not and we feel I feel many people on Carter Road feel that this is a done deal. You're just giving us lip service. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I I would say one moment, Mr. I would say some of the things that I've seen in
public in a via email and other things have been completely misleading. Um, and so that I think it's unfortunate that there are people in the community who are saying things that aren't necessarily true, talking about these two different properties that are for
affordable housing that are in our in our our fourth round agreement that somehow they're already they're already happening. There's a certain number of units. There's a certain number of parking spaces and things like that when there's no application before the
planning board at this moment. And so to say that there are shovels ready, I don't know what the shovels are going to do if they don't have a planning board for approval or building. >> These contractors are under the impression
that it's a done deal. >> Mr. Mayor, >> we have we just gonna let Miss Millie finish. Um, >> once again, the key word for tonight is transparency, and we don't feel like
>> Well, I I I I would I would push back slightly and say I feel as if transparency I feel that transparency for some in this room and and elsewhere is hearing what you want to hear, not necessarily listening with open ears and an open mind and understanding what we
have said. Because having served on the planning board this year, I feel like many of these conversations we've had consistently >> would >> the entire of 2026 to a contractor who says he's ready to move in.
>> He wouldn't be saying it. He weren't. >> Mr. Netsky, >> so I will say this emphatically. There's a fun you have a fundamental misunderstanding of land use law and the township's role in land development and you're showing it right now by what
you're saying. There is no the township does not own this property. There is no development contract for the township to execute for the town to develop or the developer to develop on that land. There
has been no land use application presented to the planning board or the zoning board. And once that is done, if it's done, and once it's done, the planning board will have the full scope of hearing whether or not the traffic is
going to be negatively impacted, the environment is going to be negatively impacted, whether it's too dense for what they are proposing. All of those things are subject to a public hearing down the road in front of the planning
board with open transparency to everyone. So I will tell you emphatically the township has not executed any document whatsoever with directly with the developer relating to them going with plows and going onto the
property. Our planner has said in open public right there where you're standing that we entered into a settlement agreement mediated by a superior court judge regarding this particular property. That's the executed agreement.
It's a settlement agreement for it. It's not for shovels to go into ground. I don't know where you're getting that from, but that's not the case. But it does present a poor picture of everyone here. And I think that's your goal, and I'm offended by it. I think you have a
fundamental misunderstanding about transparency and business people are saying we're done. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? this.
>> So, I don't know if if there's a property that's been allowed to deteriorate. We've arrived a destruction or maybe needs to get fixed. But then I keep hearing that there's a certain amount of units that are going to go
onto this property. It is that number that's being turned around. Was that something that's been approved or >> That's what I'm just trying to understand. >> First statement in the >> Oh, I'm sorry. Vince,
>> thank you, Mr. Evans. >> Um, yes, part of our fourth round housing obligation as as the planner mentioned. >> Yeah. That was hard to hear. >> Not a problem. So I'll try to speak. Um we had a certain obligation. We had
taken what's called a plan where >> right so the township has an obligation to create so many units that are realistically developable. And is that >> and so and so and so
and so when when a property owner says love to help you with your your affordable housing um that's when when the settlement agreement comes in into play the planner works with that property owner
>> um and so >> okay so there is there is some plan >> yes Okay. >> There there's there's no approved plan to build anything. >> No. No. But there's the beginning agreement in the Superior Court of New
Jersey indicating a certain number of units with regards to that property and a certain number of affordable housing units. But there's no applications. And what Mr. Ninsky indicated said is
completely correct. They have to go through the the tenants of the municipal land use law. They have to meet all those criteria, lighting, drainage, density, everything. And so we're far from far from any
approvals with regard to building any any units there. And this is this has been going on for months. There are two public hearings at the planning board level. uh with regard to this and uh there'll be I'm sure
numerous other public hearings of the planning board uh once an application had been filed and as the township attorney I I review a lot of documents and I I'm
aware of what's happening best I can and I've been doing this a while 52 any alleged contracts or anything involving these properties. I would hear something. I there nothing nothing has
crossed my desk and anyone is out there indicating that there are contracts with some developer and Mr. made a good point. We don't own this plan. Um I think that is absolutely
false. Sure. But it so it's but there's a sort of determination made that if they were going to go forward with something and get all the approval and go through on
that that there is the possibility that this can go on. I I would say Mr. Evans, if you go to the township website.com, go to the engineering page and on there there's both the initial fourth round
obligation um sort of report that the provided as well as the addum that includes um this property as well. Is this is this this parcel with this this block of
housing that may happen or may not is that the amount that will fulfill the obligation that's >> okay it's a complicated process Mr. And >> we just can't look at, you know, one
site. The entire township has to be reviewed. And this this is the mayor's correct. It's it's part of an overall plan. >> Am I assuming that we're chasing a deadline?
