He lives upstairs from Lindsay and Connor. >> The meeting of the Somerville Planning Board for July 23rd, 2025 will please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting as required by the Open Public Meeting Act has been provided. A copy of the notice specifying the date, time, and location was one published to the
Courier News, two posted on the bulletin board outside of Burough Hall, three posted to the municipal website, and four given to the clerk administrator. This meeting is a judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues the board may legally consider in reaching a decision, and the decorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at
all times. Roll call. >> Andrea Deair >> here. >> Chris Edex >> here. >> Art Aikens >> here. >> Larry Cleveland >> here. >> Jason Kraca >> here. John Manilio >> here. >> Barry Van Horn >> here. >> Mayor Gallagher >> here. >> Council member Vroom >> here. Chairperson Warner >> here.
>> Please stand for the pledge. >> I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nationy and justice for all. All right. I need a motion for approval of minutes from July 9th.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> Chris Addex, >> yes. >> Art Aens, >> yes. >> Larry Cleveland, >> yes. >> Jason Krasca, >> yes. >> Mayor Gallagher, >> yes. >> Council member Vroom, >> yes. >> Chairperson Warner, >> yes. All right, we have no res and we
have no hearing. So, we're going to move right into we do have a presentation that we will be doing this evening uh from Rutgers Blast School. I normally don't read intros, but I am going to read this one so I do not mess this up. So, uh we have Professor William Irving,
master of public policy here. Will Irving joined the Blousein School as an associate professor of practice in fall of 2023, returning to Rutgers following a three-year stint as an economic policy and revenue analyst at the New at New Jersey Treasury. Prior to his work at
Treasury, Will was for many years a project manager at the Blousein School and served as associate director of Rucker's Economic Advisory Service, overseeing them uh their quarterly economic forecast. His current appointment resumes that work as part of the New Jersey State Policy Lab. His
research interests include economic forecasting, state and local economics, and taxation and public policy. He received his MPP from the Blousein School in 2005 and his BA in history from University of California, Santa Cruz in 1993. Other governmental and
private sector research clients and sponsors including include New Jersey Highlands Council, New Jersey Transit, Williams Pipeline Company, PSEG, New Jersey Associate of Mental Health and Addiction Agencies, Loheed Martin, National Science Foundation, Medical
Society of New Jersey, New Jersey Apartment Association, Goldman Sachs, New Jersey American Water, National O Ocean Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Federal Emergency Emergency Management Agency, New Jersey Retail Merchants Associ
Association, Bio New Jersey, Exxon Mobile, and others. >> There's others. >> There's others there. Uh, so we welcome um, uh, Professor Irving. Um, and before I have him up, I just want to explain one of the reasons we wanted to do this
is uh, we had done this I want to say I'm going to say a decade ago. We'll just keep it there because I don't know the exact number of years that it was. um as an overview of where trends, what we're seeing. This is very high level. This is not specific to Somerville. We
wanted to kind of see what that trend was nationally, statewise, etc. Uh his expertise is um we're very excited for it. Let's say that. Um so without further ado, Professor Irving Thank you. Can you hear me? I need this
closer. A little closer. There you go. >> Thank you. Uh thank you, Chairwoman Wernern, Mayor Gallagher, uh and the planning board, and thank you to uh Colin Driver, uh who was kind enough to reach out to me, uh uh regarding this, uh this discussion. Um it's a pleasure
to be here. Um and I hope that this will be um a a useful uh useful conversation. Um before I start uh I just wanted to give a little bit of a plug uh to our unit at Rutgers uh recon which is the Rutgers
economic advisory service which provides economic analysis and consulting services to state agencies uh as well as local governments uh such as this uh private entities as you heard from that extensive client list which I did not uh realize was going to be read in its
entirety. Um we use a number of different modeling tools uh for forecasting, simulations, economic impact analysis. Um we generally release at this point three state economic forecasts per year uh by subscription and we currently operate in cooperation
and sort of under the opaces of the New Jersey state policy lab which is a collaboration of the blouse school at Rutgers New Brunswick and the school of public affairs and administration at Rutgers Newark. Um they provide design, analysis and consulting on the full range of state policy issues ranging
from housing, energy, transportation, education and the like. Um, I would also after my conversation with Mayor Gallagher like to also give a plug uh to the Blouseing Center for uh uh for local government uh local uh which is uh a
relatively new but not brand new uh research center at the Blouse School. Um which addresses a lot of the issues that I've had in just these brief conversations prior to this presentation. Um so I encourage you to please reach out to me uh or the Center for Local Government uh at the Blouse
School for further discussions. Um, moving on. Um, what I would like to do today is to cover some of the features of our most recent forecast and some of the trends and concerns that we see there. Um, I'll talk about some of the key economic
indicators that we track, primarily gross domestic product and employment and some of the outlook for demographic change. Um, I'll also talk a bit about some possible alternative scenarios that might be looming out there. Um what I'll be discussing primarily is our baseline
forecast. Um I'll speak a bit about the fact that uh this is quite a time uh to be trying to forecast what's going to happen with the economy be it at the national or the state level. Um it's hard to get forecasting right uh even in
times of relative policy predictability. Um and right now things are changing very fast. Um, so something to keep in mind is that it's difficult right now to pin down kind of what we think of as the baseline. Um, this is particularly relevant, I think, as you're probably
aware when we talk about tariff policy and exactly what the implications will be for the national economy. Um, our uh our forecasting model is driven in part uh by a national forecast provided by Moody's. um that national
forecast for our current uh for our current state forecast is from their June uh their June national forecast uh there have been a number of recent new uh tariff related announcements uh since that forecast was released and so we
have sort of a month-to-month the these forecasts are released monthly by Moody's um and in the interim at any given time we can have significant changes um I would say probably faster moving changes than we are used to. Um and so everything is in flux and I
encourage uh everyone to kind of keep that in mind as we kind of discuss what the baseline is. Um I will talk about some alternative scenarios as well um that give kind of a range of where things may go. So to start off, this is uh a snapshot
of kind of the shorter and longer term outlook for some of the major indicators from our most recent forecast. Um I should note that this forecast is actually still something of a work in progress. Um these figures are subject to revision. This has not been released published or released yet. Um but should
be within the next week to two weeks. Um we do not expect that there will be significant deviation in our final baseline forecast with regard to these indicators. Um this forecast as I said is based on Moody's June forecast. So prior to the most recent uh tariff announcements
regarding Mexico, Canada and most recently Japan. Um Moody's baseline June national forecast reflects an expectation of an increased average effective tariff rate from 3% to about 15% and extension of the tax cuts under
the TCJA which was more recently enacted. Um as well as increased deportations and border enforcement. Um I think the first thing that sort of catches your eye uh as we look at these numbers uh is that there's a large drop off in state GDP. a key measure of
economic output uh GDP as well as employment this year and next. Uh a significant slowdown in economic growth. Uh the US falls off sharply as well but not quite as sharply as New Jersey. Um and our growth rate will tend to be on
average uh over the longer term about a percentage point slower generally than that of the US. Um employment growth is forecast to weaken pretty sharply as well um with even employment losses uh hitting the state
next year before a slow recovery begins. Population growth which has been strong in recent years and was strong in the last decade is projected to slow sharply over the medium and longer term. And I'll talk a bit about that in some more detail a little bit later in the
presentation as well. Um on consumer prices, Moody's has been pretty consistent in their assumption that most of the extreme tariffs will eventually actually ease off and be rolled back um probably by the end of the year. Um which is why you see inflation actually
easing in 2025 to 3.3% and then slowing as the tariff costs are sort of built into uh underlying prices. So we actually return to sort of the Fed's general target level of 2% uh over
the medium to longer term. So this is just a quick sort of snapshot of our changes uh in the forecast from the last forecast and that forecast was based on Moody's December outlook. This was our winter forecast. So it was actually after the election u but prior
to uh the inauguration. So it incorporated based on sort of uh I guess more uh vague rhetoric about tariffs but without specifics uh it did incorporate some assumption of higher tariffs and tightening immigration policy um but not on a scale of what's been proposed so
far through the first half of this year. Um so our outlook for GDP this year had already shown a significant slowdown. Um so you can see under 2025 that it actually did not change. We were expecting already a fairly significant drop at the state level. Um we did
expect there to be thereafter a recovery next year that has now evaporated and we are expecting actually a bit more of a drop off. There are indeed along with that some negative growth quarters later this year and I believe one uh for the
state in the 2026 forecast uh which may preface uh something along the lines of a mild recession but we are not there yet. Um I'm not ready to make that kind of pronouncement. Um you can see that the effects of national tariff policy
are reflected in the outlook for the consumer price index which is up uh the outlook is up uh 7/10en of a percentage point from the prior forecast for this year and about half a percentage point uh from the prior forecast for next
year. Uh the outlook for employment has weakened considerably, particularly next year with possible job losses and the unemployment rate spiking to over 5%. In the shorter term, this weakening picture will put pressure on already
fragile budgets. Lower employment, higher unemployment, sustained higher prices, reduced commerce and shipping, depressed output will all put downward pressure on tax revenue. Um most in most of the scenarios that we see uh the in
the medium to sort of longer term the economy does return to a pattern of fairly uh fairly slow growth but that's across most scenarios even more dire scenarios that I'll talk about a little bit later in the presentation. Uh the
question is that so even though those sort of longer waves might not look so different uh when we go out a number of years the short-term effect on public investment decisions that affect that future uh may well have consequences.
