Good evening. >> Good evening and welcome. This is a regular meeting of the Princeton Planning Board on Thursday, May 28, 2026. Pursuant to section 13 of the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the
resolution of regularly scheduled meetings of this board for February 2026 through January 2027. A copy was filed with the clerk of Princeton on January 14, 2026. Legal notice on the adoption of said resolution was published in the January
16th, 2026 edition of the Princeton packet. Notice of this meeting has also been posted to the municipal website, princetonj.gov/calendar. Notice that all regular and special meetings of the Princeton planning board will be held electronically via Zoom was
transmitted to the Princeton packet and the times and was filed with the clerk of Princeton on Tuesday, January 14, 2026. Please note that this meeting is being recorded. During hearings on applications for development, members of the public will
have an opportunity to comment and ask questions. Public comment is heard by the board after an applicant's representatives have finished their presentations and have been questioned by planning board members and staff. Those wishing to comment orally when the time comes should virtually raise your
hand by clicking on the reactions or raise hand icon at the bottom of your Zoom screen or if participating by phone by pressing star9. Oral comments will be taken in the order in which hands were raised. We ask with respect that members of the public
express your views in three minutes or less. A countdown clock on your screen will help speakers keep track of time. Please note that speakers who exceed three minutes will be interrupted. Inappropriate public comment containing obscenity, hate speech, or relating to
matters not before the board will be muted. Miss Battle, call the role, please. >> Mr. Bodingheimer, >> here. Councilman Cohen >> here. >> Mayor Freda, Mr. McGawan
>> here, >> Miss Na >> here, >> Mr. O'Donnell >> here, >> Miss Pearl Mutter >> here, >> Miss Swummer, Mr. Taylor >> here,
>> Miss Wilson Anderson >> here. >> Sher Wilson >> here. >> You have a quorum. Thank you. Um announcements. Any announcements by board members or staff? Justin.
Okay. Um subcommittee reports. I understand we have um a report from the landscape subcommittee. Um will that be delivered by you PIV or
someone else? I'm happy to deliver the report. I don't Justin unless someone else was going to deliver it. >> No, >> I think you can. >> Okay.
>> Uh the landscape subcommittee met uh last Monday morning to discuss the um proposal by Edens uh which is the management of the shopping center. They had a proposal for the landscaping
around the transformer which will be going up on Harrison Road near the entrance uh by Nomad Pizza. Um the landscape subcommittee largely accepted um the plan that Eden uh presented with
some small changes um on the varieties and species of the plants that they were using. We also recommended that they use um London plain trees um or which are a hybrid of European and American sycamores rather than American sycamores
alone given that um many of the sycamore trees um along the Harrison Street seem to be doing poorly this season. Is there anything else I should add to that report, Madame Chair?
Um, no, not that I know. I I think that the applicant had proposed laria around a um power what's the word? Transformer box. Is
that correct? >> That's correct. >> And the committee recommended a different approach. >> Yes. Uh the committee um recommended that they use um ink berry uh mix of um
which is a native plant in area instead of >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And uh Eden's management the applicant agreed to these uh changes. >> Okay. Great. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Um >> Madam Chair, >> next. Yes. >> Sorry. I just wanted to let the record reflect that Miss uh Schwimmer has uh uh logged on. >> Thank you. I noticed that and meant to say so and so thanks Nathan.
>> Yeah, you're welcome. >> Um next up we have a resolution. Um this relates to the Steven Wasco minor subdivision um extension of time. The
address is 561 and 537 Stockton Street, file P2323-368MS. Any suggestions or comments on the resolution? And if not, would someone like to move it? >> I'll move the resolution.
>> Um, thanks Mr. O'Donnell. I saw you lean forward, Mr. Cohen. Is that a second? Yeah, I second it. >> Thank you. Um, uh, Deedra, would you call the role, please? >> Mr. Bodenheimer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Cohen?
>> Yes. >> Mr. McGawan? >> Yes. >> Miss Na? >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell? >> Yes. >> Miss Pearlmutter? >> Yes. >> Miss Swimmer? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Taylor. >> Yes. >> Chair Wilson. >> Yes. >> Motion carried. >> Thank you. >> Um, next up we have an application that I understand will be carried, but I'll read it into the record. This is an
application of Adar K. Bahage, a modification of condition subdivision approval. Um, the address is 1735 Stewart Road West, block 3401, lot 1.0. 03 zone R A of the former township
and R1 of the former township. The file number is P2525-7000 SP. Um Mr. Leco, would you like to tell us what to expect? >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.
>> If you're clairvoyant, >> the Thank you, Madam Chair. The applicant has requested that this be carried to the July 16th meeting, regularly scheduled meeting of the board um where we will hold the hearing. Uh there will be no further notice since we're carrying it to a date certain
date. >> Okay, good. July 16th and we don't need any comment on jurisdiction or well you already mentioned notice. We have jurisdiction because it's been carried. So all of that is
>> Yes. That's right. >> We're away. Okay, >> good. July 16th. Um, next up we have continuation um of the application from Toll NJ1 LLC. This
was carried from May 7th, 2026. It is a preliminary and final major site development approval at 29 Thanet Circle block 5502 lot 5 zone AH14
and the file number is P2525-712P. Um, I think I recall we were going to pick up with testimony from the architect, but Foot, do you want to say anything before then? I I understand also there
were some outstanding questions that or that maybe the applicant has addressed, but not necessarily with staff. >> Yes. So, um, all I'll say is that the
applicant did submit a, uh, or rather the applicants engineer submitted a, uh, response letter, uh, dated May 14th, 2026. Uh, that is online with the rest of the application materials. Uh, it was posted pretty much as soon as we got it.
Uh, they also provided a three sheet uh, exhibit uh, showing uh, some modifications that they had made. Uh if I recall correctly, there was a bicycle rack, a new bicycle rack that had been added. A um uh they identified the
locations of the parking spaces for the uh affordable units, the designated surface spaces. Uh and they uh identified changed uh ADA locations, ADA parking space locations. Uh, but besides that, that's what we
have uh new from the last applica um the last time we heard this application on May 7th. >> Nathan, excuse me. >> Yes, >> I'm hearing an echo. I don't know if anybody >> I'm hearing the echo as well. Um, Nathan, are you at the office and close to maybe somebody else who's also logged
in or anything like that? No. >> Nope, I'm not. >> I noticed that when Jack Taylor muted himself, the echo went away. It was strange. >> What can I say? >> Okay, so
a blanket suggestion for all who are not preparing to speak. Maybe we can all um mute ourselves. I will do so as soon as testimony starts. >> Um go ahead, Nathan. Uh, I was just going to say, um, if the if it's the
board board's pleasure to start with that site plan and just, uh, you know, clarify any last issues with those parking spaces. I know that was an issue, uh, at the last hearing, uh, with the ADA spaces. Um, so if we want to start there, we can start there. Or if we want to start with the architect, uh,
we could also, uh, you know, whatever the board's pleasure is and whatever, uh, Mr. Tar uh, would uh, would like to do. But that's all I have at this point. >> Nathan, just a clarification. Was that presented um as exhibit? Are they actually modified site plan um plans?
>> So it's only right. So it's only three sheets. Um so it it we we're and they identified them as exhibits in their response letter. Uh so that's why we're classifying those as exhibits at this point. Um any changes to those uh that
have been made and that are accepted by the board would need to be added to the approved plans during resolution compliance if the board uh looks favorably upon the application. >> Okay. And so should we treat them as exhibits A2, three, and four?
>> Uh that they treated in the uh submission as one one exhibit A2 or maybe they don't even uh label it. Darcy say that last part >> maybe they don't even label it. I was Do they label it as >> No. So they um I mean I guess we can
wait until we get to the uh testimony uh and then figure figure it out. That's how I would uh proceed because as of right now they're posted online. We do have them uh on record. >> Okay, that sounds good. Um, Councilman Cohen,
>> I just wanted to ask, you know, there was one other uh item that stuck out in my mind that they had undertaken to modify, which was the landing points of the path that crosses the um, you know,
the the low the waterway. And I was wondering if that was not addressed in the plan since you didn't mention it, Nathan. Was it not addressed in the letter or >> I know it wasn't addressed. Sorry. Go ahead. Sorry. >> No, that's that was it.
>> Okay. So, I know it wasn't addressed in the letter. I will leave it to the applicants uh professionals to identify additional changes that I did not mention uh during that uh little introduction. Okay. Uh, okay. Thank you for that. Um,
Mr. AR. Uh, as Nathan Foot suggested, can we start by just reviewing the um high points of the response letter and the changes that are being um
proposed to the plan having to do with parking spots and the other matters he described? >> Absolutely. So, thank you for having us. Uh I wanted to start by reminding you of where we started last time.
This application is the first of the 11 projects which the governing body has decided will be brought before the board to meet the municipalities obligations regarding affordable housing in the
fourth round required by the state. It it comes before you with its own zoning. Um, Miss Gribbon testified the last hearing that it complies with that zoning and so we're doing a site plan review.
We because there was enough time to both work up the site plan changes and get them to the board 10 days prior to tonight. We have done that and we're going to ask Daniel Seal, the the engineer who was previously sworn to
come back before the board and describe the changes that were made on the site plan that was sent to the office. Jerry, I'd recommend that all three sheets be characterized as A2. They're not part of the original deck, which was A1. >> It's fine,
>> Dan, if you're ready. >> Uh, I'm sorry. Before we go further, Jerry, did we need to swear anybody in or is it carried over from the last hearing? >> It's carried over. >> Okay. >> No one needs to be swear in at this point. >> Gotcha. All right. >> Okay, Dan.
>> Hi. Good evening again, uh, chairman, members of the board. Again, for the record, Daniel Chanel, principal of the firm Dynamic Engineering. Um, I understand that I'm still under oath and my license is still valid and in good standing. Um, so I'll be really brief. Um,
as you've you've heard, uh, we did have an opportunity to make some revisions. We understood the comments that were received by the board at the last hearing. Um, we want to make an have an opportunity to go in and hopefully address some of those concerns and comments um, to the satisfaction of the board. So, with that being said, I will
take a moment to share my screen here. Um so what you should see before you is uh the overall site plan exhibit that was uh recently resubmitted back to the board. Um
>> it is again titled overall site plan exhibit. It is a sheet one of three um dated May 13th, 2026. Um and I believe we're identifying this as exhibit A2 along with the other three uh other two exhibits. And I just want to note the other two exhibits are just the zoomed
in version of the the top portion of the site and bottom portion of the site. Um I only planned on pulling those up unless if there's really detailed information needed. So I'll just focus on this one for now. And again identifying this as exhibit A2. Uh, so we had an opportunity to take a look at
the ADA parking. As you previously uh may recall, we previously had the two required ADA spaces located right up here near the proposed playground. There was concerns with the location of them, grouping them together, and also having them further away from the proposed CO units. Um, so we took a closer look and
what we did is we split or we went down from two spaces by the playground. Um, and we actually relocated one of them um to the I guess it would be northwest um uh from the playground uh directly
adjacent to building I. So now we have one um handicap compliance space uh right here and the other one right over by the playground. Those are the two places spaces that are required but also we heard concerns that there was no spaces provided at the front of the site
in front of the stream. Um, so if I circulate down to the uh southeast portion of the site, we've also added a third handicap compliant space adjacent to building D. So now, not only do we meet the ADA requirement of having two spaces, we
exceed it by providing a third and we've also scattered them throughout the site uh to hopefully address some of the concerns with the location of them. Uh we felt that keeping one up by the playground was uh made the most sense because one it provides a crosswalk uh that doubles for the accessible route
from that space. U and since that playground is meant to be a community area, we wanted to make sure that we had an accessible parking space uh near the entrance to the playground. Uh so that was one revision we made. The other thing that we mentioned testimony was uh that the seven KOA units that do not have a garage that they would have
designated parking spaces. So, these purple hatched areas that you see, there's four spaces um directly to the uh the southwest of the playground and then adjacent to building I there's an additional three. Those are the seven spaces that will be reserved for the COA
units that do not have a garage. Uh we didn't plan on striping them or anything like that. They're just hatched on here to identify it. Um and we would just have signage uh located in front of the space identifying that they are reserved parking spaces for those units. Um, in
addition to that, uh, we noted that, um, the sidewalk that crosses the stream, uh, there was no direct route. If you recall, kind of the sidewalks really went to the front steps of a couple of these units.
It was a really good point that was made. So, now we've kind of altered the route of the sidewalk. We're keeping the bridge where it is because again, it's in the conservation need. We can't really touch that or change the location of it. Um, so that's staying in the same spot, but we now are kind of meandering the sidewalk so it connects to more
common areas and doesn't lead right up to people's front uh porches for those um those units. Um, and then finally, we also took an opportunity to provide some bike shares from the front of the site, crosses the stream, goes to the rear. So, as you can
see, um, keeping with the theme on, uh, Planet Circle with the bike boulevard, we also provided the theme shar uh, on the main drive that goes to the rear of the site. So, as you follow this up to the east, um, you'll see that these
shadows continue uh, right to the rear of the site just to provide some additional visibility. uh calling out that this is meant to be a shared road for both pedestrians and bicyclists or I'm sorry vehicles and bicyclists uh to provide some more awareness u that uh
that bikes could be on this road. Uh so that was the the the gist of the main changes since you've last uh heard from us. Um Mr. Tar, if I missed anything, feel free to redirect me. If not, I make myself available for for any questions the board may have. Those were our
takeaways from the meeting and uh I think you've done a good job of explaining them, but questions from the board. >> Jim Purcell has his hand up. Jim. >> Yeah, Dana. Um uh back to the parking. Um we've just recently learned of a um
DCA requirement that the you must have at least one EV charging station that is handicap accessible. So, that's a a modification that you're going to need to make. Um,
>> yes, you are correct. Um, we can uh we'll absolutely make that uh one of them handicap. And I also I also want to point out that DCA's interpretation is that that handicap accessible space is in addition to any um required spaces,
but since you already have three um and you only need two, uh you're you're okay. Um so um if ADA says that you need two, you need to add one and it doesn't count toward the original ADA 2. Um,
that was something we just learned a couple of weeks ago. >> Understood. I mean, we could certainly provide one in the open air portion. Um, but I also want to note that the the COA unit that has the van accessible parking space within it. So, the the ADA space
in the garage for the COA unit, that is also an EV space. So, uh, that may uh satisfy the DCA requirement. Um, but I don't think there will be an issue since we had a third one by adding uh one additional charging space for the exterior ADA parking location.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Of course. Thank you. >> Other questions, Miss Wilson? >> Um, just a quick question about the location of the sherrows. Um, I don't know whether or not I guess this is not
a municipal road. It's it's a driveway. And so if it were a bike boulevard, and I could be wrong about this, I'm sure Mr. Purscell knows for certain, would the sherrows be more more toward the middle of a lane and not
>> that would be preferable that the sheross be actually in the middle of the lane? Do they do represent a shared roadway for bicycles and motor vehicles? So, um the uh the policy is that we put them in the center of the lane, not to
the right as you show, as you're showing them. So, >> understood. That's not a problem. >> Yep. >> Good. Thanks. >> Good point, Chair Chair Wilson. I I meant to say that too after I finished my ADA thing.
>> Um Okay. Any other questions from from board members? Okay, seeing none and thank you for that review and for the >> of course >> changes. Um, Mr. Tar, do you want to
>> introduce your next witness? >> You bet. Uh, so the next witness is is our architect James Cybernook is here. Jim. >> Yes. Hi.
>> If Jim could be sworn, >> if you could raise your right hand, >> do you swear or affirm that testimony about to give me the truth? >> I do. >> You also want to. Please state your full name and spell your last name. >> Okay. Uh, my name is James Desgrrenic.
Uh, D as in David. Z E G R E N UK. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Jim. So as to qualify you, you're a licensed architect in New Jersey. >> I am a licensed architect in New Jersey. >> You're a member of the AIA.
>> I am. >> And you hold NCB cert certificate. >> I do. >> And you're an employee of Toll Brothers. And your assignment tonight is to explain stacked town homes. That is to say, the exterior and the interiors of
of these buildings, some of which are quite unusual. U you're familiar with the product? >> I I I certainly am. Yep. >> And you're prepared to explain it to us on behalf of Toll Brothers. >> That is my intention for tonight. >> Jim is offered as an expert with respect
to these units. >> Um couple of real quick questions. If you could just tell us um a little bit about your education and also um I'm unfamiliar with NCARB. So out of curiosity, could you tell me what that stands for?
