All right, we're on the air. >> Thank you. >> Uh, good evening everyone. Uh, I have 7:30 p.m. It's June 23rd, 2026. Call to order the planning board regular
meeting. Madam Secretary, can you do the announcements, please? >> Happy to. >> Thank you. >> Number one, call to order and statement of compliance. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by posting a copy of the public meeting dates on the municipal bulletin board and website, by sending a copy to Echo Sentinel
newspaper, and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk. Number two, standard board procedures. Any meeting conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a judicial
meeting must be maintained at all times. Number three, electronic devices. All in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic devices as to not interrupt the proceedings. Number four, pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. So, committee member Verlesa is not here currently, so we'll go on to
>> Mark him as absent. >> Okay. All right. Uh, Mayor Perae is absent this evening. Uh, Mr. Lavender >> present. >> I should clarify that. Mr. James [laughter]
>> Scott senior and he's not here. So, all right. Committeeman Verlesa is absent this evening. Mr. Hans >> here. >> Mr. Leveria was excused this evening. Miss Ojins >> here. >> And Vice Chairman Jones >> present. >> I'm sorry. Miss Mr. Oela >> here.
>> Thank you. We have a quorum. >> Oh, Chairman Richardson is excused. Wow, it's been so long since I've seen you guys. >> It's true. >> A little rusty. There's a lot of cancellations on the planning board uh meeting schedule. >> Oh, but there's still work being done. >> There's still very work and you guys you
guys got a really really big application in last week. >> Really? >> Okay. >> It hasn't come before us yet. >> Anticipation. >> All right, let's go on with the agenda. Uh so, thanks for doing the roll call. We can't do number five, oath of office, because Mr. Velesa, committee mana is
not here today. So, I'm going to go to number seven, master plan consistency reviews. I'll turn it over to Yolanda to take us through that. >> Okay. So, the township uh township committee has introduced two ordinances,
both of which I believe were reviewed by the planning board, right? We also reviewed the places of worship ordinance. Thank you. Um, now upon introduction, the township committee is required to send this back to the
planning board for a review to determine whether or not these ordinances are not inconsistent with the master plan of the township of Long Hill. So, the first uh ordinance for discussion is 592-26, which is an ordinance amending and
supplementing certain sections of the land use ordinance of the township of Long Hill to add or update certain terms and to remove invalid and redundant terms. Uh the planning board, as I've said before, uh already reviewed this ordinance, but if there are any further
comments, >> so I'll open up to the board members. We'll start with We'll start all the way over to my left. Miss Ojan, >> I have nothing. It looks good to me. I will um miss the mink farms. >> Oh, no. We're talking about the snakes.
>> Oh, I thought we're doing prohibited. >> No, we're we're doing the two ordinances that >> that are stapled to the agenda. >> Yes. That are stapled to the agenda. It's the ones that you looked at last >> that were introduced >> which is different from the agenda that I have I guess
>> started with removal of >> so that was all those definition those definitions were >> okay >> yes ordinance 59226 what you're talking about we're going to be discussing um during the uh ordinance review committee update which is coming
up >> we're not that's number eight on the agenda we're only on number >> seven I That's Yeah, >> I stapled all the master plan consistency >> documents to the agenda. >> Yeah, with the agenda. >> And do you have anything for >> I just haven't looked over the latest
version. >> Well, it's it's basically the same version that we discussed uh during the planning board uh preliminary discussion before it was sent to the township committee. >> Been no changes >> except except for the changes that that Miss Ojins uh provided us on that
evening. Uh the some of the additions the um energy resources and the recycling. >> So, Miss Ojent, I'll ask that you just review your notes to take a look and I'll move on to Mr. Hams. >> Yeah. If there's no change from the township committee. No. >> No. >> All good. >> Okay.
Mr. Alaka, >> we're good. >> Mr. Lavender. >> Good. >> All good. Miss We'll let Miss Owen continue just to review her notes. We'll move on to the next piece and we'll come back to that one.
the spelling corrections we did. I'm sure. >> Do you want to look at the second resolution then? >> Yeah. Let's move on to the second. >> You take a bit time to look at >> Well, the board the board has to make Yes, it has to make for >> We have to do it in order.