I am not going to dwell long on this slide. I was going to talk more about it, but uh suffice to say this is really meant generally to demonstrate the relationship between uh economic growth at the national level and that at the
state level. Um that first column uh kind of gives you a sense of where New Jersey has been uh over the past 25 years uh lagging the US on average uh by about 8/10en of a percentage point uh
and we see that uh going forward as well as being the pattern. Um over that previous 25- year period uh the sort of lagging has been fairly broadly distributed across economic sectors
across industries um particularly uh uh non-durable manufacturing uh and within that pharmaceutical and chemical manufacturing has seen uh has uh seen a significant lag and construction as well. uh construction uh has been about
flat in terms of real growth over that period for the United States. In New Jersey, uh it's declined construction out real construction output has declined at a rate of about 1% annually. New Jersey's employment growth of late, particularly over the past two years,
uh, which is about the time that I have been back at Ruters doing this work, uh, and so somewhat confoundingly, uh, has been characterized by a lot of volatility, uh, with significant and large revisions to monthly and annual numbers that have made it very difficult
to forecast. Um that said, employment growth was down to about 1% on an annual average basis in 2024. So we've now moved well out of the COVID recovery period and are settling into a slower growth trajectory similar to probably
the last couple of years prior to COVID when we were adding around 30,000 jobs annually. Year-to-date employment growth has been very sluggish and we're down about 10,000 jobs. Normally, I'd be concerned that this indicates that we'll end the
year well below our forecast of about 6% growth this year. However, uh as of July last year, the state had only added 8,700 jobs. Uh but after the annual revisions this past spring, the final gain for the year was just under 40,000.
So, there's still quite a bit of of year to go. Um, and as I said, we've seen such a such a significant amount of volatility uh with adjustments and revisions uh to the data that have been released over the past couple of years um that it's very difficult to say where
things are going even if it looks like a very down year at present. Um having said that uh as I noted before we s see significant downturn and even losses next year before we recover to a sluggish half percent growth rate or
lower over the longer term with growth largely limited to a few sectors including trade transportation and utilities professional and business services and the education and health sector with the goods producing industries largely flat or declining in their employment. I do think that our
current forecast is probably underestimating health care hiring right now and that may be corrected the next time we update our equations in the model. Um again though the annual pace of hiring in that sector uh has about tripled since the precoid era and I
don't think that that is a sustainable pace even with our aging population. uh we are starting to see a bit of a letup in that sector's growth through the first half of this year compared to the last couple of years and uh we suspect that that will continue.
So population New Jersey has been losing population to other states at a significant rate for at least the last couple of decades. domestic out migration averaged about 50,000 from 2010 to 2020 based on data and I I say
this uh I I this is an important point that's based on data prior to what we call the interensal revisions uh that followed the dennial census in 2020 you may be aware that the dennial census in 2020
indicated that the annual population estimates for the state throughout that decade from 2010 to 2020 20 had missed significantly in terms of what the actual population growth was. The original estimates, in other words, the annual estimates that the census
releases of state uh state growth indicated that we'd added about nine less than 100,000 people from July 2010 to July 2020, but the dennial count in 2020 uh showed us that the increase was actually closer to 500,000.
Um unfortunately uh when the Census Bureau then goes back and revises those annual numbers uh those annual changes the so-called interensal estimates they do not revise the components of that change. So it's hard to make definitive statements about what was actually going
on what was drive what was driving that fairly significant population growth compared to what the estimates were thought to be. Um but given the experience of prior decades and these more recent revisions, uh it would not be surprising to find that the factor
underlying those those errors was an underounting of international migration. Uh and that's really what's kept and continues to keep state population from going into decline. Uh it's significant international in migration. Um you can
see here the estimates for last year and indeed in the absence of significant immigration we would have seen a population decline of about 9,000 people. It's probably also worth mentioning some of the other recent revisions. Uh the original annual
releases for 2020 through 2023 basically had New Jersey with a net zero population growth for that period 2020 to 2023. This year they revised those estimates and now actually show gains of over a 100,000 over that period with the
estimate for international migration revised up by over 90,000 based on a new methodology for producing those estimates. Um and last year we saw even larger growth with significant international inflow again offsetting significant domestic out migration.
Our model has generally been pretty bearish on population growth for the state long term, mostly due to an outlook for slower population growth nationally uh coupled with a national pattern that has seen growth shift largely to south to the south and west of the nation. Uh partly at the expense
of the northeast. Um while these domestic and international migration patterns are not explicitly represented in our model, uh this administration's approach to immigration is reflected in the national forecast for population change and thus
indirectly in our longer term outlook which calls for growth of about a tenth of a percent annually compared to about a half a percent over the 2010 to 2020 period. uh on a more localized level. And this will be the one time that I uh had a
chance to dig in to some local local data. Uh if I'm if I uh if my research was correct, Somerville has added about 2,000 residents since the dennial census. Uh which is actually about 17% of the county total of about 12,000, an
increase of about 12,000, most of which uh is accounted for by international migration. Just like the nation, New Jersey's population is aging. I think we all are aware of this. And an aging population portends increasing costs and further
dominance of the health care sector in employment growth. Which is why I think we may be underestimating that sector in our current uh employment outlook. Um the structural breakdown that we that you see here of uh of the forecast for
uh growth by population, growth by age cohort um may look quite a bit different from this. This is close to the national breakdown. Um we have a little bit faster growth I believe in that older cohort here. Um and a little bit faster
decline in that youngest cohort. Um this may not be borne out if older people continue to leave the state due to the high cost of living. Um it'll be interesting to see whether policies like stay J uh will be successful in
retaining that population. Uh just a brief look at the real estate outlook. Uh for house prices, we expect prices increases to continue but to moderate uh over the longer term compared to recent years. Um this year
will still be uh we'll still see significant increases for existing and new homes, but we expect over the longer term uh for those uh for those rates to moderate particularly for existing homes. You can see there in those last
two columns of the table um a drop for existing home price the rate of increase of existing home prices from 6 and a.5% annually over the last 10 years to about 3.8% over the next 10 years in the current forecast. Uh building permits
building permits are very difficult to forecast. They're very difficult even to track. There's a lot of volatility. Um you can see uh for multif family uh indication of significant decreases there that I believe are mainly just following uh with a lag the national
pattern. Um whether that is borne out in reality is difficult to say and is affected significantly uh by state and local policy. Finally, uh, and I apologize that I was I did not want to overwhelm you with like 20 more slides. Um, and so I took,
uh, what is a very packed table and just threw it onto a slide. Um, some form of this will appear in our published, uh, in our published forecast, the longer version, which you have to subscribe to. Um, but this is a quick overview of the trajectories of a few of the alternative
scenarios um, compared to the baseline. Um and I will try to give just a quick description. Um the underneath the baseline which we've covered uh in terms of expectations for most of these indicators um there is and each of these
uh I should say each of these scenarios is based on one of Moody's national scenarios. So we take the Moody's national scenario, we take our state history and our state projections and we sort of apply these different national scenarios to our state uh to to our
state model. Um the 10% upside scenario basically means it's 10 there's a 10% only a 10% chance uh as far as Moody's is concerned that the national economy will do better than this. Um under this uh the average effective tariff rate is
down to 10% by the end of the year. The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East abate fairly quickly. Global growth increases particularly in China and Europe uh which increases the demand for US exports. Um and you can see under
this scenario we have improved outcomes in New Jersey particularly in terms of employment and the unemployment rate. GDP is also much improved though we lag the US by a bit of a wider margin than we do in the baseline.