>> Okay. Sure. Um well I'll start with my education. Um so I I did go to Temple University. I have a bachelor's in architecture. Graduated in 2005. So um been practicing architecture for a little bit over 21 years. Um to your
encarb question that's something that you know has been around for a while. It's the national accreditation of architectural registration boards. It is basically the a it is it works in conjunction with AIA. So AIA is a
professional membership which everyone is is familiar with. Encarb is a Washington DC based uh registration board holder. It is where they provide um um sort of it they kind of it's sort of
like a a holder of your licenses as you will. So if I basically want to apply for a membership or apply for uh architecture registration in another state, you know, I I go through them and uh they will hold. So basically when I
apply to the state, I upload my ENARB file and they because they hold my registrations and then that allows me to you know uh apply for architecture. They also do other things like um >> you you don't need to go any further. >> Yeah. just
>> I appreciate the explanation. I and I I probably should have, you know, seen it before and noticed stood bor was asking. Anyway, we accept your qualifications. >> More more architects are having that after their last name. They also do, you know, accreditation, you know, they help
you accreditation and stuff like that. But >> okay, >> so now that Jim is going to use go back to our exhibit A1, which is a slide deck that was introduced last time and we have a series of of drawings of which
show the building's exterior and interior. And I remind the board that this stacked town home arrangement has uh the units aren't stacked one over the other as conventional u design, but they're sort of interled. And Jim is
going to explain that to us. >> Yes. Um okay, I guess I'll start with sharing my screen. I'll I'll pull up that uh presentation that we had up last time. >> Uh is everyone able to see this? >> Yes. Yes.
>> All right. Doing good so far. >> Okay. >> As you >> as you go through this, if you could tell us what slide this is from A1. >> Okay. Yeah, this is slide 13. I think I have it here. I'll >> Oh, yeah. Great. Most of most of them have them in the corner here. So, yeah,
start starting on slide 13. It is right after the last site plane. Um, sorry, I'm zooming out. So, let me just start by saying that my intention for this architectural extra testimony is to yeah, again, as
Christopher has mentioned, just to walk you through these first set of renderings. So, we're going to start with the exterior renderings um then go on to the 2D elevations and and then onto the floor plans, which you know, then we'll once we get to the floor plans, we can talk about the
bedroom counts and units and what we have. But uh the first part of this presentation that I have is going to be more about the exterior design and the layout. So um as was mentioned previously uh there
are a total of 85 residential units in this community that we're proposing uh across 10 buildings. Of those 85 units 17 will be restrictive. Um and again again we'll get into the layouts of the and the differences
between the market rates and the restricted units. Uh 68 that means 68 will be sold as market rate units. Um two of those 10 buildings are the rest house all 17 of restrictive units. So one building has nine restrictive the
other has um uh eight. So, I'm going to start with we'll start with the first page of the architecture testimony. This is building C. If I lift back to the old site plan, sorry,
the old site plan up here. Um, this is we're the the rendering that we were just looking at is this is the largest building of 14 units on the site. It's a market rate building and you are so you are um
sorry so yeah this this is Stenet Circle right here and we are uh looking at the one end of the building so that is the fir that is the uh first building we'll talk about the largest building on the site um
so I'll talk about the materials so Again, this is another view of the same uh building C. You are the red dot on the lower uh right hand corner plan shows where you're standing at in relation to circle. So, it is like it is the entrance. You're standing at the
drive that is the entrance into the community. And you'll notice that it's a fourstory building. Um with the first story mostly be just being the lobby entrance and the garages. Uh with and the upper three levels are the actual um
living. Um the materials I'll talk a little bit on the materials that we're here while we're here on the outside. So you'll you'll notice um well actually I'll I'll wait till we talk about to get to the elevations.
Um I will go on to the next. So So this again is the same building. This is the cover sheet that we're looking at. The red dot shows the view that you're you know the viewpoint that we're looking at. Again it's the main ent. the
other main entrance into the community. Uh this is the drive that will directly serve uh buildings um C and D, although you can pass through and get to the rest of the community. >> And what she Oh, okay. 15. >> So this this is this is Yeah, this is sh
sheet 15. >> Yep. >> Sheet 16. So now we are walking further down into the main drive. Um we are Yeah. So this is where we just crossed the bridge over the unnamed
tributary. Um and these the each of these two smaller buildings uh that we're looking at there are uh market rate buildings with six units each. It is. Yeah. Buildings E and F.
And I will go on to the next slides. Slide 17. Again, further down the same drive, uh the main drive. We are looking down an alleyway between uh two sets of buildings. There's three buildings
total. So you have buildings I, G, and H. And again, I'll zoom out. This is the alleyway between them. Um, it is, sorry, is more of a courtyard. We have the the taller market rate buildings uh to the
right. And here you'll see the restrictive buildings to the left, G&H. Um, again, this is slide 17. Uh on to slide 18. So this is well yes. So this
is the 2D elevation of that first building that we talked about building C which is on the main it which is directly a front uh planet circle. So this is the largest building again uh building C 14 units.
Um so yeah this is our 2D colored elevation. Uh we have I I'll start to talk about the materials here now that you can see them in um a little more detail. Uh so these there's brick along the base. We have horizontal a mix of yeah
so we have a mix of materials to to sort of complement um you know the our our look that we are the modern look that we are going specifically for this community. So we have brick along the base. Um, as you go up, you'll notice we
have horizontal siding and the bays have cementitious paneling that which are shown in dark gray. Our our windows will be black and we have if you notice we have aluminum canopies over them each of the entrances.
And there so there is a lot there's 14 units in seven town home structures. So these are stacked town homes. There's a lower unit and an upper unit. The lower unit is a smaller residential unit, which you'll see as we go on to the floor
plans. Upper unit is larger. We have the town home highlighted in green um second from the left highlighted because that is the actual uh floor plan that we're going to be looking at um as we go on to
the next couple of pages. And I will pause here to see if anyone has any uh questions so far before we go on to the floor plans. >> Uh I don't know whether this is the right time to ask it, but I am curious
in at some point you could talk about whether all of the buildings on site will be the exact same color scheme or whether you'll do some some variation. We have now we wanted to keep uh this we
we're using the same pallet scheme in the whole site. We didn't want to we wanted to sort of have a cohesive look. We didn't want it to look jumbled or have the restrictive units look diff any different from the market rate. So we did apply the uh same pallet across all
10 buildings. >> Mr. McGawan. >> Um, very quickly, you said at the beginning that there were nine units, nine affordable units in one and eight
in another, but it shouldn't it that's shouldn't it be 10 in and in in one building, seven in another? >> Yes. Sorry, that's I have I'm sorry if I spoke incorrectly.
>> No, I have Yes, I have 10. Yes, I have 10 in one and seven in another. >> Okay, >> thanks, Alvin. >> Just checking. Yep. >> Sorry about that. All right. If no one else has any
questions, I'll go on to the uh again, this is the market rate unit. I'll go on to the floor plans for the market rates. >> Go right ahead. >> All right. So, we colorcoded the market rates to show the different units. So,
basically the blue is the upper larger unit and the green is the lower unit. Um the very most right is the first floor plan which you'll see that there's two a two-door uh garage.
Um so yeah, they'll get a total two each unit will have a total of two cars in the garage. Uh there's space for bike parking, uh trash and recycling. Um both exactly the same for each unit. And you'll notice that in front of the
garage is bas is the entrance, a closet, closet space, a little bit of storage and stairway up to the living area. Uh on the second floor is is most is entirely is the stairway for the upper
unit and the mostly the green unit which is the two-bedroom unit. Uh the two-bedroom unit is you'll notice here we had the square footages,464 square ft. Um and
yes, so the two-bedroom unit is here on the second floor. Uh and you'll notice that the primary boat at the primary bedroom for the green unit exists on the third floor. So these are we call these interlocking stacked. So it is not you
know each unit doesn't fit neatly within one floor. It kind of partake you know one unit partakes over another floor. So we call it interlocking because it's it's not a smooth geometry. It's something that we're um typically
used to providing in our New Jersey communities. Um as you go into the um as you go through the the rest so the uh uh the rear half of the uh third floor plan is the larger unit um the the
threebedroom. So the living areas are on the third floor. Uh the bedrooms being up on the uppermost floor. And we have these partial floor plans here to show what it would you know the minor differences that would look like if they had a bay. So, some have a some have a
smaller bay, some have a three- window bay, and some have no bay at all. So, we just provided little snapshots of um alternate floor plans above. >> Is there any um affordable um unit with a bedroom that doesn't have a window? I know there was at one point and I saw
from the uh the letter that was submitted that a window was provided. So, is there any other unit affordable unit where there's no bedroom bedroom window? >> Well, we're not on the affordable bedrooms uh units yet, but no, all all our units um have windows.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Yep. So, again, I just before we So, this again before this is the only market rate floor plan. It is going to be the entirely the same except for um I'll flip back to the elevation. So again, this is highlighted green cuz we are
talking about an interior unit. The end units will have additional windows and that will be the only otherwise the floor plan is exactly the same. Um again the green is two bedrooms uh with two full baths. Uh the blue is three
bedrooms with two and a half baths. >> And Jim, the slide number on this one is 19. >> It is 19. Yep, you got it. Jim, from a handicapped accessibility standpoint, it doesn't look like any of these are accessible in the sense that
unless you've got an elevator in uh a specific handicap unit. What's the what's the status on that? >> No, you're you're you are correct. These are not um meant to be accessible units. >> Um >> but you're required to have some
accessible units on the site, are you not? Yeah, the restrictive units will all the ground floor restrictive units will be accessible. >> Okay. So, just to clarify, none of the market rate units are accessible.
>> Uh, no. >> Okay. And also just one other quick clarification, the floor plans are identical across all of the market rate buildings or is it >> Yes, that is correct. So we that's why yeah we are only presenting one set of
market rate floor plans. They're exactly the same across all buildings. >> Okay. >> They're all the same setup. Yep. All >> some buildings just have fewer units. That's the only difference. >> That's correct. Yeah. So this again we're I'll flip back to the elevation. So this is the largest. So this is a um
a seven unit or seven town home building. Some are four. >> We have we have a six uh town home building. That's it. Yeah. That's the only difference just the count. >> Thank you for clarification. >> Let me just ask uh an additional
question there. So the end end units >> could have additional windows that the internal units could not. Are you going to have any windows on the sidewalls? >> Yes. Um we here I'll flip to let me let
me get to that in the following slides. >> Okay. So, um, let me, so yeah, we're on slide 19. So, slide 20, this is the the rear of the market rate of building C. You have
the garages below and you'll see the balconies. Each unit has a balcony. Um, and here are the side elevation. So, we don't show it in plan, but from a side um, elevation, this is what one
side will look like. the one end unit on the one side will have these these windows. Well, that's two units basically. Um and let's see this is slide 21 and on slide 22 is the other end um of the same
building and this is what that end. So identical to just you know >> okay. Mhm. >> And just just to confirm this is something that uh we raised in the uh uh or I raised in the planning memo uh and
was uh mentioned in the response letter that the um architectural plan showing all proposed buildings elevations. I would also say floor plans uh will be provided during resolution compliance. I just want to confirm um confirm that. Uh
yes. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Yes. And well, while there's a lull, um, just to clarify, these also were in the, uh, response letter from Dynamic, but just to confirm, um, what's shown right now is, uh, there's a brick and then there's
a siding. Um, based on the response memo, that's going to be actual brick and the siding is going to be vinyl according to the uh the response letter. I just again to confirm that >> that is correct. >> Okay.
>> And the brick is that blonde color brick as opposed to >> Yeah, it's not red where it's a a gray. It's more of a a gray. So, you'll see I'm I'm zooming up on it. Sorry if I'm >> Mhm. >> causing headaches, but just to show you
some detail. I mean, that's close to what it's going to look like. It's a 2D It is a 2D plan, but we did try to show something that we're actually proposing. >> Mhm. >> Which we intend to use. So, it's to go with the, you know, this is a a
monochromatic theme using grays and and whites. >> This is slide 23. >> Yes. I Um slide yes slide 24. So I'm sorry. So I
this is the um this is the building G. So this is the one um this is the building that we're just looking at the brick. So this is the um first restrictive unit building. This is
the 10 unit uh restrictive building. So what's the other ones the other restrictive building is a little bit smaller only seven units. Um so this is the front elevation. You'll notice that it's three stories.
And if I go on to the next slide, slide 24, you'll see why. So on slide 24, um this is the floor plan for building G. It is restrictive unit. Um we have a mix
of single of one bed we have a mix of bedroom counts. So one bedroom most these are mostly two-bedroom units and some threebedroom units. Um each town home each each yeah town home section is a little bit different. Again these are
interlocking town homes so they do not stack evenly. Um I will run through I will run through this end unit just to as an example of a layout. So we have the garage. So this is a type the pink units are all type
ground floor type A units. As I was saying these are the um accessible units. Uh the one unit on building G is a van accessible. That's what these stripes are for in this garage. So it is an accessible garage. Um they pull in and
they enter in through here. Uh entering upon the kitchen, there's a laundry area, mechanical room. Um you have a kitchen, a living living area, and two bedrooms and a full bath, which is you you can see it's pretty large to be
accessible. Has all the clearances that are required. Um and that it is there are other tweaks to the rest of the um the units but they are pretty similar in layout.
Um again we have areas for bike storage in each of the garages um that we provide uh trash recycling but yeah not every not every unit gets a garage because there are um there are 17
units 10 car Yeah only 10 car garages. So the other as was previously talked about the rest of the parking will remain uh have designated surface parking. Uh if we go to slide 25 we are on the second floor
and again this is where the building the interlocking layouts start to look different. So it is and that happens primarily because we are trying to fit different um bedroom types get a certain amount of bedroom types within these restrictive units as a whole. So, it
starts to look, you know, uneven. Uh, this green unit on the end is a two is a two-bedroom unit. Um, yeah, you'll notice that each of these
buildings has common stairways. So, enter in on on this end unit. As you go up the stairway, you went into the green unit into um the kitchen area followed by the great room in the back and two bedrooms. Each of these units has a full bath.
Um does anyone have And then let me flip to the third floor. And the third floor, so we have some the third floor has a couple of three-bedroom units that take up almost an entire floor minus the common stairway in the two left.
So, and the the different colors represent the different units. Um, each again here is the we have right here marked the different bedroom counts. So, that's an explanation the different bedroom counts and different square footages and what
they range from. Um, does anyone have any questions on these floor plans? >> There was just one question that came up last time. If you go back to 24, the first floor floor plan. >> Yes. Yeah. 24. Here we go. >> Uh, bicycle storage for those people who
don't have a garage. >> Um, yes, that we do have that. So, the garage, the people from the garage will, you know, they have the option of entering obviously through the garage or through the front door. the people that are living upstairs or the residents living upstairs, they have a common um
stairway and each unit has a bike a dedicated bike space underneath the stairs on we did not want them to bring the bike up have to bring the carry the bike up the stairs. So we do have they will each have a bike space. >> Thanks J.
>> Yep. >> So we have questions from Mr. McGawan, Miss Wilson Anderson, and Mr. Taylor. Alvin, >> uh, thank you. Um, I I I did I hear you that the ADA
accessible units and the affordable units are all all together. >> That's you didn't make a distinction. You didn't make the distinction between those. >> No, the it's just that the market rates uh we don't have an accessible unit
market rate. So all the accessible units that we do have just reside in this restrictive. So all the all the ground floor units and restrict both restrictive buildings are are are accessible units. Um,
I guess all the units with the same bedroom size, are they with the same with the same bedroom counts? Are they all the same size or do they be market or affordable? >> I'm sorry. >> I'm asking you, are they are the affordable units smaller?
>> Oh, yes, they are smaller. So they range in size. Yeah, they range in size from a um a one-bedroom 850 ft unit uh I'm zooming in the square footage
here now to 1253bedroom unit whereas the market rates start the the the smaller market rate unit is 14 um some square feet. So it's about a 200 you know the the smaller market rate is
about 200 square ft difference. So yes the to answer your question directly they are smaller units they you know um and that has to that has to do with the you know just the the space the space in
the kitchen. We have the affordable units get one full bath whereas the market rates have two and two and a half baths each. So it adds up. >> The size of these units is controlled by the state rules on the U-Hack rules and
our next witness is going to testify as to that. >> Yes. Yes, that is true. We comply with all U-Hack requirements. That's that was our guiding point principle for designing these. So and that is typical for our projects. We we use that uh hack
as guidelines. >> All right. But but again too and the the third thing is again you you if you will you didn't mix the units throughout the project. You you have the affordable units all in one place.
>> Yes. Within two build two buildings. Yes. >> Why did you why did you do that? um just because of the nature of the design of them. So again, we are required to offer a a bedroom mix whereas you know the market rates we are
not we're not required to offer any kind of um you know specific bedroom mix. Uh so and within specific square footages. So the market rate, you know, we have a little more freedom of design. Um, and
and it just made it it it made it made sense to um just because of the different bedroom counts and the different square footages that we have to work with that as you can see that, you know, as you get up to the upper floors, they become a little uneven.
