e e e we're on the air welcome to the planning board meeting for Long Hill Township this is our regular meeting and hearing dated February 25th
2025 our start time is at 7:30 on the do perfect great all right would you mind reading the announcements happy to number one call to order and statement of compliance adequate notice of this meeting or hearing has been provided by posting a copy of the public meeting hearing dates on the municipal bulleon
board and website by sending a copy to the echo Sentinel newspaper and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk number two standard board procedures any meeting or hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited mited to issues that are relevant to
what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and to form appropriate to a Judicial meeting or hearing 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 Pledge of
Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and jce okay roll do we do we need to do an
oath welcome officially Teresa come on only two were my fault one was hand I'm sorry you're great you're totally in you got to come to every meeting after tonight you realize that every Mee no no no no no no okay so miss
still I'm going need you to raise your right hand for me we'll swear in and just repeat after me I Teresa Dill I Teresa Dill do solemnly swear I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the state of New Jersey and the state of New Jersey that
I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and to the governments established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully impartially and justly and
that I will faithfully impartially and justly perform all the duties of perform all the duties of planning board class two member planning board class two member according to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability and that and that I will not use my office to Grant preferential treatment and that I will not use my
office to Grant preferential treatment nor to seek personal gain favor or Advantage nor to seek personal gain favor or Advantage not available to the general public not available to the general public so help me God want to do that part okay there she is welcome on the board well done very nice now pass
that down to miss still present Mr Hans here committee man lavender pres Mr lerio here Mr Mitchell is excus this evening Miss oans here miss rala here Vice chairman Jones is excused this evening
chairman Richardson here chairman we have a quum great thank you very much okay we have a fairly uh breviate meeting this evening uh and we're going to move right into some old and new business so uh first up um my hope is is
that everyone now has had a good amount of time with our board bylaws and can offer if they have any additional comments or discussion points that they'd like to raise before my hope
is making a motion to accept these bylaws if I can just te up Mr chairman I um the version that you guys were distributed is incorporates comments from Mr Hans Miss augin and Mr lavario um I didn't receive comments from anybody else so presumably nobody
else had issues with it um there were a few points in here that might be worthy of discussion great but um yeah we can start off with that um Mr HS actually had a comment about about um if you look at section one colon 1-10 um I'm looking at the redline version so that's page 10
on there so we're all on the same page with which version we're looking at here um you had a note about uh section A and we had a discussion about this at the last meeting um that section reads board members shall not discuss or no I'm sorry Mr laio brought this up um board members shall not discuss the substance
of any current or pending application except in the the specific context of a properly noticed uh Board hearing um I mean that's it is kind of the law that you're supposed to discuss only within that context no I mean you have simil latitude to ask questions of the board attorney or the board professionals before you know a meeting but that's not
really you know again it's kind of limited to just that that circumstance and you you really shouldn't be discussing it with any other board members outside because it could theoretically it could Prejudice an applicant it could be violated you know violation of their constitutional rights so they're not there to address you know questions about it so just with that I
just wanted to leave it as it as it was you know but so hope I read your your note it yeah made sense okay um so just that was one there were just a few that I highlighted there were other you know various like small changes like for a tire example um for example we we
discussed uh uh jeans being okay so I just changed nice jeans right nice so I just I just added the word rip in front of jeans so I think probably everyone would agree it's probably not appropriate attire for a board meeting um but otherwise it's pretty silent as to regular unrip jeans so I guess have
added if you want to wear that uh just sift through otherwise there weren't too many other comments bear with me one moment um otherwise I Incorporated everything that they suggested I did um if you look at section two colon 3-5 I
combined what was old two colon 3-5 with old two colon 3-6 it was order of proceedings then order of presentation um at the suggestion of Mr H and that to me that made actually a lot of sense because it kind of synthesized those and made it a little less repetitive y um so
you guys would notice that big it's fairly substantial change I guess and then there's one other one or two other points just wanted to get to um yeah then there was a rule two colon 5 specifically two
5-2 was uh not appearance to party so I think Mr H suggested that we either eliminate that or combine it with uh I think two col 5-6 dismissal without prejudice um I think I think this
stylistic thing but like I felt it was better to keep both sections just so there's a specific reference to non-appearance because I feel like that's a little more common of An Occurrence and people would be more you know apt to look for something like that if they wanted to know what happens if somebody doesn't show up as opposed to having to set through dismissal without
prejudice to find out that if they don't show up then the application could be dismissed so again it's a stylistic thing I not really went into it one way or another yeah I think that's fine yeah just cleaned up some language with two col 6-2 the only other I think the only other major
change was with the annual review procedure of the rules um I don't know if the board feels like it needs to it would rather have it be said in stone that it has to be reviewed every years or every year or that it should be just like you know maybe we will maybe we
won't so it's kind of up to you guys how you want to word that that section and this is yeah two colon or I'm sorry three colon 5-1 on page 32 um the way I initially worded it was that um it would basically like it was like
the board May appoint a bylaws committee which should um you know provide results by the end of April that year um and that would be at the direction of the chairperson right right but the way it's worded now um was that I think Mr laio suggested this as well and I think we
did discuss it kind of at the last meeting too is the way it's worded right now is that it basically says you essentially you have to create the subcommittee every year as a chairman so it's you know again it's whether you guys want to actually set that in stone or not is up to you does anybody feel strongly about that being