>> Can we jump jump to the other one? >> Well, yes, >> let's do one at a time. >> Yes, the board should find whether the first ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan. >> Uh, yeah, we have to do it in order. >> Remember, it's a it's a double negative. So, It it is a double negative and the reason why positive
>> yes the the reason why it is a double negative is there are some measures >> uh that need to be enacted and do change the land use uh development regulations that aren't necessarily consistent or inconsistent with the master plan. Uh
sometimes they're just procedural and they really don't impact the master plan. So that's why when these uh ordinances come before the board because every single land development ordinance must come before the board. So if for example we're changing the fees you know
for applications that still changes a portion of the land use and development ordinance and that has to come before the planning board. The master plan is silent with regard to those matters but it still has to come here. That's why the board finds that it isn't that it's
not inconsistent rather than it's consistent. Some of them just won't be [laughter] >> okay. Spelling under now therefore be orained was supposed to be changed to read state and not sate. >> Say the page >> still
s a t >> not state. >> It's something >> you did twice. >> It's carried over. >> Yes. >> Can you site the page please? >> It's the first page. Um and that's fine. It's a typographical error. Um, and that
will not be part of the ordinance once it's codified. It'll only be the things that are underlined and stricken >> that are part which is in section two. >> Thank you. Anything else, Miss Oen? >> Um, honestly, I can't read that fast, but that's fine.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. So, have a motion. >> Yes. >> Can I have a motion for ordinance 5926? >> Can I have a second? >> Second. And that's a finding that this ordinance is not inconsistent with Longill Township's master plan.
>> We should do a roll call. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, Mr. H. Uh, no. The motion was Mr. Opelka. >> So, yes. Isn't it automatic when you make the motion? >> Well, no. I have to take the role. >> Oh, >> yeah. >> So, and I always start with the person
who made the motion and then the second. So, Mr. Okala, >> look, we are all so rusty. >> I know. >> Yeah, that's true. WD40 going. >> Yes. In favor. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hans. Okay. Uh, Mr. Lavender. >> Yes.
>> Miss Ojins. >> Yes. >> And Vice Chairman Jones. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Y, if you want to take us through ordinance 59326, please. >> Yes. This ordinance. Yes. Now I'm remembering. Yes. This ordinance was
reviewed also by the planning board uh before it was sent to the township committee. The township committee has now introduced an ordinance amending uh the land use ordinance of the township of Long Hill regarding places of assembly, places of worship and public and private schools.
So effectively before this before this change uh the township's ordinance really didn't regulate uh these uses very substantially or at all. So uh we've we've now uh brought this before the planning board and the township
committee has clearly agreed that this is necessary. So they've they've um introduced this ordinance. >> Yeah, I did watch the video of the TC. um when they first introduced it, there wasn't much feedback uh that got sent back down to us. I don't know if anyone heard anything different. >> Okay.
>> So then I'll start um in the same order. M Miss Oen, >> do me less so I can Mr. H >> just to double check. No changes as far as you're aware. >> As far [clears throat] as I'm aware that we have gotten no feedback. >> I have not.
>> And I've not heard feedback from the Yeah, it it looks the same to me. I checked. >> Okay. No questions. Mr. Alpaka, >> I'm good. >> Mr. Lavender, >> also good. >> M Ojan, this is a very efficient board we are running today. [laughter] Back to you.
>> I can appreciate that. I haven't had a chance to read the latest copy, but >> if there's no changes since the last time we I haven't done anything except >> you've made no amendments, >> change sake. [laughter] But now we're on to
>> We're staying on 59326. So can I have a motion for ordinance 59326 that it is not inconsistent with the master plan? >> So move. >> I have a second. >> Second.
>> Mr. Opela. >> The way I say yes. >> No. No you. It's fine. >> And Mr. Hans. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lavender. >> Yes. >> Miss Ojins. Yes. >> Vice Chairman Jones. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you very much. >> Perfect.
>> Very good. >> I can entertain you there, Mr. Hands. It's efficiency. It's the efficiency just amuses me. >> All right. We're on to um number eight on the agenda. This is the ordinance discussion and the ORC update. I'll turn it over to Mr. Hans as I've been absent
from many of the meetings. So, >> I try and be as efficient as you. It's amazing. Okay. So, um last probably three or four meetings, fair to say um we spent time on sheds
and we had previously spent time within the planning board and previously I think with you as well Tom going back last year talking about sheds. So we took another look at this and I think what you know a couple of main points and I obviously hand over to Liz in a
couple of seconds but what we tried to do as well is recognize that perhaps it's not a one size pardon the pun not one sizefits all sheds there's only one shed permitted but we thinking about we have different size lots different
situations in town can we be a little bit more accommodating to folks so especially those on perhaps the larger lots may want two sheds but still on the smaller lots still may want two sheds. So we just um maneuvered around size
total size allowed for sheds one or two in those lots designation sizes. So over 20,000 square ft. We said maybe get two sheds, maybe 350 squares feet or whatever, but no more
than one shed being 200 square ft, which fits in with existing premises and UCC in terms of construction permit. So we kept that sort of underlying principle in place but we tried to be a bit flexible on the smaller less than 20,000
two shares maybe 160 square foot in in total. So it could be one shed 160 two shares of 80 and then we looked at different positions of the shares in terms of lot um location on the lot and boundaries you know con uh just reflective of your
neighbors and uh screenage and stuff. And lastly, just the heights. We also altered the heights between the larger lots and the smaller lots. 50 over 20,000. I think we went to 15 square ft to the to the top to the gable
from the ground. So, not the base of the shed, but from the ground that it sits on and 12 feet for the uh 20,000 square ft or less. Very quickly, that's my quick summation, please. And I think we spent a good amount of time going through this. Hopefully it's been a
thoughtful conversation discussion within the ORC and uh see where we take it from here. Liz. >> Yeah, I I think thank you David. I I think that you actually covered everything really. I um did a memo at the request of the ORC uh which sort of
