Test. Test. >> The minimum is the same. >> Yeah, I think so. >> We're ready. >> In compliance with the open public meetings law, notification of this meeting has been sent our official newspapers and other publications circulated in the Borough of Old Tappan and notice has been posted on the
bulletin board of Borough Hall. Please note all meetings are videotaped and posted on the website. Fire exits are located at the main entrance to the Council Chambers and in the rear of the Council Chambers. Everybody please stand to salute the flag. >> 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. >> Do the roll call. >> Here. >> Mr. Marini? >> Here. >> Mr. Lessing?
>> Mr. Jones? >> Here. >> Councilman Martello? >> Here. >> Councilman Boyes? >> Here. >> Mr. Savino? >> Here. >> Mr. DeZenzo? >> Here. >> Mr. Zaretsky? Mr. Kramer? >> Here. >> Mr. Costigliola? Mr. Rubino? >> Here.
>> Do we have a quorum? >> Do we have a quorum? >> We do. >> I think so, yeah. >> We definitely have a quorum. >> So, we have to go into closed session. Uh I don't know how long that will be. >> What is this gentleman here on? >> Yeah. >> 139 here. The resolution? >> Why don't we do his resolution now?
>> I'm I'm happy to do that. >> Uh I think that would be good. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> What's the resolution? >> keep him around? >> To memorialize a variance approval for a golf golf pavilion. >> Oh, I remember that one. >> Yeah. Okay.
Um it required a D4 variance. So, uh class one and class three members can't Mr. Boyce. And Mr. Maltese would have to he didn't participate in the
original hearing. So, we would need a motion to approve the resolution. >> Motion to approve the resolution. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Jen, can you call seven? >> Mr. Maggio? >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Salomone? >> Yes. >> Mr. Badini? >> Yes. >> Mr. Kramer? >> Yes. >> Mr. Zaretsky? >> Yes. >> We don't have enough. >> How many do you have? >> Six. >> That's That's okay. >> Second.
>> You only need five. >> Okay. >> Perfect. Congratulations. All right. Now, we're going into closed session. >> [laughter] >> Have a great rest of the evening. Whereas the Open Public Meetings Act, N.J.S.A. 10:4-12, permits the public body to
exclude members of the public when certain matters of are discussed. And whereas the Borough of Boonton Planning Board wishes to discuss pending litigation. It's still pending litigation. Um And the name of the case is
T.E. Holdings versus Mayor and Council of the Borough of Boonton et al. Docket number L-4189-23. Uh and said matter of is a matter of litigation that can be conducted in closed session. Um now, therefore, be resolved that the
discussion in closed session may be made public at a time when the determinant of the borough's interest will not be adversely affected. And be it further resolved for the aforesaid reason the public is excluded the portion of the uh during which time the above item of litigation will be discussed. And we'll
need a motion and a second. We need a motion and a second. >> Motion. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I vote. >> All righty. Mr. Gravel, thank you. Before we go, we can skip to an the engineer's report. Do you have anything else for us?
>> Nothing else. That was really the only thing on my agenda tonight. >> It was good good agenda. All right. Thank you, sir. You You're more than welcome to hop out of if it suits you. All right. >> Thank you. >> All right. Take care. Good luck.
All right. Seeing nobody in the audience, suggest making a motion for the public to open for non-agenda items. Uh environmental commission report. >> We failed to secure a forum at the main meeting, so that meeting was canceled.
We are off for July and August, so our next meeting will be in September. Uh I will tell you that we did hold the Hooked on Fishing Contest at the beginning of June. Uh it was a lively crew there on that day. Not too many fish were caught, but everybody had a
good time. And hoping to do it again to do that again next year. >> That's fun. Where did they actually do that? >> Down at the Hackensack River down at Harmon Park. >> Nice. >> Yeah, I heard we had um apparently Westwood held the same event
on the same day and they just advert copycatted the heck out of it. They couldn't have heard a lot I heard that they were jammed with people. And they had special fish stocking at their >> Oh, well, that'll do it. That's the trick. >> Yeah, we were we were really you know,
we were the second choice that day. >> All right. We're getting guppies. All righty. Council liaison report. >> No report. >> Nice. Construction official report everybody received. Financial secretary report.
>> All right. We had a lot of action month. As far as budget goes, we had $1,462.50. Escrow, we went from zero last month to $18,438.90 for a total of $19,901.40. >> Sweeping reform, looks like we got some
funding. Would anybody like to make a motion regarding paying those funds? >> I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion. >> Okay. I think we have three motions, so one of those can count as a second, I guess. All in favor?
>> Aye. >> All right. All right. Minutes, I know we will see them at the next meeting. New business, we're going to skip, we're going to go to the end on the master plan. We'll just get through everything else and focus on the master plan. Any old business?
I know we had been talking to Ed about doing some drafts drafts of the ordinances, so if you get an opportunity, just remind him of that. I think he was going to work on that. Any communications? None. We did the resolution.
Um, that's it. So, let's go right into the master plan. I I I really hope everybody had an opportunity to at least look at the master plan, if not read it. >> Good evening. Members of the board, um, here we are looking at a re-examination of our last
master plan document. And what I prepared in conjunction with the discussion today is a PowerPoint. And we can go through it. It concisely points to the key elements of the re-examination report. Uh, condensed it
down to three pages and 11 page slides. We'll go through the key elements of the the document, but that does not preclude discussion. After that, uh we can have a robust discussion about the kinds of things that you would like to address. Anything in the re-examination document
that you would like to uh have noted, any typos or any errors you might see. Hopefully there aren't many or any. Uh but let's let's go through this and just as a reminder, the municipal land use law requires that
municipalities look at their master plans uh at least every 10 years, minimum. And the consequence of not doing that is that there's a rebuttable presumption of of uh rebuttable presumption of validity to zoning. So, it affects your zoning if
you don't do it. And it's interesting legal language cuz it's a rebuttable presumption. So, you could always argue your case, but you shouldn't even get there. Uh the board has always met its uh re-examination requirements in a timely manner. We are due to adopt this by no later than November, so we can do
so uh next meeting as we are preparing to do with the public hearing notice. Uh we should be well on our way to compliance. Uh once you do that, it doesn't mean that you can't re-examine it the next day. Issues come up during the course of the
year that you you don't believe are adequately addressed either by ordinance or by plan document. We're going to talk about some of those things tonight. Beautiful. Uh you can always amend. There are amendments that you can do. There's a process to that. I mean, it's not very difficult. And you can do many master
plans. You can do many amendments and uh address things as they go. So, it doesn't The 10 years is the max, but don't feel constrained to make changes if you need to in the interim. You can You have the ability to do that. >> We've never done that, have we, in the past? >> Uh we have not. Um and you know, that
takes consensus of the board and the bureau to fund and make sure that, you know, it's really necessary to do or not. And it depends on the severity of the of the issues. >> Mhm. >> Uh it just so happened that uh this this master plan process started last year. Why did we take so long to get to this
point? A few reasons, but the biggest reason is the affordable housing plan that the board adopted on the fourth round. I'm happy to say that we're working with the town, the board, and the and the borough officials. We filed We've got a consent and a compliance and a a
certificate of compliance has been filed with the court with fair shares busting significant. So, once that gets filed, you have your immunity for the next 10 years. Those elements have been incorporated as findings in the re-examination. And we'll we'll go through this. There's a little bit of iteration. A few other
issues have come up as well in a timely manner that we're able that we're able to incorporate those into the re-examination as well. One of them has to do with different types of housing groups, group homes, rooming houses, community for sober living facility. How do we deal with these land uses that are
coming in? And do our regulations adequately address those check neighbor. So, we'll talk a little bit about that as well. So, if you go to the slides >> One One quick question. >> Yeah. >> Can we just keep doing this forever every 10 years or at some point do we
have to then actually do a new master plan? >> Well, that's a great question. Um >> [cough] >> Originally I thought, well, you know, it's been a while, maybe we need a new master plan. But when I go through some of the documentation, if you've read the the re-examination report, not a lot has changed.
>> Mhm. >> [clears throat] >> You know, you saw your biggest growth spurt in the '60s and '70s and the '80s, and then everything leveled out. You have no land. We did our inventories for the housing plan. You've got nowhere else to go. >> So, there's no requirement to to >> No. >> Okay. >> You you As long as you're doing the
process and reaffirming and modifying conditions and goals and objectives as you go along, it remains a valid document. And what this document does is it takes everything that came before it, recognizes that things haven't changed, and those policies are still good. They're still valid. Uh
change just for the sake of change isn't always the best thing. If it works, then you know, don't don't fix it. So, but there are changes that we need to acknowledge. We'll talk about the town center. We'll talk about some things like senior housing, group homes, things of that nature that we do need to
address. There's also issues with regard to how we define lot lines and and and setbacks. We've run into those confusions a number of times over the course of the years. It's time to fix that. So, those are the recommendations that are coming out in the the plan for the examination report and
then we send it in. And then one other very important point and I'll be into the slides. The master plan is a policy document. It guides decision making. But in and of itself, it's not enforceable. But we need a re-ordinance. And that's where the recommendations are
to take a look at this ordinance, this ordinance, and should address this by ordinance. That becomes the implementation tool. And there's a consistency requirement under the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law that your master plan needs to be consistent with the regulations that you're adopting. Can't be too far out of whack.