kind of more of a mandatory item for riew I mean cuz the sequencing would be in theory that that would be brought up in January after the reorganization me early in the year with regards to are there any
changes of the bylaws no I I I think it reads the way it should read I mean if someone raises an objection to the bylaws that would ensue a discussion and we would talk about having a committee to review them yeah right right otherwise yeah it's busy work that was
my feeling we've got enough to do without necessarily having to review the bylaws every year well originally it says if so established now we're saying established so can I just confirm it's we're saying it will be established I'm looking at it again I think the the establish messed
up on the edits here yeah so at the the way it reads now is is first sentence the board chairperson May appoint up to board memb up to four board members um initially I meant this change that the sh to to make it mandatory in in case
you guys wanted to go that route but um so right now it's written as though it's it's mandatory to establish it well the way it reads now is May appoint so if you want to keep it as May then it's not M no it says may Appo up to the version we
have yeah it says may point up to four which means you can go to four but you can do three you could do two that's the May okay you're not May the forming the this subcommittee established shall so if it says if if so established previously now it says established so to
me I would say this this is mandatory so I Tri out the words okay I see what you're saying okay maybe that's what that's process was at the time as well my preference would be to have the flexibility of to decide no whether and that should be up to the chairperson and
if so established so so we'll go back to if so established if so established if so established shall review the board's rules and uh offer recommendations to modify the rules to the whole for the board for discussion and approval um did you want to set the hard cap to April of
that year I know we discussed that in the bylaws committee to kind of just kind of set a deadline so that every you know it's not like lingering throughout the year yes I think that's appropriate if you're going to if if the committee is formed we would want it the culmination of that done through by
April okay anyone else have a any other comments on that otherwise i' I just suggest a final version I just have um two two comments and this was um what I found when I compared how you had
Incorporated two Co and 3-6 into two colon 3-5 yes so I just went back to check that the points that had been in uh two Co 3-6 were indeed in two uh
Co 3-5 and if I could bring your attention I'm looking at the clean copy and I'm on page 23 which is actually um two call 3-5 number five and letter
b and I'm wondering if that should read as it does in the um before when you had order of presentation by itself uh inserting after applicants applicants Andor applicants attorney shall also
submit documents okay you're looking at the clean version what page 23 23 the very first line red line is page 22 oh applicant shall also submit such
documentary evidence your exhibits on what in the prior um draft Oh Oh you mean like at applicants or their attorneys right okay yeah I don't see why not or applicant's attorney yeah or their attorney ches
okay yeah that's fine I mean traditionally when you say applicants it refers to like you know how do I explain this not the applicant specifically the individual applicant because an applicant could be like you know a business you know an LLC or some kind of
entity right so when it says applicant refers to you know it's assumed that it means everybody on their team including their attorney engineer what have you but yeah I just but I understand what you're saying so there's nothing wrong with that word and before it had been worded the applicant's attorney shall
also submit so I just took it from was before yeah good cat and then on item number six um on that same page where it says interested parties Andor objectors I would have inserted not
represented by an attorney question applicants and or Witnesses since if there are interested parties or other objectors who are being represented by attorney that has to be done by their attorney so I interested
parties and other objectors or their number six interested parties Andor objectors not represented by an attorney question applicants and Witnesses and then it would flow into number eight if there are any interested
parties represented by an attorney all questions must be posed by their attorney okay so I see so for number six real quick before I even get into that I I just noticed that the number list is is screwed up and like five is repeated twice so we got to just pick that up um
but what is currently number six right would read um interested parties and other objectors Andor their attorneys question applicants and or Witnesses well I thought it was not represented because you not represented by I see you're saying yeah okay so non
represented at the beginning right because eight talks about exactly right because it says when they are represented by an attorney okay and you might want to then reorder it I would think if you have interested parties who are represented by an attorney then if
you have interested parties who are not represented by an attorney that want to be heard you would hear them after those who have representation so then it would just kind of flip-flop what number six and
number eight my thought is actually eliminate number six and move that to the beginning of number eight oh you could do that yeah non-represented interested parties yada yada ya then it goes straight to if there AR any interested parties kind of keep it all condensed in one section which I think
makes sense to follow after because I guess theoretically you know when you're giving the public an opportunity you're also giving it opportun to objectors and other interested parties to ask questions and by other interested parties there could be somebody who's you know entity that's represented but they they don't take a position on the application yeah just you know
understood my only question being those represented and not represented I got you no that makes sense to to kind of distinguish so so so then you would combine yeah just add that number six and number eight or corre you add a sentence to number eight yeah just add
basically just take what what you're suggesting for number six and the beginning of to the beginning of number eight gotcha so then interested parties and or objectors not represented by an attorney question applicants Andor Witnesses followed by if there are any
interested parties represented by an attorney Etc y exactly okay yeah got it that's all that I have okay great thank you thank you any others and then just a go back to the uh
the annual bylaws thing I guess review just to give you guys the final version of that language it would be so we can vote on this tonight if possible um it should read at the annual reorganization meeting the board chairperson May appoint up to four board members to a subcommittee established for the purpose
of reviewing the board's rules this subcommittee if so established if so established can't read shall review the board's rules and offer recommendations to modify the rules to the whole of the board for discussion approval by no later than the first board meeting in April of that calendar year that's how