went in our reasonings for different standards. The one reason we actually really needed to address this is because routinely, not in front of this board, but the zoning board gets shed uh variance applications regularly and it
seemed as if our ordinance was not working because everybody needed variance and it was adding time and costs to homeowners. So, this is intended to stream to be a little bit more flexible and a little bit more um reasonable in terms of what you know
current needs might be for homeowners and also the kinds of properties that exist in Long Hill. Both small um you know and we split at 20,000 square feet is is slightly arbitrary but it's round number half an acre you know and so
anything less than half an acre was treated a little bit differently. Um, but I think it in both instances, either under 20,000 or over 20,000, we're creating a lot more flexibility and um and per and I think practicality for
homeowners. That that was the overall intent. Uh, and we spent what seeming I Deb said, "Okay, we're doing sheds." And I said, "That should be really we just changing like 100 to 200. That's it." And it was a lot more complicated and complex, but I think we came to something that was is reasonable. I
think it hopefully will will work well. The one thing um I'm not seeing in in in the draft uh note is are we addressing pre-existing non-conforming those that might be sitting on a lot line those are inside the bulk standards
or we are we addressing that or that going to be just grandpa >> well do do you want to answer that as a legal legal answer I have I have an answer but I [laughter] go ahead I'll follow up I I think what >> you don't want shed authorities running around the town.
>> No, I think honestly these standards are so much more reasonable and realistic that hopefully there will be fewer fewer instances of those. I mean, you know, when sheds are existing sometime and we've had that where sheds are actually
almost on other people's property, you know, on their neighboring property, but in that instance, you do want to correct that >> or on town property. >> Yes. And that's the practical answer. The legal answer is grandfathering only comes into play when a structure or a
use was commenced before the zoning ordinance was enacted that caused that structure or use to be non-conforming. So just because you put something on your property illegally because you didn't know what you were doing because your neighbor said the property line's
over here and you could put it over here but it turns out that the property line's actually over here. uh that you can't that's not grandfathered that that's not a pre-existing non-conforming anything because it's not legal to begin with. Right. >> So, you know, >> we're not grandfathering something that
was illegal, >> right? A >> and we and we cannot grandfather anything. The township doesn't grandfather anything. It is up to the property owner slapplicant if they choose to appear before the zoning board of adjustment um to testify and to prove
that what they have is a legal pre-existing non-conforming use. The onus is on the applicant. The onus is on the property owner. It is never on the township to try to grandfather something or prove that something pre-exists something. >> Uh because the issue is the township cannot possibly. It's just an
impracticality uh to have them go on every single property and try to figure out who pre-exists the ordinance, who doesn't. It's it's impossible for them to know. >> But I will say um sorry like a good number of um zoning board applications. It's because the sheds
exceed 100 square feet. >> And so we >> that's how this started. >> Yeah, it is. And that's why I thought it was just going to be an easy fix to change up the square footage. >> Two years later, here we are. >> Yeah, exactly. Um and so in those instances hopefully people will be more in conformance.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. And another thing that we did here, we changed one of the earlier sections in the ordinance that requires the zoning approval because the problem is there are some things that you don't necessarily need a construction permit
for, >> but you still should get a zoning permit. Because just because you don't need a construction permit doesn't mean that you're putting it in the correct location on the property or that the property doesn't already have so much coverage that we're just adding to the
lot coverage and exceeding it. So this is something so that the zoning officer can keep her record straight and [clears throat] you know have so that when these people do come in for yet another variance for a deck or a swimming pool or a walkway that the
zoning officer is aware. um before they get to the board. And we realize from the survey that there's actually a shed also standing there that no one knew about. >> Right. And and and often I think we've seen that people purchase properties and they have no idea they have a non-conforming shed on their property
>> or you have an easement that runs through your property and there's a shed sitting on that easement. >> Right. But that happens often. Yes. >> Um so what we added here was that um you know a zoning per when a zoning permit is effectively required. So anytime you
need a certificate of occupancy that that's it's always required at that time but we also put if you need a certificate of approval for anything then yes you also need a zoning permit and we're also requiring a zoning permit for anything that is not required by law
to to have a construction permit for. And that also might cover fences >> because often people will place a fence somewhere on their property. You don't need any permits for a fence, but they should get a zoning permit so that the zoning officer can opine on whether or
not this is right. It's in the right spot. It's within the setback so there's not a problem because these are problems that we encounter at the zoning board >> almost every second week. [laughter] >> I do appreciate the spirit of trying to give some guidelines around how these
are to be addressed because we did take this on I said two years. was actually three years ago >> when we were just trying to do the 100 200 Republic be a simple fix and here we are >> three years later still talking about it >> and I I think your dad was on the board when we were talking talking about this
so um thank you for the hard work I don't know if there's any other opinions >> comments >> I just wanted to add one thing I think what the ORC also is recommending is that some of this language be put on on
the township website so that people who are going to who who say I don't know what what do I do what do I need how big can I get one you know that that be easy rather than have them >> so then the novice looking for going through the code book trying to find it can't find it but now it's and a lot of
great work has been done on township website and we should be utilizing that that communication portal to get information out to >> frequently asked questions about >> good old FAQ Yes, but the thing is someone has to keep that updated. >> Mhm.