And it just uh yeah, it it just made a lot more. we we feel like we're able to provide more by combining them all. One thing I get your point is that, you know, we're sort of, you know, keeping them, you know, we're not spreading them out through the community. But if you
look at the site plan, if you go back to our site plan, we kept that in mind. We were trying to locate the building. So, we didn't want to locate them on the edge and and keep them, you know, out sort of outside of community. wanted to feel them, you know, sort of integrate
them a little bit better. So, we put them by the courtyard about by building I. So, these are the two restrictive units uh buildings right here, building H and building G. So, they share a courtroom with building I. Uh they're back by the playground. So, we felt
they're very well like centered into the community. We go back to the floor planes. >> I'm I'm a little confused. in terms of what you testified to about the the number of bedrooms that were required. Um, >> okay. >> What does that have to do with the
location? You you were you were um correlating it with the location of the um of the two uh buildings that had only um affordable units. I wasn't exactly sure what the correlation is. >> Yeah, I just meant that. So, I'm I'm back to the market rate floor plans
right now. >> So, we have two different types of market rates, right? So here, so they fit neatly together. Again, these are not just straight stacked um town homes. These are interlocking. So I can fit two different town homes and repeat that a
market rate town homes together uh units and one town home together and repeat that across the community. Whereas the restrictive units here is a little more complicated mix of onebedroom, twobedroom, and threebedroom units
together. So, it doesn't fit as neatly into a town home. Also, just the way we do, you know, we make because they are smaller, we wanted to we have to stretch these buildings out a little bit wider.
Um, so these are 24 foot as opposed to the um market rate. I don't have that. Um, the market rates are a little bit smaller uh in width. So, it's also important to uh confirm
that these are for sale units as opposed to rental units. And the U-Hack rules make clear that they can be in separate buildings as our next witness will testify. They they can be clustered as long as they are not in an undesirable location.
Which is why uh um the architect was uh uh testifying as to the um location as to the um uh not being along the sides or uh the road of the uh property. It's
immediately adjacent to a market unit and in the middle of the complex. Okay, for now. >> Thanks. Thanks, Alvin. Claudia. Um, yeah, my my question was along the same lines as Alvin's. Is the exterior
finishes also appear to be inferior on the restricted units in comparison with the market rate units. And I also did have a bit of a reaction to the clustering or segregation of those units into two buildings. So, I did just want
to follow up with with that as um my personal feeling. So, maybe you can address the exterior materials because I saw they the buildings don't look as fancy as the other buildings. >> Yeah. Well, we are
we stressed giving them um so yes, they are three stories. They are not fourstory buildings. Um, but we did pull the brick up, you know, high on these. They don't have the the main difference is that they don't have the the darker
gray bays. Everything else, you know, we did our, you know, we felt like we provided them the same uh level of quality as the market rates. Uh, this is just the front elevation. We gave them the same aluminum um canopies or the
front doors, the same doors and windows. Uh it's the same horizontal siding and and gray brick. I will go to So this is slide 23. I will jump to slide 27 at the back. It is a similar
looking rear elevation for the garages at the market rates just a little bit shorter of a building. Um but they both have each you know we we gave units balconies just like the market rates. If I go to slide 28,
um again similar composition. It is not, you're right, is not exactly the same, but we do have full story brick um horizontal uh uh siding on the on the side. Um we have we again we have cementitious
paneling um between the windows. It's a similar feature that we have on the market rates. And on the opposite side, same thing. It is. Yeah. So, we Yeah, we've we definitely paid attention in our designs
to try to not create a too much of a separation between the market rates and the restrictive buildings. But, you know, they are fundamentally different buildings. So, they will look different from each other. I am jumping ahead. So, again, we are on
slide 29. So that's the other um side of building G. >> It does look like there are noticeably fewer windows on the side elevations of the of these buildings that house the
affordable units. Is that not the case? It looked like there were three on the uh market rate ones. There were three long window that has a lot to do with the layout of the plan. So, I'm sorry. I'm jumping
back to 20 uh slide 26, which is the um which is the third floor plan of building G. So, you know, we have a bedroom which we gave them windows in the front. It's just they're they're tighter units. So, the it's you don't you're not going to want as many
bedrooms. Actually, we we fit a a window in the living area. Um we have there's a bedroom here. We fit a a window there. Um again, at the corner, the front corner um there is there is a bedroom.
We don't have a bedroom on the side, but there are that same room does have windows. So each, you know, it does look like there are less windows. Well, there are less windows, but you know, each function has windows that would otherwise have
windows in the market rates. Again, here we have a a bedroom with a window on the side of it. We we don't want a window in the in the laundry or the bath or or by the stair, but this living area in the front does have windows. So we we
>> and I'm seeing all these windows that you're pointing out on the left side of the picture. I'm not seeing any on the right side of the of the image. So on type two. >> So that does that uh that side elevation
have no windows or have windows on a different floor or something? >> Well, that's the second floor. So it's the Let me jump back. So I will talk. So yeah, again I guess you were looking at this right unit.
>> I believe there should be windows and maybe we didn't catch that, but this is not showing any windows when I believe there are on the second floor. So if we jump to the side elevation yet, there should be a window. You know, both
side elevations have windows on the second floor. So, I'm not sure why they're not showing up in plan on that on this particular unit, but there should be a window there. Again, we have the great room here. I believe you tried to find there is a
there should be a window shown in plane here. It's just incorrectly not shown. So, there is a window in the living room. Otherwise, the great room has um sliding doors to a deck um which is larger than a window. Uh, these two bedrooms in the front have
windows. >> Okay. >> Um, >> no, go ahead, Nathan, and then we'll call on Mr. Taylor. >> Yep. Um, sorry to jump the line, Jack. Um, I just wanted to then confirm that that will be uh updated in any
compliance uh plans, any plans that are submitted. >> Yes, I will make sure we update that. Thank you. Jack, you're on mute, so you'll need to unmute yourself.
>> Muted. May I continue this discussion about the issue of integration just a moment? I think Alvin and Claudia have raised a very fair question. We're dealing with a socially important issue in in New
Jersey and one where Princeton has become a leader in affordable housing and meeting legal requirements for the state. And so when we decide under such circumstances not to integrate in conventional ways
that have been approved as a matter of policy. We need not only to discuss it, but we need, in my judgment, a reference in the document itself for what we've done, why we've done it, and why it's the right thing to do.
failing to anticipate issues, we're going to have them and they'll be they'll be more effectively dealt with in my judgment if we anticipate the issues and think a minute longer still
about the this issue. Thank you. >> We'd like to we'd like to do that. And again, Craig Rancamp is an expert in affordable housing and a planner and is going to speak to that very issue next. >> Okay. Thanks, Mr. Tar. Um, Councilman
Cohen and then Miss Na. >> Yeah, I don't want to spend any time defending the U-Hack rules >> uh above or beyond saying that they are the rules. Um, I do want to speak to the
location of these affordable units because I actually feel like it's the nicest location in the entire site. I think that um the front doors are going
to front on this um greenway between the affordable buildings and building I which is going to be really one of the nicest p public places uh on the campus and it's close to the playground uh
which is another real asset. So, I just want to say not only is this not in a disadvantaged spot, but it's actually one of the nicest spots uh on the campus.
And um yeah, I guess I'll I'll leave it at that. But that that's my feeling about the locations that were chosen for these bu for these affordable affordable buildings. Yeah, again I just want to stress that we did take the location of these buildings very seriously and it
was um thought and discussed about uh in the planning of this community. Um but yes to your point it is exactly why although we didn't you know intersperse them into the different town homes uh each of the buildings we did
take you know it is the reason why we placed it in this courtyard between uh building I and we have a a brricked walkway in between. Um it is in the middle of a major it is very is probably the most accessible building um
circulation all around. So, um, and as we think, you know, retreated back from the main drive, they do have a bit of privacy, too, which is I think is rather nice. >> And and just one more word about that
because I think that um, you know, the the stack town homes each have separate entries. These buildings are not like Avalon at the shopping center where where they're hallway buildings. Uh in a hallway
building, the residents interact at the in the hallway. On this campus, the residents are going to interact in the outdoor spaces, the public spaces. And again, these buildings are very nicely situated to
interact with the residents of the uh market rate units. So I I just, you know, I want to make that point that even if you had them intermixed in the buildings with the
market rate units, you would have no more interaction between the market rate residents and the affordable residents than you will uh in this plan because they will they would only interact in the outdoor public spaces anyway.
>> If I could comment on the application of U-Hack because David referred to it and Chris did a little while ago. If they U-Hack provides that if the units are rental units they can they should be interspersed in
the same buildings market and affordable. These are not rental units and U-Hack has different rules when they're for sale units. Then they don't have to be dispersed. No requirement of that although obviously if a developer wanted to do it it could. Um and the
only requirement is basically integration of the affordable buildings in the um uh in the development and David has commented on on that. So I just wanted to make that distinction that there's
there's no requirement of dispersing of affordable units um with market units within buildings because it's a for sale development. Thanks, Jerry. >> Pivy. >> Um, thanks. I just want to um kind of
echo the comments previously by um members uh uh Miss Claudia Wilson, Mr. Taylor, and uh Mr. McGawan. Um just about the fact that it's a little bit disappointing um even though this may be
completely in compliance with the UHAC regulations. those regulations represent a certain minimum. It's a little bit um disappointing to see that uh maybe you didn't exceed the minimum here in some sense. But going back to the
architectural drawings, I had a question um just specifically on building H. Um, looking at the uh plans that were submitted, it seems like one of the units at the end of on
the left end of building H. Um, looking at the rear elevation, there's um for some reason half of the third floor is cut off or it just is a roof. Could you explain that and why you
did that? >> Uh, yes. It's just a Um, let me Well, >> I'll walk through the floor plan. The building H. We didn't get to building H yet. I'll, you know, >> they're pretty similar to building G. So, I'll try to,
>> uh, run through this. So, again, um, yes. So, it doesn't look like anyone else has their hand raised. Um, this is slide 30. So, this is the next, this is the smaller of the affordable,
um, sorry, of the restrictive buildings. uh building H. Um, and this is the entrance. Again, similar materials. If we run through the floor plans here, again, we we show a mix of different square footages and and bedroom counts,
very similar to building G. Um, the the bottom units are uh type A accessible. Uh, if we go to the second floor, um, again, these are the layouts, different different bedroom counts. I'm just running through this really
quickly. And to get to your point, so it's just the size. We we kept this building on the end. Yeah, you can see it looks like that. So, it's just that we didn't need the full square footage of the building. It gives it some
geometric, you know, we we tried to change the elevation up. Uh it doesn't it's not a, you know, a completely flat side of a building. Um it gives a little bit of you know geometry to it. So we we
were just playing with the composition. So, I mean it just if you made that building So, if you just made it consistent um with the rest of it, you would just have a larger unit. Is that the issue?
>> Um if we Yeah. If we took up if we want full Yeah. It would be >> that would become like a three-bedroom unit. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, I'm just curious like was there a
certain number or limitation on the number of three-bedroom units or >> it it's not I mean again we met the we met the requirements. It's it wasn't we didn't have a limit. Um it was just the
going through the design. You know it >> once again that is both the U-Hack rule and a municipal ordinance and the next witness is going to testify to it. >> Yeah, I will say that this is at the very you know Yeah, this is at the very
end of the um >> I'm just saying from an aesthetic perspective it's maybe not ideal aesthetically. Um but maybe there were I'd like to hear other reasons from perhaps the next um
person on why you chose to go this route. >> Yeah, I mean we feel that's not a fully a flat building. It it kind of you know it gives a a gabled roof on this very end. It's just a nice feature just to add some you know variety to the
building. So again, it's not a completely um it's not a completely predictable composition. >> Well, yeah, one person's nice composition is another person's looks a little weird to me,
>> but but on the elevation that you just showed, there are no windows at all on that side elevation. Is that >> is that the way it's supposed to be? This is slide 35 I'm asking about. >> Yes. So, I'm back on slide 33. This is
the I'm sorry, the third floor. So, that is true. There's no windows here on the third floor. I'll I'll just run through each of the floor plans quickly. Yeah, we don't have any. Again, each of the rooms that we feel should have windows
have windows. Um it is just has a lot to do with the layout of these of these particular units. Um, the bedroom up here has has windows. Bedrooms down here have windows. Uh, the circulation space, laundry room, and bath closets do not
need windows. Um, and again, so >> so it it does it does look like there should be a window shown on the floor first floor, which is not shown on that elevation. >> So, what's the ventilation for the bathroom? >> I take that back. It is. Yes. Sorry.
So, so what's the ventilation for the bathrooms? Are those going to have vents? >> Yes, they will have vents. >> Mr. Cohen. >> Yeah. I just wanted to um support Paul's comment about that
uh unit with the um I'm going to call it a shed roof rather than a gable roof. Um, I'm not sure you're saving any money. You don't have any less exterior wall. You don't have any less roof
compared to and you have more uh odd connections which are costly when you're building a building than if you made it a simpler box. I think that having an additional three-bedroom unit,
and by the way, you would have an additional bedroom and probably a bigger living room, which would be a nice thing for that unit as well. I don't believe that there's a maximum. Um, Mr. Tar, you know, in contrast to what you were
saying, I think you are allowed to have more three-bedroom units than the minimum that's required. >> That's right. >> Under the U-Hack rule. So there would no not be, you know, if you could get a threebedroom in there at virtually no additional cost and you would get more
rent for it and it would be nicer for the residents. I think that would be a smart change to make. >> Well, it's not rental, David. >> There is there is rent. Affordable units bring rent and
it's for sale. These are for worth more. It' be worth more as a purchased unit. >> Yeah, it'll be worth more. So, I'm just >> The point is the point is taken. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Well, we can certainly take your all of your comments into consideration
and uh we will definitely go back and uh take a look at that further. >> Yeah. And and I think a few more windows on the wall if they could be worked in would would be nice from the exterior. Yeah, I agree with that. >> Go ahead, Jim.
>> Yeah, I'm sorry. We just paid attention to landscaping here on the side. So, it's not going to be a totally like, you know, completely there will be trees on the ends of these buildings. So, >> yeah. >> But yeah, but I think the concern is really those upper um those upper
floors. Uh, and I just want to get confirmation from the, uh, the board because I don't want it to be too, um, vague in terms of what's, you know, kind of what's being agreed to or what's being asked for. Um, is it the board's um,
uh, desire to see that roof raised to make it um, a flat roof uh, and turn that more? I guess it's up to the applicant to determine how what that actually looks like in terms of the interior space, whether that's an additional bedroom uh or some additional
common space in that unit. Um but is that the the board's kind of um where where you want to go with this building is to get that roof um you know to to provide that flat roof and consistency between the different buildings. >> That's what I would like
>> think so would like it. >> It's what we heard. Okay. All right. Just confirming um and just also just confirming what uh Councilman Cohen uh mentioned. There's no maximum to the number of uh uh threebedrooms. There is a percentage that has to be met. They've
already met that. Uh but uh any additional threebedroom if that's what they want to do with that extra space. Uh >> if it takes away the two-bedroom, you have to reallocate. So we you have to be careful. >> That's true. That's true. Um so yeah, but uh uh yeah. Yeah. So we can >> So that I think that was my my question
also and maybe the next person can testify if there's a certain number of two bedrooms if there's a certain ratio you have to maintain between >> 20% 30% they're very precise. >> So um so maybe taking that twobedroom but um fixing that roof so it's level
but leaving as a kind of flexible den space. So you can call it a two-bedroom but someone could treat it as a threebedroom. We'll let them do the math. I think that >> usually the way it works is you have
>> a maximum number of onebedrooms, a minimum number of three bedrooms, and everything else is two-bedroom. And I think if you add one threebedroom and reduce by one, your two bedrooms, you're not going to be getting in trouble. But I
>> I don't want to swear. So let let your guy do the calculation. >> No, that's absolutely true. Uh David, and I think in these very unusual circumstances, if the board wants to make that unit into a three-bedroom unit, it would have the power of
imposing that as a condition. >> And and just to to uh clarify because I have my memo right here, but we did do the uh the calculations. Currently, there are 10 10 two-bedrooms uh equaling 58.8% 8% of their units and the minimum
is 30%. Um, so I think uh, you know, if if this were to be a three-bedroom with that extra space, um, they'd still be meeting all of their benchmarks. >> Thank you. >> And just to verify, yes, this is a
two-bedroom that would be turned into a threebedroom. >> Um, okay. With that, I think I went through everything I intended to go through for the architectural testing. >> Well, we've had lots of questions along the way, but if there any more before we
get to the planner, we should ask them now. >> U just want to emphasize that I I'd really like to see more windows on that elevation that shows the only one window. And I know you I heard what you
said about landscaping and and I um appreciate very much that there will be trees on that side. I think it would be nice for people to be able to let out their window and see >> the trees >> see that tree. And there's no rule about having a window on only one wall of a
room, you know. So, if you can add some windows there, I think it would be good for the people inside as well as those looking at the building from the outside >> to to pick up on Mr. Foot's question of the board. Uh, that point is well made.
There's another toll project that's under construction where windows on the ends were an issue and it was left to the toll to work with staff to put in those windows. Assuming again that we receive a positive vote that a condition
would be that the applicant work with staff to incorporate those windows and only if they can't agree to come back to the board. >> And you're immutable to that, Chris? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I just wanted to chime in real
real quick, Chris, and just say that we we certainly paid special attention to the side elevations, but completely understanding your concerns. Uh we're certainly open to taking a second look um and doing another review of this and we can certainly share those uh with you as uh as conditions wherever we see feet
we see fit of approval here. So, definitely hear you and something that we're strongly going to take a look at. >> Thank you. I did have Oh, sorry. >> No, go ahead. >> Um, so I was going to ask about washers and dryers. In the uh response letter,
it was noted that uh um each unit will have a dedicated laundry room, but washers and dryers will not be provided. Um just want to confirm that that's the case and uh also ask um if it is possible to provide uh
washering washer and dryer units for each unit. Um >> are are you me are you talking about the restrictive units? >> Uh what it's saying is that uh uh uh in either market or affordable
units. Um, so what what I'm reading here is that uh none of the units will be provided washer and dryers, just the laundry rooms, just the space for uh washers and dryers. >> Um, >> I can feel that one, Jim. >> Yes, >> I can just jump in and take that. Yeah.