it would read adopt question question for you then whose decision is it it would be as far as forming the committee yeah be the chairperson yeah should be should it be a uh consensus of the
board so you know blah blah blah if if if if the board so deems something like that yeah I obviously I would take input from the board but it's just a matter of how do you want to codify that you want
to that's what you're is it because it's bylaws is that your concern as opposed to a normal regular yeah not that I have a concern of anybody here but a chair in the future that decided to bu this through they appear to have board
approval for whatever the heck they're trying to bully through so I would think that it would have to come from the board the the issue yeah I guess I'm just looking if you could read it just the first sentence one more time at the annual reorganization meeting the board
chairperson chairperson May appoint up to four board members to a sub committee at the annual reorg meeting yes if a consensus of the board is to review the bylaws you don't like that I don't think
it's way I don't think it's the way it's read can you read it again as as is or with no okay as is rewind at the annual reorganization meeting the board chairperson shall or may appoint up to four board members to a
subcommittee established for the purpose of reviewing the board's rules that's the first okay all right so that's strictly the chairperson's decision under this way it's worded against whether or not the board wants to do it or
not is that the way we want it can I just for clarification this is just because it's the bylaws no I understand not any other Committee just the bylaws right I I don't disagree because you never know in the future and it could be something material or it could say
something like the chair may ask for a vote to review the bylaws if the chair if the chairs that out of sync with the board they're not going to get voted in as a chairperson to in the reorg meeting funnier things have happened right no I hear you and that's why we want to get
this straight I mean I don't know how you build a consensus though a simple floor a simple just majority of members of the board find it prudent the board chair okay that's fine the thought
member you know five members or whatever and then if once established the chair may I just want to make sure that's consistent with ML that we could just yeah it's you know this is one of those more you know discretionary right things
like this is your your okay here I'm totally comfortable with that okay so at the annual reorganization meeting um if a majority of board members then present finds it prudent
the board chairperson why don't we just make it man it's done every year for four months and a chair yeah but it may not beant and necessary I mean we may have other more issues I just don't want to make something yeah necessarily
mandatory but that goes it's the same point I guess it would a quick it could be do a quick review so so one of the ways that works on the township committee for police roles and rs at the very first meeting that's that's something that we vote on and usually that's rubber stamped that it hasn't CH
changed from the previous year but if there is discussion then it ensues that that a committee is so it could be it just be at the reorg meeting the board shall uh vote on to whether or not to accept the bylaws in the written form blah blah
blah and then that's your stage gate for whether or not you then you're but the whole event is 10 seconds 10 seconds I like that so your point is you you know before going to the meeting that you may want to change anything and if you do want to change it's like reviewing it's like reviewing the
minutes before meeting me anybody have a problem with the with the bylaws blah blah blah sounds good sounds good that way can you capture that I'm trying to good luck so we just want to leave it
up to a majority of the board members at that point in time That's essential what you suggesting Scott I think right I I think we're what we're suggesting is just simplified it more at the reorg meeting the board shall the votes on shall vote to accept the bylaws as written for the ensuing year you're
talking toote on the correct yeah okay and if there's a dissension if there's a dissension or a thumb down vote then a committee would be created at the direction of the chairperson to evaluate that and come back with a
suggestion right this way it's actually a little bit cleaner it forces everybody to kind of think about what they're voting for so that is a shall the board shall vote to reopt the existing byw whatever form
they're in such a the chairperson shall app point of the four board members there sounds good okay all right so then I think I got this so I think the way we want it to read is at the annual
reorganization meeting the board shall vote to readopm MERS to a subcommittee established for the purpose of reviewing the board's rules this subcommittee if so established um shall review the board's
rules and offer recommendations to ify the rules to the whole of the board for discussion and approval by no later than the first board meeting in April of that calendar year it's pure legal poetry it is I couldn't have wrote it better myself we'll have to read three times to
figure out what and you realize we've still got back a month and a half to change it and I I don't you said up to it's still up to four board members right right well you need that no more than four up to four up to four right it's fine yeah okay perfect okay there
probably simpler way to write that but fly you know okay so I think and I think that's it so everyone's cool then I think we can adopt as amended and move on will you give it over to the zoning board as well for their review with they
we can for them to copyright that I'm sure it's in language that they may want to yeah yeah I'll put a final one together get on yeah yeah either tomorrow or or Friday I got a no Thursday I got a got a busy day tomorrow yeah just so the numberings all check so
just do a good typo check of course yeah any any typos any misn numbers would also yeah misn numers is that I say it incorrect numbering that would also be corrected as well if if it's there okay right if we're comfortable is there a motion to accept so as amended
as amended for our discussion this evening as amended a second okay great comme lavender yes Mr hands yes Miss D yes Mr laio yes Miss oens yes Mr alala yes
chairman Richardson yes excellent good good job thank you all for and thank you especially to the subcommittee that helped to roll up sleeves and work through that so great job okay next is uh an update on the state cross
acceptance process so I don't know uh who has been designated for Mr Jones Mr hands are you that's fine I'll take it provide just a quick brief summary of where we are yeah actually this would be
easy on Zoom meeting but I guess we can't do that so you going have to bear with with us as we walk through this a bit so uh firstly Tom did a great job putting everything into a spreadsheet so now we've got uh a number of tabs to the
spreadsheet timeline goals the surveys that and then the questions and then we included the uh the map a a map for reference and then just put in the state plan's comments about the
area that we are in okay so I haven't said all that so I think last time out we talked briefly about you know the plan itself so I'm not sure if anybody's gone back over it in much detail I'm sure you