>> I experienced that today with something that was not updated. >> Oh, no. >> Lot of dead links. >> Okay. >> Can I Yes, please. >> Just say that I I a lot of work and I think an excellent job was done. I looked at some of the other townships.
Nobody is um has gone into as much detail as is in this ordinance. I I really especially like item G on page isn't numbered, but the one that's any storm water run off from the sh captured within the property since we
have such a high water table. >> My question is how are we going to assess that? How how when somebody asks to put up >> I think that's going to come from the residents themselves, right? When there's too much water showing up on someone else's or the zoning permit.
So anytime >> corrected. [laughter] >> So anytime a zoning permit for a shed is applied for they have to provide me with a survey. So lot coverage is a big issue. So that's one of the things we review. If the lock coverage is under what they're allowed that's great. They
don't need any issue. They don't have anything from engineering because basically the only time you need to get anything having to do with lock rating is if you're disturbing over a thou anywhere from a th00and to 1500 square feet. So sheds do not they don't you
know they're not nearly any you know couple hundred feet at best but if they're over their lot coverage well then they've got an issue and they can't have a shed or they got to come to the board. But I I think just the second part of that is I I think um there are
members of the ORC who were saying, you know, theoretically you could have um a gutter, right, >> going to your neighbor's yard. And so this is the idea was to no, you can't do that. You've got to capture it on your own yard so that it doesn't become a storm water runoff issue for your
neighbor. >> And you only know what you do know, right? There are sheds that are like kits and they show up, they can get delivered, you can put it together on a weekend and you're none the wiser. >> Friday shows up, Monday it's done.
>> 100%. And I will say nine years working in this town, we've never received >> any complaints from runoff issues with sheds, >> right? >> Ever. >> Hopefully neighbors are good to each other, >> additions, landscaping projects, decks,
other things, but not sheds thankfully. But um just to assure the board that if we were to receive a complaint >> then the township engineer would definitely go out and take a look at it and if he felt that there was you know he would he would make them do something with drainage or gutters or something.
>> But it would give him something to remediate it >> 100%. But >> and if they didn't get a permit then a few more letters in the mailbox. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Deb is it fair to say that when they come in for permit that be something you'll be looking for perhaps? >> What? >> The runoff? No,
>> you wouldn't be able to see them. >> No, because there's really no need because sheds are too small. >> So, as part of the permit process, because it's the simplified permit process or whatever for shed, [laughter] right? >> I love how you keep saying that. >> I know. I love because it says it
>> only till we change it. David, >> I know [laughter] to be done. >> Yeah. >> So, the simplified process. Um >> but should that be as we as we now state it here? Is that something that when we come to look at the permits we should take a a stronger look at it perhaps
>> as stated with a smaller setback? Yes. Then I I will I will be including some language to that effect on the zoning permit itself >> to make sure they person knows that they cannot >> correct >> stick the gutter to the neighbors property. Okay. Perfect. Can I just make one last point and this is a general
point and I I here I thank Liz for putting the introduction and hopefully everybody sees the detail of the introduction helps give some background to why and what is within the ordinance and also um to Yolanda for adding a
couple of bit more wherees in the ordinance as well. Oh, okay. >> To provide a bit more background so when this all does go to the township committee in this case, they have a little bit more information and hopefully a better understanding of what the ordinance why it's here and what
it's trying to achieve. So I want I just want to thank both professionals for helping out with that. >> That was it. >> Do we need to >> Okay. Anything more on sheds? So >> question about electric.
>> So does that mean running an electrical line like from your house or does it mean solar as well? >> Just means >> either one. >> Either one. >> Either one requires a construction permit. >> Go. >> Yeah. I think the idea I put it in the
cover memo the idea is that once you start adding electricity then there's a whole lot or any any >> any other utility. >> There's just you all of a sudden now we're kind of like well what else are you using it for? Right. And so that >> that dwelling piece, right? >> Yeah. And that this is >> a cave, a she shed.