So, that that's what we do on all of our not just uh the restricted or affordable units, but all of the market rate units as well. Um it's just typical for uh we supply the dishwasher, uh the stove, but refrigerator, washer, dryer, those are all optional to purchase that are
designed studio for the market rate. Um it's kind of the same suit with the um with the affordable housing, just treating it all kind of equally. >> Wait, could you go back over that the refrigerator doesn't come with the unit? >> No. So, we don't offer refrigerators or
washers and we don't include refrigerator and washers and dryers as a standard um in our market rates either. Um and we're just trying to treat everything consistent. Uh they'll get um a dishwasher, uh stove, um but no uh no other appliances as far as refrigerator
and washerdryer. >> Okay. So, there's room for a refrigerator, I take it. >> Yes. Yes. Yes, there's certainly room for it. Um it's just not included as part of the base house and either market rate or um affordable. Okay. And the washer and dryer, there's not room for that. >> No, there is. >> There's room for that as well, just not
included. Like the actual appliance is not included um into it. >> Okay. Oh. Oh, fine. Thank you very much. Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm zooming into the plan. So, I get the laundry rooms here and space refrigerators here. So, >> and I assume the laundry has all the
appropriate >> Yes. All the hookups and everything for it. So, it's just plug and play when >> ready ready to plug and play. So, >> exactly, for lack of a better word. >> And and if someone buying the unit did
want to include those in the purchase, that would be those could be added, but it would be an additional element of the uh the the cost. >> Correct. >> Well, that's a good question as to how the determination would be made as to
the um what the unit could be sold for. I think the unit would be reduced in in in sales price to reflect that. >> Yeah. There there'd have to be some configuration of that with the administrative agent uh to determine the the pricing with that scheme. >> Exactly.
>> Yep. But as long as you're willing to to work with the administrative agent on that, then that's you know that that is what it is. >> Yep. >> Yep. Okay. No more architectural questions. >> I'll stop my I'll stop sharing my screen.
>> Our next and last witness is Craig Rancamp. And Craig's background is so interesting. I'm going to ask him to be sworn. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give be the truth?
>> Do swear. >> Please. >> No. I'd like >> I I should say someone else is in control of my name. Um I am not at the moment AICP. I am a licensed New Jersey planner, but I don't have my AICP anymore. >> Okay. Craig, if you can state your full
name and spell your last name. >> It's Cray. I'll spell both. It's weird. Cray. C R E I G H. Randamp. R A H N K A M P. >> Thank you. >> Craig, you have extensive credentials. I'd like you to just give us the
highlights of on the planning side and then veer over to affordable housing where you're a specialist. >> Sure. I I was going to keep it short so you can tell me if I need to do more. Undergraduate pen, graduate Georgetown. I've been in the field 46 years,
licensed in New Jersey for 31. Um, continuously and currently valid. I've qualified in over a hundred uh trials and hearings. Uh, probably about threequarters of those are in the affordable housing world. uh four other states, three federal districts, and I appear before planning and zoning boards
throughout the state. Um since council asked for more Mount Laurel stuff, I've served as a courtappointed uh well, they used to be masters, now special adjudicators, um and have been in the affordable housing uh world for quite some time. >> We accept your qualifications. Thank
you. >> Thank you very much. So Cray, uh, we've redesigned buildings G and H. So maybe we've partly solved that problem, but I would like you to >> speak to the issue about the actual
movement of uh, an affordable unit into a market building and so forth and so on. >> Yep. Um, Councilman Cohen and Mr. Foot have made me largely irrelevant, but I'm going to talk to the issues again. Um, let me share an exhibit.
There we go. Hopefully that popped up >> and we see it. >> Very good. Um, >> is it is >> Mr. Foot had asked for planning testimony on four issues. One was the income distribution by bedroom count. The second was the locationational
issues that you all have just been discussing, a diversity by product type concern that he had. And lastly, I'm going to be having new information on the issue of phasing. So, I'm going to talk about those four things just so this is what what what is what
is now. >> This is uh slide number 39 of the applicant's first exhibit. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Um, and I'd like to direct your attention to the lower uh right hand corner where it says unit distribution.
Uh, you'll see a column onebedroom, two-bedroom, threebedroom, and and total. Um, as Mr. Foot said, there is a maximum of onebedroom of 20%, a minimum of threebedroom of 30%. So, we do have the flexibility of doing an additional
three-bedroom unit. Um, I will defend the applicant by saying most municipalities um make that maximum a minimum because the threebedrooms bring larger families. Uh, so there is a municipal impact to going to an additional third, but we're more than happy to to do that um at the board's
direction. Um, so this table would shift to having one more three-bedroom and one less two-bedroom based on that conversation. Um, and unfortunately 39 that was initially submitted has an error in the far right column. Um, it would actually be one, one, and one for
very low, low, and moderate. And the two-bedroom would be one, four, and five. One very low, four low, and five moderate. So, we've got a balance between low and mod in each of the categorizations. The odd extra unit is in the low category. Um, and in your
housing plan, it identifies that this site would be generating two very low, and they would be one at the onebedroom and one at the two-bedroom. We wouldn't have them both in the same classification. Um so this was the additional information that Mr. Foot had asked for. Um and unfortunately it's not
quite correct on 39 and based on the conversation we would change it. Uh so I will submit this to him corrected uh uh after this evening. Um the second issue is location. Um the the background of this issue and I understand very well where people are
coming from on this. There were some really evil things that developers had done um in the late second round, early third round. For example, there were highrises that would have one elevator for the affordable and one for the market. Um so that they lived in two separate worlds in the same building. Um
there were developments that put the affordable housing in up front near the highway or in the back away from the developments. Um and it was that kind of exclusion that everybody was reacting to. The first generation of U-Hack revised rules had what I call radical
integration. They had to be scattered everywhere. That went out for industry comment and they spent a lot of time working with forale housing developers um who work very differently than rental. We haven't seen forale affordable units since late round one,
early round two in the mortgage housing crisis. um because of of changes in U-Hack rules, it was very difficult to do mortgages in the incomerestricted market. Um that's starting to loosen up now and and you now have a developer willing to do um for sale affordable. Um
so a lot of the things that we have in our head are about the experiences we've had over the last decade or so with principally rental projects. Um you're going to start seeing sale um more often. Um and they have different issues. Um and one of which is on appliances. in for sale, you typically
don't provide the appliances because people could be moving here with them. Um, so it's a different environment than than you have for rentals. Um, as as you were just discussing. Um, I'm going to switch to the U-Hack rule that we're working with now and see if that works.
Did the rule come up? >> Yes. >> Switch tabs and it works. Yes. Brilliant. Okay. Um, so this is um, let me flip my page here. Um this is 525 well yeah 5 580-26.5
sub3 which is the for sale regulations and two that I've highlighted is the location requirement. Restricted units may be clustered provided that the h buildings or housing product types containing the restricted units are integrated throughout the development and are not concentrated in an
undesirable location or in undesirable locations. Um, so I'm going to go back to the site plan. >> Just just hold for one second. Um, let's let's mark that as exhibit A. What do we have up to? A3. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> That and the slide before it. I apologize. The slide before it is in exhibit one. >> Yes, that's in the slide deck. This is this is simply the statute, >> right? >> Yep. Yep. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay. So, coming back to the site plan, uh, Councilman Cohen anticipated
exactly the line I was going to use. In a common, uh, rental project, you have that hallway. We have what we think of as our outside hallway. If you go out the front door of an affordable unit, directly across the green space from you is a market family. You are intermingling in what is essentially the
outdoor hallway. Um, and I think of that that o front yard um um parkletit if you will uh courtyard as as a toddler loopway. Um the affordable units come proportionately they the two and three bedrooms are allocated by family size.
They will have kids. Um and statistically they're disproportionately young. Um so this is giving us an open space area outside the front doors of these units where you've got a controlled open space. Uh that that's going to be toddler heaven. Um, and having that sidewalk going around, even
though one corner has a couple steps, um, is going to be a a great recreational area. And from there, you access the playground. So, this is exactly the right place on the site for these units to be. They are not being disadvantaged. They're not stuck up by the entrance away from everybody else.
They're not a deep corner. Um, they're smack in the middle of market rate units with access to the best two pieces of open space on the site. Um, so I would suggest you they're in exactly the right place. Um and you heard from the architect the practical limitations that come with for sale units. The the units
the affordable units complying with U-Hack size requirements are still very different than the configuration you can do with market. Um we also have to have ADA accessibility that you're not required to have in market. So the puzzle pieces don't fit together when you try and integrate them in a forale
context. So coming from that architecture, knowing that we're doing building by building, affordable or market, this is the absolute best place on the site. It's also the area on the site that's most advantage from a parking perspective. Um, you had the discussion last time of the parking
distribution between front and back. This is the area of the site that has enough parking to be able to do the affordable units that don't have garages, have surface parking close to the units, um, and not be competing with the guest parking for the market rate units. So, I would suggest to you that
this really is the right place. Um, and it does conform with the regulations. And about the garages, I just wanted to touch on that for a minute. Um, there was at the at the last hearing, um, I think a little disappointment that some had garages, but not all. Um, this is a
circumstance in which garages are not required. Uh, the affordable units typically don't have garages. Most developers do the affordables without any garages. Um, so that some have garages here. In fact, more than a majority of them actually have garages is a positive rather than some of them
not being a negative. Uh this is actually something that is an additional benefit um for those that get the garages that typically doesn't happen uh for affordable housing. So I I I would urge you to look at that as a positive, not as a negative. Um you've heard that they have similar architecture. They
meet the constraints on sizes uh in terms of unit size, windows for bedrooms um and uh utilities. we've talked about. Um, now Mr. Foot had raised a question about a requirement in U-Hack that you have to have affordable units in each of
the same kind of product types that you have for market. But under U-Hack, there's no such thing as a stack townhouse. There's duplexes, there's townouses, there's multif family. Um, and stack town houses um is essentially a marketing term. These are multif family units. Uh, this is not a
townhouse. that doesn't have one unit, you know, ground to ceiling with party walls. This is a multif family unit. Both the market rate units and the affordable units are the same kind of housing type under UAC. They're all in the multif family uh um category. Um it's just that the market rate units
have more verticality and they're four stories uh than than the market rate units do. Uh but I don't think having steps is necessarily an advantage. Um so this is a a situation where where Mr. Foot's concerned about being them different product types. They call them that from a marketing perspective. U but
within the universe of the regulations, these are all the same kind of unit. Um the last issue I have is phasing. Um in UHAC there is a four-step traditional phasing plan uh that breaks the site at
25% 50 75 and 100 of your market units. And on the affordable side, you have to do 10% of your affordables by 25 of market. and then you catch up 5050 7575 and 100% of the affordables before 90. Um as you see on the site plan, this
site plan lays out so that you've got a front section that you've got to develop before you at least the infrastructure before you get to the back section. Um and in a for sale context having that exact um um you know sort of se quarter by quarter accounting is very difficult.
What the applicant is proposing um is that 100% of the affordables will have their COS by the time they get to 62% of the market rate units, which is actually 42. Um it's an it's a actual physical number of units. They went they figured out what infrastructure they need to
build, what units would be uh sellable by the time they got to the affordables. So they would be allowed to do 42 of the market rate units before they would have to bring on all 17 of the affordable. So the public interest is protected. You've got just less than 40% of the market
rate units unbuilt, unsold before the affordables have to be delivered upon. Um so the town is protected. Um and they would also agree to submit the building permits for the affordables at the 50% mark. So you're going to have a progress mark at 50% that the affordable building permits are submitted and they're going
to be built and and ready for sale. CO issued by the time you get to the 42 units. Um, I think it's a practical solution for a small for sale site. Um, and still protects the public by having so much of the market rate housing still on the back end after the affordable housing is uh constructed and
occupiable. Um, so those are the four issues Mr. Foot I think you would ask to have addressed. Um, certainly open to any additional questions that you or the board might have. >> Miss Nukem, >> I'm sorry. I I'll put the plan away.
>> Sorry. Um, thank you, Mr. Lane. >> Yeah, thank you, Ka. >> Um, so just a a quick question. You mentioned, I think, uh, early in your statement that, um, some municipalities
don't want more threebedroom units. Um, >> that's often the case. Yes. >> I'm glad you guys are far more enlightened than everybody else. >> Could you just explain what what you mean by that? Um, sure. If I may be blunt. School kids. >> Oh, I see. Okay.
Okay. That was it. Um, that's all. Thank you. >> Thanks. Thanks, Colby. Nathan Foot. >> Yeah, just a few uh follow-up uh questions. Um, the first one just uh the unit distribution table that was
provided. Uh, I know uh uh Craig, you said that uh you would uh provide that. That's great. Uh I would also ask that those that table be provided on the um it could be the architectural or the site plans. Um but just so that they are in the plan on the actual plan documents
uh somewhere. So I would ask that that be >> I'm sure we can find someplace on the plans to put it. >> Excellent. Yeah. So if I could ask that that would be a uh condition of approval should the board uh look favorably on the application. Um so that's the first thing. And then um I wanted to follow up
on two things. uh that were mentioned. Uh the first being I think the placement the the location of the uh the uh the units. Um I I think the concern um for the board um it sounds like is is obviously like
the the interpersal, but I think also um for lack of a better word, stigmatization um of those uh possibly of those those residents because the buildings are different. um are they different enough
to uh uh show you know that this is a different um uh type of resident um you know so I think that's potentially also of concern uh to the board because it is you know it is
just one story difference but still that is a difference um the the windows that might you know the the agreement to provide more windows that might help uh so I would ask that you uh provide additional testimony on that uh and then the second the second part uh thing I
wanted to follow up on was the um uh the town townhouse town homes specifically stack town homes not being mentioned in um in U-Hack and specifically what you mean by that because um you know I I'll
I'll be honest I haven't uh I'm not an expert in the entire document um you know so I I don't know if there's another place that I'm not looking uh But the the place that I know where they're mentioned is uh just as examples. So for example, it's like uh
single family home, town home, uh I can't remember what the third is, but there's three of them uh listed in parenthesis at uh uh the point that I know of where they they are listed. Um, so just because something isn't listed in the um in U-Hack, I'm just wondering
um how how that gets excluded uh in your estimation. >> I I'll take that one first since I I put up the uh the pros you're saying. Um and it doesn't say include uh so it's not meant to be exclusive. Um but in no code
is a stack townhouse a thing. Um duplexers are defined as side by side. Multif family are unit over unit. We are unit over unit. We are in squarely in the definition of a multif family unit. Um we use this the term stack townhouse
to convey to people that our multif family units are fancy because they've got a staircase inside. >> It's still a multif family unit. >> We we do have stack townhouse defined in our ordinance. I will just point that out. We do >> we do have that. >> Yeah. No, I'm not I'm not saying it's
not used as a term of art. Um I'm saying it from the perspective of building codes and and regulatory state level things. Um it is a multif family unit, unit over unit, not separated by party walls. Um and and even some of our affordable units have have verticality
with a bedroom on one level and the and the the the families below. So even within the affordable units, we've got a stacked flat or or whatever else language you want to use. Um so so I I don't see that as an issue in this case. This is we're not doing um the
affordable in something that's that's fundamentally different as a unit type um architecturally from what we're doing for market. So at least that's my answer. You can see the regulation. I'll I'll stop sharing that. Um let me go back to the stigmatization one that that's
let me do one thing at a time there. Um and my answer is going to be unsatisfying. Um, in the 80s when I was a young man, the idea that we were hiding the affordables and no one would know, um, was what we thought we were doing. Um, it turns out that a large
share of all compliance in municipalities are in 100% compli affordable developments. Clearly, everybody knows that they're affordable. Um, and it turns out in all of the homeowner documents in the for sale affordable housing units that we did in the 80s, um, all identify the addresses
of the affordable units and the homeowner documents that are handed everybody in the community. Um, there is no one in the community who doesn't know which units are the affordable units. So, no matter what we do in architecture, everybody knows who's who. Um, and and there's just no way to hide
it. Um, and and I think, you know, 40 or 50 years into this process, we now know. There's no way to hide it. Everybody has the information. Everybody knows who's who. And at the very least, everybody assumes that if there's a bunch of kids, they're probably one of the affordable
units because the market rate units will very rarely have school kids in this kind of of uh uh unit type. Um, so there is no history. Well, >> I mean, it is two what are they? Two-bedroom units. The the market rates
two is it two or three bedrooms? >> Three, I think. Yeah, >> three bedrooms. So, I mean, there's, you know, >> Oh, there's always a possibility, but where we are demographically as a nation, the people in this income range buying this kind of unit that doesn't have a private yard
>> aren't the people with kids. If you've got this kind of money and you have kids, you can find an older, smaller, single family home uh that'll meet your needs better than living in this art. So, it self- selects. Okay. Okay, covered four points very quickly.