could probably speak more eloquently than I can on the whole plan but I I don't know about that but it's basically 10 goals you know Economic Development housing infrastructure etc etc that State's looking
to to sort of uh suggest and recommend that everybody's looking at the within land use with the same sort of lens of certain subjects match right so some of the things are you know climate change
infrastructure uh Equity plan and sound planning stuff so that's all good right so I'm not going to go through this in detail because it's it's going to be it's one of these things you probably have to sit back for a few minutes so I think the challenge right now is to think about what are the important
things that we should discuss as a board perhaps what the one or two questions that you think about as a board and you may want to apply on before we submit something presumably to the township to go to mois County to submit to the state okay and there is a meeting at Mo toown
on Friday I think Bob and I hopefully will attend all being well um maybe get more this Friday this coming Friday mo so some of the question so let me just back up a bit further the planning area
that we are in and it's quite an interesting one if you ever look at the map and go online and and look at the map but we're in this planning area pa5 which is designated as sort of sensitive environmentally sensitive planning
area okay which I think is interesting bearing in mind Warren I think is um which was Metro and Berkeley Heights is urban something along those lines so there's a very distinct border where we
are because of basically the river and the flood shed and the uh and the swamp has designated us very much in environmental sensitive area so we're on that side of the equation as opposed to the
urban buildout of the surrounding towns to us just our neighbors right so I think that's quite an interesting thing to just be conscious of as we think through what does this what does this all mean all mean to lill
so having said that so as an environmentally sensitive planning area there's some guidelines and as you can imagine they're more focused towards environmental right so so some of the things are um and firstly some of the
categories of to be environmentally sensitive area population density of less than a th000 people per square mile so we're per the master plan 11.8 square miles 8,621 people so it's 731 people per square mile so we do fit that metric
MH which is good right and then some of the things that they would talk about are or the intent of the planning area is to protect environmentally environmental resources protect both large and small contigous areas of land promote ReStore
in habitats and biodiversity accommodate growth only in sensors so that's the sort of things to think about um confirming programs SE and public water services to centers Revitalize Revitalize cities towns and
older traditional set settlements it's s then centers and revitalization and protect and enhance the diversity of the existing character of stable communities so it does it's not saying from that we have to mass
build out and do lots of development that's why I would read it but I'm sure they have some different opinions so what was that density number it was let our density is this is just my simple math for 8,629
people 11.8 square miles hope I'm right is that 731 people square mile right it's less than a thousand it's less than a thousand and so what what what what are they consider to be the maximum population according to their density the designated for this are is a th000 a
lot of the others per square mile some the others are over a th000 first square mile right so that's one of the categories so we blow that cap right so which is good one thing think oh my gosh are we over that like is that a debatable point thankfully we're nicely
under that and then they go into some criteria about and some of this stuff is you know not really fat production water so about 10 criteria that I don't think are overly important to us at this point in
time the main point is the environmentally sensitive area surrounded by Urban environment sensitive is still hard in as well so anybody in the swamp and a bit of chat and some areas of chatting as you can imagine so that's that's sort of The
Guiding principles we can work from does that all make sense there's a quick background there I think just to interject too I mean one key feature of our master plan and certainly our conservation element was was to uh
promote and pursue uh as a goal to update an environmental resource inventory and I think we as a board need to support our environmental commission yeah and and really put that up to the four especially now with this cross
acceptance process identifying Us in that area it puts even more of a premium on making sure because you got to understand what you're protecting and what the inventory is of the environmental issues okay but it's it's important to recognize that that
classification if you will is the same classification that the township was in in the last plan from 2001 yep so so that didn't change that didn't change the the category is a little bit broader now in
in in the prior plan there were a couple other classifications or groupings that that combine them now so but it hasn't changed where they have placed the township itself because the criteria stayed the
same so the criteria for the density stayed the same so it was the same or is it now are you more dense to still be in this I I don't know what I didn't I didn't go back to look at all of the criteria in the 2001 plan but it's like
I think it's um it's up to a th000 people and the smaller criteria was like 100 people per square mile or something right which we wouldn't have met under any circumstances in 2001 I'm just wondering if it was like 800 or
something previously right and we were close before and now all of a sudden they've expanded for everybody at this point due to the growth of the county that's all basically what they're saying is that this 11.8 square miles can support up to 11,800 people and still be
and so the that begs the question where would you put those people and what would you need in terms of services and schools and correct this that and the other yep so those are all the things you start getting to think about so I'll just finish off the pruny stuff
so just set the background and then to those points those are things we should discuss as the board as to how we want to respond to the questionnaire okay uh remind us again what the deadline is for
a response right now end of that March 31 Mar was coming up pretty quick yep so let us and I think when we had Jessica here was like well could be extended maybe maybe
we may get a better sense on Friday a more formal hopefully at um at the meeting pres but yes right now end of March and we did also talk about potentially having a a meeting to discuss everybody's points of view so we then can submit assumed to the township
committee or the township administrator who's going to submit the yeah I mean that's the other thing is what's the deliverable what's the document that gets submitted do you know Chris I believe it's I think it's a
questionnaire that you you send right right this right I think the Govern just a question right and so I'm pretty sure it comes from the governing body they send it in on the Township's behalf I could be mistaken on that but I heard I mean but are we are we being