That's why there's a consistency reviews every time the mayor and council introduce an ordinance, they send it here that affects the development regulations. We need to determine whether it's inconsistent. That's so that the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. Council's not doing something that
you're not aware of or that may be contrary to the plan and you can make recommendations. So, that that's a very important understanding between the nature of the two. The still be out of nature of the two. Policy >> Who does the consistency review?
>> When when when the mayor and council introduce an ordinance, policy, it gets sent if it's a development regulation, it gets into the planning board. And we've had a number of those. And the board determines with 26 >> 26 section 26 of the MLUL
>> Whether or not that the first uh, consideration is is it not inconsistent with the master? If it's not, you make that recommendation. Or it's 45 days to do so. If you don't, then the council's free to act on its own. If If that doesn't preclude you from
making recommendations on top of that. We can find it's not inconsistent, but you can say, "Hey, you know, maybe we want to change some language." And we've done that as well. And that's so that we're working in tandem with the mayor and council. So, that that ties everything together. Everybody wants to be on the same page.
>> If the planning board determines that it is inconsistent with the regulation, the governing body can still act. Except they have to set forth in the minutes their reasons for so acting and why they disagree with the, uh, planning board's determination of inconsistency. And it
also has to be by majority vote. Which would be, under our system, four votes. >> So, on the title page, you know, I filed one There are three three major findings in the document that that encapsulates the document.
First is looking at what's not happening in the borough, which is a lot of stability. There's really not a lot of development except in specific areas. We'll talk about where the development's happening. Uh, when you look at the fact there's been no changes, then the policies carry forward because, you know, we're not
going to arbitrarily change things if they are still relevant. The word is relevant, and if nothing's changed, they're still relevant. Uh, the plan is talking about focusing growth in the town center overlay area. We talked about that during the housing element, their shared plan. It's a
component of our affordability plan. And what we're trying to do is take that and leverage it into something positive for the community. And then final, uh, takeaway from the from the document, uh, so to speak, is we've always emphasized protecting.
We've always emphasized any application that came before the planning board. Um you are talking about protecting neighbors. That's always been the focus. That has never changed in this document. Those are the three key takeaways. So, primary primary conclusion and
recommendations is that the established policy There's no need to adopt this now. We can go through the whole expensive this because we have really not much has changed. We'll get into some of that in a moment. Uh established policies remain viable. Uh they remain valid. You could vote unanimously both out and well
established and well established within the community. So, what we're talking about is we're going to reaffirm strategic pivot here is we're going to reaffirm the 2006 and 2016 goals. We're going to amend our land use plans to recognize certain changes that have
occurred. And we're going to implement and recommend implementation of certain codes to make sure that the master plan is actually happening. Uh we have our fourth round Mount Laurel compliance. That's addressed. We are addressing our town center mixed use
revitalization of our retail area and modern residential neighborhood protection is going to be upgraded over the rest of the decade. Talking about community profile is you see a lot of statistics in this document. It goes through what's changed, what hasn't changed. There's been very little change.
Uh not surprisingly, you're still only 3.9 square miles. You haven't annexed any towns next door or anything, but And 92% of your assessed value is coming from residential uses. That's no surprise as well. There's still over 25 acres of vacant land, but none of that's
really buildable. They're all by name constraint. You have no industrial property to speak of. So, the implications are growth pressures have shifted from green field development because now all your farms and everything can develop. That's considered green field to kind of looking at redevelopment opportunities
in the in the borough, much like Pearson. That would be a good example of a redevelopment opportunity that happened and that was basically as a result of the third round of housing. Uh the residential character of this uh the borough has not changed
significantly. Uh there hasn't been a lot of individual still of a lot of lots cuz you don't have a lot of lots that have changed the character of some of the some of the neighborhoods. And the environmental constraints heighten the need for careful site design. We've always known that. You know, environmentally we've always been
conscious of things like wetlands, storm water, open space. We've always been worried about tree removal, tree replacement, landscaping, all of that which forms the character of the borough. So, this is reason why you can't do that. Demographic Demographically you can see
that there's been growth and healthy change. Uh the population's really not grown very much since 20 20 uh 2020 population told me about eight residents and that's going to be that's going to change by the way in the next census because of what's being built
now. That that's all going to get counted towards the next census. But for now, for our purposes with the current statistics that we have available, there hasn't been a lot of change. Uh median age has gone up slightly. That's not unusual. We are aging as a society, we know that. Household size
has really stabilized at 2.05 uh house persons per household. It's fairly stable. Um and if you look at the the bar chart for housing, you'll notice that we had 335 permits issued. But if you look at the chart, you'll notice the brown multi-family. That's kicking in on
the 2021-22. That's Pearson. That's being That's reflecting that redevelopment of that site. That's the major change. There've been a number of changes to state and county policies, state planning and new growth development before Obviously, the number one
priority for the state is always been affordable housing compliance and redevelopment opportunities. That particular policy of the state has been pushing for the past few years. Stormwater management control is a major difference in state policy where it's been strengthened and there are new
storm water requirements. Uh we now we talk about electric vehicle readiness, putting in EV stations, etc. And really much of the of what's happening in the boroughs being shaped by housing policy. We know that. We talked about that during the total
housing plan process. Uh if it were not for that, I think we would probably be very happy staying in the stable community that we are, but unfortunately, fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view, the real world that affects most communities uh has had an impact thoroughly on that.
We see it evidenced right here on Pearson. Uh as a result of the mandate we have the fourth round town center. Again, that's coming out of state policy. In the county plan alignment, you know, the Green County master plan, really if you look at it, it supports orderly development, which we're looking at and
and then housing diversity, which we are providing through our fourth round plan. We've always wanted to protect our local places and you know, mixed-use economic centers, well we're going to talk about creating that in the function of the plan. Uh policy takeaways, we we meet state
mandates through compact walkable town center strategy, walkable technical residential character. We're trying to balance out the two. We want to grow in a way that doesn't impact negatively our established neighborhoods. That's always been a But there are some issues that still persist and some that have emerged.
Affordable housing compliance will not go away. Uh there will be a round five. Um I won't be here for that. Good luck. I have no idea what's going to because all we have is a scanner. The fourth round has been an absolute disaster.
Procedurally, implementation-wise, it's been nothing but confusion. It's it's model policies. It's been hoping for major reform to come out of it. But but that's a hope. Uh infill redevelopment, we're still concerned about oversized homes. And
most specifically, what's left since you don't have a lot of land left. People are looking at their long lots. And without naming any particular application, they're trying to chop those up into opportunities for housing. But does that make sense? And then and you can remember you know you know
access issues. And and and how do we put houses behind houses? And are they now flag lots or are they flag lots? And these are the kind of issues that are emerging. And you might catch more of those because people are always looking for opportunities to build. Uh but I think that quite frankly, policies
that are in the we we we examination report have to support policy of if it doesn't fit in the neighborhood, you don't meet the negative criteria. And that's the criteria whereby when something has to seek a variance, and it's contrary to way it has a
detrimental effect to the zoning and detrimental to the impact on master plan. We have policies that talk about flag lots. And flag lot types of uses uh subdivisions. And you talk about the impact on neighbors. And so, you have those in there, but I think we could strengthen
those uh in this language that we can use and incorporate in here that would strengthen that. >> John, I I agree with that completely. The concern I have and some of you I think are aware of it. Pending legislation, there are three bills. One of which would allow
a single-family homeowner to build a second residential structure on their property. So long as it's 5 ft from the property line. It's just >> It says two dwelling units allowed. >> It's unbelievable. >> Churches are going to have an right to do housing? >> 40 to 90 units per acre.