>> Uh, Mr. McGowan, >> um, you're right about your last your last answer that that's >> it's unsatisfying. I know. >> I mean, it's really really unsat satisfying. >> There's there's a reason why when I asked the question I did, it wasn't just
for me. It was just there's another neighbor who knows something about affordable housing and knew that the that the units are going to be on in a separate building. And the comment to me was deal deal killer.
So I wanted to make sure at least that there was some >> comment on the record that to to to address that particular issue. And and the other thing that's that's somewhat dis disturbing too, it's not just the location. These are smaller units. These
are they're they're distinctly apparently smaller units than the market units. >> It doesn't see that doesn't seem to matter to too much at all, but that's that's it makes me uncomfortable. >> It is the absolute reality in forale
housing. um there there is no way for the private sector to carry a 20% set aside when you're also selling luxury units. What it would do is essentially say you can't build new luxury units anymore. Um you can only build one step
up from affordable. Um you if you want to provide additional square footage, it becomes as a tax that you have to do with additional square footage in in your affordable housing. And those are the issues that HMFA went through that if you're going to do this in a for sale environment, you have to allow the
market rate units to meet the market and then put in very severe minimum unit sizes. These are larger than they were um in in the first and second rounds um to control to make sure that the affordable housing population gets good sized units. Um and they've done that.
They they've elevated the size of units. there there were some very very small affordable units in the second round and we look and I think we all learned our lesson that that was not a good idea. So that the the minimums have have increased significantly. Um but you have to allow the market rate to get bigger
if you're going to allow it to function in a for sale context. Okay, >> other questions for Miss Na. >> Um, so just uh kind of one comment and one question. Um so just
on the point that um families with children will be living in the market rate units. I think that's um maybe true as a national trend but in New Jersey and in Princeton um there's
such a limited supply of housing, single family housing. Um, so, you know, I think we we will probably see a fair number of um families with children interested in those market ratings.
Uh, there's just no other option in in town. >> To me, that's a good thing. I'm I'm just reporting what the >> No, no, I'm just saying literally in Princeton there's no supply. Um, right. >> Uh, right. Uh, and that's why we're building this this uh development here.
Um the other question is with the affordable unit buildings, you know, can we just clarify um the build quality is going to be the same in in I understand the units are smaller
and the material finishes may be different but the construction quality is the same across both the market rate. >> Jim, could you speak to that? >> I can feel that one Chris. It's kind of Yes. all the exterior uh materials um
the same way framed out. Um everything will be consistent across the board with the with the market rate and the um affordables. >> The materials are the materials be the same. >> Yes. All the exterior materials, the brick, uh the vinyl, siding, um the
roofing, all of that. Um exterior trim, it would all be consistent across the um the affordable and the market rates. You're not reducing insulation or none none of the building systems change. >> Okay. >> And that >> sorry I was just going to say and that is a requirement of U-Hack. So U-Hack
does state that exterior all those systems they have to be the same between the affordable and the market rate uh buildings and the the units. Um the interior finishes can be different but the exterior the buildings have to be of
the same quality. Well, Alex will correct me if I'm wrong, but the base that's offered for the market is the same base that's offered for the affordable. The market people have the option to buy something fancier if they want as an option, but the base is uniform. >> Okay.
Um, I think that's that's all my questions for now. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Taylor. >> Yeah, just a practical question. How have we handled this issue in the remaining developments of the Tanat
place? >> We have handled what? >> How have we handled affordable housing with regard to this issue in the remaining development of Tanat? >> Yeah. Tanet,
>> Mr. Clerk, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is your first for sale project. the uh >> in the fourth round. Yes. I think this might be a Justin question though because I think J uh Mr. Taylor's question is regarding the other developments on because we do have other
>> Yeah. >> developments on one of them is a tax credit deal. They were both rental. >> They're not for sale projects. >> Okay. That's correct. They are not for sale projects. And and in rental projects, they do have to be if there
are affordable >> if there is an affordable set aside, they do have to be more integrated into the um into the buildings. Um you know, when when we start getting to those other rental projects in the uh for these fourth round projects, you're
going to see how they get integrated. And that is something that we're going to be looking at >> uh with uh with those. Um >> is um 375 Tune though that's a for sale project isn't it? >> Yes. >> And that's a toll project right? >> Yes.
>> And and the affordable units are also in a separate um structure. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> That was third round as well though I think >> that was third round. Yes. >> So different rules but but they are
>> similar similar kind of uh situation. I have a question. The solution has to be solved in in the same way either around for for sale units. >> Yeah. >> I have a question completely from left field and completely outside my purview
as a land use engineer. >> I can't wait >> and I certainly I certainly hope that the legal mind sitting here can answer this question. But um my I I have a concern about the lack of accessible
units in the market rate. And I thought that there was a federal law that said that any multi-family uh development of greater than four units needed to have accessible units
>> that and Okay, Nathan, you're gonna answer my question for me. Thank you. Go ahead. >> No, no. I mean, if it it was Sorry, I sorry to cut you off. If if there was more, I I apologize. >> Um, and and again, maybe the legal mind should be jumping in on this, but my
understanding is that town houses and single family homes are excluded from that uh Fair Housing Act. That that would be the Fair Housing Act that controls for the uh uh for the accessibility standards for projects like this that don't have uh federal
funding behind them. Um but uh >> well we just heard this is in a townhouse. These are not towns. These are multi townous is the informal rule that the actual rag under the federal fair housing act is goes to whether the product type has a common entrance um
and and hallway. Um if we don't have that we have individual entrances to units you're allowed not to be accessible. >> I yeah I can elaborate more on the building just from a building code um standpoint too. So the town home the market rates as you seen are two units stacked on top of each other. They are
governed by the inter by the residential code. So because the residential code is technically a one and a two family dwelling code and there'll be a fire the se the party wall is a fire separation means that meaning that each town home is a
separate building. So the market rate units are governed by the residential code and where we have more than two dwellings it becomes multif family. So anytime you have three or more it's multif family. So that's why so the the
um affordable buildings are multif family because there's three or more unit per you know per building. Each town home is technically a separate building under the fire code and you are not required to so what I'm
trying to say is that you are not required for one and two family dwellings you are not required to um um have ADA uh accessibility >> and as a followup to that um with those affordable units those buildings um
because they are defined in that way. Um that's why those ground level units have to be accessible or adaptable uh under the federal under federal fair housing act. Um whereas the town h the market
rates don't um and and that's that's that that's the a difference there. That's where that difference comes in. >> Okay. Hey, got nothing to say. >> I know. I mean, it's a go figure kind
of. >> It is very much so. Yes. It was kind of shocking when I started diving more and more into that and going, "Really, this is how it's set up?" But it is that is how it's set up. >> Um, so Mr. Tar, you have no other witnesses.
Is that correct? >> That is correct. I think that the we're finished with questions. Of course, you're going to hear from the public. Yes. And um I see Mr. Foot, you have your >> hand up. What's on your mind? >> I I did have just one uh question. It's
it's been on my mind and it keep it keeps slipping my mind. It finally came back to me. Um just about the uh I know that these are going to all be for sale units. It's more uh but in terms of um is this going to be a condo style
type of ownership structure uh or is it more you know is there going to be homeowners association and also who is responsible for um the uh maintenance of the exterior of the buildings and the roofing of the buildings. Alex.
>> Yes. This will be a a condo uh style association where the uh the HO will take care of the exterior maintenance um along with uh throughout the site uh maintenance >> and the the affordable units will be members of the association.
>> They will also be members of the association as well. Yes. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, so it is time to um move to public comment. I would like to take
the opportunity since it's nine o'clock to take our typical midmeating break um with um both gratitude and apologies to members of the public of which there are 36 um who have been waiting patiently and I
know are um many of you interested in weighing in and expressing your views and asking questions. So, but right now um it's nine o'clock. We're going to take a 10-minute break. We'll resume at um 10 after promptly. So, please
everybody be back by then and then we'll start taking public comment. Um thanks everybody. started with public comments. Uh welcome back. Um, now is the time if you are um a member
of the public uh and now we have 33 members of the public to raise your hand and we will um bring you over into the panelist room in the order in which your hands were raised. So first hand up uh
was um belongs to Carlo Nan. Um after that will be the person identified as Matteo 11 and then David Newton. So
Mr. Nalen, if you would um hope I'm pronouncing your name right. If you'd activate your camera, please. And there you go. Unmute yourself. Mr. Mueller, our attorney, will swear you in um and then ask you to state your name and spell your last name. Go ahead, Mr.
Mueller. do your thing. >> You can raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give be the truth? >> I do. >> So, I want to affirm. Again, please state your full name and spell your last name. >> Carlo Nan. N A L I N.
>> Thank you. >> And uh I've been a homeowner at uh Governor's Lane for 16 years. Madame Chair, I want to express my gratitude to you and the planning board and the township staff for your expert evaluation of this application.
Redevelopment of 29th than could be a step forward in expanding affordable housing, but I believe the current plan falls short of what's best for Princeton. I want to focus mainly on the environmental and safety concerns about
this plan. The applicant's own report says that over excavation and replacement of existing fill will be necessary and that portions of the existing building will be crushed on site. Uh we have not heard whether the current
structure is free of asbestous. uh where in the pre-demolition inspection for asbestous and its removal described in the uh proposed pre- uh demolition and uh plans during demolition, crushing and site
preparation ahead of the work that was done on Avalon and the senior housing. Our patio, which is more than 900 ft away, needed to be cleaned every day because of the airborne debris. We heard
there's a plan to protect the tributary, but no details or comment uh to ensure that airborne debris doesn't also pollute the rest of the wetlands. Uh when will we see details about this? Next, the pedestrian bridge will be
replaced in kind. Will this work be performed uh with Fair Housing Act ramp guidelines? Will this work be performed under permits according to the D Freshwater uh wetlands protection act rules that
became effective in January of this year uh as has been recommended by the Princeton Environmental Commission. Next, ebike uh safety uh in particular with regards to charging. Uh we've heard
that uh there's going to be space in the garage. Um what about the fire safety associated with charging u these these bicycles uh inside garages? Should indoor ebike charging and fire safety be
handled uh under a separate municipal ordinance? Um, we heard about the uh the number of outdoor parking spaces that could place a burden on uh street parking on Terune and Grover.
Uh, I'm curious to hear about the practical experience with tandem garages from other sites. Do people are people expected to only put their car in the garage and not in a
surface parking spot if they have a garage? And then finally, there is a um a New Jersey um snow removal and disposal policy. And with the limited amount of
space that is not in wetlands and not in detention basins, where is snow going to be piled in the winter? Those are all of the concerns that I have. Um I think I have some suggestions on how to address
some of this. One of which is make the project smaller. Keep the same number of affordable housing units, reduce the overall size of the of the plan. And some of these things could could be solved. You could move the buildings
away from the environmentally sensitive area. you could um integrate the affordable units in with the market rate units. Uh you could move all of the units closer to Thanet and public
transportation rather than having many of the units quite far away. And then lastly, um freeing up that what I'll call the eastern side of the tributary. You could have a community garden, you could have a dog park, and
you could make the uh the playground even more attractive. Um, >> thank you, m Thank you, Mr. Nalen. Um and I I for the board and for the public um relative to our threeinut rule slashguideline
um when uh a member of the public is posing questions as well as ex expressing um you know opinions and and providing advice. Um I I think of the questions as outside the three minutes uh and because
it's important that people be able to pose whatever questions they have and so um again thank you for those questions Mr. nail and we want to hear from I I think there will be a lot of people who are testifying tonight or um you know
offering comment and we will come back to these questions that you've raised and and uh address them. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um next up we have Matteo 11
and then David Newton after that. If you could raise your right hand. I'm not seeing >> I'm not seeing that person yet either. Is >> okay. >> Is he >> uh No, here we go. >> Yep. >> There we go.
>> Hi everybody. Matteo Dabazo. Uh let me see if I can rename my profile here so you can have the spelling of my name as well. >> Thank you. And Mr. Muller will swear you in and you'll have to spell your name anyway.
>> All right. >> If you could raise your right hand. If you could raise your right hand. >> Oh, yes. >> Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give be the truth? >> Yes. >> Those sworn or affirm. Please state full name and spell your last name.
>> Mateo Damaso. Uh last name Di T M M A S Oo. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair, and planning board members and Toll Brother representatives. Um, I'm a resident of Governor's Lane, and I'm reading into
the record the substance of a letter that we sent on May 1st, 2026, uh, as for from the Governor's Lane Condominium Association that was signed by David Weatherill. Governor's Lane is a 65 home community that shares a
property line with the proposed 85 unit development at 29th Annet. Um, respecting the three-minute rule, I'll try to summarize the letter's content and ask that the letter be admitted full in into the record. Um, we want to be clear from the outset that we recognize
and support Princeton's goals for affordable housing and we welcome new neighbors. And what we're asking for are conditions to any approval that address our concerns of the HOA and time to understand the conditions that the planning board is also requiring before
approval. Um, our letter made four requests on behalf of the association and its members. Um, and the first were all related to ensuring we have documented safety and compliance information. Uh, which appears to be incomplete in in what is available to us today on the
Princeton website uh to allow for independent technical reviews in four areas. uh the impact of the recently changed storm water management system where the redesign was submitted on April 24th uh so that we can verify the new design addresses the deficiencies of
the earlier design and does not pose a risk to sensitive environmental areas uh or to our property or neighbor neighboring properties. uh the when the fireflow test from July 27th, 2020. Given this was this one on
the application is from 2020 before Avalon and Princeton Senior Living and the Alice were built on the same road. Um we'd like to ask that this be updated before approval. Um as it could result in site changes if there were for some reason not an appropriate fire flow
test. Confirmation of sewer capacity was not something we could find from Stonybrook Regional Sewage Authority, which we did not see in the materials provided on Princeton's site. And given the volume of recent and planned development, a traffic study,
particularly at Terune Road and uh North Harrison intersection that considers the cumulative development impact between 2020 and 2026 in this u developed area. Expert review of fire and safety risks
uh around hydrants uh is is another ele is the second element. The third, a sufficient barrier and boundary screening to ensure the privacy and green space along our shared border, including requesting a masonry wall and appropriate mature uh trees
that would give appropriate screening with an appropriate plan to ensure survival of that screening because we've certainly seen that uh screening is sometimes put in and and you can walk up and down Terune today and see the the dead dead uh trees that have been put
in. Fourth, a a formal construction management plan. So that that covers some of the things that Carlo mentioned as well around uh noise and dust from the construction with some uh escalation path in order to raise concerns or
questions to the developer uh for the work on our boundary and given the views on flood and extreme weather risks have been changing significantly. Also note that the New Jersey uh freshwater wetlands letter of interpretation expires this August and predates all of
the other development in this area and we ask that the updated permits be confirmed before approval. And overall I'm I would ask based on this evening's discussion if the list of conditions of approval that the board is requesting would be shared transparently before a
vote of approval. And we respectfully submit these requests with the intent of ensuring a safe, compliant, and respectful development for everyone, the new residents, the neighbors, and the town. And we appreciate the planning board's uh consideration. >> Thank you, Mr. Dtomaso.
>> Thank you. >> Um, next up we have David Newton and then Sam Bunting. and then Fabian Paulo. Paulo, somebody bring over Mr. Newton. Welcome, Mr. Newton. You need to There
you go. Active. All good. Okay. Mr. Muller, would you swear Mr. Newton in, please? >> You could raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that testimony about to give be the truth? >> I do indeed. >> So, swear to affirm. Please state your full name. Spell your last name.
>> Uh, my full name is uh David uh S. Newton, Ne, and I live at 49 uh Governor's Lane, where I've lived for the last uh 29 years. Welcome. Go right ahead.
>> Um, thank you. I'm a longtime resident. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm a longtime resident of this town. Um, I've been involved with the business in this town for a long time and I've pretty much seen over the last 43 years the stuff that's been built and hasn't been
built and everything going on. Um I would like to start off by just giving one word of gratitude um to your vice chair Mr. O'Donnell who kind of nailed it or my objection to what's going on in the first meeting. He asked uh Toll
Brothers or Toll Brothers representative whether they had come to Governor's Lane um to um at least talk a little bit about the plans and the Toll Brothers representative um I don't think it was Mr. Tol Mr. I'm sorry I don't think it
was Mr. Tar but said I do not believe that they were approached and Mr. O'Donnell basically answered um well I've always found or worse the effect Mr. Dong said I don't take your words but I've always found that um
approaching the neighbors is tends to be an advantageous thing and as far as I'm concerned that um Toll Brothers has not approached these neighbors meaning meaning Governor's Lane they have approached nobody in the immediate vicinity to talk about this project and
why I think it reeks of a tiny bit of arrogance and I hate to say this regarding Mr. Tar who I've known for many years who I think is a superb lawyer and also a very very well-mannered person. But I think why it
reeks of arrogance on somebody's part is because we know that Toll Brothers has an option on the Italian-American Sporting Club where they probably need some type of approval from Governor's Lane. But regarding this thing where they didn't think they needed anything
from us, they managed to uh totally ignore any of our concerns regarding screening, regarding the trees they're putting in, regarding the water levels. Again, I'm for their project. I want them to build here. But on the other
hand, I also believe in good manners and uh that has basically failed on us. And I I think that as the chair I would really appreciate that before anything is approved here that Tol has a good manners to come and speak to us because as far as I'm concerned with screening
and a number of other issues we're being totally left in the cold and and totally left out in the cold and um that um tool if nothing else has to be reminded that Princeton may maybe I as English I talk too much about good manners not having
any particular good ones myself but I think in in the normal course of things I think they should have approached us and they should have spoken to us. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you Mr. Newton. Appreciate that.