invited to either agree or um disagree with the assertions that are made yeah absolutely we go yeah right so just one point on that you look at the boundary conditions
right the worst case right you start at the density 11,800 people look at that scenario could we ever support that right where would we put those people how would we provide services that would require a buildout analysis for the town
yeah right but I where I'm going to you know we need to identify what we need to either agree or disagree with right the levers in this that have the most impact against us and I think that density thing is like high suspect yeah yes right so but
we have to affordable housing that doesn't include in that number for the Third round it was the third right and the fourth round up coming oh yeah right so there's at least 1500 people I just top of my head, 1500 people so we're going to hit near the 10,000 Mark pretty
quickly just on what we've already been designated to or we'll designate probably two as well so we're going to get closer to that more yeah is there any other number that we're quote unquote looking to negotiate or not besides density in terms of numbers I don't
think it's in terms of numbers was as Crystal as that so let me just go through the other points very quickly and then we can decide how we want to take this discussion further forward because I think everybody needs a few minutes or time just to think through some of the stuff anyhow so what the key
so the question as as we showed last time a lot of this stuff is relatively straightforward you know we could just things say things like um yeah we have addressed this in the master plan like we said last time master plan actually did pretty reasonable job addressing a lot of the
things so we can point to that reasonbly clearly and confidently say yeah we have thought about this stuff okay so I think some of the questions where we start to think about a bit more deeply
is um and I'll just read not necessar my comments but the way the ones that I think more discussion and some of the stuff uh you know again just lifted some of our responses are lifted from the master plan itself we've addressed this by
going if you go to the master plan you're going to see it so hopefully that gives a confidence to people that we have you know conformed if you will with the so some of the questions if inconsistent so let me see if I can put
the background to that question reviewing the 10 goals of the prary state plan indicate the degree to which the municipality having key concepts of and key Concepts and policy objectives of
the plan so what have we done to or where do we think what level this goes to your numbers a little bit know so this one maybe we're 50% I don't know if we can come to something like that and this goal we 60% I'm not sure sure we can quite get to that point but so
um we've asked for Jessica maybe to to help us to respond how we want to respond to that in terms of um what we've already written and how much does that conform to the plan does that make sense the
municipal plan versus our master plan maybe have Jessica or somebody try and put those numbers today and say yeah we've addressed 90% of this particular subject or 20% of that and even though we only address 20% that's all we can really address because of
these conditions right so David so perhaps it's higher level the recommendations in the master plan would that correlate with what the the state is inv visioning we have exactly some of the points here we pulled out Tom Tom
went to the exercise and said here's here's a here's some distinct recommendations from the master plan to address these points gotcha so I think it's uh so the ones where if inconsistent so now
we go to the negative side of it if inconsistent how municipality or County become more aligned with the state goals and how will this be achieved and and predicted timeline for consistency so where we may say we're pretty confident in some subjects there may be some areas
that even we can challenge ourselves and say well actually we could do a little bit better job okay so the ones that I picked up and Bob maybe you can add on your comments as well here I think some of the key points are coming out are reuse repurpose rebuild I think I said
this the last meeting connect and recenter so with those sort of emphasis coming from the state plan yes we we talked about um centering around the Villages that became a focus of the master plan so then I'll just step back a little bit further and say is our
master plan challenging ourselves hard enough to do some of that stuff or is it about right then that' be the discussion Point perhaps of the board to say actually what we vote we are we think we're still consistent because we are addressing the centering and we think we're doing it in
a very constructive And Timely fashion right or we may come back and say well maybe we could do a little bit stronger job in one or two areas right so reuse and thermoplastics always comes to mind what can we do we've had that as a
Redevelopment area for so long now still go my wife every time we go by it's been the 20 years still the same still the same so then what that then resonates with me a little bit is how then can the state or somebody else help
us overcome some hurdles that we can't overcome ourselves right so for me some of the answers back to the plan is not what we can do locally but what can the state help us do right so what where where do we need
help if thermoplas is going to be another 20 years doing exactly same thing because we can't get the redevelop if we weren't able to get the hous in there because of the flood and all that sort of stuff is there something that we could do better or rather is there more help that we need for very specific areas to help us meet the goals that
you've asked us to meet state plan so where do do we want to approach that subject and they put any time constraints around their goals well I didn't see I didn't read time did you did they put what any time
constraints in in the plan in the state plan in the state plan in their in their goals no I I didn't read it any deadline dates it it's it's more a vision to 2050 based upon a 2025
plan I don't recall seeing dates at all you know one of the things that I've seen other towns use in this type of context is use this to support appealing to the state for Grants that's what I think this is where we should think exactly you just you turn that language
right back around in regards to you set this as a goal great but we need help with funding because there is there is some language in in the plan that says it the plan should help Foster right
investment by investments in communities to to to address what the state plan's looking to do it has that kind of language in it so for me that's one of the key Avenues here the rail trail by rail we can't do it alone we need New Jersey Transit so where can the state
actually help turn it around a little bit and there maybe one Avenue that we can go can go down um and I'm going to I'm going to stop here for a second Bob ask Bob to just give a couple of comments but is it worth just I don't know if
everybody wants to read the sure great everybody read the whole plan be fantastic right absolutely can we maybe just send out a few points of areas of thought that we could then discuss at the speaking on behalf of the board we would appreciate your distillation and
summary you guys are really smart and good readers yeah it's 160 pages long too right so but we would appreciate any distillation down to okay here's what we have deemed to be the key issues have you guys reached a consensus guys and G