>> Yeah. Um and they just came out with another one um where they want to relax a lot of requirements so that and by the way um it's not just New Jersey, a lot of states are talking about relaxing requirements to facilitate the construction of housing to bring down
costs because they look at it as a matter of supply and demand. Uh when you build a lot of housing, there's a competition and prices drop. That's the theory. Uh but the flip side of that is what is the cost of that both in terms of
population growth and what it does to the environment and neighborhoods. And um my position's always been well, we need to locate those in appropriate places and we'll talk about that and how we apply that principle in in local government. So, we got we talked about that at the I
think the last meeting. I know it was one of the last couple of meetings, that whole issue that that brought brought up. Is there if that gets passed, is there anything that we can do to prevent that? It It does it still have to come before the board or does it >> Well, it would have to come before the
board except except they have an as of right to do a certain density. >> They would got you would be in a position where you have to develop a town of policies to at least put some standards on it. You already have an accessory dwelling unit
provision in your ordinance for seniors. I mean, we did that to expand the opportunity for people to bring in their parents or or to provide senior Yeah, so it's it's a permitted process. It's in your ordinance now. This extends it to a lot of brackets. Uh though it's not law yet,
>> No, it passed committee though. >> Yeah, I mean, you know, it's it's not but here here's what I would suggest. If it should come to law, let's put it under a microscope cuz I don't know what final form it would be cuz it could get I don't know.
Let's let's focus on it and then let's address it, but right now it's not law or it's out of maybe scared of it. So so technically somebody can build an accessory dwelling unit and rent that out? Does that go into the lottery if it's affordable? >> No.
One unit could be one unit. So you could choose the the owner could build it and rent it out to Mr. Smith and Mrs. Jones or to your in-laws. >> It it it it it'll effectively be two dwellings on a lot. >> Or a >> attached dwelling two families. It's basically two families.
>> But what does that do to the floor area ratios? >> All that would have to be assessed and and it becomes very difficult when there's a state law that >> It overrides local zoning. >> Yep. >> I mean you might as well take most of your zoning laws and throw it in the garbage can.
>> So there's no ordinance that we can >> Nope. Nothing. >> No anti-demolition >> What if it was 40 units per acre? I mean >> It becomes a law that's signed into law. It's law. >> I mean the other one's not that great either. Up to 90 units per acre on a
church site. I mean that's what, a 10- 15-story building? >> Yeah. >> They don't care. These people are sick. >> It's a college dorm. >> I'm laughing on the outside, but I'm not laughing on the inside. >> The other issue that's emerging has to do with short-term rentals. You probably
heard of them. Is it a major issue in the in the borough? Perhaps not, but you do want to be able to have regulations for them and define >> That That kind of became a bit of an issue a few months ago with the World Cup thing. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Airbnb ordinances, right? >> Correct. And we don't really define it.
We we need to do a better job with our rental uh the rooming house definition, boarding house regulations. We need to make them a little clearer. Uh and then we have to deal now with the community silver living facilities, and they're not the only ones because they this is a class of people that have some
protections under the federal law, but maybe what we can do is direct it in a way where again balancing the need to protect residential areas and neighborhoods that we we come to protect, but also making provision for it so that it can't say we're being exclusionary.
And so we're trying to balance that out. We talked about how we're going to do that and what we're recommending going Those are emerging issues. Now as a result of the the formal housing plan discussing with the the borough and the land order, what's the best way to
meet our mandate doing and you have no land. How do we combine that with a positive development for the borough and what are the needs of the borough and what are the key How would you define you know, and we want to collaborate with the town center overlay.
And it's divided into two sub areas. Uh we have the uh town center overlay and then a mixed use uh zone overlay which is 21.9 acres and then you have the depression overlay zone which is about 12 acres. And we did that as an overlay because
you have no land so it's all considered unmet need. But we're [clears throat] trying to kind of direct the growth to what we want to create as a downtown. A true uh walkable community asset for for the town people.
So we can try to accommodate the affordable housing within a mixed use context to still provide retail and try to provide community space that would be enjoyed by everyone. You think programmable space. And so again consistent with the goals
and objectives of the plan, what we're talking about is directing growth to the commercial corridor, not out into the middle of residential neighborhoods or or church areas or things like that that can impact stability. We don't want to destabilize what's already here.
That's a concern and we're addressing that through the town center. >> So, when we talk about the town center, what we're doing is developing guidelines and and there's a portion in the the document that's dedicated to that area. And what it's called is that's going to be a land use plan
amendment. That's an actual amendment to the land use plan that recognizes the zoning that we've already adopted and that recognizes this as a as a legitimate land use. What we're trying to do is we're going to talk about things like re-mobility spines. So, you've got corridors or internal
circulation as landscape. You've got civic green event lawns where people can congregate, you can have events, you can have community gatherings for whatever reasons. You know, when we look at the design of the of the developments coming in, you
could allow under some design guidelines rooftop amenities. They could be something as grand as that. Looking at maybe creating a woodland edge park to separate town square town center overlay from the town hall development district on the other side. Also providing that amenity to the
residents and to the occupants of the businesses in the town center. Shared green streets so that people can move around, structured parking lines. I mean, if we can uh kind of coalesce parking in in structures if we can, we'll we'll we'll
accommodate it. If not, it doesn't work. We'll We'll look at that as a matter of of design. >> What does that mean? Like multi-level? Or is >> It could be or it couldn't be. You mean if you build like maybe the building up there can come up or maybe we don't do it. Maybe we do surface. Uh but if you want to achieve some
reasonable development, the reality is if you want to make it walkable, you've got to be recognizing that it needs parking. You need to have cars. There's no place to park on those kind of roads. You don't want that. So, we have to deal with that. You want to build in sustainability. You want to make sure that it's built to a good standard. I'm not talking about uh the gold standard
of LEED cuz nobody's building up to the according to that. We'd love to have that. But it doesn't mean that we don't want to look at green roofs if it happens or rain gardens or things of that nature. We'll incorporate you there. You know, we'll have signature identity elements, things that kind of make it
sense of place. You know, signage, sculptures, things of that art, water features, for example. We can incorporate those elements. When you put all that together in a comprehensive plan, you've got a pretty nice setup. And then, of course, it's important to connect that with what's happening over at the
Cuz that was building a center community. We want connections. And we're working on designing those as as they kind of concept. Cuz, you know, we want to be able to interact So, we want to talk about
protecting residential neighborhoods, that's important. But, we want to recognize that some facilities are going to be necessary. We felt that, you know, the best place for, like example, a community service living facility would be the Greater Town Center professional area. When you When you put these facilities there,
they have access to all the services and connections that are enjoyed by all the other residents. So, in a way, we're incorporating them into the community, but they're always supervised, but they're but they're not being injected into neighborhoods, you know, where there's some trepidation about, you know, what goes on.
Uh but, we're providing that. We're saying we can do this here and still accommodate that need. >> They'll be close to the services that people need. >> And and so, again, um trying to make that that very delicate balance.
>> How do you make that happen? >> The recommendation is permitted in the PCOP zone. And then, again, talking about that's the policy. It's strengthening the impact of the implementation by ordinance. Cuz now the ordinance is
>> Now, you talk about the landing zone in the minute. Again, we get into the area of the big down and the after we go down. The purpose of the amendment is to revitalize over shopping center, underutilized commercial property. If you look at Five Guys, it's
had a good run, but I think there's a consensus in this community that we need to do something. Provide opportunities for visionary housing. A lot of times they go hand in hand. You want to revitalize your shopping center to put units above it and add that economic incentive, but it
also it's walkable on the street. People can go downstairs, shop, go upstairs. It's a very efficient mode and it works. To the extent that people have space to get in, shop, or dine there. They have a development. Strengthen the synergy with the Pearson
mixed-use development. Again, that connection is extremely important because you don't want to isolate these developments from each other. You want to be able to get together and integrate in a way that that allows participation by everybody because I believe that that strengthens economically both sides.
And again, we're looking to direct growth to the commercial corridor, not to establish residential neighborhoods. Which we don't really have any green land that we need anyway. So, it makes the most sense to do this. The design direction is we want to make it walkable to the extent that we can,
balancing parking, circulation, but also providing mobility. Talk about the woodland edge park, rooftop promenade, and then sharing the streets, creating green corridors so that cars can circulate but have a a nice softening effect. You don't have
these roads blasting through. So, what we're doing and what the bottom line is with this is we're looking to transform the auto related commercial land into a walkable compact mixed-use pedestrian downtown. That's really the goal. Uh now, how does this work? Well, the
amendment to the land use plan uh the plan talks about some of the design elements that we're looking for in the in the amendment. And so, when an application comes before you, there's nothing's going to happen here without an application. And it's not anything of significance, obviously.
Changes in tendency are going to come your way. That that happens every day. But if somebody wants to redevelop that site, they're going to have to come to you. And the purpose of this is to guide your review uh that's the fit. Is this what we're looking for in terms
of the vision that we have for this area? So, that's why these documents are so important. Use it as a tool. Use it to to protect or to facilitate. That's what this is for, and that's what it's about to help you when you review
the plans and when you formulate your own ordinances. >> Did you skip slide 10? Was that intentional? >> No, that's the Oh, slide 10. Oh. >> Was it intentional that I like that thing there? >> I would say that's fine, but All right, so it's an intentional
priority. >> [laughter] >> Everything. One, we're going to comment We all we've been carrying this forward a number And this is a if you want or if you don't. It's all day land use regulation. I've been your planner for 12 years, and
I looked at uh I'm reviewing a plan. I'm going to this section for site plan. I'm going to this section for subdivision, different chapter. Then I go to And then your administrative procedures are over here, and then you have the zoning.