>> We're always chasing. >> Thank you. >> Can I ask one question? Come on. Say for the record. >> Katherine, can we get a copy of the settlement agreement? I would like to see what the town agreed to. >> The public record.
>> Is that a public record? Where is that located? >> From the clerk's office from us, but I'm pretty sure it's >> I think it is on our website. that engineering page
>> engineering. Okay, I'll work. Thank you. >> Anyone else for public? So, Joyce Allington, >> I'd like to know this is I've asked questions before, but everything was told to me that it's theoretical, you
can't really give me an answer. So, once they do, these developers sign over or or they they decide that yes, we are going to go forth, how long do we have before they start to do any type of um
what is it? the the land, the traffic, environmental studies. How long do we have before they they go do those studies? Because you told me before that you have to you have to um
he has to you guys have to make the deal with the developer basically, right? >> Let's just go to the the planning board application. I don't I don't know about the deal. We we we don't control when the develop a
developer will file an application will do what excuse me any environmental study >> we do that don't we doesn't the township do those studies >> we have professional yes staff or
>> as part of the planning board process right and so they will review it and make comments and the applicant can can produce studies So, but we don't control that. It's up to the >> not
once once these things start to >> that you guys sign a deal with the developers. >> No, no, there's no deal sign. >> So, the application there's an application made by a developer or property owner to the planning board.
Once that's done, there's no time limit. whatever time is required of the planning board members or the professionals to get through all of the scrutiny involved in that application. That's what happens. It could take a while. So there's no there's no time
limit. There's no necessity for the township to respond. It's just a matter pending before the Lawrence Township PL and I will we'll know about that. Yeah. So that's what that's what I want to add was that they'll put they'll produce an application of all the documents they
think are necessary for whatever right and so when when our municipal engineer deems that plan complete then then it gets placed on a circuit whenever one of the regular meetings is of the planning board that will be dy noticed that will
be up on our website it'll be everywhere >> so everyone will know >> everyone will know everyone's invited >> won't be theoretical when I ask these questions >> and that and that's why you can ask the questions. I have a sneaking suspicion that this it won't be just one year. I
just have a feeling that both sites >> they'll be separate they'll be separate. So the separate application so >> so get ready
first and third Mondays 7:00 downstairs we'll move on to resolution Is there anything else? I don't see anything. >> I'd like to move 18 A through 18 H4 and 18H6 through 188
in second. >> Miss Farmer. Yes. >> Yes. Mr. Kaki. >> Yes. >> Santos. >> Yes. >> Yes. So I have a motion for 185 >> authorizing resolution designating certain property located at
3641 roada sequence and directing the preparation of a redevelopment plan. >> Got a second. Thank you. Yeah, this is this is debate time. So,
>> Miss Farmer. >> No, no, no. Right now, we're this is open for debate. So, we can discuss we can >> all things very small. Yeah, unfortunately.
But for the record, I just want to say that um I was listening very clearly to the comments that were made. Um words such as urbanizing these people, draining resources,
bleeding our neighborhood, schools, police department, um subsidized housing, housing projects, municipal projects, not feeling safe in my neighborhood
because of the people. I take tremendous tremendous it pains me to hear these words coming from residents in my community. I have lived here like many of you that have
spoken tonight over 50 years. I'm a fourth generation Lawrence Township resident. I take great pride in my community. The beauty of all that is Lawrence Township. I believe that like many of you know, we
have a national crisis for affordable housing. And I believe strongly that our teachers, our firefighters, our police, our professionals, our young college students like the gentleman 20
years old who is here today from the Junior Historic Society deserve a place to live here. They they deserve also to have an opportunity to live in the word neighborhood.
It pain me to lose a historic home like the house. But I also realized 30 years had passed and no one did enough to save that house. And I'm
hopeful that maybe going forward we can find a way so that we don't have a situation like what happened with the house where we allow an owner to let a historic home in our community becomes.
I would hope that more of us would be in a position to do the work. Having served two years recently on the planning board, I am very much aware of our responsibility as a council
of what we are required to do legislatively by the state. We are mandated. It is not that we get to pick and choose where affordable housing happens in Lawrence County. As a matter of fact, it's happening all over Lawrence
Township, not only in this particular community. So, I'm very proud of the work that we have done as a planning board, as a council, and that we will continue to stand up for all the residents of Lawrence County. Thank you.