I think we we've got some ideas we haven't I've got mine Bob's got his Tom's got his we've sort of working together there's I I don't think any of us are diametrically with each other on what the plan says I mean the point that you rais SC about
what do you do about one uh a thousand people per square mile kind of stuff that needs a little bit more research to figure out if that's exactly what it's saying or even implying I think they were trying to set categories
for groups but um it needs to be looked at to make sure that's what it was because they have breakdowns of village town municipality all that kind of stuff in terms of size and number of people
per square mile kind and I didn't look at it from that perspective is could they pushing for this right um but the other the other piece of it is the way the township is designated and the way
the properties are defined they're they're very clear about identifying the the state open space the township open space the connection to the Great Swamp and from from my read that's the
same way it was in 2001 so I I didn't get the sense that they were trying to shift something for the township but that requires some more look back in the 2001 to see what it specifically says and we we can do that it's a good catch MH
um in general I think we believe that the updates of the the master plan were very timely for this because they've gone through a lot of review um they've caught up with a lot of the things that are in this plan especially the stuff on
uh sustainability which we have a specific element on um the one piece that we're not relying on an up to date one is the the fish or housing plan
and land use element right that or housing element I'm sorry that's the one that we have a committee to to finish um and and having some guidance from that team that says we don't think
what's in here is going to be affected by the way the plan's being Rewritten you know I I think we're and pretty good lock step with the state plan because it's very high
level but I think it's a wonderful opportunity though to Circle back and then reemphasize connections with the state plan with our master plan to then set priorities because I think there's a
convergence here that I think it's important to identify as we go through this process I would recommend uh Liz leaney be very much involved with this because of her in-depth knowledge of our own master plan which she was very
instrumental in drafting I think she would pick up even more so not that Jessica couldn't do it but I just think Liz is closer to the master plan our master plan to look for those connections uh so what what is the
recommendation here in regards to um how we push forward with this process and one more subject just very quickly before we get to that point um for me the water Shar the Ron River back to the state level thing you
got the highlands Council youve got the um pic river towns there needs to be more of a connection overlap between that and work together for the whole of the P River um let us go to the meeting
on Friday M let us have a chat with Tom and and maybe Liz as well and then come back to the board with a a brief summary and maybe you know hear the five or six things maybe to think about perfect and then we'll come back at maybe at the next board meeting who
would have a chance you think what's our what's the that'd be fine what's on the dock was is there something that we could take on the next meeting that a problem and would you be ready by the next Mee I guess we have a subdivision application that I just
received but that won't be ready till the end of March okay so Friday's the meeting maybe next week we can get something to the board when's the next meeting 110 that's two weeks away so so hold on the response to the county is due back on the 31st of
March right so I think that has to I think they would have officially have to come through the planning board it might be or not to the planning board so through the governing body if I'm not mistaken um so I think they would need to meet prior to you know before that goes out the door now so I guess my question is Scott I don't know you know
when when's the the last Township committee meeting in in March is there do you guys meet once a month tce oh 26 okay so we got plenty of time okay but question yeah okay How firm is that March 31st deadline well that's a question we Friday on Friday hopefully
we get sense I mean I think the sense is too if you can you know if you were able to show progress or something I agree with that all right our second meeting would be on 25th it's in progress okay okay we're not you so make sure you know everything's
so let's do that let's go to the meeting and hope to come back to the board but um with something bit more very quickly last question and shut up Chris is there anything that we said tonight about the plan that you would say yay or nay to or
no look it's it's you know it's what you guys think but in terms of what we've interpretation of it I hope we we not no I I think you guys are understanding it pretty accurately and how all this works I mean it's you know at the end of the day again you got to you're going to
submit your responses to the county the count is going to generate something that they're going to send to the state so you got to see what they come back with I mean you could you know okay scream from the heavens but if they don't listen to you then right what's it really worth um I mentioned this in the last meeting but in the event that you
guys disagree with what Morris County wants to submit to the state the opportunity to to weigh in to weigh in and say right but that becomes a completely different process now you've become a negotiating entity right so that's a lot more work and yeah so hopefully we don't need to cross that
bridge but if we do we we'll cross when we come to it you know what I mean okay so the next plan board meeting that'll be the open discussion hopefully yeah we'll being well and anybody from the public can app as well yeah thank you very much thanks for that
briefing that was very helpful there thanks for the work you guys are doing on the cross acceptance process so quick question yes so when you say 11.8 miles is the size of the Town that's what the Great Swamp yes right that's the border of the whole town if
the border of the whole town including what we go into the Great Swamp so but there's also carve outs for environmental areas that are state federal so do they change the calculation do they reduce the or increase the density increase the
density based on the actual area that could be built I think that' be a question question best unasked yeah but but just your Qui your point if you look at the map it does point out the Great Swamp so absolutely right point it does say the Great Swamp is a park so that's sort of off the
table okay however they then will come back so that's a fair point because I think this Scott's point about density right if you take that out and then they increase the density by 25% from 800 per yeah to a th000 you know if they change
the the denominator effect here for us that could have a pretty significant effect so but but if you look at the maps with what they Define as potentially potential properties for development in the town if if you were doing a calculation that was going to