>> This is sort of making these kinds of things just storage very distinct from other types of accessory uses. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> It's more of just clarification. >> Yeah. >> I I I'll add one last comment. I like the fact that you took the measurement
from the ground and not from where the elevated point of the shed is because you can put sheds on blocks. And yes, it's a 10 foot shed, >> but it's really 12t up in the air. >> So I I like the measurement from the ground, >> right? >> And I'm assuming it's from the lowest
point because it could be sloped. >> Is that how you're measuring it? Could you define where? >> So from the ground level of the shed entrance or something? >> Yeah, >> it's measured from the ground at the entrance >> to the shed to the highest point of the roof.
>> Can't exceed 12 ft. >> There you go. I think it's close enough. Yeah. >> And have a 12oot ramp that's at a 30° slope. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Any other All right. Any any more comments on sheds?
>> So, what would be the next phase for this? So, I would suggest that we uh that we have a motion, a second, and all in favor or you know, we're both to because then the board is basically in that vote directing me as the secretary to forward
this to the township committee >> for first reading. >> So, okay. >> For their review and if they are inclined >> for introduction number on this ordinance, there is no number. >> No, because they assign it when it gets to the So, what happens is the township
committee Yeah. They'll put it in for discussion first. >> Yep. >> Then it goes to assigned. It gets assigned a number and they have the first reading. Then it comes back to us for consistency. >> So we could see this in possibly three meetings which would take us probably September is when we'll most likely see it, right? We'll have one meeting in
Janu and July, one meeting in August. Maybe there's a third meeting in there somewhere in those two months and then it's September. So by the time it comes back to us for >> any >> consistent >> comments or not inconsistent review against the master plan and then we
would then vote on it with a yay nay and then it would go back for second reading and final comments from the uh public and if it comes back to us again we'll make any amend reviews amendments and then it goes back for final adoption. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So the so the the action on us
right now is a a motion to send this to the township committee. >> Yep. >> Yep. So can I have a motion to send draft ordinance for residential sheds to the township committee? >> So move second.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Great. >> Well done. Good job. Good job. Anything else uh you want to cover off on ordinances and OC? >> Second one. We have another >> second one that's attached. Yeah,
>> it did a great job. >> But very quickly, >> this one's actually an easier one. >> Yes, it's easy. >> And it's an ink farm. >> I thought 100 200 feet was an easy one. [laughter] And look where we are three years later. >> We know more about sheds than we ever >> Yeah. Everyone wants to. [laughter] So,
this one now includes some uses adjust uh changes getting rid of prohibited uses and including mint farms which I'm sad to see leave personally. [laughter] >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sad the
thought of the mint farms and it's always a >> it's always a bit of fun to talk about prohibited >> explain this one. [laughter] >> Oh, I ain't going to. >> Of course, some of my >> I'm just having my little laugh in the middle. I know >> Elanta owes you to the reality.
>> Okay. Um so the township ordinance as it stands right now uh basically says that any use that is not permitted within the other zones is effectively
prohibited. But then goes on to specify um and to enumerate prohibited uses. than a point of contention. >> Generally, it it it does it might cause a little bit of confusion and
because the problem is if you say that all uses that aren't permitted are prohibited, then why specify uses that are prohibited? Because if you know I if if I'm coming to the township with a use that isn't permitted in the zone that
I'm located >> but it's not in the prohibited use list you know >> all negative. >> You know I understand that it's prohibited but maybe it's not as vehemently prohibited as this list. You know and >> I guess at the outset initially it
doesn't make any difference because it's prohibited or it's really really prohibited. So there is no difference because it's still prohibited. But the arguments that planners and attorneys make when they come before the zoning board, they always seem to pick on this
prohibited uses list or occasionally do where they say, "Well, you know what? Our use isn't so abhorent that you called it out in your prohibited use list." and and you have board members who are sitting there and they have to
make a determination using this and how do you apply this? You know, you have to apply uh the standards in the MLUL. All this does is throw a little bit of a monkey wrench into those standards. It's it's simply
stated it's unnecessary because this list is never going to be exhaustive. There are always going to be other uses that you are going to find that you don't want to see in Longhill and that are not going to be permitted in any of the zones, but they're not going to be
in this list. >> So, it's it's a pointless list and >> and there are uses that will never come to Long Hill. >> There are uses Yeah. that'll never come to Long Hill. There are uses in here that are already in Longill.