Um, thank you so much, Miss Farmer. That was what I think as the newest council member. Um, very, it illustrates really well what all five of us are um, feeling
and we are all listening. We're all hearing what everyone is saying. But I think there's a difference, as Chris has said, with hearing and agreement. Um, this, you know, a lot of the things that were said tonight were
offensive. I would like, as the newest member, I really bleed on our professionals and I think what was said about our planner was completely inappropriate. Um, and I, you know, I wish I got to say before she left how awful that was to accuse her of
something, um, with no basis. In fact, um, and I appreciate all of your voice. >> Uh, just real quick, we have a crisis, a housing crisis, affordable or otherwise. People deserve a place to live in your Balic
neighborhoods, in the not so Bolic neighborhoods. We all deserve a place to live. I fully support this for my generation, for generations to come. Um I I don't want to say much else because I'm speaking with a lot of big emotions
after what I heard this evening, but um yes, we everybody deserves a place to live in our community. playing board. It takes a lot of time and you got to have strong backbone and you got to listen. We listen.
Sometimes you come downstairs and a room's crap. Other times you come down, there might be three people and a a decision has to be made that night. You aren't there to hear the decision. Tonight is an example of it. This room is loaded
with people talking bad about a planner, about transparency. We don't hide nothing. The board downstairs is open to the public. The meetings are advertised, put in on our website,
and you don't show up. And when you do show up and a decision has to be made, you decide to leave. And I don't like what was said about doing stuff say illegal. We don't.
We can't. We have an attorney downstairs. We got to listen to that as a our planner. We have an engineer down there and the board downstairs. You have some members that been here for years
and know what they're doing. And I stand by all of them for what they do. And I'm proud of the decision that I make for down here. I can't make a decision because one group in this township feels it's wrong.
You got to look at the whole township. The 33,000 residents that we have here is who I represent. Whether you voted for me or didn't, I got to represent. It's my job and that's what I do up here.
I'll end with um yeah, tonight some of the words that we said were disgusting, offensive to me. um showed a real lack of understanding about mention as someone who has friends in sort of all four corners of the diamond I think
of the diamond um from north Lawrence to south Lawrence from you know from one square village all the way over to I know people it's because of what I do it's because of how I campaign it's also just how I get to know people and so to
hear things that are mischaracterization of this township shows sort of how small that world view is of what Lawrence is and what it how it exists right now and a fundamental misunderstanding of what we've all gone through various uh places
in this township. I you know when I moved into my home in Colonial Lakeland I was the third owner of a little Cape Cod that's not unfortunately not an acre. Um but I I heard stories about how that was potato farms back in the day back in the
50s. Um there there's numerous occasions where progress has happened. Um and one of the things that we have been tasked with is to try to how do we manage that that change? How do we uh fulfill our legal obligation for the Mount Laurel doctrine which is came from came out of
a community zoning out existing residents. And so it was exclusionary zoning. And so one of the things that's hard for people to understand without getting into the weeds is that some of the things that we're doing, it's not about a deals construct. It's
about making changing our zoning to make it inclusionary to allow for the realistic development of affordable housing units. And no, Lawrence Township does not have the funds to build say the 10 affordable units. Like most
municipalities in the state of New Jersey, we go out to to the private sector to do that. The way they make, for the most part, the way they make the pencil out is they make 20% affordable, which if you actually look at the numbers can be a six figure income for a family of four in our neighborhood in
our region. Um, for it to cancel out, they have to go 80 or 80% of market rate. And so to say that it's it's, you know, I've heard horrible things about people saying, "Do I need to build a a fence next to my house because affordable housing is coming in?" Well, quite honestly, if you
look at what market rate is at up in North Lawrence with the Princeton address, I don't think you're going to have to worry too much about those people, right? I don't think you will because those are going to be some damn nice houses. Um, and so it's it's it's a
funny thing to me when I'm sitting up here and I'm thinking about my legal obligations. I have professionals, I have colleagues, we all do the work in understanding this and people are saying, you know what, ignore it all because I don't want it in my backyard.