drive the number so high you would have to identify a bunch of property to do that and they've already categorized so much of the property into environmentally sensitive areas that the the the map that they've developed only
identifies three properties for development right right and they're small so you know they're not going to be huge so I I'm not I'm not sure that they're they're using it to say that the town can go to that level
but it's it clearly needs the research to decide if that's what right they're implying in any way so I guess then if you get a comfort level as you said about the Fe that they have thought about it and they said these are one or two areas you could redevelop so therefore you would think then they may
be factored in everything right no I so I think it's I just want to make sure that they don't when you go to the meeting right because this is the open Period where people can make comments and if somebody goes in there and says you know we should really be looking at this for areas that have higher
jurisdictional uh laws that say that you know you can't we're not even going to count that we're going to to change how we we view all the towns going for forward by taking that out of your effective area right yeah that's
absolutely that point thank you okay uh moving along it was mentioned um during your briefing about the housing element and I can give a status that uh our um board planner is diligently working on that uh draft document and that is due
to be out in March so we will assemble our subcommittee or committee around that support Liz in regards to that it's it's highly numbers driven a lot of Statistics it's if you look at our older housing element it's uh it's one of the
drier elements not a lot of language mostly tables and figures but Liz is assembling all that we should have that by March and then we're going to start cesing that with the affordable housing um uh plan that Jessica is working on uh
to bring that all uh into into one um but we do need to go through as a planning board and and uh opine and then review and approve that H housing element as part of this process and we'll come up with a date and so forth
to do that uh ordinance Review Committee anything more to share is anybody thees do you want to uh yeah we've all been honestly missing each other the past few weeks but we still have sheds ordinance places of worship and we've
working on the villages ordinances um the tricky thing with the villages is it touches so many other ones and once you kind of open that can of worms you want to make sure you're hitting all of them um honestly I've been trying to get with
Liz but based on your comment it makes sense maybe I've been missing her because she seems busy with something that might be a little bit more important yeah well that that's a huge the the housing element okay right but she still should have no that's fine I'm just I'm glad I know
that now um yeah and and Tom is obviously the chair of the sub commmittee so uh hopefully next meeting we can I'm curious I don't know Don or the whole group like I know we had that chart the flow
chart that Liz presented which is great but like how do we actually start getting that moving along like because I know we brought the sheds here but there were a lot of opinions and so then we took it back and so now what are we going to keep bringing I'm using the sheds as an example are we keep bringing
it back and keep getting more opinions like at what point do we say enough right well yeah and like now it's going to move to the next step right so just I think as a group we I think we were getting close and then we lost some momentum the problem too is if we pick it up and put it down for too long yeah
then people have a whole different set of opinions it's it's funny as I walk around town I notice more sheds out of compliance than I've ever seen in our rule about that German right philosopher
something right about that right and then Scott I don't know from your perspective like simultaneously we have the ordinance that came from you guys that were reviewing for consistency and
I'm trying to implement in my comments here that you'll see I'm trying to implement some just some of the same principles even from the ones that come from you guys which is the consistency Clarity and all that and and just to clarify I mean the the the just to to to
to uh clarify the issue of this this is not a land use ordinance so this becomes a little bit challenging for us to comment on as a board from that standpoint we're not asking for a consistency review in this case so I think that what what we're proposing to
do instead of even discussing this is that we've got some great comments that were provided as we'll just I'll forward this to the the board the township committee attorney exactly uh copy of the mayor Etc and they'll have the comments great okay so that yeah just
because we've got a lot of work we've got enough work to do on the land use side than having to review lots of other ordinances that come in I guess I guess we just need to decide at what point are we as a planning board going to take chunks that the subcommittee is working
on and saying like Okay we're now going to put I think the next step is the township committee for the first review yes so the first reading right first reading y y um and I would love to do that with those three and oh and I'm I'm sorry Deb you had also said like I was
kind of in my I was I remember one day I was like zeroed in and I was working on all them and it was like she's supposed to be doing that right sorry okay doing well yeah so what she will do is when when we are are at a
point with certain thin sheds whatever we're looking at maybe you know three time she'll put that into the ordinance and then it's just really a matter of the board adopting but when you say put it into an ordinance do you mean like write it into because I was like writing
it well these are amendments to the an already existing ordinance right so what she's doing essentially is just um doing an update to give to the township committee right versus a brand new or no no I know I was doing in track changes right cuz
it's 2025 right and I'm not like striking out and making things red right is that okay to do it and like I would think so because but then why but that's kind of what I'm saying like why is can I do that to move this along with some of them or she because I don't want
to yeah you can whatever you present to the board if the board it all says yes we love this send it to the township commit then that you give me the permission and I send it yeah and it's their responsibility to synthesize that into a written right ordinance for adoption you know there's two ordinances
right there's you know I think what you're referring to is the code right that's where everything's kind of laid out an ordinance per se is just a you know that's what they vote on and adopt it then becomes orance right so so whether it's an amendment to an
existance or if it's a new land use ordinance right it goes to the township commit they then it comes back to us for consistency one last time yeah I mean I have a bunch in track changes David I don't know if you agree like that we're in a decent
place with some of them to no yeah I think that I don't I don't know how to get everybody on the same page to bring I just haven't looked at it I'll be completely that's fine I just had I was waiting until I got got stuck
in this as opposed to going to that just the time another critical element that we are making some movement on is uh Joe's work our our um Township committee engineer updating the zoning Maps because those