Um and we will ask uh the applicant to address the screening and other um issues that have been raised by you and others tonight. Um let's see. Let's bring over um Sam Bunting
and then after that is Fabian Po. And as of now, there are only those two hands up. So if you would like to address the board, I'll remind you that now is the time to raise virtually raise your hand
by clicking on the raise hand icon at the bottom of your screen. If you if you want to address the board, um welcome Mr. Bunting. >> You can raise If you can raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give me the truth? >> Yeah, I so swear.
>> Just want to affirm. Please state your full name. Spell your last name. >> Samuel Bunting. B U N T I N G. >> Thank you. Go right ahead. >> Yes. So, I had a few comments and a
couple of questions about the application. And first of all, I wanted to um say that what a great job the the board has done with the scrutiny of this application in particular with the the the indepth scrutiny of the affordable
units which I think you know we all care about very much and you know sometimes I think it's um it's ironic that we spend so much time um quizzing these developers who are trying to build affordable housing about their plans,
but then when somebody wants to build a McMansion with no affordable units at all, they don't even have to come before this board. Um, but that's the way it is. And you know, I think that the the board has done a good job. And in fact,
I also had a couple of questions about the affordable units. Um, one one thing which I I think is really good about this plan is it it provides for sale affordable units because the vast majority of affordable units which are
constructed in Princeton and elsewhere in New Jersey are are rentals and rentals are great. I've lived in rentals, but you know, people often like to have their own place and this development would provide units at a
price point which ordinary people can potentially afford which can can place them on a property ladder and I think that's a real strength. So the two questions that I had, one is kind of a broad question. What are the obstacles? Why do we see so few for sale
inclusionary developments? Um Mr. Ran Camp talked about perhaps was an issue with providing mortgage finance, but I don't understand why why are developers not providing a greater selection of for sale affordable units
like this. And then my second question is more specific and we touched on this but I don't think I quite got the level of detail I was interested in about the condo phase. So my understanding is this is this is a a condo development. The
the different homeowners in the development both the market rate and the affordable rate will be members of a condo association. So my question is do they pay the same condo fee? If the condo fee is like $1,000 a month for the regular units, is it $1,000 a month for
the affordable units as well or or or do they get some slack cut to them? Uh, I'm sure that's probably something which is um which is known or is perhaps even governed by the uniformed housing controls, but I would just like to get some clarification on that if possible.
That's all I got. >> All right, good. Thank you. We will um we will circle back to those questions. I promise. Um bring over please um Fabian Po
and then after that is a person identified as Katherine. >> Mr. Paul >> Fabian if you would um activate your camera and unmute yourself please. Thanks. >> Yep.
>> You can raise your hand. >> Yeah. Fabian Polo. P A U L O T T. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony to give me the truth? >> Yeah, I do. So, I just want to affirm. Okay. >> Thank you. Um yeah, I um thank you for having this meeting. I just have two a
bit exotic requests but a bit different I think. Um so my first one is related to uh the reasoning by the master plan when the property was resone if I remember well. Um it was found that by converting office space into housing that will reduce inbound commute and um
reduce the reliance on cars and I think those are that's really good outcome but there was no data based on previous development to support this hypothesis. So I'm hoping that with this development and for all future developments you will make it a requirement to have or an effort to verify whether the sort of the
hypothesis that you made at the early stage of the planning can be verified because you know it could work and that would be the first one cheering up but it could also increase outbound commutes since so many businesses are outside of town. So I I just would like to know and I think that would be really good data
for the town to for future planning. Um my second uh request is actually also for the planning board. Um one thing I'm missing today is a discussion of this development as part of a much bigger development north of the shopping center. If I'm not mistaken um when it's
all done, the planning board will have approved I believe it's 732 units to the north and they're all next to each others and I think there are 180 maybe or so to the south of the shopping center. So it's probably the neighborhood that has seen the most development in recent years.
And I don't think there's been any discussion by this board of the combined impact of all these developments. And for me, many of these impacts are very positive. I think it makes the neighborhood much more lively. It provides housing to people. That's great. But there are also some negatives or things that should be accounted for
that I think are missed if you plan for each development independently of each others. Um so on the street I live on Grover Avenue which is immediately to the south. There's been a pretty significant change in traffic pattern, traffic flows and speeding. Um that's
okay. I think it comes with density but the speeding part I think conflicts with the fact that it's supposed to be a back boulevard. So it's difficult to have it as a bypass for arrison which I think is becoming more and more and a bike boulevard. And I think if it had been planned or if it had been discussed so
700 units together I'm sure the planning board would have imposed some condition on the applicant and there would have been some effort to mitigate the issue. Uh but because it has not been it doesn't seem that there is any mechanism um for this board or maybe like the console to invest in and sort of
mitigating those negatives and I think that's unfortunate. I think it will sell density to my neighbor a lot better if there could be some investment because I I can say I'm not um the majority in being very happy about this development. Many of my neighbors are not so happy
and in part because of the change in traffic. So I would really appreciate if there could be some discussion of what if anything is being done and um whether that could be implemented at the same pace as those buildings are coming up because I think that's important to have the same timeline like you know if it
comes five years from now like it's a little bit late. So I would appreciate this. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um next up we will bring over Katherine and then a hand just went up. identified
as Gov Lane 32 and then after that Vanessa Ying. So bring over Katherine please. Okay. >> Welcome. >> Okay. If you could raise your right hand,
do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give be the truth? >> I do. >> Just want to affirm. Please state your full name and spell your last name. >> My name is Katherine McCertie. It's MC Curr Dy. >> Welcome. Go right ahead.
>> Thank you. Good evening and wanted to say thank you for the opportunity to speak and um really appreciate all the work that's been done so far by this committee. Um I'm a resident of Avalon Thanos Circle and I fully support the
creation of new and affordable housing as my own family actually benefited from the recent development in this area when we moved here. But living here, it's also given me firsthand experience with some of the environmental impacts of the
rapid development and intensive landscaping practices that I've seen. In particular, my main concern is the continued loss of the mature trees and forested areas. In recent years, as you
know, um a really significant woodland has already been cleared for the nearby multiple developments, including my own. And this proposal will remove another 180 trees. I submitted a letter today to the board with um a little bit more
information as well as some images around that. and understanding that replacement trees and native plantings are important. They just they can't replicate the ecological benefits having mature forests um that have been around for decades.
And to be honest, I'm also very concerned about the long-term maintenance practices with these developments, particularly um the repeated use of chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers
around the sensitive waterways. Here where I live at Avalon Thanet Circle, I've regularly observed pesticides and other chemicals being applied very close to Harry's Brook. I measured it out and it's about 40 ft. And it's also an area
where turtles regularly lay eggs and um these chemicals are known to harm wildlife ecosystems and really overall the health of the watershed itself. So I respectfully asked the board if they could consider a few questions as part
of the review and one would be does the applicant have any kind of long-term pesticide or landscape chem chemical management plan? Will you somehow integrate p use integrated pest management to minimize the chemicals
used? Um, further, how will the board ensure that chemical applications around Harry's brook and other sensitive areas are actually restricted? I know um they're in the plan and I likely were in
the plan here at Abalan Planet Circle as well, but in practice it does not seem to be um present. And then finally, what protections actually will exist to preserve the functioning wildlife habitat and reduce the long-term
ecological harm. So, thank you so much for your time. I respectfully urge the board to require stronger environmental protections like preservation of mature trees, reduced the turf grass, better uh stream buffers, and um
uh long-term ecological stewardship plans that minimize the use of chemicals. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um I think our next person coming over I
think a hand actually went down is um Gov Lane 32. Okay. And then after after that person um Vanessa Ying. So bring over Gov Lane 32.
if you could um raise your right hand >> and you'll need to um unmute yourself as well, sir. >> Great. >> Do you do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give me the truth? >> I do. >> Just want to affirm. Please state your
full name and spell your last name. >> Uh, my name is Jun Jang. Uh, J U N Z H A N G. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you for the opportunities. I'm also a resident of the governor's
lane. Uh, my fellow neighbors have already addresses many of our concern. Uh but I want to highlight the property line between the governor's lane and 29 circle. Uh I think we need a proper
privacy screening here during the constructions and also after it is finished and uh we have a lot of concern because the the the development site is so close to our house and uh we're worried about that
the extra noise and the people using this area as a shortcut to walk through uh while using the plants has been suggested but uh I I feel like it's a landscaping ing is just not enough and the bushes and trees cannot block the
loud construction noise and they will not uh physically stop the people from cutting through. Uh so in order to provide uh protect our privacy and keep the area quiet, I think we should
probably consider solid fans and war instead of just plants. So, I really appreciate the board and taking the time to listen to our concerns. I think that's all for for from me. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. John. >> So, let's bring over Vanessa Ying. And I'll say one more time, if you want to address the board, now's the time to raise your hand. Um, as of right now, uh, Vanessa Ying is the last person who
raised their hand. >> Is she here? >> Uh, yep. I just saw the box pop up and Yep. Hi. Welcome. Hi. >> If you if you could raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give be the
truth? >> I do. >> Just want to affirm. Please state your full name and spell your last name. My name is Vanessa Ying, last name Y I N G. Thank you so much for organizing the meeting and for listening to our concerns. I am a resident living on Governor's Lane. And it's related to
what June said earlier, but I would like to raise the like reiterate a concern regarding noise control during the construction process for the proposed to brother development at the 29th init. So given the proximity to this proposed development to the existing homes on
Governor's Lane and as well as nearby neighborhoods, I believe that this is essential for like to minimize construction related noise and this to be addressed in a concrete and enforceable way before the project proceeds further. So it should include like general assurance of the that like
the construction will comply with applicable or regulations and also there should be a clearer def like explanation of what specific measurements will be required to minimize disruptions to nearby neighborhoods and that's like my whole
concern. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. we will explore that. Okay. So, um seeing no other hands up, I will close the public comment portion of
the meeting and go back to the start of my notes where Mr. Nailen raised several issues. Um uh he asked about the demolition plan for the current structures and um
whether or not the applicant is aware of any asbestous. Um the plans to control airborne debris. um the plans for the pedestrian bridge and
whether or not they need to comply with um the recently adopted um strengthened storm water management rules. Um,
and he asked about D review, which I understand is separate from our role, but should probably be um explained by um, uh, Jim Purcell or whoever is the
appropriate person. Um he asked about ebike safety and um specifically measures to ensure that charging them a charging ebikes in the inside the
um garage areas um would be done safely. So, that's not the end of the questions, but I'll stop there because I don't want to just >> keep asking questions or posing questions without um uh giving the
applicant an opportunity to >> respond. So, let's start with the um demolition and and that kind of thing. >> Alex, go ahead. >> Yeah, I can certainly speak about the demolition. Um we did do an asbestous test on this on this building, which is
typical for us to do before um any demo. So prior to actually demoing um the building uh we did discover that there was some asbestous in the carpet mastic that they used from a long time ago. Uh so that will be taken care of by one of our vendors um abiding by all state and
uh local uh regulations for uh for that removal. Once that's removed then we will move forward with the actual demolition um of the building itself. >> And when that >> I'm sorry go ahead Mr. Char. No, no. I was going to move to the next. Go ahead.
>> Uh, well, I I guess I was going to fold in a concern um raised by Miss Ying about um dis disruption and noise. Are you um do you need to
um observe statutes or local ordinances related to noise? um decibel level uh during um demolition and construction and do you know what hours uh you'll be
operating and and that kind of thing? Can you speak to that a little bit please? >> Yeah, we'll we'll certainly work within um the hours that the that the town allows. I think it's um Monday to Friday it's uh I believe 7 to 4 or something like that and then Saturday they would
have um some hours but understanding the board's uh concern with um with noise here we can certainly restrict any demolition to do that like kind of during the week and not interrupt someone's weekend and work on the weekend when it comes to uh demolition
but can certainly keep that Monday to Friday within the working hours that the town allows us that's allowed by the down. I mean, >> and and what about noise levels? >> Uh, so noise levels it wouldn't it would be along the same line along the same
lines of what you would hear during normal uh construction. Um, where you would have the setting of trusses, nailing, things like that. Like normal construction noise is what you can expect when we're doing uh demolition. We'll have a big uh machine out there to knock the building down. It's not what
you would expect like with a big wrecking ball kind of thing that you might be used to seeing. It'll be done um and taken down in stages and level and not just one big loud boom if you would uh for lack of a better word. Um I don't know the exact decibb of what it
would produce, but I can say it would be along the normal what you would expect from construction. >> Mr. Purcell, I saw you turn your camera on, so I assume you got something to say. Well, um this board has in the past placed conditions on um applicants um
particularly the university on monitoring uh adjacent properties with um acoustic equipment to determine that they are not exceeding the state uh mandated levels of of noise um trespass
on other properties. Um that could be a condition here. That's all I'm saying. >> Um, do you plan um on erecting any kind of um barrier during
demolition and construction between your property and neighboring properties? >> Yes. So, >> than a silt fence kind of thing. I'm talking about a >> Yes. So, we'll we'll have a fence around with um to prevent dust and all that
from escaping the site, if you would. Um but I I don't know if that's exactly what you're asking, but that's what our our plan would be. That again, it would be any like kind of typical to what you would see um in in construction. Um,
if that kind of answers your I don't know if you have something in particular in mind or >> Well, I guess I I I think what the neighbors were asking about and and so it's what I was curious about is um the
um possibility of a structure um uh at at or just before the property line. Um that would form a a physical barrier
that wouldn't necessarily be a soundproofing, but one more um >> offense, I guess, if you want >> level of protection and separation um from the project. And I see Mr. Mr.
Cohen has his hand up, too. So David, you want to add to my >> Yeah, I and actually I wanted to sort of combine this question with the qu question of streaming which several of the residents asked about and particular
um Jun Jang uh was suggesting that a permanent um wall rather than planting might be the more appropriate type of screening. And so that could be visual in the long
term, but with the right kind of wall, it could also have the benefit of some acoustic screening. And I I wanted you to talk a little bit about that. I don't think it's in the current plan, and you're very tight to the property line with the driveway uh that runs along the
back of the of the property. So part of the question is what could fit there? Another part of the question would be if the residents of Governor's Lane was amendable, you know, would you be willing to put something on their
side of the property line uh if you can't fit it on your side? So, >> I can certainly I can certainly speak to that and I I'll take that in two different parts if you don't mind. one for uh for the demolition of the building uh which we can certainly put a fence up there for screening purposes
like a temporary uh chainlink fence um just to kind of screen anything that anyone would be seeing. It wouldn't 100% help with the noise but certainly visually uh it would help a lot um >> chain link fence with a with a fabric >> right exactly >> on it. Yeah. Okay.
>> Correct. Yes. So we we can certainly do that. Um, and I think we plan and intend to do that anyways because it's very difficult for us to do. Um, with regards to the to the fence and the screening on top of the wall, there's a wall there with landscaping on top um that I
believe uh Dan had went over. Um, we're perfectly fine with adding more landscaping there. We planned on doing that because we do need to we did agree to walk the site with um with Mr. Drailski. Um the only issue with putting a fence on top of there is it would
require maintenance and then an easement because then you have to get on the other side of it and you want to clean it. We think we can provide enough screening there with any type of vegetation that Mr. Dermillski recommends to give the same visual uh visual effect of screening but then not
like a solid barrier that would require maintenance in the long term and getting access on both sides of it. If that makes sense. This brings us to the point of uh whether or not to go to the landscape subcommittee and work through these in detail. That was recommended to us and
toll is amanable to that. It seems to be in generally speaking a a better environment with more time able to be spent working with the subcommittee. >> I agree with that, Mr. Carr. do think that we should probably decide here
whether or not some kind of a permanent fence or wall needs to be a condition. Um, I personally am very ambivalent about that. I I understand the desire for separation and the good fences, good
neighbors principle. At the same time, I feel queasy about putting up a wall between neighborhoods and uh it just it does not feel comfortable. So maybe we can talk a little bit more about that. Mr. Mr.