Those are those are the quote unquote what people like to refer to as the grandfathered uses which either pre-existed the ordinance or they were permitted by varants but they're here you know so what do we do with them when there's any kind of a change or an
expansion or whatever when they find themselves on the really really prohibited list and not on the simply prohibited list. I mean it's just >> like double secret probation. >> It it's it's interesting. Yeah. It's it's it's unnecessary. So what's the recommendation? So the recommendation is
to leave it at all uses not specifically permitted by this ordinance are expressly prohibited. So any use that doesn't make its way into a zoning ordinance into a zone as a specifically permitted use, it's simply
not permitted. That's it. So if if a nightclub or a dance hall is not permitted in any zone, it's automatically a prohibited use without calling it out. And and what this also does is this says nightclubs and dance
halls. And then the kids call it something else, >> but it's not specifically prohibited. And then we have a question that it opens up a can of worms that never needs to be opened. So, if I want to open up a bowling alley on Valley Road, is that a permitted use in the >> Well, it would be BD zone.
>> No. >> Is it It's not a permitted use in the BD zone. But then you're looking through this and you're saying, well, you know, those automobiles. >> It's not listed there. >> Yeah. It's not listed there. >> So then I could take Kings and make it a bowling >> and and then >> they'll come to the zoning officer who will say, "Yes, it's a prohibited use."
And if you wish to locate that use, you will find yourself before the zoning board of adjustment asking for a devariance and and then there's an unnecessary >> quarrel over what all of this means. It's just unnecessary. So the recommendation is simply that all uses
not specifically permitted by this ordinance are expressly prohibited. And you may ask why would we put cannabis in here? Um, and the reason for this, this is the the all classes of cannabis. Um,
this section is required by statute. That's the only reason why it's here. I did pull it out of the prohibited uh use list and I put it and I left it in the ordinance only because when the
legislature enacted the statute regulated cannabis uses and where they locate, there was a time certain by which every municipality had to either opt in or opt out and Longill opted out
from being able to have did that. >> Yes, it did. So, they they opted out. Many municipalities, I would >> venture, I guess, and I would say majority of municipalities opted out and not because they necessarily, you know, oppose cannabis or cannabis uses. It's
just that these municipalities were given such a short period of time to figure out what the zoning would be and where these should be located. And then there was the issue of your master plan and you know whether that ordinance would be you know even consistent with
the master plan if they tried to jam something into a zoning you know into a zone at the 11th hour just to meet the deadline of the statute. So many municipalities opted out. >> Yeah. And and just not to add on to what you're saying is as Yolanda said if you
didn't opt out you were stuck for five years. >> Yes. And in the opt in you automatically opted in. opted in and you couldn't you had to wait. >> So lack of a voice said you were in. >> Yes. Which seemed like a long time but is actually coming up in a couple.
>> It is coming up. It is coming up. And you know >> Yeah. >> municipalities just didn't want to make that, you know, just make that choice. >> They had enough information. >> They didn't have enough information. >> Wanted to see how it played out in other towns. >> Precisely. Exactly. So uh yes. So many
opted out. Longill opted out. And because they opted out and because that was a requirement by statute, I'm leaving it in. >> So if the township decides to opt in at the end of five years, we'd have to update this. Remove that. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yep. >> And and this
is more detailed than you probably care, but there's like five classes of cannabis. So >> many towns will say, "Well, we're okay with retails." And I think that's class four. Yeah. >> A four, I think. So they'll say, "Well, okay, class four." So that this would be changed to say everything except class
4. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Right. Right. And and they can opt in and and municipalities some municipalities have been watching the roll out in other municipalities and seeing you know what's happening. >> Um there there are places that aren't doing so well because you know they a
lot of these uses congregated in those towns that permitted them and they're not doing great >> and the market got saturated. >> The market was saturated. So, so people are watching to see, you know, h how how they can structure their zoning ordinances if they want to invite those uses into the town uh to make them
successful because you don't want anything that that comes and is, >> you know. >> So, this doesn't hamstring [clears throat] the TC is what I was getting at. >> 100%. They if they if they elect to opt in at any time, then we just change the ordinance. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, they changed the
ordinance. But I I just want to make sure that by putting the committee the committee changes the ordinance something that says that they can't go back because of >> the way the law was written right because there was a very strange optin opt out if you strange >> if you change this does this mean that
you have to wait five more years or something along those lines to make any >> no >> changes to your >> the other thing is if you can opt in it was a weird thing where you automatically opted in and couldn't get out >> or you could say okay we're out But we can go in at any time.