It's worth just making sure you have to go through a few pages. And it works. Uh some towns, and it's a matter of preference, like consolidating those. Everything, section one, administrative, definitions, design standards, stormwater,
environmental, zoning. You know, it's all in one chapter. It's one place and you just go through it. That's But is that a must-have? That's entirely a policy decision of the town board. It's workable. We've been using it and we're working that way for years. I would be honest, consolidating land use
regulations can get real messy. Uh it can be drawn out and it's a bit That's the downside. The downside is you're on very You have a lot of them. >> Messy also probably means costly, too, I imagine. >> Yeah. >> John, I'm just thinking, too, in terms
of variances versus waivers {slash} exceptions. If you put it all in one chapter, if it's all a land use chapter, you may not have anything in terms of waivers or exceptions. Everything may be a variance if there's deviations. I'm
just thinking a a lot out loud. >> Yeah, well but and you know I pay attention to that when I do comprehensive ordinances. I've done a few. Uh I'm very careful to define exceptions. There's a difference between a variance and a design exception under the land use law you all have there is one is a practical difficulty standard.
Variances as you know is two standards. Um Adding commercial design But I included that here for discussion just because it's been a carryover I mean I don't know whether there's a desire or not. That's up to the board. But at least it's there as a reminder. Maybe we
should do that But it's a matter of >> What falls into the commercial definition for us? >> The What do you mean? >> Well, it says add commercial design standards. To me that means it's not residential. >> Right. >> Right. >> Add commercial design standards. Well, where is that going to come into play,
council? And that's what we're working on right now. And that's the direction that the land use amendment gets into details on. And an implementing ordinance, it you know, once we get to work we have a PC ordinance now. We're going to I I imagine out of this and the discussions that we're having
on how we can improve it, there going to be amendments to that to reflect what's in this plan. Uh with with the recommendation here is amend the transient occupancy regulations. We need to strengthen rooming house, boarding house. We need to define them. We need to make it clear
where they're permitted where they're not. For example, recommendations are not permitted rooming houses, boarding houses, short-term rentals anywhere in the borough. There's no need to do that. These are commercial enterprises in residential zones. And knowing this town, I know consistent with our
consistent policy of protecting neighborhoods, we don't introduce these things. But we we we need to strengthen those sections. And and so that's that's the recommendation. That's implemented by ordinance. And we also then have to address also address the uh
the needs of our living veterans. So, we need to take care of that. Uh then we went into and I mentioned it earlier, uh clarified lot lines. Um talk about yards. Let's get that cleaned up so that we don't get into these long winding discussions and arguments between lawyers and planners about
what's a front yard, what's a side yard, uh corner lot, triangulation, matter of fact, interior lot issues have to be revisited in that. >> I would think that one should be relatively easy. We just haven't done it. >> I mean, so but we want to highlight it as things that
we want to focus on. Okay? So, and maybe in the ensuing discussion you might be able to tell me other areas that you want to focus on as well. I'll tell you what the timeline is and what the plan is from here. We wanted to workshop this and give you some time to digest the document, think
about it, reflect back on your experiences as a board member, ask the planner, "I wish we had something on this. Why do needed to talk about that. And why is that now legal and all that? What bugs you is something we talk about, right? It's good therapy, right?
We You know, I'm your therapist. Tell me what is bugging you because I I react to what you're telling me as well. Right? I mean, it's it's you know >> So >> I never called myself a psychologist. >> No, you definitely aren't a psychologist, yeah. >> Huh? >> You definitely aren't a psychologist.
>> So, we want to focus on on amendment strategies that preserve open space, preserve the historic character, and all the way we plan what we want to be saying. I keep that message from the cross in the document, but if it's not strong enough, let me know. And that slide wasn't very important
>> I I do want to focus for a moment on what you just said a moment ago about us all thinking about what's what's bugged us. I I had the opportunity to talk with John and Ed yesterday about the master plan. We went through it in detail. And and one of the things that was in
the 2006 master plan, was in the 2016 master plan, and is in this master plan re-examination, is the discussion about senior living. And that's just one example. I'm not going to get into it. It's very It's very strongly worded. It talks about how that's that's good to add to the community. It helps for our
seniors. It It provides a lot of opportunity. It's not a traffic generator when you think about it. And yet we had 244 Old Turnpike Road come before us, and we had members of this board be critical of it. And so, here's your opportunity. If you really don't think that we should have
senior living in the community, then now's your opportunity. Take a look at this master plan and provide commentary. I'm only using that as an example. Frankly, I like the idea of senior living because of the reasons I just said. Um but there're going to be other things in here that we should all look at, and we
should just take make you know, make sure that there's something in here that you don't disagree with completely. Let's take advantage of that opportunity. Now, what's the timing of all of this? >> Right now it's just a workshop. You know, opportunity for some feedback.
There's still opportunity for feedback from the board. The goal is to have the final document up before the board for public hearing at your next meeting in August. If you feel that you want to do that in September, you can have more time. Time is running short. Summer's coming up.
You don't want to let it get past that. Uh the goal is give me feedback. Let's talk tonight. Let's get the dialogue going. We would need to advertise by the 17th of July. Uh I would pass I would provide >> Next Friday. Form of notice.
>> Form of notice. >> Has to go to multiple people. >> Yeah, the notice will >> Contiguous towns, county planning board, planning advocacy. >> Planning advocacy gets some hard copies as well as the town. County used to take digital, no more. >> Does it make sense to do it in August
when there's there might be a lot of people not around? I'm just >> My my my my lefty knee replacement is in 2017. So, we can do it >> Jen, what do we have for public hearing in August? >> We only have one application in August.
>> Anything? Is it a residential variance? >> I don't remember. The one with the uh the >> With what? >> Massapequa. >> Oh, that's a subdivision, I think. >> Some of these I would like to make one of them This some of these are rather pressing
at the moment. You do not want to go past August. The August hearing doesn't have to be much longer than whatever changes you want. You can highlight those and talk about it and make up And again, if something changes, >> I think the August is I'm I'm on board
with that. I I just think if there half the board half the board is not going to be here and they and they've spent time looking at the document, they cannot get you those comments. >> So, I will I will make sure any comments I get tonight or subsequent up until the final I have to have that document ready
at the time of publication. So, that's what we will do for everybody. >> Yeah, 10 10 10 days in advance. Would it be fine if they emailed you commentary? >> Well, that's my question. What's the mechanism of relaying our >> I've been a good mechanism if you have any ideas now, but I don't want to
preclude email comments or anything like that. >> Yeah, we should >> One thing we do is summarize them at the hearing and then we'll go through it and we can adopt the changes. We could adopt that night with amendments as well. If If we go short at the public hearing, oh, I got another idea. We can We can add that as part of the
public discussion. So, I want to >> don't know if people have have the opportunity Look, you you got this nice simple I I knew you did. I had no doubt in my mind Dickon about that. Uh but but I think this is an opportunity for us to provide commentary. I provided all my commentary
to Ed and John yesterday in a short 90-minute phone call that we had. Uh and I don't know if there's any highlights from that that we should point out to everybody and then let's open it up to >> some of the discussion items that the chairman had shared
because, you know, and and I I encourage commentary from all of you. Uh I'm I I'll go through the goals to page nine and your page is my >> Well, if you've marked it up in my >> Yeah. >> But the goals >> five >> Uh >> you talked about maybe strengthening
opportunity for for both tenants and seniors. And we know we have the assisted living coming in. Now, one of the comments I made in that discussion was, well, they're giving us 10% affordable. >> Right. >> Because that's what the the mandatory uh requirement is under the federal state
law. There's nothing that says you can't require 20% if you want it. Some towns have done that for assisted living. We can think of and add those types of recommendations. That would take an ordinance in the moment. So, we would in fact we would we would treat assisted living
like we would any other inclusionary development. They would have to just >> And would that help us meet our goals sooner for the >> it would certainly add to the inventory. Uh you know, you have this unmet need that I don't that you know, depending on how many units get built over the years.