The 25% downside scenario is again the scenario where we would expect there's only a 25% chance that the econ that the economy would do worse than this. Tariffs remain high. The wars persist. Uh a weakening weakening European
economies de uh dampened demand for US exports and a mild recession uh nationally takes hold next year and that recession as you can see is a little bit worse for the state actually significantly worse next year but with a
fairly robust recovery the following year. Uh the final scenario reflected here in this table is a stagflation scenario to no to which no uh particular uh particular percentage of likelihood is
is assigned. Um what it does assume is that we end up with significantly higher tariffs um and that accelerated deportations lead to labor shortages and together these factors drive higher inflation uh leading the Fed to so after
a period of significant inflation. Uh the Fed then comes in and raises rates next year leading to a fairly deep recession. Um, and those negative effects then tend to hit a little bit later and a little bit deeper as you can
see with uh uh with employment dropping by 3.8% in 2027 uh with a with uh a drop of 6% in GDP uh in New Jersey followed by uh an even
deeper drop the following year. Um in all these cases uh we do tend to return to an equilibrium after several years. Uh which is to say these are not necessarily whether they are positive or negative scenarios uh they are not
necessarily long abiding trends. Um there are some Moody's scenarios that uh that look at without again similar to the stagflation scenario without necessarily positing a specific uh a specific probability but that look at uh
what the effects might be of protracted downturns of much longer uh much much longer uh declines in output. And that is uh that is the conclusion of uh of my talk for now. I'm happy to take
your questions and uh I hope that was uh that was useful. >> It was. Thank you. I'm gonna open it up to the board for questions. >> You're going to call on me last. I know. >> Anybody?
>> Mayor Gallagher. >> All right. So, first of all, thank you. Um, as as uh the chairwoman had said, we we did this uh a number of years ago and it kind of began to lay the framework of how uh Somerville developed themselves.
And as as this board and as the council goes into uh another phase of the phase of what's next, um we're beginning to look at our master plan, we're looking at our zoning ordinances, we're looking at our redevelopment areas. And in order
to do that effectively, you know, uh the chairwoman and the board felt it wise to to begin those discussions so we can see what where the future lay lies for us. Um so that we can make those informed decisions as we did a decade decade and
a half ago in order to have success of what you see in Somerville now. Um, so that's kind of where we're going with this, that we're we're we're starting at the high level, the the the bigger economics and we then want to kind of
work our way down to um the Somerville specific economics and the ma and the main street economic the because the Main Street's our economic engine, it has the potential to have a very positive effect on our residential tax base if it's successful and vice versa.
So we need to ensure that the economic engine continues. So we have to understand what's happening at this level in order to create policy decisions for um for the the local level. And that's kind of our broad overview of what we're trying to do. And
that's more I think for the public uh than it is is for you. Obviously you do this for a living. So um I I found it interesting. I mean, New Jersey, you said New Jersey lags uh the US in a lot in terms of um economic
growth a little bit and one of them was in particular manufacturing. You know, we've seen that in the last 40 years, manufacturing in 50 years has just kind of flown the coupe. >> 50% at least of employment uh has evaporated over that period.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's it's pretty striking. What do you see? I mean and I mean I don't know if you can answer this but how do you see AI affecting all of this artificial intelligence right how much time do we have right um
like other uh revolutions in automation um I think it's I can't give you a a good answer uh I can't give you an answer that that talks about numbers um past uh sort of revolutions in
automation, right? >> Yes. Uh have rearranged uh the way that we work without necessarily uh eliminating jobs. Um that's certainly I think um the the
the hopeful scenario um is that it creates uh new avenues of opportunity. Um having said that uh It seems to have more potential uh to
replace work maybe than replace certain t types of work than certain past technologies have. Um you know I could find myself fighting an AI bot for my job. Uh I think it's possible. Um it has you know
certainly um infiltrated the university space um you know uh in a number of ways uh both positive and negative uh where it can be uh I think from from the perspective of of education in the university we're still at a point where
um you know this is a a technology that for our purposes synthesizes information and we discourage uh students from not synthesizing it themselves. where it uh where it will take us in
terms of uh economic growth. I I'm not >> it's all over the map. >> Yeah. I wouldn't Yeah. I mean, it's it's more of a discussion than it is an answer. >> I mean, I think it's an it's a you know, we spoke uh prior to this presentation about sort of um the current environment
of of uncertainty. Um and you know that's sort of one element of of the current sort of uh policy environment is is sort of uncertainty. I talk about sort of the fastch changing environment and I think AI
is is is move is the same thing right now. Um it's changing every day what we hear that AI can do and sort of you know these comparisons that say it can do this amazing thing. Um but it you know often does dumb things and um it's so
just that that broad range of possibility uh speaks both to opportunity but both to but also to well you know can it really do things when will it be able to do things well enough that we need to start worrying. Well, yeah. And and I and I think part of that
is is, you know, us I don't know if we'll ever ever figure it out or at least be able to project. You know, where AI has a of a a great benefit uh in one area, it will have a detriment in another. But when there's a detriment, there's typically an advantage somewhere
else. And it's trying to find out where that advantage is. Um, and you know, I look at it's going to it's going to affect um, uh, professional, retail, uh, residential. Um, but does that drive people to stay more where they are? I I
don't know. And, and does that then bode very well for downtowns? And that's, you know, that I'm trying to figure that out. um this board and this board's going to try to figure out not just just from the AI side, that's just a component of it, but you know, how how
do we map out our community, not just our downtown, but our our entire two and a half square miles of awesome um for, you know, the next 20 years. And and as you say, you know, it may not be a
straight line. It's it's changing. and layer in New Jersey on top of that change. Um, and and you know, because New Jerseyy's a little bit different. So, it's uh it's a lot of home rule. Um, and it's a
challenge and that's that's kind of what we're trying to figure out. Um, you know, you had the the 2000 uh uh population increase. That's probably about right. Um, I don't know that you had said a majority of it was international migration. That was for That's for the county. That's for the
county. >> That's for the So the Yeah. the majority of the county's increase. Um and Somerville accounted for >> I guess about 16% of the >> county's increase. >> Yeah. >> Um >> uh I think any I think most counties are
uh this this uh net domestic out migration uh problem um I think hits most counties, you know. is and the the cause of that I I would assume a couple of causes. Um age
um taxes >> sometimes. >> Uh I think that's probably a lot of the times on that. Um you know it's just it's you know when you retire you got this much money and it's got to go this far and how do you figure that out? So you know that's a challenge and it's not
a challenge we can fix but it is a challenge we can have an effect on from from a local municipal side. Um and you know that those are the kinds of things we have to look at as well. So it's >> there are I think as you know there are those I guess what you would think of as uh the high cost of living pushing
seniors out um high taxes maybe discouraging you know some people um are kind of I guess what we call push factors and then there's also pull factors right from other places um whether that is economic opportunity whether that is you know um you know all the different factors that have moved so
much population you know, we've seen this sort of shift uh in population toward the south and the west um over the past 15 to 20 years, I think it is. >> Um and there's so many things that go into that into that and it's not only uh sort of New Jersey New Jersey that has
uh I think seen some of >> seen some of that movement. >> Can you talk a little bit more about housing stock and and you know where you see that going, the need for housing? You know, there's there's a lot of talk right now. We've Somerville's done a lot of development,
a lot of redevelopment. Um, you know, we we've taken older dilapidated areas, we've taken contaminated areas, and we've converted them into uh, you know, uh, productive pieces of property in our in our community. Um, what does the future bring? What what's the next 20