Just ignore it. Ignore the notal doctrine after 50 years, after two settlements at the Supreme Court level. Ignore it. and you know and coming up with all kinds of things. And just as a reminder, I kind of tried to do a quick count of the seats in here about let's
let's be kind and generous and say it's 100. There's 32,900 other people in this township that I worked as well. And so that's what I'm trying to do tonight. I'm trying to do the best for this township. And so Mr. Yes. You don't have a vote, but I have
>> But you have a voice. I know the code. >> I don't like using it, but sometimes I feel like I have to. First, I want to I thought you were going to say something about who's left at this meeting. I want to thank everybody who stayed to the end of this meeting. Says a lot about his character. The people that left, I'll
let that I'll let you decide what that means. And to the 20-year-old who gave a great presentation and who is still here and you think he probably have other things that he'd rather do, but he's here. I wanted to just very briefly give the two-minute history of the bullet
house. Um over 30 years there has been many efforts to save this building. The the the primary reasons for it is we lack the legal mechanism to do it as a governing body. We don't own this property. We don't get to say as a
township fix that house. They're the property owner. We get to say it when somebody says we want to live in that house or we want to rent that house. That means occupancy and that means inspections and that means us saying no one is living at that house until this
this and this is done. That's where our enforcement powers come into play. We don't have any authority to to compel a property owner to fix a property that he doesn't want fixed. That's just how it is. And all of us, I think, would agree
love that house to be saved. And there has been offers over the 30 years um and the property owner has agreed to do it if some organization were to step up. We actually had engineering structural engineering study whether that house could be moved to another location from
years ago. I think I don't know maybe eight to 10 years ago maybe in more recent I was married >> and it could have been done and no one steps up whenever we over 30 years people come forward when these issues happen not when not when it's
silent out there so I don't know what the status is right now whether it could be moved I mean there's more deterioration there was the planning board um deeply considered how to save that pool of house and a lot of it had to do with the equation equations of if
we save it, how much density, how much more density is going to happen if we decide to save and that's an equation that you the planning board members had to deal with in reaching this conclusion. So all of us, I know, would
love to see the house preserved, but it is not a historic house. And if it became a historic house, then we would have had the teeth to say it's a historic house. You need to do something about it. Because we've seen other property owners with historic houses on Princeton Pike taking care of their
properties. It's got the it's got the plaque on it and and they're they're closely monitored to make sure it is able to be used for uh occupancy and preserved for historic value. So, I just want everyone to know the Gullet House was on our mind throughout this entire
process. It's been uh on our mind. If someone stepped up or a foundation stepped up to do it, great. But it's I think just improper for a municipal government and local taxpayers to fund the multi-million dollars it would take to improve or bring that house back to
life for a property that we don't own. That doesn't make any sense or respect for local tax. So that's why I wanted to put on anyone else. Just one last thing. There are opportunities with the master
plan to engage. >> Mama, yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. Yes. Mayor. >> Yes. >> Council on
>> We didn't have any heat. So that's why everyone's looking at each other. Um but I just wanted to thank you. Yeah. No, this summer there's no need. Um, I wanted to thank the recreation department and the recreation advisory committee for another successful fireworks event. It was wonderful as always. Um, and I also wanted to
highlight our recreation program and I think it's one of the best programs our town offers. Safety Town was held again this year. It is the 50th year of the program. Um, it's a program held for incoming kindergarteners to learn about safety in a welcoming and fun environment. campers learn valuable
safety skills, including home and fire safety, how to call 911, and many other important lessons to help keep them safe every day. I think that it highlights the amazing work that our first responders as well as our municipal employees do and what can be accomplished when each organization
comes together to help educate our children. I want to take the time tonight to thank the recreation department, uh, Miss Jen Scarupa, who runs the program, and the Lawrence Township Police Department, the Lawrence Township Fire Department, um, for giving campers tours of their police their
stations. Thanks also to the Lawrence Township Health Department for their presentation on sun safety, hygiene, and animal safety. One of the best parts of this program is watching former Safety Town kids come back and become volunteer counselors once they get to the middle
school. It's truly a wonderful example of the village that we're always talking about. And the last thing, uh, National Night Out will be Tuesday, August 4th here at town hall from 5 to 8. Come out for a fun night and sign up for the town newsletter if you want to know what's
happening. >> You're so welcome. Yeah, I do have volume for our committee. So, >> I just want to thank you for
disability. >> It's one of those interesting things to me about how George HW Bush really changed sort of my practice was able to attend the business and economic relief.
Um, and we were not able to officially meet, but we were able to conduct an interview of the student who's interested in being on the committee. And I have to tell you, we have some really outstanding members in our community of young people who want to
engage and want to contribute to our township. There there were several um applicants, I believe six or more. And I think that just reflects again the education and um the community and our young people wanting to engage. So I
just wanted to make note of that because I was quite impressed with with the candidate and the others who were there. >> Wonderful. Anyone else? >> All right. Mayor. >> Yes, I may. I I just want to publicly thank the mayor for coming to the
Ceridge Mall this Saturday to welcome the Anchor House riders and support staff. 48 years in a row they have come into great ridge mall and um it's quite a sight. They could not ride in on their
bicycles because of huge storm. But uh it it everybody thinks it's just a a home for for abused and runaway children in Trenton. Truth is and and
I've been part of for almost 50 years. many many large stash residents and their families have participated in. So it's a a great event and next year want to see 180 bicycles come in come to
the mall and uh it is the biggest nonprofit bicycle fundraising event in the excuse me in the United States. It ends right here IN SESSION. >> Thank you.
Korea.