I think you're chasing that number always because the number keeps growing. >> Right. >> it's [clears throat] not So, if you add but I that's a it's still a good goal. One of the discussion points was well, can't we target our seniors in the borough? Well, fortunately it's a regional need. You
can't. Our organization is local other than for veterans is not. >> That one that one made me salty. You know, cuz we actually have language in the earlier version of the master plan that says we should try to target but it doesn't sound like we have the ability to do that. And if you remember when 244 came before us,
that came up and they basically said, "Nah, we're not doing anything for you." >> It's not supported under law really. I know I don't practice law and I don't I mean you can't bring in people, right? >> That's just >> Anyway, uh goal nine also on page nine
you talked about we talked about this the goal is to discourage creation of flag lots or subdivisions of property or putting new restrictive development out of we could strengthen that one if you want to. I'll highlight those changes at the end. >> Yeah, that's that's important. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah, because you know we're facing this daily now and we have recent experience with this and this is a typical response. If we don't like that, let's do a policy, let's adopt ordinances. >> But historically we haven't done that. So, so we we can come out of this master
plan with a lot of great ideas but we actually have to then act on it. >> That goal is existing. It's supported your your board's actions. It could be made even clearer in what we're talking about.
Um we talked about under under 10, which is um master plan 2006 master plan goals and objectives. And again, you see a lot of repeat things because what we're doing is we're looking back. The re-examination report
is a look back. What do we need to change going forward? And that's why I'm saying, well, maybe we don't need a whole new ball wax. But let's strengthen what we have here as a document. Um encourage the maintenance of established community character, protect established neighborhoods, and preserve
existing trees and other natural resources by discouraging their removal. We we can strengthen that language to make it more environmental, you know, so that it speaks to the real issue, which is we don't want to dilute our town cuz environmentally that's a disaster. Uh promote continued maintenance and
rehab of the borough's housing um stock. We we had this discussion um This gets a little more involved. The goal is promote the continued maintenance and rehab of those housing stock support facilities and their utilities. This includes the borough's
desire to place limits on the ever-increasing size of structures. Again, it's getting back to the FAR. How do we emphasize the benefits of rebuilt dating homes instead of removing them and then building the new ones? >> And I don't know the answer to that. >> And you know, as long as We had a long discussion about that cuz you have
teardowns, right? But you have envelopes where the zoning allows you to go to a certain height envelope. The FAR So those regulations It's been a consistent recommendation that, gee, you know, we need to look at the FAR again. And I mean, I think it's been reviewed ad nauseam. Nice. It's
just a matter of enforcing it. But the policy is there. Um one of these recommendations is maybe we limit the upper floor expansions, you know. Uh an example was we talked about what we could spend something similar. We could make that recommendation. Again, that gets
implemented at the Um encourage quality and design landscape and still quality to new land. Preserve existing trees is a very generic language. It It's worked. Uh but how we strengthen that language, you know, just in storm water for example,
how do we issue We can expand on that as well. >> Uh that would be golden and uh >> And then we're not going to go through the entire document. We can do >> No. No. I think the I just the highlights of what we talked about. >> Uh one of the things that we talked
about was property maintenance. Now, you have property maintenance code. There's a concern that maybe it's not strong enough. And what a lot of towns have done with property maintenance is that they adopted they adopted the national building codes in their property maintenance code by reference. And it's a whole big
thing. >> That sounds like it's easy to do. >> It's It expands the construction official or whoever the entities' ability to go out and say, "Fix the fence. The window is falling apart. The roof is falling." To give them a little more strength in their argument about why this needs to
be done. Again, it's an enforcement thing. Uh and that's a borough policy, but we could strengthen the recommendation that you strengthen the current code. But your current code really talks about external things that collapse. But I think maintenance goes beyond that.
>> Yeah, people remember I don't know a year or so ago I mentioned that the house on the corner of Old Tappan Road and Orangeburg Road. I don't know what corner that is, the south If we got the I'm not going to try and figure out which corner it is, but um that has a
big property with a with a fence around it. The fence is all dilapidated, broken, smashed, falling apart. >> Look at it every day. >> Yeah, we talked about it that time. And and it's a year later and nothing's been done about it. It still looks the same. >> Yeah. >> It's been like that for a long time. >> And we also
for years had a shut-in lady on one of the prestigious streets that their uh property was a disaster. It was overgrown. She lived there, but didn't do anything. I finally walked by the other day and
somebody bought it and it's now all cleaned up, but for years it was a disaster. That's unfortunate. >> issue cuz you have some some laws on the books here. That book. Again, it's resources. It's not images. It's It's a lot of work. I've done a lot of
enforcement on a municipal level. It's It's a lot of It's serious work and small town like Old Tappan, you got your hands full with departments and everything else. You got to really hard look at what you got on the books. >> Well, my thought on this is I do appreciate when somebody comes by and
leaves a note on my door that says my garage door was left open. I'm hoping they're providing the same note on the doors of these houses that look like a mess. >> We talked about uh number set goal seven in 2006. So, if going back to 2006, you did your last
open space recreation plan in 2000. Maybe it's time to take a look at that. >> Great chairperson, by the way. The chairperson of that committee was just fabulous. >> I agree. He'll tell you himself. >> [laughter] >> The bottom line is that >> They did great work. >> I believe that if you want open space
money from the state, the agency will come. So, they Yeah, they did an update recently and you've got to update your roster. You got to take a look at your properties and identify what you might want to buy. Maybe it may have already been done. I don't know. I have no idea.
Has They have not given something to deny. An update may not be as heavy lifting to [clears throat] do in Old Tappan. I don't have to. Something to think about. Um Um Okay. You talked about one of the goals,
excessive length length of cul-de-sacs and long bends. Sub E. Um I go 11 on page 16 17. We talked about excessive length of cul-de-sacs. State the issues, uh limitation. All that is controlled by our residents. So,
you know, if you try to do any regulation on that, we talked about that. We you you're already seeing this. So, >> And I think the cul-de-sac of length is not as bad as the really short ones. The little stub ones. >> Correct. But, see, those based on uh daily traffic volume.
>> Yeah. >> If you do a collector, you get a shorter one. >> Yeah, interesting. >> Um There is a in we talked about uh goal 14. Um Is that design elements for non-residential landscapes and all that?
We talked about it. I think we addressed that. We talked about doing a green design element. We have We are developing that with the town center. Uh the question is, you know, we I'm not sure how far you want to take it into residential. It depends on the town. Some towns have some residential
guidelines, but problem with that is one man's art is another man's >> Yeah, residential's hard. That's tricky. Yeah, it is tricky. It's hard to do that. I think with the commercial standards, we have an opportunity now to to address the character of some of the
buildings in the community. >> And then it talks about creating a design review committee. I've never had the desire to do that. And quite frankly, it adds another layer of bureaucracy. Cuz if some towns do have this, you got to go to see a design
review committee. Then they make recommendation, they don't make time, you miss your board date. It gets busy, you see, that's why I'm I'm a volunteer on the old board. >> But, if the town's taking the time to create a design for the new town center,
shouldn't we have a little bit of authority over surrounding properties, matching it potentially? Um, is there a way we can control that with language? >> We not really What we're looking at is you have authority in the zone that you create. Right. But, to make it ex post
facto or outside of that is a little more difficult because people are used to their domain. >> You have to tell them what they want to >> I'm not commercial, not residential. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We already doing that in town center. You may want to eliminate that because if you're not going to implement a
design of your committee, maybe we just take it out. That's also an option, by the way. If something is no longer relevant, take it out. But, I I left it in as an opportunity that if it should arise, we can do it. It's not mandated. I haven't done it, but you might want to sometime. I don't
know. >> I I don't know how necessary it is. I can imagine. Well, it I mean, the question is are we going for a certain design aesthetic for the town center, and do we want the other commercial properties when they're redeveloped, if they're redeveloped, to match?
To kind of create consistency. If we're going I I don't know what we're proposing, >> Well, there there was a bit of a design aesthetic we were looking at for that. >> Yeah. >> To your point, that is an excellent observation and question. Town center is your business area. You
need to zone it to be one. And your B2 is your your professional office zone. Within there is a whole list of design criteria. So, we're we're addressing where the commercial happens. >> So, we do have B1 and B2 also >> That's got That's what it
>> Yeah. So, that So, that's your entire commercial. So, there are design guidelines so that when they do redevelop, there's consistent standards to your point. >> That's an excellent observation. >> Um I do have
one question if I could, John. Going back to um property maintenance, do need to strengthen, now that we have sidewalks in parts of town that didn't have sidewalks before?
Um, one of my pet peeves, I'm a walker because of my health issues, and there are properties that have sidewalks now that don't cut their living fences whatsoever. And I'm assuming it's the property owner
that's supposed to be taking care of trimming that so that people don't have to leave the sidewalk, go in the street cuz I can name a number of homes that I can't, and I'm only 5'8", never mind Phil Boyce or anybody
Michael, you know, taller would have could not walk down that sidewalk. And there's other properties where their landscaper is cutting and blowing dirt, and the sidewalk is completely covered, and the property owners never
clean that up. Is that something we need to add? Sidewalks that goes under >> to ordinance. Ordinance because you have code. Anything that that's on sidewalks in the public right of way, it shouldn't be encroachments.