>> Yes. Okay. So it's not a fiveyear op. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yep. So township committee can change this at this point in terms of cannabis at any time. Uh the township committee can do whatever it wants basically. I mean if it wants to, you know, reject what we're doing here, they can do that too. >> Um or and they can add to this if they
if they like. [clears throat] >> On our master plan, cannabis uh retail is a prohibited use. >> It's not permitted. >> It's in the master plan. I think we said just to continue to monitor it, >> right? >> That sounds that way. Okay. >> Just just be just
>> we took an observation approach as opposed to a hardline stance. Right. >> Okay. All right. >> So, >> I'm not looking to open up a dispensary. I'm trying to get context. What's here? What's there? >> It was to give flexibility just if the if the township changed their mind, the
TC changed their mind at some future date that there was a language master plan that kind of gave them that flexibility. >> Yep. So if I can just the flip side of this doing this piece of work two aspects. One is what uses at
some point are prohibited like lumber yards, like gas stations, things exist and maybe want to say well let's have a look at that and that's what we talked about in the master plan was how can we rationalize some of the uses in town but
that's going to be a step two because that has a larger consequence of actually now permitting >> maturity of looking at this holistically. >> Exactly. So this is just a first step. Don't lose Don't want people to lose sight personally of mint farms. Yes, we can put those aside because I'm pretty
sure we don't care about mink farms as much as I like them. [laughter] >> I think we can put those one sidearms. >> Yeah, I would be surprised. And then but I think that I just want people conscious of the fact that things are even though we just get rid of it.
There's no reference to it that we will look at those that have rational sense to be looked at again like lumber yards like gas stations but there's a whole process why has split it up into two. Maybe just want to talk about that. And I'm I'm glad that you brought that up
because this is just having something like this, having a, you know, an extensive list that goes on and on with prohibited uses. It's it's just another thing to overlook when the township is looking to add uses that already exist
in town. We already have drive-throughs in town. Um, and if the township wants to add drive-throughs, for example, in those areas in town where they already exist, this is just another place that we're going to have to take this out of. It's just more administrative paperwork
and just another, you know, area where we can trip. >> Opportunity for inconsistencies. >> An opportunity for inconsistency. And even if that inconsistency only occurs for a short period of time because it's caught at some point. Um, and I mean
like to be real, we we'd catch this, but maybe somebody else wouldn't. >> Um, we we've had a lot of experience sitting with this ordinance, but someone else who may work here in the future may not. >> Um, so if we can make this better and easier for the future, more consistent,
I think that's part of the goal as well. And as David was saying, part of part two is taking a look at some of these uses, uh, taking a look at the master plan, matching them up, and seeing where the master plan is directing that these
uses be, whether they remain prohibited or whether the ordinance review committee, the planning board, and the township take another look and maybe include them in some of the zones that make sense. And can you just also talk for a second about why this can be a standalone
um ordinance or change as opposed to something needs greater oversight by adding >> like the notices? Yes. What we're doing here is again it's the double negative. We're we're removing something that's prohibited anyway. So we are not
changing any use or classification in any zone because when you change the use or classification in any zone, you have to give what is known as super notice. You have to give mailed notice uh to people and that is costly. So what we're trying to do at the ordinance review
committee, we're being careful and we're choosing to change the things that we can to clean up what we can without [clears throat] triggering uh the need for super notice. That will come one day when when the ordinance review committee
is working on implementing the master plan into the ordinances into the zones. So we will have to give super notice, but we're hoping that we might only have to do that once. you know, we do a large enough ordinance and only have to do it once that we don't have to repeat that uh a number of times. We're trying to
save money in that way and and that's why >> and and time and a lot of time because it does take a great deal of time >> whatever. So, we're doing it this way and >> you know and another thing that we changed um here importantly uh performance stand uh standards
compliance. It it's said here initially that any use that fails to meet the performance standards of section 144 um would would be a prohibited use. That's
very odd. [laughter] >> That's not a real standard that that cannot be enforced. That can't be implemented. Why why is it it marked reserved for that one and also reserved for the one below that for his use is enumerated >> because one point one two 3.2 and one
point two one one point one two 33.3 are being removed and I believe that there is a one one two 3.4 >> maybe yeah >> I I think there is um and it goes on so we have to save those sections so we save them as reserved
>> okay so this is another back yourself because I don't want to reumber all of it. >> And if if I am mistaken then you know >> No, I'm sure you're >> I'm sure you're right. I'm sure it was. >> So >> So they may So this one two 3.2 might be blank and and the next one will be blank
but then one two three four might have content and you don't want to rename everything. >> We don't want to remember. >> I got it. I got it. So you're saving a space. I got it. I also just wanted to add just so for people's general edification, this board doesn't hear use variances, but
>> this doesn't change the proofs required for any of these uses, right? >> Whether they're on this list or not, it's the same process before the zoning board. >> It sounds to me the objective is one, clean up, two, save time, and three save financial spend for the uh for the
applicant. Yes. Right. and then those that are doing the reviewing takes the ambiguity out of their hands where it's more clear exactly what it is that they're trying to address. >> But yes, but I I guess what I'm trying to say is this isn't taking these out of this prohibited. It doesn't make it any
easier for these uses. >> Understood. Exactly. Yeah. So there's no circumventing the process by removing >> like oh now I can put farm >> because it doesn't change [laughter] actually this was creating opportunities for workaround for other things that didn't make it
into the list. >> That is exactly right. You know, and and it's it's funny because some of the things that were included I I think over time were things that were permitted at one time or obtained by varants that were disfavored, >> right? Probably true.