years, 30 years in terms of I know you're saying population, young population is going down, which will have an effect on our schools. So, that that's uh, I want to say a benefit because, you know, every community should be filled with kids. That's that's just it makes
it cool, makes it fun. Um, but it's going to have an effect on schools, which also then has an effect on your taxes. So, you know, what you see in one area going up, you may see in another area going down a little bit. So, what what's, you know, just talk a little bit about the housing? >> That's something I may have to get back
to you on more. Um, but um, you know, you it's it's the changing uh the changing age structure of the population. It's the very uh it's the if we are correct the sort of very uh severe or significant
slowdown in population growth. Um at the same time I think we um you know there's there's plenty of demand for affordable housing. Um and you know housing shortages have contributed to
the uh to the significant price increases uh in housing which have been sustained really uh very much in the northeast more so uh than elsewhere in the country. Um and these kind of opposing forces of needing housing yet
facing a very slowing population uh slow slowing growth in population uh make it a kind of a difficult difficult issue to think about um and what kind of uh what kind of development we need, right? And
who's going to be filling it and what is the population going to look like? Um, is is the housing demand tied to the inflow of migrants? You know, I think the number was 90,000
last year. I thought that was the number. >> 95. >> Yeah. So, so, you know, there's kind of a nexus there. And I'm not trying to get political. It's just I'm trying to look at >> uh economics and and if you have this huge demand and you said that if you
have this huge demand and not enough supply is going to drive the cost of that supply up. >> That's right. That >> fair enough. Uh that said, um the net increase in population uh over time is
going to be slowing. So you know you um >> you also don't want to see yourself go into population decline, right? Um, I think the things that uh uh the things that make uh New Jersey an attractive place to live um can also sometimes be
the things that cost a lot and make New Jersey an unattractive place. >> You know what? You're right. It's And what's interesting is, you know, prior to Well, I'll say maybe Rich, you'll be able to tell me. Uh the population of Somerville was closer to 15,000
>> back in the 80s, I think, at the peak. >> 70s 80s. late 60s, early 70s. >> Yeah. And and from there there was a significant decline um until we hit the low of about 12,500 where it stagnated
for a number of years. And what's interesting is with the economic success you're seeing in Somerville now, the population begins to go up. It's it's just a it's it's it's a ride. You're going to get your chance in a second.
Yeah. >> Um if I can just jump in. >> Yeah, I'm done. Yeah. >> No, the um is there any analysis with the you know rental verse purchase with the outlook going forward?
>> Uh not that we have sort of in our standard kind of modeling going forward. Um I would have to sort of look into that specifically and get back to you. >> That's round two. That's right. There you go.
>> I have a quick It's actually more of a um an observation. I kind of want to make sure that um and I think some of this would be for the public and the planning board as well is one of the the biggest significant um changes or differences I'm seeing from when the last time we actually sat through this
and listened where where the economy was going where where the state was going where the nation was going is we are in such an influx of uncertainty where a decade and a half ago there was a little bit more certainty in where things would be going but with that I think the
biggest thing that I'm seeing is we made, you know, a lot of our decisions back then when we were really looking at what type of housing we wanted to move forward on. We um and and and some of it wasn't from this. Some of that was that very specific towards Somerville, right? We knew we had the transient village
that was a big push because of the age groups coming in which seems to now have being shifted slightly which is that's a huge difference for us, right? Um, I'm I'm very shocked at seeing that 18 to 64 basically flatlining now and the elder
population of over 64 continuing to rapidly increase. Um, because that's not what we had seen over the last couple decades here in Somerville. We were seeing that we needed to provide housing for young adults coming out of college or going through college or starting you
know and they didn't want you know that back then the trend was they they were not like we did in a lot of our generations coming out of college buying your first home immediately right they did not want to buy homes they wanted uh something else to be able to do that first decade of their life with right
into adulthood when I say adulthood after college I know they're adult we're all adults at 18 but they're not really adults I can say that the four kids I have. Absolutely not. >> They're not really adults till later. But that to me is a big trend at least for us on the planning board as we're
looking at master plans and and those kind of um indicators trigger me more of trying to understand and say these are differences that we are not used to, right? And that's coupled with the uncertainty of not
knowing what's going to happen. um the decline of the 0 to 17 um so rapidly uh with yet 18 to 64 staying the same you know and that again becomes not something specific to Somerville but is that because people are having less
children because that's always something we've talked about is that certain generations they increase in their younger gen you know more more kids more family versus they level off um and again that affects the type of housing that we might be looking for or the the
services, excuse me. Remember, our master plan isn't necessarily just about housing. It's about the services that we offer to those um and such a higher um aging population, some of those services need to be looked at. Um can we keep up with that? Because to your point, the
last thing we want is a population decline because, you know, as a resident, what happens then? That tax burden now goes to dispersed over less people, right? Um, and thinking about that, I think that to me has been that stuck out the most to me as something
that even through this uncertainty, seeing that, um, is something that we would need to think about, which is probably prompting a lot of the questions of why, you know, what are you seeing in those types of housing? Because it was, I don't want to say it was clear-cut then, right? It wasn't. It was, but you could see a trend coming
and a need coming where I don't really feel like I almost feel like the whole country as a whole and this isn't political statement is on a reset right and with that reset comes a lot of uncertainty >> and that's partly I think this changing
age structure um which is um significant but not necessarily sudden and you know this is only one scenario of that um you can find different uh >> age cohort forecasts that uh will be generally uh similar um but might be
shaped a little bit differently for the state and for the nation Um, you know, to your point about, uh, you know, you had young people coming out of college that weren't looking to go buy their first home in the suburbs. You know, you uh, we spoke about Jim Hughes who used to come and give this talk. Um, Jim tracked that for a long time and and,
um, and for many years talked about, um, this big change in the way that young people uh, and not even just out of college, but people in their 30s, even in their 40s were wanting to live. They were looking for mixeduse environments uh with walk within walkable communities. The kind of things that
Somerville, I think, has sought to develop over the last 25 years. Um that they were looking for um these uh these mixeduse environments um that kind of reverse the trend of their parents, right? The suburbanization. Um,
and I did I do recall talking to him I don't know a couple years ago about um um about maybe starting to see um sort of that trend starting to reverse a little bit. Maybe some some people are starting to look a bit look for those wanting more land wanting their own
space. Co obviously uh played a role in accelerating that. Um but I think there were some seeds of it starting to appear uh even prior to co um you know as to the sort of uncertainty and you know forecasters and forecasting uh tends to
be um inherently conservative um you know we don't like to go out on limbs and say you know next year the economy is going to grow by 10% right um you know so you know we've talked about these scenarios and
these uh and the significant effects of of current policies that are being implemented uh at the national level and at the state level that um you know that we are under our baseline assumptions right now expecting um to cause some pain over the next couple of years. Um
you know that's not all that new. Um, Jim Hughes used to start every talk by saying, "I've off I've often been called the Jack Kavorian of the New Jersey economy because I've predicted 10 of the last seven recessions." And this is so
um I think there is sort of a um an inclination to uh to be somewhat reserved in our expectations um to be particularly coming out of first the great recession then COVID um to um
to see uh I think I think I personally maybe am a little bit uh sort of reticent to to look too hard at anything that looks like it's going to grow fast. Uh and so it'll be interesting to see sort of as um as both state and national