Trees, dirt, or otherwise that creates any kind of obstruction along the walkway. That's an enforcement. And you probably already I don't have it up in front of me, but we probably have sidewalk ordinances that requires you to shovel it, but there's the hazard of it, you know, because it does become the the problem. The irony and I used to get a lot of
complaints of this in government, you know, you make me put in the sidewalk for the public, but now I got to maintain it. That's just the way it works. >> And the other thing is, on those sidewalks, we have wheelchairs, and we have county roads. We have county roads, but we have
wheelchair access at the edge of a crosswalk. >> The ADA >> yeah. >> And there's no There's no lines to tell the cars it's a crosswalk. So, anybody that goes to cross the street is got to be their own traffic cop um to do it and
then we don't seem to be able to get the county to do that. Is that something that in our safety aspect we can add >> That's That's really >> Again, we're back to enforcement not >> or ordinance and future planning.
>> I mean >> Well, there's no ordinance here right now. >> I mean, there's something that the bureau is a matter of >> policy and takes up with the county. Cuz you're not going to pay for it. You're already paying county taxes. So, that's the That becomes a project-based thing is >> So, maybe for the mayor and council to
>> Oh, the engineer is trying to get them to paint those lines anyway. >> But that's for years now. So >> Maybe he missed Maybe he missed one. You should show us where that crosswalk where the depression is. >> Let's go to Orangeburg and at the end of
the walk by the gas station there's no lines. >> 'nother thing. Yeah, so he's been working on that. >> there are literally crosswalk down things there for people to cross. And there's nothing there to tell anyone that there is a valid crosswalk.
>> They also recently moved one of them and changed the whole configuration and they're supposed to come back and stripe them. >> Mhm. >> Uh under full number they could say from >> Wait, one one last one. >> Hold on, sorry. >> With this deal we've had people coming
to us lately with hardships. Is there a standard or more detailed definition because >> What are you referring to? >> Or when they want variances and they're claiming hardship >> and you read the planning criteria into it. She wants them to.
And the criteria is everything that is laying on his floor. She wants a physical hardship and if he can prove it to her. And they you can't comply if you have some physicality associated with your project that prevents you from complying. For example, I got a
boulder. I I got to move my house this way, but that causes a side yard variance, but I'm it's not reasonable to take out this granite boulder that's been there for centuries. Uh and that's that's a physical problem. Or I can't go back I I can't I have to move my house this way because I want to
build in the back of the property. That means digging up That's a physical >> [clears throat] >> Then you have the C2 where the benefits of granting the variance outweigh the detriment. So, the the standard there is you give me the variance, I'm moving an inch. I need the
variance. Does that inch rise to the level of a detriment or does the benefit of moving it, which creates a more squared building, benefit outweigh that? So, there are standards There's There's laid in law and they have to absolutely prove that. If you don't think that
someone's met that criteria, then then and then you have the negative thing. You know, no variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the zone plan and to match, you know, the master plan and all that and the neighborhood. So, you've got the ability to assess that and apply those
standards. And that's where you argue about well, what's the negative criteria? How do you meet positive? Well, what's the positive detriment to the existing zone plan? And there's They're They're established. So, I wouldn't, you know, pass that and
when your client comes here, I will just cover this. Make sure does this rise to the level of substantial detriment? Does it meet the physical hardship variance? Does it And that's a judgment call on your part. You could ask for the reasons and you can make your own judgments when you present
your justification. And it's And it's it's their burden, not yours. I don't like it because it doesn't work and it's not fitting. You apply the negative right here. Uh there's a section under streaming home occupations under four. Um
we do have some language in there, but I think that we could strengthen that and make sure we don't have businesses running out of homes that have an impact on people. I always took the position as a as a director that I don't know you're there because you're a marketer or a realtor making phone calls.
You know what you might be even, you know, an art teacher student comes in and take the student in class. There's no real impact, but all of a sudden I'm doing a drop and ship job out of my FedEx structure coming every day every
day picking up flowers that flower shop in my basement. Now that's an impact. Now yes, we all get Amazon, we get FedEx, but that's for residential purposes, you know, like I need that product that I'm going to deliver to the house. But but I'm making a business out of it.
You want to be able to say, you know, within limits. You don't You don't want to invade someone's home. They shouldn't be impacting the neighbors either. So we might The thought was maybe keep adding strengthening your that those regulations should be strengthened and there's plenty of examples how to do that.
Um we're we're getting close to Those are the major comments that >> And I appreciate you going over that with everybody. I would like to hear other people's comments. Pick and I know you said you have a few.
>> Yeah, but not like in ready to share it now, but I will send an email. >> You okay? >> So we're going to have like a master sheet with all the comments. That's what I would like suggest, you know, it's like you keep >> you know, I could um
you know highlight what I'm getting from each particular voting member and then you all look at it and share the discussion about it. >> Vicky, is there anything that rises to the top of your list that you'd want us to discuss in front of everybody? >> Yes, one of them I think there is a
recommendation of having a separate adjustment board and planning board. Uh I would like to know what's why we have that recommendation. I mean, currently we have only one merged, you know, planning and
adjustment board. >> Which one is that? >> I think it's on page 15, one of them. >> That's 10. >> Yeah. I think it's, you know, multiple So, why are we making a recommendation to separate them?
>> four. >> Okay. >> You know what? That's a great example to take it out. Is that okay? >> we just keep it the way it is. It's working fine. >> Yeah, I'm going to make a note later. >> Yeah. That's one. >> Number four says examination of the recent variance
requests reviewed by the old town combined planning board slash >> That doesn't make a recommendation. >> There is a No, there's there is a discrepancy. There's other places it says, you know, recommend to having like a separate
which some some some towns have it, you like these Yes. Yeah. Correct, yeah. That one comment you're right. >> Um >> The key is that it this is a um
finding of a fact. >> Right, it doesn't make a recommendation to have two boards. >> It's actually on page 17, not 15. Page 17 and number 12. The town should periodically revisit this decision. >> Okay. >> okay. >> We we revisited it and we're going to
keep it the way it is. >> Yeah, 17. >> Yeah, I highlighted on 17. >> I can make a comment here that the board has determined that it's one board is perfectly fine. >> Yeah. The older >> Again, that was a That's an example of recommendation that the older dollar
there in this town. >> Yes. >> And one of the recommendation I don't I mean it was part of the recommendation to have underground parking in the town center. When >> Let me look at the words. >> Yep. I like that.
But you know, it shouldn't you know, be on the expense of having more parking lots. It's just you know, gives us opportunity to have more green space. >> Correct. >> Yeah, so that's the That's >> Yeah, that's the idea. >> Yeah, that's the idea. >> have all surface parking. If you go to these older shopping centers, they're just
look It's one big sea of pavement. >> Yes. Yeah. >> The idea is to get green in there, to make it a community space and make it aesthetically nice. And sometimes, you know, we have to balance parking with with that goal. And the only way to do
that maybe is to accommodate parking. But that may may not be necessary. But we don't want to say we don't want to preclude that as a tool >> And the other one not necessarily I have page number connectivity between uh mixed use and commercial property.
And a good example is you know, you know, town center here and the condominiums. I mean literally there is ugly fence between the two. And you can't even walk from one to the other. And you know, the entrances is like it's
you know, as an engineer I'm ashamed of like having like entrances, you know, they're so close to each other. It's so confusing. Somebody wants to make a left turn to the new The >> It's funny you said that cuz I just saw somebody yeah the other day yesterday or
two days ago driving in the wrong in the wrong direction on the street to go into that. I'm like, "That's an accident waiting to happen." >> We're looking at some of the condominiums just like for curiosity and we wanted to walk from
you know, the new development to and there is a like a pathway and it's like filled with water all the time. There's a drainage issue over there. You have to like jump over like small pond to go from one side to the other. It's
It's It's one of the things, you know, we should I don't know if we can, you know, put it in the Absolutely. >> And we brought it up when they got the approval. We couldn't get it in the budget. The current by state ownership. >> That but that's exactly what
>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I go to uh Montvale a lot for like lunch cuz it's close to where I, you know, work. They did a good job of like building all this, you know, multi-family and, you know, they have a very nice
restaurants and food, you know, places and, you know, yoga centers and That's what I envision for Old Tappan. Something along this line. What's that? Yes, that's the gold standard. Yes, like you >> From design [clears throat] from >> Yeah, it's
>> I I represent the Montvale planning board. I'll have to I we had a meeting last night. I'll have to be happy to convey that to the chair. And the problem is they're going to have a lot more residential units coming on board. >> Yeah, I I I know I >> Just on Ridge Road, the KPMG site. >> Listen, I go and buy a sandwich and and
I I make like 20 and like half an hour walk and I enjoy it every time I go it. Yeah, it's uh >> They've done a good job with it. >> Yeah. >> Well, I think >> I can do in my own town, you know. >> Just put it in words. >> Yeah. >> I feel I could have wrote too.