O'Donnell. >> Yes. When uh the walkthrough is done with Mr. Doilski, would it be possible to have Mr. Weatherville, who's the president of the Governor's Lane Condominium Association, be part of that walkthrough? Yeah, we would we would have no issues
with that um pertaining to because part of the walk is where that screening area is with Governor's Lane. So certainly we would like their uh we'd like to get their their input on what would go up there. You know, I'm I'm in completely agreement uh with you, Madam Chair, that
putting up a fence up there kind of just breaks a barrier where we think that landscaping can provide the same benefit. There's no walking lane or travel lane. I don't think anyone's going to be climbing up on walls to get over into governor's lane. So, I think landscaping can get the job done there
and we're certainly open uh to a member of Governor's Lane looking at that particular area um with m with us and Mr. Dolski. >> Thank you very much. Um, can you speak a little bit um to the
pedestrian bridge and the compliance with the real rules, the new storm water rules and and that kind of thing? >> Daniel's popped up, so he wants to talk. >> Yes, I know what I don't know. So, it's all yours.
>> Yeah, my pleasure. Um, no, it's a that's a good question. So, uh, actually tomorrow, um, we're submitting our, uh, formal application, uh, to the D, um, which includes necessary permits for some utility crossings that will be going underneath, um, that stream as
well as the bridge replacement. Um, so those are general permits uh, that the D will review and, uh, we fully intend on, uh, being able to comply with all the conditions of that general permit. As far as new real rules, um while yes, the rules were adopted beginning of this
year, um they are not yet in effect um potentially going into effect uh come July. Um so we will be submitted well in advance of those rules um and uh essentially compliant with the rules that were um uh that are still effective
um that are not those New Jersey real rules. Um, however, it's important to note that a lot of the rules in this new rule change that's coming out is um applied to coastal areas of the state. Um, there's some minor nuances uh that impact stormwater management uh but not
greatly different from the stormwater management design that we're currently uh intending to u propose and construct. um which again would be fully compliant uh green infrastructure designs um and will comply with all of the uh the
current stormwater standards um that the the state has put in place. So um in short, it'll be a fully compliant and uh and likely a fully permitted um development from the DP. >> Okay. >> Um and just as a I'm sorry, go ahead,
Jim. I I just uh I just heard something from Tan that I hadn't heard before. You said bridge replacement. Did you >> The uh the pedestrian bridge, we're likely replacing it in kind. >> Okay. Um that was not >> Yeah, I mentioned that in my first uh in
my testimony last last hearing. We're resurfacing um the existing uh vehicle bridge, but the pedestrian bridge uh we uh we've evaluated. It's still in good structural standing, but um likely going to uh just replace it. Um makes it
easier to make ADA compliant and align with those existing sidewalks, but it'll be in the same exact spot in the same footprint that it's currently located in. >> Okay. I I missed that you were planning on replacing it, and that's it's not a not an issue on my side. >> Sorry. >> I'm glad you're replacing it. Um
>> the the second thing is and I know I know Joe Scopian's with us this evening, but um you know we we've we've spent a lot of time with uh Dynamic to um make sure that all of the stormwater management is compliant and uh you know
we we are satisfied that they have met all of our needs and and requirements. So um that that to me is not an issue. Um and uh of course as Dan just testified uh they will be getting the
appropriate permits from NJD. Um and uh from that standpoint I think the the board and the public can be satisfied that uh the environmental impacts um from storm water management
and flood hazard area and riparian are being met. Thanks, Jim. >> And if I could just uh ask um Jim, is there anything from Joe Scoopian's letter that has yet to be addressed or
that need to be made conditions of approval? Uh or um has everything at this point been uh updated to both of your satisfaction? >> I'll let Joe answer that question since he's uh available right now.
>> Yeah, thanks for asking. Um yeah, in my report of oh gosh, on my report of April 30th, uh comments two through, uh eight, I have I have not received any
replies on those. Comment number one is the issue of the the drainage area to the converted detention basin. That one's been already resolved. But comments two through eight, uh, I would need to have some, um, response to.
>> Yeah. Joe Joe, let me just inter. Have I sworn you in yet? You were not sworn in the last time, were you? >> I'm sorry. Say that again, sir. >> Did I swear you in at the last session? >> No. Oh, yes, you did. Yes, you did. Last session. >> Yes, you testified.
>> So, 2 through eight. Um, is that like four pages of text or can you summarize what you haven't heard back on? >> So, we I I just want to note that when we did um resubmit our our last uh
resubmission letter uh May 14th, 2026. Um it was a all-inclusive response memo um to the various comments that we received and uh we did uh respond to Mr. Scoopian's um comments. Um, all the comments were were essentially minor in
nature in our opinion and we have no problems revising our plans uh to essentially meet his uh his requests. >> Yeah, perfect. I'm afraid it was an oversight of my office that we did not provide him with a copy of it. So Joe, we'll get that to you tomorrow.
>> Yeah, and and I agree. Um they're very chairman or chair person. You don't really want me to go through them. They're they're they're >> I didn't think I did, but I also >> They're technical. >> Yeah, they're technical.
>> Yes, I will I will review them on once I receive them and and respond. >> Well, and I appreciate that. I heard Mr. um Senol. Is that how you pronounce your name? I'm sorry if I'm Mr. Senol. Daniel
>> Chanel. >> Sorry, I would muted but very close, but Chanel. Yes, it was definitely okay. >> I'll take it. >> Um, >> so I >> he said that they accepted all of them and and um >> yeah, so I think we're good with two
through eight that you still need to take a look at their responses, but what I heard is that they are agreeing to everything that you've suggested or asked. >> Exactly. The the first comment was probably the largest, but that was one that uh we've previously worked through
with uh Mr. Scopian and as he mentioned, we've already addressed that. We're we're in agreement on that one. The rest of them, the other seven uh will be no issue. >> Okay. Um
can um somebody please speak to ebike safety and um uh meaning relative to charging the ebikes. There was a you know time there when there
were lots of seemed to be in the city anyway in New York City quite a few fires associated with ebike charging. I think it was almost always with um you know batteries that were not properly
manufactured or whatever. But so can someone speak to um who on the municipal side um inspects or otherwise ensures that the
facilities for bike charging are provide for safe a safe charging environment. >> Is is there going to be any bike charging facilities? I haven't heard anything about >> it's I mean as the owner of an ebike I can tell you that there are no
facilities. I mean it's like an adapter that you would charge plug your toothbr you know your electric toothbrush into. I mean it's bigger than that but the every bike comes with its own charger. They're all different. They plug into a
regular wall outlet. Um, I I I think it's beyond the municipality to have the capability to look at, you know, thousands, hundreds or thousands of chargers throughout town and decide
which ones are safe and which ones are not safe. So, um, >> yeah, >> I'm not saying it's not a valid concern. Mhm. >> The good thing is that you know if it's happening in the garage, a garage is separated with the fire separation from
the living space. So I mean just by code. So at least that's something. But >> yeah, >> would be something in the HOA documents or something about you know UL listed or other otherwise?
>> That's a good thought. Yeah, that's a good thought. uh because because it's it's black market batteries that are that cause the problem. It's inferior batteries. It's not batteries that are sold with ebikes and Yeah. Okay.
>> And when there was testimony about EV charging stations in garages, that was for vehicles, not for bikes, right? >> Well, the bike storage is in the garages, too, though, >> right? So, bikes bike charging happens in the garage or in the bike storage
area. So yeah, I'm sure I um framed it in a confusing way. Um can um would someone speak just briefly to the practical implications of tandem
parking? Has toll found with other projects that it's um that it presents problems? >> Um I can I can take that one on. Um we haven't found any issues with it. Uh we typically do restrict our garage in our
HOA docks that garages are just meant for parking and not storage. Um which >> by that makes people have the space that they need in their garage to park their cars and not just use it for storage and then park elsewhere. So that's how we've
seem to address it. Uh I think I think part of the concern though was because it is tandem and you do if you were to have a two f uh twocar family um that one of the occ the drivers in order to get out um would simply park
in the surface parking as opposed to parking in the garage and have to do the uh the shuffle with the uh the other driver. Um so I think that that sounded like it was the concern. So could you speak to that as well? >> Uh yeah, sure. I mean, it's kind of
impossible for us to really police that. It's kind of just when you live in this type of neighborhood, that's what you're that's what you're getting into. You know, you kind of just park accordingly like, hey, if someone needs to get up earlier than the other person to get to work, then naturally so they'll park behind that that person, you know. Um,
it's it's a tough question to answer and it's a tough thing to police at the same time. I hope you can kind of understand that. Um, as far as people having their cars, I mean, we are providing them spaces. We are restricting the garage just for parking. Um, and I think that's
the limit of what we can do unless there's another recommendation um that you guys have for that. We can certainly entertain it. >> Yeah. I think I think we've heard in testimony in other cases that they basically don't work and that the that that second space in front of behind I
guess you would say the the the car that's in the garage that people don't park there and they park in surface parking somewhere. But and I I just comment it's no different than most residential driveways where one person parks in front of the other. You know,
we I mean, I know some houses do have double wide driveways, but um throughout town, res our residents are dealing with >> Yeah. >> having to share a driveway and and with another driver and their family.
>> Yeah. I I hate myself for extending this conversation about parking, but I do have one question and that is with the people who um have are entitled to who are in affordable units but don't have a
garage and therefore are entitled to a parking spot. Are they assigned a parking spot? Are there Yes. Okay. >> Yes, they will be assigned a parking spot. Yes. >> Okay. >> That's in that that's in that response letter.
Yeah. Okay. Sorry about that. >> If I could just ask if very quickly while we're on that subject because it was just something I wanted to um parse out. Um how will those be designated like signed? Uh in terms of
um what what language is actually going to be used to designate those spots? Is it just reserved and then people know what spots they're in or is it going to be reserved for unit X? >> We will put reserve for unit X on there. So there whatever unit it may be so there's no confusion about um who gets
what and everyone's transparent with exactly which parking space is goes to their unit >> and that was indicated on the recent uh exhibit that was supplied to us. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Um so the the last question that Mr.
Nalen asked was about um where the snow would be piled and and I I want to follow up on that because there are you know there are areas right outside the area of disturbance that are either storm water management or in a
conservation easement. So I am curious about um whether there is not to you know ask for those snow piling up plan at this moment. But are there spots where you can push the
snow that you're not pushing it into, you know, snow that's already got um, you know, uh, salt or some other melting agent in it. You're not pushing it into the stream. You're not pushing it into a
conservation easement area. Can you speak to that at all? Yeah, sure. So, the conservation easement is more towards the center of the site by the by the uh tributary. Um, we do believe there's ample space around the site um to to push uh to push the snow. Um, of
course, depending on how severe the storm is. is I mean if we get feets of snow then we would have to come up with a plan to remove it off site but we believe on a normal uh on a normal snowfall we have um space around the site and we can certainly put together
on our landscaping plan just do an overlay of a snow removal plan um as part of compliance just to show you guys where those locations are. >> Good. Great. Thank you. Um
Mr. Dtomaso asked about um um documenting safety and compliance that they think has to do with demolition and and construction. And um he also had a question about the new storm water rules and whether they apply
which I think you've um uh addressed. Um he asked for a technical review before um the board approves
uh or acts on this application. Um he asked for an updated uh fireflow test or whether one had been conducted. Um he asked for confirmation of sewer capacity.
Um and he posed a question that I think was answered at our last meeting about um a traffic study and whether or not it took into account the cumulative um uh growth, you know, from
uh other new developments in the vicinity. And I I was pleased to learn at that time that the traffic analysis did take into account all of those um uh other new dwellings. So could you speak
to um safety and compliance during um uh demolition and construction? And can you speak to the fire flow test and sewer capacity? >> Yeah, certainly. Um, with regards to safety during construction, we have an
on-site team there with construction managers. Every time there's someone on site working, there is a toll representative on site with them. Um, uh, overlooking this, we do have uh safety protocol throughout. We're doing regular safety inspections of the site. Um, and unless there's a that's kind of
just like a general generic uh statement for what we do on site as we're building, as you've learned at Tier Hune, we kind of do the same uh processes there. If is there's a more particular question I can answer on safety, I'm happy to do that. But we just have like our normal on-site
personnel walking to site um inspecting, making sure all of our contractors are abiding by our uh by our normal safety protocol. Um with with regards to sewer and water, um this is a New Jersey American site, so we'll certainly uh we did do a flow
test, but as working with with New Jersey American, they're required um we give them all the unit uh configurations with the um with the flow and uh come up with the flow rate and make sure they can uh adequately uh provide water to our site. Um we have a will serve letter
from them. Um and so we can certainly that's one of the steps in the process of um of approval. Uh with regards to sewer um that is part of the outside agencies that we need to go to um the local the regional and eventually um the state to
get a treatment works application. So all that would be part of outside agency approvals that we need to obtain still >> and those typically u Mr. Muller, those outside approvals are listed >> typical conditions approval
>> conditions of approval. Right. >> I did I I went, Madam Chair, I'm jumping in again, Jim Purcell. Um I do have a concern and I um one of the um members of the public brought it up. I do have a
concern about the construction and a construction management plan. Uh, sounds like a really good idea. Um, my biggest concern is dust control. Um, we've seen too many projects in Princeton where dust control is not taken seriously. And
uh I would like to see a a detailed plan um not just a plan sheet but a a a program uh as a as a document of how not only dust is going to be handled but soil
erosion sediment control. Um, as as I mentioned before, I'm concerned about the uh the the tributary to Harry'sbrook and uh also uh the neighboring commu the neighboring communities and the impact
of construction on those communities. Um, and I I I'm I'm going to suggest that to to be extra careful, Harry, the tributary to Harry'sbrook actually have some uh uh some check dams uh and soil
erosion sediment barriers uh placed in them. um because the construction is so close uh that uh you know just in case there's a problem, we do not need a flood of mud flowing down into
Harrisbrook. Um so it would be uh I would like to make that a I I would like to be able to approve a construction management program uh from Toll Brothers if that could be a condition of approval. I I think it Jim I think it definitely
should be right along the lines that you just described. >> Yeah, I can kind of jump in on that too Jim as well along with the with the BMPs and I agree with you. We can uh work on that plan with uh with with your office along with the typical BMPs. Um we do uh
have a weekly uh storm water inspection by by a third party to ensure that everything is in place as it should be. Um but certainly happy to work with you on that um on that plan. >> Thank you. And if I could just I wanted to follow
up on the fireflow test because Alex it felt like the flow test you were talking about was for domestic you know service to the buildings. The question the specific question was that there was a fire flow test done in 2020 and whether
that was updated and it seems reasonable to think that it might have been updated. I I don't know if Daniel has an answer to that. >> Yeah, November of last year, we we completed a fireflow test. >> Okay, great. Yeah, I thought it seemed
likely that that would have been done. >> Good. Thank you for Thank you for that. Um >> sorry, Madam Chair. >> Yes. So, uh will that um will that flow
test be provided uh as part of the record? >> Yeah, there there's yeah, there's no reason why we need to hold on to it. >> Okay, we can make that a condition of approval as well. >> Yep. >> Thank you. Um,
so and then, uh, there was a question about the letter of interpretation, the LOI from D. Has that, is that something that you can you talk about the status of that?
>> Um, yep. It it is still uh active and uh and current. Um, as I mentioned earlier, we're planning on making our submission, our formal application to the DP for the various wetlands permits that we need uh tomorrow. Um, and as long as the
application is received and deemed complete while that wetlands LOI is still valid, um, then uh then we're in good shape. Um, if a wetlands LOI expires while the permit is under review, it's still considered to be
valid. Um but we also have the option to seek the extension of that LOI for an additional 5 years. Um which we could pursue if needed. >> Okay. Um let's see. Mr. Newton asked about
screening um which we're going to look at in detail at the um landscape subcommittee. Uh Mr. Bunting asked about um a general question about obstacles uh to for sale
inclusionary projects and but specific to this um was asking about the um homeowner association fees and do all um residents pay the same fees?