policy play out I think over the next year. Um I think you know hopefully uh you know maybe that maybe we get a little bit less uncertainty. Um and that can help. I wrote a blog post uh for the state policy lab about a month ago kind
of prefacing this forecast. Um but really addressing the issue of of tariffs and uncertainty and you know they affect things tariffs affect things in a number of ways. Um they affect but and without going into sort of the specifics of that it's theyffect tariffs
and any other kind of announced policy um affect behavior anticipatorially. So people begin to change their economic behavior in businesses and individuals uh in anticipation of prices going up. Then there's the actual implementation
of whatever you know the policy might be will have its own effects. And in the meantime there's the uncertainty that surrounds it. And so you kind of have a three-pronged kind of effect that's very hard to pin down. I think um you know time will I I I
hope and think that uh sort of you know maybe a year from now um we'll be able to hope I don't I don't know that I hope my forecast is is accurate. Um but I think we'll be able to maybe put kind of smaller brackets around it. Um you know
constrain the uncertainty around uh wherever we think things are going uh maybe a little bit more. >> So it's it's interesting. So, and and the chair brings up a number of great points. So, you think back to 2008 2009 when the world crashed. It was just an
economic hoo-ha. Um, we we the council and the planning board had decisions to make at that time and we were in in full flare of our redevelopment efforts and trying to to to move this this forward. And we had
two choices. One choice was to lick our wounds, kind of hunker down, wait it out, or we could look at the the decline as an opportunity, and we we went on a trajectory and charged ahead. That's
exactly what we did. So that when things did recover and rebound, we were far ahead of everybody else. And that's a credit to the council and to the planning board at that time. And and I look at this time again as an opportunity. You know, we've and I think
we're still in a much better position now. If you take a look at at our municipality, um whether it's residential, commercial, business, it doesn't matter. It's we are in a great time. When we began that process, the planning
board has the luxury of looking 20 years out, 30 years out, and trying to figure out what that is. and and the burough council we look at today and tomorrow I mean I don't mean just today and tomorrow it's probably a couple few years out but that's our role that
that's the council's role the planning board's role is to to vision to go forward and I think this begins to lay that groundwork and and I think what Lisa said was really important that it's not just about housing as we look at our
master plan this is about the effects of what's happening in our population, what's happening in our commercial, residential districts, how do we provide for the future for them, whether that's uh economically, commercially,
recreationally, historically. Um, so you have all these different elements of our master plan that now begin to play into this as well. And this is that first step as we begin that process of of, you know, figuring out what's next for
Somerville for the next 20, 25, 30 years. Anybody else on the board? >> Go ahead, Larry. >> To me, it seems like >> your mic. >> Uh the aging slide, that's the one we
should be focused on because that's where the people are. That's where the money is. We need to do more in that direction only because everybody's going to get old. Everybody's gonna get old. >> Not me, Larry. >> Well, not you.
I'm gonna die before I get old. >> That was good. I like >> Yeah. Yeah. But the way these trends are, it seems to me that and also 2050 is never going to come. We all know that. >> Not for me anyway. But the aging
population, that's where if we want to maintain people staying in town and staying around and being vital members, that's where our focus is because Spencer Cleveland, that's my son, is not going to go buy a house like my house.
He'll do that in 20 years when he has kids because they push all that stuff >> out. Yeah. >> We did it 10 years after our parents. They're going to do it 20 years after >> their parents. Good point. >> So that the trend is going to be that. I
think that that's the most interesting. >> Well, and these numbers are borne out by the board of eds numbers that they just did in the referendum. It's it's they're right on. >> Yeah. >> They're seeing the population decline in the schools. So, we should have things like additional like 55 and older
communities that people can live there like they have in Franklin Township or Summer Somerset Township. >> Well, and I think it also, you know, we we just went through the affordable housing and I think that also some of this will play into in areas that we
want to focus on with our affordable housing, right? So it's it plays into so many different areas of things that we can still construct through master plan and other plans that we're working on even our redevelopment plans. What do we you know if there is going to be redevelopment and you know that's one of
the reasons why we wanted to look at our redevelopment plans because what we planned for 1015 years ago in those areas you know not probably is definitely not where we might see it going in the next 10 20 years and we want to make sure that we can dictate that and make sure that we're following those trends to accommodate the
residents current residents as well as future residents coming into Somerville. So yes to your point that's why I think I was so focused on that because I think at least even if it is not exact right it's if that watching this trend here is really one of the most important basis
for everything we do is because that is the population that will be coming in and we're trying to keep at the same time >> I think it's important also to recognize that it is well what we're looking at is the is the baby boom is the aging baby boom um they will not be the aging baby
boom forever and they will be uh replaced by a smaller generation uh of of aging people. Um so I guess as you think about sort of development decisions when we think about things like senior housing uh things of that nature for which there is now going to
be huge and growing demand. Um that will not always be the case. Um and it'll be interesting to see. >> Well I think >> there's a needle to thread there. I think >> I think on that point, Larry, you know, to tie that in because you're right, our generation, the generation of our
children, I mean, you know, my kids are basically the same age as your kids. And and I can say that even with some that are uh my my two stepchildren that are a little bit older, their decisions in those time frames are very different than what my time frame was, right, at those ages, which also will impact, to
your point, when they become the aging, their decisions are going to be very different than what we're making or we're thinking at our ages. So, and that's the trick of trying to because we are, you know, I know you said it's a luxury. It's a luxury, but it's the the burden also that the planning board has
is that we're not looking at next year or the year after. We are trying to plan for that next 20 to 30 years to make sure that what the the direction we drive it in is in line with one where the our our not just the country and the
state but our community is going towards so that we can attract the right people because development doesn't happen overnight right and even change in services doesn't happen because you need to know what kind of services so I think it is a luxury but I think it's that burden also of trying to and and to me
that's why this was so exciting just because I know that you know I'm I might not be as excited as some of my board members but um >> I'm a static >> but this was you know when we did this 15 20 years ago it was very exciting
time because we see now the the fruit from our labor then and now that we're we're really kind of trying to say hey we see this but we really need to now look at the next 20 to 30 Anybody else on the board before I open up to the public? All right, I'm gonna open it
up to the public. If you have any questions, comments, come on up. >> Richie, [Laughter] >> I have to identify myself. >> Yes, you do. >> Rich O'Neal, 124 Westcliff Street, Somerville. I've been here a couple of years and a lot of what you said I saw.
When I was a kid, this was a town in the middle of nowhere surrounded by farms, but it was an industrial area. You had many, many plants here. A lot of guys got out of high school, went to the plant, and they were going to be there 40 years and sit on their porch. That was the lifestyle. Most of lot didn't
have cars. They would take the bus down to to Calco. Things have changed. There's no way to get out of high school now and walk to the plant. There's no plants. New Jersey has de-industrialized. I mean, it's it's it's gone and I don't think it's ever coming back. It's too expensive to do it here. But what I have seen, as you know,
I run that little museum that we have a fair amount of floor traffic. And what I've seen coming in are new people in town. The old regulars are still coming, but I see there's an influx of newer people. And there's two groups. There's a younger group and then there's the older group. The older group are coming
from Montgomery, Hillsboro, Bridgewater. They're downsizing. They're living in the apartments. The younger group, they don't want a house. I'm going to work here in a couple of years. I'm going to transfer. I'm not going to be stuck with a house. They don't have kids. They have dogs. I mean, that's just the way it is.