>> I think those are good points. >> I know. Listen, I'm a walker, too. >> Yeah, I will send, you know, make a list and send it all. >> Did anybody else have anything after looking at the document or having the opportunity to see the presentation or >> Yeah, please.
>> Um having to do more with references, like on page 11, number four. We mentioned the 2004 New Jersey Stormwater Regulation. The regulations, I think the latest regulation is 2026.
real >> The amended >> Yeah, I think that's cuz it's restating the the 2006. This is a restatement of the 2006 >> You're right. That's right. >> Yeah. >> Well, it's a restatement, but um maybe I can make a comment.
>> A footnote or something. >> And the boroughs can confirm. >> Yeah. >> And then the same goes, I guess, on page I just lost it. We talked about the totals. Page 28. 28, um this section on Stormwater
Management Plan. The Municipal Stormwater Management Plan of document, December 19, 2005. I know that that >> There is a new one, right? >> That was renewed. Not renewed. Revised. >> You said what are you from 18? >> Well, it was 28 in the old document, so
it might be like 29 or 30 now in yours. It's the Stormwater Management Plan. Yeah, we we had the same It's 28, yeah. >> So, all towns should have Stormwater Management Plan as a separate plan. The town would have allocated
probably this year or last year. The utility services plan on >> And the main other question I had was do we have a hiking bike program? >> We talked about the hiking bike program. I think that was something that the bureau was currently planning. I I don't
know the status of that. I don't know either. If you don't know about that means you probably don't. I don't know about it. >> Cuz I would like to >> Yeah, environmental commission knows the status of that. >> Probably we have >> Reinforcement and expansion
>> And we did have any bicycle lane. >> And my question that was that a lot of towns are connecting their parks to trails, biking trails and hiking >> With the new multi-family homes created by the enclave, there are tons of people
pushing baby strollers across Old Turnpike Road. And across that terrible entrance and through that puddle that you mentioned. So, we really do need to get our act together with sidewalks to have a walkable town. Completely. Seen a lot more dogs with collars, pick up some things like that,
warnings. >> Anybody else have commentary on either what they read or what they saw tonight? >> Something I heard there was a mention about the green space and funding. Did I hear you correctly or we have to make sure we have to square it where we're correcting open space and
>> I will I'll talk to Anna. I mean, I don't know where you but I need to get three million funding. You need an updated plan. I'm sure he's got to have that cuz you're getting three million dollars, right? >> We're still We're still taking a an itty-bitty amount of tax out of
everybody's putting it in that fund. >> to do that, you have to have a plan. I'm not sure you're updated. >> Yeah. >> I don't know. I I didn't want to presume and I didn't get a chance to talk to him about that, but we You know, if it needs an update, it's updated. >> Yeah. >> But I'm sure the state's mandating that. >> Okay.
>> My My question is, I guess, holistically for everybody, is that an opportunity for us to revisit uh start developing like a little bit of a war chest to buy property that we want to put down? >> That's what we did back in the day. >> That's what we do in >> I don't know if there's enough money though now.
>> Yeah. Yeah, for the record. Yeah. >> And last time we discussed it, I think you said it was only a few hundred thousand in it and That did In the early 2000s, we were able to get the Oaks property, the Bonnaville property, but I guess there's nothing more that we can do. >> So, I have a question though, but if we
if the borough buys property, 10 years down the road and the state finds out, "Hey, you guys own property. You guys can build on it." >> Yeah. >> No. No. No. No. >> They can't? >> No. What goes on your Rossi, whatever is on that Rossi stays on the Rossi portion. >> Halfway. >> Okay. >> And it's It's very difficult to remove
>> I want to make sure. >> What's a Rossi? >> Yeah, you you try to remove it, you'll have to like You'll have to have exponential >> I'm going to let him talk. >> I did a I did a removal in the 90s. >> It's a couple of years. >> You have to You have to uh The way you
do it is you have to extend time three >> Or more. >> Three three times greater than what you just The brick over the brick. >> Okay. >> If you take an acre, you have to buy three acres and you have to actually comparable value. >> Mhm. >> It's to discourage you from >> Let me think about it. Environment about
you >> would kind of value monetary value or environmental value. >> There's a whole section that you you assessor has to fill out this value. >> Okay. >> And then you have to hire a green cruise approved uh appraisal >> Hm. >> to come up with the value. >> Hm. >> And you're paying
>> Hm. >> So, conversion is something that you take very seriously and nobody does before we have to get it. So, when you come back to the town hall they come back and say tax and look at the regulations about the housing regulations.
Recreation lands are a lot of specifically from consideration that they are obligation. Historic properties that are on a register that you have to balance that. There there's certain systems in the town and the property section and structure. We took that all
into consideration when we came up with your obligation very way way back when we started this. >> Okay. Do you have any other that you've been in contact with? >> Oh, yes. Um goal five the affordable
uh senior housing. Have we ever discussed or um you know, doing something like an affordable uh veterans housing? Like I know Montville they have a six-unit apartment. Um >> It's not part of the plan, but that
doesn't mean we do. That's something that the board we balance >> Hm. >> and then you have to assume that >> Any benefits as far >> Sure, you get to you get to target veterans. That's one of the one of the few examples where >> Besides helping veterans, I
>> target veterans. And veteran housing is is something that you can actually designate the only veterans >> Can you elaborate on that? What do you mean? >> Veteran you you have to have your own balance service. You also have to qualify though. >> Right. >> It's to help to help
>> Are you planning on moving in there or Maybe, who knows? Prices keep going up. >> [laughter] >> project with the girl you see. For example, I know the town they saw a house, they bought it. Uh they're working with the local uh with the county and the burden and and the veterans groups.
>> Sure. Perfect. >> It can be done. >> Okay. >> I would support >> And credit is still it's it's a one for >> My feeling about the park had not as well. >> Okay. >> I would say that we should be sold at that point. >> And then my other thing is regarding the
master plan. Um cuz we kind of glanced over the uh the permitting of the CSLRs. >> Mhm. >> What can we do with regards to you know, zoning and ordinance? Like what what can be done?
>> What can be done is you create the policy. We're talking specifically if we're going to strengthen the ordinances that we see in the town. You create an ordinance. >> I mean, it's we have one, but we just >> It's important to do the policy first. >> Okay. >> The support the ordinance that you're
going to at some point That's the policy. Who's regulating? It's almost like you have to speak the intent and then build up. >> Which one is that one? >> Uh just nine on the slide deck regarding the uh the CSLRs. You know, like
I guess we can discuss it more later. >> Again, you don't you need to set the policy, the goal the ordinance will set the specifics in the policy. >> Okay. >> Anybody else? >> [snorts] >> And so
you outlined earlier what the process will be over the next 30 days assuming we do this in August. And I'm fine with that. I just concerned that a lot of the members of the board may not be here. >> What what you know, I would appreciate comments as soon as possible because I got to consolidate it and send it out
and I'll send the document on this as here are the comments that I received so that we have a document that we can all review together. Because one of the issues that what I want to avoid is putting something in and where did that come from? >> Yeah. >> One person can't speak to the entire group.
>> Right, we have to discuss them. >> together, you know, and why we had a conversation with the chairman but I shared with everyone >> Yeah. >> the chairman's comments so that we you don't agree, now's your time. You said, "Hey, you know, maybe that I got a problem." Or not, or I support it, you know.
We want to work together to affirm what we want to you know, to make it happen for them. >> And it's What did Ed [clears throat] say about the document? It's also it's important for us long-term, right? In terms of enforcing decisions that we make. How do you
support decisions? >> When when you're faced with an application, this should be one of your guys, not just So, what does the zoning say? Well, what does the plan say? Now, this is particularly important. Like the use variances, you know, I mean, how does it fit into the master plan? If it either does or it doesn't.
If it doesn't, then what is the special reason? But that's the criteria of this plan. You use it as a tool to help you make a >> Yeah, I frequently cite it in the resolutions. >> Exactly. You don't have to struggle with the decisions. What does the plan say? Okay, well, I can live with this because
it moves it this way in the right direction or doesn't. >> It'll help support what we're doing over the next few years, next 10 years on this board. So, the part about adopting it, getting it approved, that sounds pretty straightforward. You explained it to us. I also wanted
Right. Right. [music] How do we do that? We make an announcement? >> It'll be advertised. >> Be advertised, okay. >> Yeah. On the borough website, it'll be a notice to the clerks of contiguous towns, the county planning board with a copy of the plan
to the planning advocacy group in Trenton, copy of the plan. Now, I want to be a steward of the taxpayers' money. Um we approve this, we say there are all these things we want to do, whether it's ordinances and everything. What is the process for doing that while
not incurring excessive costs? How do we Do we prioritize them? And >> I think that the >> Cuz we haven't done that in the past. We've approved master plan and then we put it in a binder and we put it on the shelf. Metaphorically, anyway. >> If you want to prioritize them, then
obviously the the town center is the priority. >> That is the priority. Legislation. Yeah. >> Dealing with the rooming houses, boarding houses, that's a priority. It's a pressing need. Um other than that, the order I I don't see tweak your your town is set, you know.