Um, if we tackle the first question about obstacles, I don't want to take more than 90 seconds on that because we are, you know, we we'll have a hard stop at 11 o'clock. Um, but if there is a short concise answer to that question,
I'm happy to enter it and happy to hear it. I see Craig uh that you are ready to talk. Go. >> And I'll make it short. From 85 to 2001, if an affordable unit defaulted, the bank could remove the deed restriction
to make up for any damage in the foreclosure. After 2001, they were not allowed to and mortgage money dried up. In recent years, HMFA has made money available um and banks are starting to return to the marketplace. So, it was a regulatory change that completely
changed mortgage availability starting in 2001. >> Ah, good to know. Thank you. Um, condo fees, HOA fees. >> With regards to the HOA fees, we do what's called a percent interest. Um, so
basically, uh, based on how large the square footage of the home is because they're taking care of the exteriors of it, um, and whatnot. the larger the square footage of the home, um, the more the, uh, the HOA fee would be versus, so a lesser square footage, like a one-bedroom square foot in the
affordable housing would pay a lesser amount because they have a smaller square footage of living area versus um, what's in the market. We haven't determined those monthly fees yet, but that's generally how we establish it. Is there any kind of cap on the HOA fees
that can be charged to owners of affordable units? >> Um, I'm not 100% sure of that, but our our goal always is to keep our HOA fees low. Um, natural >> the HOA fees are part of the income and
calculating your mortgage. Um so that what you're paying at the end of the day is the same regardless of how big the HOA fee is from the consumer's point of view. Ah >> yeah okay okay >> yeah yeah to expand on that just a little bit there's a 30 basically 30%
you know the the idea is that we to make it affordable it has to be no more than 30% of whatever the uh household uh level is moderate low very low 30% of that is the uh cap um and the condo fees
as said those are incorporated into that 30% >> good Okay. >> Yeah, that is good to know. Um, Mr. Paulo asked about data supporting um the
as I understood it um well he was asking why this area was reszoned for housing. I think that broad question was asked and answered during a master plan process but that redeveloping
um so-called stranded assets uh commercial buildings that are not used and for which there is no market is um uh a good idea especially when those
assets are in close proximity to daily destinations. shopping and jobs. Um, and there is a lot of data to support that. Um, Mr. Cohen. >> Yeah. I just wanted to I mean he had a really specific question that seemed
like a fantastic idea to me and I think this is a question for Justin or Nathan which is is there any way for us to collect data on how many people who work in Princeton end up purchasing or
renting units in the new developments that are going in versus how many people you know move to Princeton for instance for but continue to commute to a job outside of Princeton. You know,
how much is our narrative of why we're trying to build housing succeeding? And I have no idea whether there's a way that we can collect that data, but I would love to if we could. >> And there's a third category of people who work outside but move here and then
find work in Princeton. Sure. >> You know, >> it's a moving target obviously. >> Yes, it is a moving target for sure. >> I think David, we we get that data through census reports. Um some of it >> do the know where people live and how
much they commute. I don't >> I don't think that's the they they do. We we have commuting data from the Census Bureau. It's not um it's based on a sampling. they use sampling methodology but that data is available and NJ future has actually done some
interesting reports um on that at the state level I believe maybe looking at counties municipalities in in >> but it's as a as a block as a community it doesn't go to >> it's it doesn't go to neighborhood level perhaps which is
>> or the or the new housing versus the old housing >> no but we can look at it in aggregate at the municipal Um he also asked about um investments to address cumulative impacts and um I felt
in a way that that was intended or not a softball question because there have been a lot of investments in um uh road connections and bike lanes and crosswalks and you know reconfiguration of Harrison
street, etc. to uh in large part to address um you know, not only existing but um pro um anticipated additional traffic volume, additional pedestrians, additional
um bikes. Um Mr. Cohen, do you want to speak to that at all? Or Mr. Purcell or Justin Leco? >> I I'm going to pass. I don't know if somebody else wants to. >> Madam Chair, I have a brief reminder for
everyone if it's okay. Um, this site was offered for affordable housing at the same time as Avalon Bay and the municipality intentionally held this one out from the third round, saved it for the fourth round to phase development in the area so it didn't happen all at once.
>> I'm going to take a pass on the uh question as well. It is a question that is being discussed at the uh council subcommittee level um of the
impact of the changes in the um traffic patterns, not so much the amount of traffic. Um and uh we continue to discuss it particularly at traffic safety.
>> Yep. Thanks, Jim. and and Mr. Pulle's uh question was really specific to Grover Avenue. Um and and Okay. >> We do have discussions about that. >> All right. Thank you, Justin. Let's go.
>> And I need to be sworn in, Madam Chair. >> Yes. Could you raise your right hand? >> Yes. >> Where are you? >> Justin. >> Oh, there you go. >> I'm here. Jerry, >> it's your affirming the testimony about it to give me the truth. >> I do.
>> Just order affirmed. >> Thank you. Yeah. And without going into too much detail because I know the late hour and I'm losing my voice. Um you could start to see some of the ways in which we've uh made improvements to roads that previously did not have improvements. um you know like uh uh the
uh ext uh crosswalks that are going over Turon eventually to connect that new road that goes to the shopping center uh which comes out nearby to uh uh Thanet. Um and then even the smaller ways that
uh we've added benches on Thanet so that people can walk, take a seat, continue on their trip. Um, we continue to uh investigate uh making more connections between these new developments. Um, sometimes it was easier to do that based
on timing. Other times we're kind of backing our way into it or working our way into it with different property owners. I think you will see that in future developments off North Harrison um that will come to you uh as part of the fourth round. Um but we're really
trying to make this that um uh connected kind of more of a neighborhood than a bunch of disperate uh uh developments. Um and I think there was even a suggestion at the last meeting that there uh be the potential in the future for a connection uh to Governor's Lane
if the two sides could work that out. uh and we would want to kind of build it in so that if that compatibility between the neighborhoods uh and connection occurs uh no one would have to come back to the board. Uh so that's how we're trying to connect these things and not
just these different projects and kind of future proof other ones that might change um and just you know continue to create these networks and make them kind of feel like a neighborhood. Not just I live in X or I live in Y. It's more of I live in Princeton by the shopping center
and you know I walk there to Rita's or to uh the gym or whatever else and I pass by your house or I pass by your neighborhood. So that's the intention. >> Thank you. Thanks for that Justin. Um Katherine McCertie raised questions
about environmental impact um and uh the loss of mature trees and forest. Um there are 180 trees um being um removed on this site. A whole lot of them are within a big big parking area
that's going to be covered with um dwellings uh going forward, but but there is an area of the woods um that's being partially cleared. Um and um I know board members share that concern.
and I certainly do. Um she asked about long-term maintenance um and whether or not Toll um subscribes to um integrated pest management or other practices that minimize the use of
um pesticides, herbicides, um etc. Weed control. Sometimes these things um have a life of their own with the homeowners association. I I say uh guardedly. Um Tol, can you
speak at all to your um your landscaping practices and what you do to make them um child safe and pet safe and uh bird and pollinator safe? >> Yeah. the the quick answer is all the
above on that. You know, um when we when we hire these these landscapers, um of course we know that kids will be traversing around the site and we're we're very mindful of that. Um it's not like what you would see on a golf course where you're using these high potent
chemicals um of that nature. uh if there's certain things that um the board wants us to I don't know if there's elsewhere in the town where the board have restrictions on certain chemicals or whatnot certainly open to um open to looking at that but uh throughout all of our developments in the state we're very
mindful of um of the chemicals uh that we're using and it's not in violation of any any laws if that makes you uh feel any better but if there's specific things that you guys have that um you don't want landscapers to use we're certainly open to um to looking and
putting restrictions on that within our HOA docs. >> Um okay, I uh well, let Freddy Pearl Mutter speak while I think about that. Freddy, you're on mute. Um, I have some uh comments related to
some of this and then I have some other you may want me to wait that some other um environmental comments that are not land use but they're certainly related to the development. But in terms of uh gardening and birds, etc. Um, one of the
things was that we wanted to see if they if somebody if they could uh put in a community garden or several community gardens because there is no real private I mean there not there is no private open space. Um, so in addition to just
having landscaping could would it be possible to put in a community garden somewhere? Oh, we did we did look into that and I think Daniel, you had testified to that um earlier uh in in the first meeting. I mean, I can certainly feel it unless you
uh want to just review that how tight um the space is on the site. >> Yeah, it's a really tight space. We're largely confined by the conservation easement that runs through the vast majority of the wooded space that exists on the site, which means we have to stay
completely outside of that. And in my opinion, it kind of adds a benefit to the site as well. It kind of provides a peaceful and inviting um community for the residents and kind of really tucks it away and hides it. Um also, community gardens are really difficult to maintain
when um you have a a group of of residents. Um, I know these are for sale, not you know, rentals. Uh, so a little bit more benefit there, but a lot of times people show interest into it for a month or two. Um, and then what we've seen over time is they kind of go
a little bit neglected and then it falls back onto toll to maintain them. And when that takes place, it usually ends up just being a a landscape areas kind of like what we've provided around here. Um, we do provide some nice seating areas, especially up on Thanet Circle. There's a nice little seating area that's going to be tucked away into a
proposed landscape area um that will further enhance kind of the ecological value of the conservation ement that's up in that corner. So, I think that almost acts as a garden as well as uh several little seating areas. So, right next to building D. Um that's in the front portion of the site. There's uh
not really a garden that someone can work on per se, but it is kind of a garden area with some seating which adds some nice value to it. And then just for kind of adding some context to the environmental impacts in this site, honestly, it's my professional opinion that I think we're providing an
enhancement to this site when under existing conditions because if you look at the the site as it exists today, that existing office building as well as the parking area is right up on top of the tributary that goes through the center of the site. Um so they're they're paying no um attention to the required
repairarian setbacks for that buffer. And with our proposed layout, we are actually restoring um the repairarian zone associated with the stream back to a natural condition. So we're pulling the the buildings and the um and any impervious surfaces away from that
stream um allowing it to be replanted with green space. U so that's going to add an additional buffer to that stream where none currently exists. And that buffer does several things. It provides, you know, ecological value for different species and and um and also shade for
the stream to kind of keep it cooler, not getting a a heat effect. Um but it also provides a way to kind of filter storm water uh as it sheet flows towards the stream. It provides a green space for water to run through before it makes its way back to that stream for the areas that aren't actually being collect
collected by our storm water management system. So, uh, really in my opinion, you know, we're kind of restoring, um, the site to a more of a natural condition while maintaining that existing, uh, conservation easement. Um, yes, we're taking down 180 trees, but we're also complying with the
municipalities, uh, tree replacement requirement. We're providing 204 new trees. Yes, I know they're not going to be as big as the trees that are taken down, but fully compliant, and we're looking to uh, again enhance and give back uh, to the areas that we're taking away from.
Um, I have some more questions, but do you want to finish? No. >> Um, well, let's see. Um, I think, uh, no, go ahead with your next question. U, Freddy, go ahead. >> Um,
one of, uh, we would like to see the roofing made. Is it possible for the roofing to be solar ready? Yes, we've agreed to put um put a conduit uh up there. >> Okay. Um do you follow construction standards such as lead or I'm going to
get this wrong. B5 BD plus C for midrise multifamilies. >> Um I imagine you're give me one second here. I know that this was one of the questions on the reviews that we sent over. So, I don't want to misquote myself on
um on that. Uh sorry, I'm just scrolling through here, but we're not pursuing um >> nothing lean because it's not a lean building, but the other one, >> right? Right. Um I'm just I apologize. I'm trying to find where we responded
back to that to get the actual wording that we have. So, we are >> page seven of the letter. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, we're not following lead here, but um we do follow certain things with as far as the the building uh envelope goes um and and and making the
buildings tight and more and more efficient um uh with the with the ventilation, but lead isn't something that we are pursuing here um for this project. >> Um bird safe glass. Do you use bird safe glass?
>> Um bird safe glass. Yeah, we do. We're not proposing bird safe glass here. We do have um uh mullions within the uh within the windows and there's curtains here. So, it's not like a huge office space building with long uh glass windows that birds will typically fly
into. They are broken up with curtains and demoleons. >> Um and casement windows, something windows that you're going to open up and get fairly good air coming in. >> Uh we are not proposing casement windows here. We have the uh the typical d uh
double hung windows as you would see in um typical residential for this one, but we're not proposing any casement windows. >> And the other the other issues um most of which we've spoken with before really are dealing with the plantings, you know, non-invasive plantings and things
of that sort. Um if you can make keep a lot of the old, you know, more of the older trees, obviously we would like to see that. understand you've got to have cliff trees down obviously to do your construction but if you can save some of the old trees the new young ones don't
in my view really you know it'll be a long time before they replace the big ones but you know whatever you can do to keep maintain as many of them as possible would be helpful >> understood and that's our and that's our goal and we are certainly again that'll be part of when we're walking with uh
and reviewing with the landscape committee we can take a a little bit more of a deeper dive into that and discuss it a little bit Is that it, Freddie? >> Yeah, I think that's it for now because the other most of the other issues dealt with the land use issues and we've really talked a lot about those.
>> Yeah. Um and um I I'm not in a position right now to um with regard to the landscape practices and integrated pest management and whatnot to um to talk about, you know, specific practices,
but I would very much like to because I' I have really good sources for information about this. I'd very much like to have a conversation about um the landscape management plan and maybe um maybe even before the landscape
committee um meeting uh because you know if Tol could have a an approach that is um above and beyond um I mean obviously very effective and a very
beautiful site and responsible landscape management and everything but with, you know, fewer inputs and none of those flags on the lawn that, you know, kids can't read that say warning.
Um, that would be great. So, I appreciate you're being open to that and I'll look into it and then and channel some things, some ideas through Justin if that's all right with you. >> Yeah, certainly. And I am no expert in landscaping by any means. Um but we're
certainly happy to um take any recommendations that you may have and certainly get it to one of our experts and just understand the impact of it and just work together to come up with a good resolution. >> Yeah, because Miss McCertie was absolutely right about the very close
proximity to um you know environmentally sensitive open waters and land. >> Y >> um okay. So that was that took us through the comments. Mr. Zang talked
about the um physical barrier um uh during and after construction. I I gather you're willing to do a a physical barrier of chain link fence with a solid mesh screen during construction.
Um I want to know what board members think about requiring a fence. I I think I heard that we don't want to require offense, but I I don't want to just uh I want to talk about that a little
bit more. Um and then Miss Ying was um concerned about concrete and enforcable ways, measurable ways to make sure that um there's noise control and control of disruption. So to that end, I
was wondering in addition to having a construction management plan, which is such an excellent idea, um can Toll identify a point person for for one uh leader of the homeowner
association to communicate with just so there are open communications between um Toll and the neighboring um um and the Governor's Lane neighborhood for you know just again just to keep those
lines of communication open and address concerns directly and not have to send everything through the municipality. Certainly. Um we so when we set up a homeowner association and we start closing units um toll representatives
have control of the board until 75% occupancy and then we still have um the president of the board is uh um a toll employee until the final transition um is is completed. So there will always be a point person on the HOA that is
>> No, I mean during construction. I'm I'm sorry to cut you off. I mean somebody who has insight into the construction site and construction practices and if there are if you know issues arise from the homeowners association next
door. >> Yep. >> Who do they call? That's my >> Yes, we will we will have a point person that we have an on-site construction manager who will be the point person um for any of those issues that come up. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Cohen, >> I just wanted to give you a response on
the question of the fence. Um, I I think it's so integrally tied to the question of the screen plantings. So, I think it should be again I think that should be referred to the landscape subcommittee where so we can really
understand what's possible with plantings there. >> Thanks. That's wise as as usual, Mr. Co. And thank you. All right. Um, Mr. Mueller, are you in a position to start going through what
we've talked about in the by way of conditions? >> I could. >> Are we there yet? >> Um, yeah, I could do that. I think the better bet to tell you the truth because there's an awful lot of them is for me
to draft a set of conditions and at the next meeting of the board to basically go over it. I can I can drag I can do it now but there's a lot of stuff and if you'd like me to I certainly will madam chair but I thought ju just because
there's no doubt I have no doubt that whatever we discuss now I'm going to come back to the board with the conditions and we're going to go over them point by point just to see if >> comfortable with them. So however however you want to handle it. Um, well,
that that sounds like a good approach to me. I if other board members disagree, I'd like to hear about it, but um uh but I appreciate that, Mr. Mueller and Mr. Tar. >> I'm trying to say Alex is far enough away he's not kicking me under the
table. So, >> uh >> I just I know we'll go past 11, Louise, if we try and do it point by point now. Uh, I agree. We'll go well past 11 and it's um and we've been looking at our
screens for a long time. So, >> one thing that just to remind the board, the May 14 letter that we sent was our effort to go through all 34 pages of of memos and indicate the very very few that we couldn't comply with as
conditions. But I agree, there's 34 pages of stuff that's that's just never happened. And there's a bunch that's come up tonight that >> Right. >> We at least need to >> Yeah. >> understand where we landed. >> Yeah.
>> So, you're on um our agenda for >> this the fourth >> next week, right? >> The next week, right? The fourth. Jerry has to work hard all week. >> So, um So, Jerry, you would have the draft
conditions to the board ahead of that meeting. And >> I would I would hope to I I'm actually starting my vacation out of state on Saturday, >> but but >> take it with you. Take it with you.
>> Yeah, that's what I'll do. >> Okay. Um, do we have other Well, I guess it doesn't matter whether we have other items on Well, it does matter actually. Would this um I guess this is a question
for you, Justin. Um would going over conditions um associated with this application be first on the agenda or would it or are other things that for whatever technical reason have to go before it?
uh outside of our normal things like minutes or I don't think we have any resolutions, you know, the announcements, things like that. This would be the uh first and only application on the agenda next Thursday. >> Okay. All right. And so, um, just for members
of the public, the the public comment session happened tonight and we won't reopen public comment next time, uh, next week, but we will go over all of the conditions uh, that were talked about tonight and the um,
um, and including the conditions that are in the the applicants response letter, which is available on the municipal website if you care to take a look at that. their responses to all of the staff and municipal committee um
comments um that were given to them last month and and earlier this month. Okay. Um >> and Madam Chair, there will be no no further notice. We're carrying it on the
record right now. Um this is the notice. >> Okay. So, we'll reconvene June 4th with uh this and nothing else on the agenda other than routine business. Um, anything else?
>> No. Thank you very much. >> Thank you um Mr. Tar and all of your uh representatives from Toll. Thanks to members of the public for for your patience and for your comments and insight. Mr. Cohen, >> I move to adjourn.
Second. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> Have a good night, everyone. >> Thanks everyone. See you next week.