There are When I was a kid, five or six or seven kids in a family was not unusual. It's unheard of today except in Gallagher's house. All right. But, but I've seen all this happen. So these statistics here match what's happened. And quite frankly, I
think you've done a tremendous job in building a diverse bunch of households. You don't have to be rich to live in Somerville. You can get an apartment. If you are rich, you go upstairs. I mean, everything is here. And what I and what I do, because you all know I'm kind of
nosy. When people come in and and visit the museum, I'm at I'm talking to them. Where where were you? Where'd you come from? Why are you here? What brought you here? And what do you do with yourself? And what I'm finding is they a lot of them started just visiting the pretty restaurants basically go to then they
found themselves coming here more often then are going home looking at two acres of grass and I don't want to do that anymore and they start coming to Somerville and they live here. So I think the diverse number of apartments of all different basically pretty much almost all economic realms are here. You know people can live here and they can
afford to live here. But there are older people there's no kids in that house. There's younger people. They all have a dog and that's who's come here. And I don't think that's going to change for a long time. Even the as these younger kids get older, if they have kids or more dogs, whatever they do, I the way they talk, they don't really want a
house. They don't want to be tied to it. They can't move. Their jobs are their jobs are uncertain. And if you're stuck with a house, you can't sell it. What do you do? >> Should I stop now? >> It's great observations.
>> That's all I do is look. Anybody else? Mayor Sullivan. >> Good evening. Dennis Sullivan, 8 South Richards Avenue, and I'll put my homeowner and resident hat on. Um, Summerville is a success story
because of a lot of people that put the hard work in. One thing that that looking forward, our housing stock is aging and I represent that aging segment of the population.
In about 10 years, my little house will be 100 years old. And that's not atypical. And what worries me is that there'll be pressure to, you know, demolish those old houses
and combine lots and do what we've done successfully with contaminated properties. But South Richards Avenue, North Clark, Deont, they're not contaminated. And I I just worry that there'll be pressure to as it happened
in Staten Island. The 50 by 100 foot lots had Cape Cods. They got demolished. There's now duplexes with an underground garage. So I think it's going to be incumbent as we move forward for the planning board, the zoning board, and
the council to look at some sort of rehabilitation credit program. Years and years ago, we put an ordinance in where if you do a home improvement and you do it with licenses and permits, you get a five-year abatement.
I I don't know how updated that's been, but at that there used to be a $25,000 limit on improvements. If that hasn't changed, I think that should be looked at because you can't build a kitchen for $25,000. >> We're going to talk to the state on that one. Yeah.
>> Capp. I think I think there's going to be as the population ages, the housing's aging, too. And I think it's incumbent to to keep what's good about our older housing stock, but give the homeowner an
incentive to stay and maybe encourage his kids to inherit it and move back. Thank you. >> I I want to make a comment on that because I think Thank you, Mayor Sullivan. I think that that's one of the reasons why we also here as a board um took the undertaking of looking at our
zoning and looking at some of the restrictions that currently are on our existing homeowners to improve their homes because that also can take place where they want to make an improvement and we've tied their hands, right? Um to your point um having used to live on
that road, we are uh very restricted on on roads like that on what they can do to improve their homes because they've you know they're automatically non-conforming to new existing. So once you try to put a deck on or you try to redo this or redo that, you are now
hitting uh setback and front uh and side uh and backyard um setback restraints. So I think that's one of the things that we want to what we are trying to think of. Um the other turns over to council. You you know those some of those
conversations really wouldn't be here but I think they are worth um exploring. But uh you know to your point that is again for the board to hear you know that is one of the reasons why we want to look at these things because we want our residents to improve their homes before they age out so much where it is
easy for a developer to come in and say you know what it's better off just to flatten these two blocks and start over because we don't want that. those homes have, you know, um I hate using that term historical, but there is historical significance, right? They might not be historical homes, but there's historical
significance to these neighborhoods and to these areas that we don't want to lose. though. >> Yeah. To, you know, to to Lisa's point, the uh were were grappling with issues um of the older Victorians in and around Main Street, you know, up and down High
Street, Cliff Street, and a lot of them over time had been converted into businesses and now they they're some of them are being converted back to residential and they're faced with these challenges now because they have this impervious coverage. they have parking lots and and they're caught in this
quagmire between two worlds and there's no way out. Um it's classified as a commercial property and it it just becomes very difficult and cumbersome. So, that's something that I know uh I think we have a subcommittee on that that they're trying to tackle and at some point they're going to be coming to
historic to say, "Hey, look, >> take a look at this because, you know, we're trying to help homeowners, people who are taking an existing beautiful building and they want to convert it back to a single family home and they're having challenges. And we're we're we're going to work with historic to try to
bring that back to this board so we can bring back a plan to council that says, "Hey, you know what? We've got we've got to change some things. We have to change some of this zoning to make it happen. So, >> anyone else from the public?
>> Okay. Hearing uh Go ahead, sir. >> Hi, uh John Flores, 389 William Street. Um I'm on the zoning board, by the way. Uh great presentation. Thank you for the information. I have one question particularly about the outflows from the state. Is there a demographic breakdown
of those outflows and any kind of research into the the purpose or the cause of those outflows? Uh there there is research and debate over the cause of the outflow. I don't think so answer
I don't think there's much individual Is is your mic on? >> I'm sorry. >> Yeah. >> Um but with uh with domestic um a lot a lot of the data um at least uh it used to be and I believe it still is. Um even
what the census publishes is based at least in part um on fairly limited IRS data. It's the IRS that actually collects a lot not not for international migration but um for state-to-state flows um state-to-state domestic
migration flows um what they do is they match returns. So a person filed in one place this year filed somewhere else next year or filed in the same place and that's that's where most of that data comes from. So there's I think a bit on
um the sort of uh on the income levels, but that's about it. Um there may be more through the census, but I I don't know off the top of my head. >> Okay. Thanks. I mean, I I I asked because I mean, I've traveled around the country and I see a lot of these newer
town, newer cities in the south and the southwest and I talk to people and it's they really talk about cost of living, brand new spaces, uh job opportunities because business is moving down there and it just makes me wonder uh you guys on the planning board have a big
challenge ahead of you um in terms of trying to figure out what's going to happen in the next 20 years because in the next 20 years the boomer generation will be all but gone. I mean, I'm I'm a Gen X and I'll be I'll be almost gone if not I'll be
soon. Um, but for you guys to have to imagine what this town is going to be like without boomers in it. Um, and what's going to replace that and how that's affected by outflows and who's here and who's leaving and who's staying. It's a it's a great challenge.