The R25s, the R you know, all those zones are set. We're not going to change zoning there because what for, you know? You know, if you prioritize it, if you see something in your in your master plan that has been ignored, let me know and we can talk about that as a
priority. The ordinances are This is the expensive part. Yeah. >> I would um hope that maybe you could provide us once you get all the comments and maybe a very simple priority list.
And And you mentioned number one and number one A just now, but but anything else you think we can do because I think we should we would want to knock them off over time. >> Mhm. So, um we're going to make notice. When's the next meeting?
>> August 12th. >> August 12th. So, you would have to >> Which is in 5 weeks, so we actually have an extra week. >> prioritize around the the end of this month. So, I would like that if you can get me comments by, you know, perhaps by the end of next week so that you can
consolidate them and distribute them and then we can talk about it. And then we have a public hearing and we can make amendments and changes then, but I'll highlight all of that and we can adopt it. >> So, you'd like to get comments by the 17th? >> Well, that might be pushing it. I mean,
by no later than maybe the 20th or the 20th of the following week. >> So, so John, if you could do everybody a favor, maybe put a little note on your calendar to just send a reminder out to people a couple of days before, just in case people are busy doing other things.
>> Uh let let let's shoot for the 17th. >> So, a week from this Friday. >> And I can work with that, get that back to the board. We'll be prepared for the meeting on the 12th and we can go forward and adopt and everything before the 30 days is up. And I'll get you a formal notice. Now,
the notice is on the website. I'll post it on the website. >> You don't have to put it in the paper anymore. >> Right. So, we're working on it. But I'll get you a formal and an inbox and all of that, but you >> Yeah. Got to work with the work with you.
Good. >> I'll take care of the notice to the state. >> Planning advocacy. Will they take it electronically? >> I don't know. We'll send it in. >> Town and planning board hard copy, too. They used to take it electronically. Now, no more?
Yeah. Do it by certified mail. Both. >> Yeah. So, I'll take care of the state and >> Yeah, I'll send it to the clerks of the contiguous towns. They don't need a copy of the plan, just the notice. >> If they want to see the plan, they
>> They can come in and get it. >> John, thanks you everything you've done for the bureau over the last dozen years. I Appreciate it. We will see you one more time next month. >> We spending most of your time in Florida now or Pennsylvania? >> No, Pennsylvania. >> Same thing.
>> [laughter] >> What? It's singing the praises of that state. It is very retirement friendly place. >> Low taxes. >> Low tax, low tax pension, low tax social security, low tax 401.
>> I like that. >> It's right next door. >> PA you said? >> [laughter] >> Um but seeing that we have a member of the public in the in the background there, does anybody want to open the meetings to the public? >> Make a motion to open the meeting to the
public. >> Second. >> No. >> Yeah, I think I heard a second. All in favor? >> Aye. >> Any questions, Mr. Gallagher? >> I have just one. Can a master plan in this current aspect of the way I remember 244 Penn Road when they threw
it back in our face. >> He did. >> And he said the master plan, you're going against the master plan by allowing 244 to be built. It's going to be built because of a lot of other reasons. Um but can it hurt us?
It's a perfect example of what >> Some people manipulate. >> that you wanted to do. Why state in pension The whole thing about documents is that they are confusing. So that people know what the rules of the road are. >> That's me. >> As you say, you want to encourage senior housing.
Then take a position opposite that. Because they're trying to apply it. The way it's applied. That's why it's so important to talk to and review the documents. So if there's things in there that you think might come back and bite You know, I don't think so. I mean, I think we're all in favor of what
presents senior housing and extending that opportunity. >> I think our approving >> resolution for 244, reference the master plan and the things that supported the granting of approval. >> If we had a discussion today right now, let's say we're done with senior and we're done with that aspect. We're
not going to go through the senior and take that out. We would take it out. And that is an intention. That becomes when it comes in, I don't want to see housing. We can have enough senior. Too many old people. What do you mean? I'm just being ridiculous. I'm being an
example. >> No, but a tax is goods and services. >> Which is why when we review, we like to look at the impact and say you're going to do this or this. >> Here you go. I have the resolution from 244. >> Is County with you? >> Tooth, I don't go home without it. The
[laughter] 2006 master plan references the need for facilities for senior citizens and notes the need for age-restricted housing. The 2016 master plan re-examination quote recommends the senior citizens residential land uses for all types and levels of care be
permitted as conditional land uses. These facilities would be treated as substantial and desirable land uses that would be encouraged within the borough. And it goes on and talks about other things about the master plan.
>> So with that in mind with that I'm just throwing it out there. I'm not picking on that. >> We don't want to be specific. But let's use that as an example. It all comes down to being precise in what we do. You know there are other other aspects of >> Just because the master plan says it
should go here. >> But if it doesn't fit because a lot of times they a great example of building miles 100 units. I want 10,000. You know, if there actually something actually says to do >> So John, like so so in essence
like senior housing it's a beneficial use, right? But also green spaces as well. So how do you place a value on each and can the master plan address that? And and is there a Well, yes, we have we uh we want to promote affordable senior
housing and senior housing but not at the detriment to green space and contiguous green space this close to our core. Could we have gotten that granular in our master plan? >> Well, it is there because it's it does talk about preservation of the
environment. So what you're trying to preserve are areas like woodlands that are wetlands or they're they're they're uh >> In which case both were on that site. >> So you you just have to use your common sense in applying the language. We have
a lot of talk We do talk a lot about the environment. We incorporate into everything we talk about especially town center. We mean we mean we mean we want to make sure that we don't destroy the character of this town which is woodlands. It's all woods and nice lawns
and green and clean. We all aspire to live in Old Town. >> Anything else? >> Councilman that you'd like to to throw in? Add it and and we can do >> I'll make some recommendations, yeah. Oh, you didn't give us your name and address, but that's okay. Okay.
>> [laughter] >> Now, this is the point of interest I guess. I wasn't allowed in it was too crowded. I did go to the large town hall select board meeting prior to this make a statement on that data center but it's kind of my agenda building now. >> Really?
They had a big crowd? How big is that plant uh data center plant to be? >> Where Where are they going to put it? >> Right where like the Bloomberg is. Right I mean a lot of our a lot of our neighbors are getting that first one they built the building homes. They fire
up the generators. Uh it's >> Where is >> Right on Lake Compounce. >> Can't picture it. Do you remember where the Verizon building used to be? >> Off of Hammer Boulevard I'm trying to think of what street. The water right up to the shore there. >> Oh. Is it where that Victory is where where
the gym is? >> Uh you make a left at that sheet metal place. >> Yeah. >> Within the >> Yeah. >> Uh but it's It impacts the water's edge development. >> Yes, it does. >> Yes, it will. >> Yeah, that apartment building.
>> Yeah, it's Ramland up on Ramland Road is what he's talking about. >> Do you remember where the old Verizon building used to >> Yeah, back there. That's Bloomberg in the middle. They want I guess he's talking about expanding it. Or next to it. You go on the access road to the reservoir.
You see the back of this building. >> Yeah, I know. Definitely good to hear. >> Data centers Nationwide? >> So the nationwide. But but the thing is the good news is where you going to put a data center in Monroe? But you don't have to worry about anything. >> There's definitely There's a lot of land
in like Wisconsin and >> Well, >> Dakota. >> Monsey out Chestnut Ridge Road. The 351 K p m KPMG Um either going to be 485 plus a data center or 685 without a data center.
Monsey prefers 485 with a data center. Fair Share is suing Monsey. They want 685 units. Yeah. That's just one site on Chestnut Ridge. You've got BMW down the street that's worth 400 units there.
95 Chestnut Ridge Road earmarked for 190 units. >> So is BMW going down also? >> I'm sorry. >> Is BMW going down also? >> They tear down a lot of buildings down, yeah. You have 1,000 units on Chestnut Ridge Road.
>> We have the building revised >> There's school pads, no. But I just don't like the way the uncleared looks. That's a whole another issue. >> You know, you know, it's one of those things, Mr. Chairman, where we didn't want them to become the new judge. >> I just wish we had design standards.
I'll just let me say that. I'm salty. I'm always be salty about it. All right, anything else, Mr. Gallia? >> No, thank you. >> All right, do we make a motion to close the meeting to the public? >> Motion to close. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Excellent. Make a motion to close the meeting. >> Make a motion to close.
>> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> One time. >> In July. >> Yeah.