were woefully out of date getting overlay synthesized and he is now I think that's become almost a top priority for him to complete that talk to him because some of these impact that absolutely and and it and it was very hard to like you said open up the the
Box and then not have accurate information as to the zoning the way the zoning overlays and what has evolved since really 2016 in a lot of instances can I um I'm sorry interject that and if you feel like the committee feels like
you're at a point with something that you're working on sheds or The Villages or something that you know you're coming you're having an issue behind the scenes then bring it to the board on an agenda and that's what we're here we sit here all talk about it the problem is you
just you can't talk about it with other board members behind the scenes right we just need to you can bring it to the agenda any time right it doesn't mean you're going to vote on doesn't necessarily mean you have to vote on it you know but you can so if the committee is at a point where you're like oh you we're struggling with this then put it
on the agenda give it to us to put on the agenda and you have a discussion about it okay so the next meeting let's put it on yeah well we're going to bring sheds I'm I'm not going to be at the next sheds places of worship and The
Villages um and hopefully we can bring those and at least get a concessive consensus from the planning board and I'd love to get that moving and then we'll pick the next three and I think like you said momentum is let me can I can I jump in here for a second I wanted to get this point across because we want
to you I think Tom had kind of like a playbook for all these ordinances right we need to think about the pipeline here the process turning this into a machine so we start cranking through and so let me say what I have to say we create these ordinances here
they're going to be markups of existing ordinances right our output here is an agreed upon markup of an existing ordinance which addresses a checklist on Tom's thing that goes to the township
committee and Jack piget it's discussed in public I would like to have a planning board member there besides myself because I'm on the committee because I don't think we want the committee looking at these things cold and freewheeling they're like well
I don't think I think Barn should be R you know right it happens right so someone from the planning board not me who can stand up and participate in comments and educate the township committee on exactly what was the intent and how this connected back to the
master plan right because the basis for because honestly I mean eight people here should probably be close to the pin and and and land this within a centimeter of where it needs to be without everybody having to hit the fire hydrant so to speak
right alterate I'm happy to attend to because remember everything we're doing here affects my position also zoning right because what we don't want to do is just just get into vapor lock where we keep spinning around these things here and then we spin around the township committee and then it comes
back down and nothing gets done right good point right so that you know that's the pipeline I think it's important when it gets to the township committee that a planning board members there and Deb yourself you know to kind of give the gloss on exactly what we were thinking when we did this in reference to the
master plan I think you're right Scott too because I think that a lot of questions come up too especially since we as a board cannot take you know input from the public when we are sitting and deciding but you as the township committee can right so comes up I I
think it's very a good idea to have right and objections will come up and the committee will not be able to answer them because they have they don't have a PhD in the master plan that's fine yeah good I think that's a good idea all right I think that's a good plan yeah I
my my goal for 2025 is to get moment because I I think we all have been looking back and going like gosh we've been holding these at least the sh for a long time right right let's get the low some of the lwh hanging fruit you know plucked off the tree you would think it
would be lwh hanging right you would think but obviously it's not I think Scott's point is the important one like we have to figure out how to systematically do this right and whether it's every one of these meetings just have one on the topic at this point just to have suggest just to have something
to discuss right because I feel like Teresa is doing a lot with the committee like just put one on here to get the discussion so we're not getting bogged down and you guys are working so hard behind theen but it also brings up topics that we may not be thinking about and this way to
Scott's point we kind of get in the habit of doing this and and I think we prioritize these over other stuff that just seems to come up out of nowhere like this thing that was sent to you guys to review from the committee by the township committee yes without these things here should be prioritized coming
out of here correct right because we've deemed it to be these are all the things we need to fix as opposed to other ideas which just seem to float out of the air well the timing is good because we do not have a lot of applications so this is this is our window because then all
of a sudden we could get very busy with applications and it's going to be harder to find time for that I don't want to speak for Tom but he did have a a spreadsheet going and um if I think I think one thing that he had said in the past was like anyone
here that identifies other ones that like I don't think Tom because it would it's a lot for one person or for people to identify every single ordinance that needs to be changed so just if you identify one ping me David or Tom and it can be added to that pipeline I will try
to one of these days this week or next sit down and and do some of that work which is I think looking at the master plan itself and then looking at our code book and another key input is we've got to put some pressure on uh I guess it's Liz working with Ed we need input from
the zoning board yeah that's an important report that they provide in regards to what are they tripping over because they're on the front lines with a lot of these ordinances is to get that information which would help inform Us in regards to what should be prioritized
as well so I thought that that's I mean I think they're are they working on it have you heard anything more on that not yet yes I know I because I because I have to put basically what I do is I put everything together all the applications yes and note you know okay well this was
impervious coverage this this was bulk St you know I kind of noted and then I basically distribute it to uh the two professionals three professionals and they give their input as to you know into all these
areas like for instance we have seen dozens of in purpous coverages you know in the past couple years so that's going to be you know discuss okay it's just a matter of putting it all together and Basel great perfect so you know the
downside of all this now is no more cancel planning board meetings because there'll always be something to discuss we make them quick we'll make them quick exactly or cons okay speaking of quick any other New or Old
business great is there a motion to adjourn so I moved second all in favor e e e e e