So, I uh I wish you all the luck. >> Thank you. Anybody else? Marge Sullivan, 8 South Richards Avenue in Somerville. Um, I just want to dovetail off of something that Larry Cleveland said about um, go where the
demographic has the most people. um having navigated um two sets of elderly parents and many of their knowing many of their friends and and relatives. Most people in the
older demographic of which I'm rapidly becoming part of uh prefer to age in place and uh Somerville has many attractive features that will allow people to age
in place. your talk uh devoted a lot of time to uh the industrial lag but uh I think New Jersey economy has strengths which uh I couldn't tell from some of the slides whether you touched upon them
um we should have a big health care industry service industries um and even pharma pharmaceutical uh production all and Lord knows Somerville has a hospital right here all of the and good transportation network. So all of those
things are attractive to people who are older, healthier and want to maintain as many options as they they can uh as they age. So I would say the planning board and the zoning board should think about
ways to make Somerville increasingly accessible to people who want to age in place. And that might mean making uh you know doing more about transportation. We have a lot of the apartments and uh
people uh are living close to the train station, but it might be nice to have some other kinds of transportation that would be helpful to elderly people, not just the county scoot bus. Maybe we could think about that. And as uh uh older people are living in apartments,
maybe the developers could be encouraged to have scoot buses that would take people to the train station if they wanted to go to the supermarket. Those kinds of things. Um so think about how you would a help people age in place and
then your demographic will stay and not go to the sunb belt where it's even hotter than it is in New Jersey. Thank you. Anybody else? All right, I'm going to close public session for that. Any last minute from
the board? >> Thank you very much for coming out. >> All right, thank you, professor. This was awesome and we really appreciate you coming. So, thank you so much. >> We'll see you around. >> Okay. Uh pending I am uh Sidewalk Cafes is on
here. Did we have something specifically for that? >> I don't think we >> I think it was the donuts. >> Yes. You wanted to speak about Yes. >> Well, it it's a it really is just a a brief discussion and and test taking the
temperature to see if there's an ability to maybe try a test scenario or not. Um, and I'm happy the DSA is here for this discussion. The, um, so I had the opportunity, and it's not a new concept. I had the opportunity to be down in Little Havana in Miami, which
was a lot of fun. Um, but they do something a little bit different down there. And, uh, their their sidewalk seating, so their sidewalks are actually narrower than Somerville's. And their sidewalk seating is actually
pushed to the curb line. Um, so the the pathway consistently is open, clear, and it runs right down the front of all the storefronts. Um, the concern I had at the time was, can people get in and out of their car when
they uh when they try to exit, they park and try to exit? Um, is there going to be an issue when they try to back in and, you know, does the does the rear end of the car come out over the sidewalk? And so kind of watched and and looked and um but it worked and the flow
of pedestrian uh traffic was free, clear, and busy, super busy uh on a much narrower sidewalk. So, you know, I came back and I'm, you know, running around town. I'm looking at him going, wouldn't it be interesting to see if we can try
it here? And I'm not saying it's going to work because I do understand Friday nights could be a potential problem. you know, how do people get up close and personal with with the cars? But is there an ability to have um a couple one, two, three, four different uh
stores, storefronts, restaurant fronts try it? And let's see what happens. Does it work? I I don't know if it'll work or not. We can all say no, it won't work or yes, it will work, but we won't know if it'll work until we try it. And if we
can find willing store owners, and I've approached a couple and but their immediate reaction was eh um but if we can find a couple of of uh willing participants, is it worth a shot? Is it worth a test scenario to see if it works? And it may mean people may have
to kind of do a bit of a jog at times. Um, but I think we've all seen that there are a couple of uh uh restaurants that have in the past pushed their seating out to the curb. Uh, I think more so up across from the courthouse,
but it worked. Um, it did work. So, I just throw it out to the board for thoughts, comments, and and >> I have a couple of ideas on that. First thing is that my understanding is they're going to start removing the tree grates. >> They have that that's going to start
happening. So that's gonna >> claim a lot of sidewalk space >> for use for whatever. >> Yes. >> The challenge is >> and if you have to be a jerk about it, get a ruler that's a yard stick and walk
down the street and if you hit anybody, they're in the wrong spot. If you care, they're in the wrong spot. >> Enforcement's already on it. >> Well, they got to they got to keep it on because that's that's the biggest problem. And you said the weave and that's fine. you want to go this way and that way as long as it's a constant pathway. But if people have to step in
the street or step over the top of the brakes or anything else to get hurt, it's >> being handled. >> So, but yes, I think we can try a couple of spots >> for that. Shift >> shifted out maybe in some of the areas that they've already coned off.
>> Yes. >> Has no parking. They have hash marks and now they put the bothered there. That's an excellent spot. I am gonna say to Larry's point, I know that in the past that was one of the biggest reasons why we had stayed away from it was because
>> of the grates uh and the well the whatever around the trees. Yeah. >> Um because it was limiting um the space that could be used. So as those open >> I I agree. I think that there is definitely areas that you know we could probably look at to say why not open it
up to those areas. But again, yes, weaving because I don't think it's going to go straight across downtown, >> right? >> Um, but maybe it's a trend that starts and finishes like that. But yeah, >> so I think the answer is yes, we can try
it. >> I do think that those those new areas that they did, the hashmarks, no parking, and they put the ballards, that'd be an excellent spot to put >> seating right against the traffic because nobody nobody >> nobody can park there. That's
>> so, you know, my only concerns and um, you know, off the cuff would be restaurants who are now serving out there and you have, you know, a waiter, waitress coming out with a tray of drinks and everything now having to go through the crowd that's walking through the street to get to the tables and back
and forth. Um, I also share the Friday night concern. Yeah. >> You know, I don't want if I'm sitting there, I don't want somebody leaning over me to check out the the lovely car that came down. But >> and maybe to that point, you know, again, how I said maybe it's appropriate for certain restaurants, maybe it's the
one where it is a self-s serve and you're going to sit versus the, you know, the serving right now until we can kind of see how that works. I I will say the the biggest concern I know on coming some of the applications we've had recently through ARB um were necessarily
it's really about Friday night because that is different than most towns. Um, and that brings a very different level of concern and um, I guess conflict in the crowds, right? So, you have somebody who's eating, but then you have somebody else that might not be there eating and
they're there to go look at the cars and they can't access them. So, I think to your point though, I think we can try to look at some kind of balance and maybe where it's appropriate versus maybe not appropriate right now and then kind of see how those areas do >> and allow it to snake if I like the idea of the, you know, where there's the no
parking. I also don't want to be eating >> and a car, let's just say, doesn't have the greatest exhaust going on and is blowing out some black smoke right next to me. >> You know, it's just the way. >> Anybody else on that? >> I just have a quick question. So, the
cafe permits is yearly or is it once it's issued it's >> No, it's yearly. >> Okay. So, you can't test it out for a year. If it doesn't work, then >> Yeah, I'll I'll talk to Burough Hall. We would have to see if we want to test it. Um, you know, we'd have the council uh discuss it as well and uh and then we'd
have to see, you know, how we would allow that to happen. Uh, it may just be a council passing a resolution to allow test scenarios because we do have the ordinance in place. >> Anybody else? All right. Uh, redevelopment plans, master plan, and
zoning. Um, I don't know where we stand with our timeline right now. Um, did we finalize that where we we can get it distri? Okay, thank you. Um, so that will get distributed within the next week. We can get it distributed to you guys so that we can hopefully at the
next meeting maybe really look at that and then kind of dive into what that means for us. But um I know that uh Colin and crew have been diligently working on that and refining it before it reaches here. So um improvement coverage uh the subcommittee one of the
things that um I know you weren't here last week and I didn't get last meeting John and I didn't get a chance to give you a call but one of the things that we were thinking about is in that one area um that we felt with when it came to imperous surfaces and things like that
where you came up with that solution maybe piecing this kind of the thought process right so originally this was hey let's look at everything to make sure we can put it as a package And I think that project is a little bit bigger and is delaying some of the needs of residents that we know we can help
right now. So I would ask if you could look at that and see if you could put something together that would um kind of like we did with the decks and the pools. We pulled the decks out, let that go forward, and we'll still continue to look at the pools. Um so if you guys as
a committee could look at lease saying, you know, hey, we're going to address this and even if it's, you know, every other month we're we're updating that. But I think then at least at that point it allows some relief to residents that are in dire need of that and we're not
delaying it trying to get this big package of of solutions for them. >> Yeah, that's it's a good point and we'd had some conversations last week I had with um the zoning official and and Michael. Um so it is a bigger item than
we could tear apart with one solution. >> Um so yeah, I agree totally. I'm not sure where we left off with the change of use if that was d I think we drafted something on that, right? >> So maybe we can bring that back that piece back. >> Yeah. >> Um and we'll we'll review that again
with fresh eyes just that piece and see if we can just push that forward. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Um I know it's not on here because it was uh last minute but we had comments. So, we did put um burough council did intro you guys
introduced they did have some comments on the EV um ordinance um Ryan on these is it easy to see where their comments were? >> No, I think it's all the comments are
underlined in black but I don't know maybe Mike knows a little bit more of that. I I think that's it was I the board made the recommendation to council and I prepared two emails to Kevin. One was the red line and one is
Kevin wants to know where in the land use ordinance. So I did a subsequent email proposing that it goes in one section 102-17 M. So you see what's in front of you is
adding the section to 117 in the Kevin underlined the changes. Okay. >> Which are essentially what the planning board recommended and there was some discussion with the council about >> uh drilling down further on this uh in
between the first and second reading on this. >> Yeah. The one one of the discussions was gas stations. Yeah. you know, and I would would they be covered by um the uh electrical and fire official? So, so if
they if if they were going to put in So, I think you had said to me that that the state of New Jersey requires that gas stations have it now. Correct. >> Yeah. There is a and the and the in the regulation that Governor Murphy passed, it bas basically says you have to allow
electrical charging and gas stations without board approval. So I if the board to drill down on the issue of whether we can put distance requirements in gas stations to look at a more inclusive of all different scenarios. Uh
if the board I think it's something it should be drilled down on. Yes. So I if the board allows I'd like to get with car on that to see if what flexibility you'll see in the beginning a lot of these sections of this ordinance cannot
be modified >> right >> it says right from the the from the state you cannot modify this. So those areas that cannot be modified. What we did is clarify under site safety what we can do. But uh the comments back from
some of the council was that we should take a more inclusive look of gas stations and other uses to see if we can uh look at meaningful >> Yeah. I think creating some standards. So, safety standards, correct? Um, you
know, away from buildings, uh, not near combustible elements, how many feet apart, and I don't know if the construction code would address some of that or the fire code would address some of that. I'm not sure. I just >> I I would imagine >> comment. I just have to drill down to see what we can and can't do. Like, we
have the IRC, IRBC, the receptacles. There are so many codes that >> preempt basically the bureau's ordinance in terms of what you have to do. So I I think if I I can s sit down with car and go through it and say no, you can't
touch that, you can touch that and uh so we can clarify thoroughly vet this in terms of are we addressing all the different scenarios. >> Yeah, I know. I think it's a good catch and a good comment from the council. You know, while it's before us, we might as well make sure that we are including
everything. >> Yeah. And I don't know that we're going to be able to drill down into every scenario. So I think it's from a construction, electrical, and fire standpoint, creating a set of standards that then applies across >> everything. >> Well, we we address residential and the big
>> basically commercial on decks, but we didn't address every retail use. If it's back to your point, yeah, >> if it's it's all included, it's all included. But to look at the gas stations and some other retail uses which specifically are permitted by
legislation to see what we can do there if anything. >> Y safety. Safety >> safety blanket across >> safety. Right. >> Wouldn't other resident or retail uses be covered by surface parking lot?