>> I mean, we still have examples by >> the people sitting on the desk. >> We have we have defunct locations of places that need to be addressed that operated and they're on that list. >> Right. >> They're on that list. >> Right. Right. And and you know, performance standards. What performance standards are are the standards that we
apply when we look at site plan approvals generally subdivisions larger larger applications every application has to comply with the performance standards but many of the performance standards require compliance with uh with law and regulation that is beyond
the township. So, D regulation, um, you know, the radiation act, you know, if we're talking about radiation coming off of of a site, uh, or of a use. So, these are things that the township doesn't even have control over. So to say that if a a use fails to
comply with something that another governmental entity has jurisdiction over becomes somehow something that requires a use variance is a very strange thing that I've never seen anywhere. I don't think it's appropriate. I I don't think it's legal frankly.
>> For example, like one of the performance standards was say say excessive noise. Well, if that came before the board, you would say, "Okay, you have to mitigate that." And so you the applicant would have to mitigate it and they would have not only to meet the township but also to meet the state standard. But what
this is saying is that use is no long like not even a permitted use anymore because you've exceeded the noise, >> right? And instead of their as of right application before the planning board, we're now kicking them before the zoning board of adjustment and we are giving them a much higher standard which you know we would find ourselves in court
and probably lose [laughter] with that. >> Just very quickly on performance standards that's something we're still looking at within the ORC. So we'll come back to this again at a later point in time. >> So we we've been working on if you want to go over some of the things we were working on but >> no I think I'm trying to adhere to the
um hour allotted >> by the So, so back to me. >> Yeah. >> Um, so thank you for this. Uh, again, >> lots of good work. I think the mindset and and the direction you're headed is exactly where we want to be going. The stuff that we've been trying to do in
the past is now we have some traction. So, well done on that. >> So, the ask here is a motion uh to let me get the right verbiage. Can I have a motion? Give myself a paper cut.
uh to approve the prohibited uses in LU123 entitled prohibited uses. May I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Thank you. >> Speak up. >> Second. >> Thank you. >> All in favor?
>> I >> I >> Any oppose? No. Okay. So, these these two proposed will now be forwarded to the township committee. >> Excellent. following the same um criteria that I mentioned before. Okay. Uh Mr. Hans, there anything else that you would like to educate uh this body
that you're working on on your work? >> Honestly, I think we can uh I think we got through a lot. >> Yeah. And there's more stuff obviously, but I think what does help is having both >> having a dedicated time of the professionals
>> and doing this, we'd like to do this right now face to face >> and allows you for that dialogue and discussion and back and forth. So I think that process has been more beneficial this year. >> Well done. >> So I appreciate the time and effort. >> It's been a huge asset. >> Well, thank you.
>> Yes. And I think we're going to tackle so two things, one easy and one more difficult. I think again like sheds and the prohibited uses. We're looking at home occupations and >> you go keeping suspense in the box. >> We're saving the super notice till next
year because we're going to actually run out of money soon for the budget for this which is a good thing. So >> Okay. >> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. So thank you. So there if there's nothing more for ordinance discussion and or OC update, I'll move on to any old business or new business.
>> I will I will just note for this board that you have if there's a subdivision in the pipeline that you will be getting probably by August. >> Okay. >> Um >> August, September time frame. >> Well, probably the August meeting because uh the professionals still have to review it. Although we they had
started that was the um Old Forge subdivision. we had a meeting on. So that's that came came to the board. So I probably scheduled them for the August meeting and then in September you will probably be starting uh the car wash site which [snorts] uh has been
submitted to us for it's 167 units. >> I'm not sure. >> I don't remember off the top of my head. I feel like that's the number. >> Okay. >> But so that application has that's the biggie that's come in. >> Okay. Big one. So, we have two big ones coming. >> Yep. >> Okay.
>> So, then uh guidance to board members is as the information comes in, have a look, have a read, have your notes prepared so that way when the information is presented to us that you have your questions ready to go and they may get answered along the way so you
can knock them off that way. And if they're not answered, then when it's time for us to uh add in our inquiries, then please do so at that time. >> Yeah. And if you do have any uh questions um you know bring them here
>> and the board professionals always assist with their with their uh reports. >> That's correct. >> Yeah, you can you can always email me separate separately obviously or professionals and if you have any questions >> if you have any direct questions you need to >> and remember [clears throat]
do not email the entire board. >> Yes, please. >> One to ones. Yes, especially with these upcoming >> be offended if you didn't send me an email. [laughter] >> Um, okay. Any other old business or new business? >> Hearing nothing. We'll move on to my
favorite agenda item, item number 10. Can I have a motion for adjournment? >> So move. >> Can I have a second, please? >> Second. Meeting adjourn.