>> Like a gas station we would be under surface parking lot would have to follow those regulations. So rather than keep thinking of every possible situation, I mean there's no other possible situation than these four. If it's not if the
parking is not in a structure, it has to be on a surface lot. I mean there's a good point. >> Whether it's a Wawa uh car dealership, whatever, there's a surface parking lot. >> It's a valid point. >> So it kind of you're covering it there.
>> It's a good point, Bar. So maybe to your point, maybe we just add a couple extra safety standards under that surface to to make sure that we're addressing in proximity to other things besides a building. >> Yeah. And clarify that it's not just for development. It's for any surface lot.
>> The clarification would be some scenarios. What the legislation says is no a board action. It's not a variance to make sure those scenarios are covered or at least >> saying we can address this, we can't address it. Yes, Barry, you're right.
It's a surface parking lot. However, the statute specifically says gas stations, you must allow bang, bang, boom. So, to see what we can do on that >> and it has to be allowed everywhere. That's the legislation basically said, you know, you have to allow them in every location. >> Said it's it's a service to confirm. I
mean, I think the only thing you might want to confirm is that structure would include a uh gas pump, which I think it certainly would because I don't think you would want an EV charger, you know, >> or a propane tank, you know, something like a propane tank, something like that. Yeah.
>> Or maybe even a certain distance from where the tanks are fueled. >> That's true. I mean, yeah. >> Delivery comes in and they open up, you know, whatever. Something like that. Because that may not be a structure, >> right? That's what I'm saying. I think we just under that to his point under the surface need to narrow a make some
additions in safety precautions that are not what we were thinking as typically a structure. >> I like your combustibles because even with a parking garage or anything, if they have a a generator that's gas-fed or whatever, you don't want them buting it right up against that either,
>> right? It might boil down to some of these in the legal call or interpretation is we may have to exclude what's specifically said in the legislation in terms of the setbacks because we don't have the authority. That's something I'm just
throwing out. >> Make sure we're not doing anything that violates >> right. I'm throwing out that the question came up gas stations. It's right in the legislation that you must allow. And to back on Barry's point, it might be that we have to call that out saying except as otherwise noted in the
legislation to address that. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. ARB approval. We had one come through. Again, this is so that for everybody's transparency. We had one come through for five Michael Lane. It was a fence. You had that in here. Um any comments on that, Jason?
>> No, it's the exact reason we made that ordinance and >> absolutely >> complied with it and made it easier for him and it looks good. >> Yeah, >> it worked. >> It worked. >> Good job, guys. >> Right. But >> yourself under that, >> but the planning board has to take action on that, right? The ARB make a re
makes a recommendation to this board >> under this ordinance. Yes. Right. >> For Oh, for this one. Yeah. So, actually we do not action on that. >> So, I'll make a motion to approve um with the recommendation from the ARB. >> Second. >> Now, would this be everybody presents eligible to vote? >> Yes.
>> Yeah. >> Gotcha. >> Andrea Dair. >> Yes. >> Chris Addex, >> yes. >> Art Aens, >> yes. >> Larry Cleveland, >> I have to abstain. >> Jason Krosca, >> yes. >> Johnio, >> yes. Yes. Barry Van Horn, >> yes. >> Mayor Gallagher, >> yes. >> Council member Vroom, yes.
>> Chairperson Warner, >> yes. >> All right. Uh, chair, uh, comments, I have none. So, I am going to move on to opening up the meeting to the public for comments or questions. >> You're a board member. >> I just want to explain, >> in case you forgot, Larry. >> No, I didn't forget. I know exactly who
I am. I just want to explain. I've only abstained because I know these people. >> I know. Yeah. >> They're the nicest people in the whole wide world. So, we've prove that I can say that. >> Sir, if you just state your name and your address for the record, please. >> Sure. Uh, Councilman Andrew Ki, 26 East
Orchard Street. Um, couple things. Sidewalk cafes be great to see some solution that keeps pedestrians going through. So, whatever you guys can think of to get it along. were eager to hear it because we've had many complaints or a couple at least a couple complaints and spoken with some uh business owners that are real egregious on where they
put their um their their sidewalk cafe seating. So, um that's why the enforcement is stepping up as far as uh that goes. Um eager to hear about the master plan and all that and thank you all for putting in the time on it. One thing that I think is really important >> like
>> I know he's one thing on the improved surf uh coverage uh discussions that are going on. Just keep in mind that if the water can't pass through it then it's it's just going to contribute to flooding no matter what version of that you we have a conversation about it's always going
to come back with the comment that if water can't pass through it then it's going to contribute to flooding and make it worse for your neighbors. So let's uh let's be conscious on how we're developing any type of changes. I personally would like to see one package of changes all happening all at once because I think it'd be easier to think
about it and all uh all the parts put together rather than peace meal as it comes. But understanding that there's some motivation to have it uh parts of it go quicker. I look forward to seeing what you guys come up with. Uh, and on the electric vehicle thing, I was the one who made most of the comments and my
major concern was that we were kind of taking out the teeth of the uh, ordinance to some degree um, by not allowing it in certain parking decks. I understand concerns about being underneath residences or too close to businesses and buildings where things could burn. Uh, I understand the concern
of structural, which we talked about afterwards, um, damage from fires. Um, obviously we'd all love manufacturers to finally get to the point where these fires aren't actually a problem for everybody. Statistically speaking though, electric vehicle fires happen far less than internal combustion engine
fires. The problem is, as we know, you can't put them out. Um, so I would love to hear some more creative thoughts in how you guys come up with this as far as uh drilling down into the changes to the surface lot for the combustible fuels and making sure that's safe, but also
just making sure that when we do this for electric vehicles or other newer technologies, we're not uh making it prohibitive for the people in town who are going to be adopting them and having them at their homes. Um, but yeah, those are my comments and again, thank you all for being on the planning board. I appreciate your time.
Thank you. Anybody else from the public? All right. Hearing none, I want to close public and I am up for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed?