years in this pro into this process. 1985 the state legislature adopts the fair housing act which also created the council on affordable housing koa under the fair housing act and then there were
there is a series of rounds prior round 1987 to 1999. Round three was 1999 through June 30th 2025. The reason why round three was more than 10 years, it it also included the gap years. That's
when COA technically went off the rails and there is a number of uh lawsuits back and forth. And ultimately in 2015, the Supreme Court adopted a decision
that found COA was no longer operating, kicked everything to the superior courts for the third round. So that's why the third round is an extended round. And you can see that the third round ends June 30th, 2025 in a couple of weeks.
So, round four, the plan that we're adopting tonight is to cover the period from July 1st, 2025 through June 30th, 2035, a 10-year plan. All of this has been kicked off in the uh the amended fair housing act that was adopted by
Governor Murphy on March 20th, 2024. Then we go through a series of calculations that amended housing uh amended fair housing act adopted new variables and me methodology
to adopt and calculate each municipality's fourth round obligation. There are three variables. It's very well detailed in the plan itself. I'm not going to go through all of the variables this evening. Um, it's based on non-residential valuation factor,
income factor, and land capacity factor. And those are three variables that are calculated by the Department of Community Affairs to assign each mun municipality their fourth round obligation. Springfield Township, we're in housing region 2. We're together with
Essex County, Morris County, Union County, and Warren counties. That's very important because these obligations are not calculated by municipality or by county. Everything in the Mount Laurel world is calculated by regions.
The next slide, there's a series of timeline. It's a timeline slide that shows you the actions that the township committee has taken and the state has taken. This all kicked off when DCA first
the the law was passed March 20 March 20th 2024. Then the DCA issued their report for their calculation of what is Springfield Township's obligation for the fourth round. And that report came out October 18th, 2024. and we were
assigned an obligation uh prospective need obligation of 284. By the end of January, the township committee was required and they did adopt a resolution, but they did not support the 284. We did a detailed report that is also on the township's
website that calculated we did our own calculation as a municipality and found that the our fourth round obligation was 239 based on those three factors primarily due to the lack of developable
land. We went property by property as directed by the township committee to try and find a more accurate number than what the DCA had uh calculated for our township. And there's couple of multipliers that we
were able to look at which was the income factor and the developable land factor also known as a land capacity factor. When the township did their own analysis, our report showed that the obligation should have been 239. At
least that was our opinion. Township filed the declaratory judgment action in the superior court with those findings by the end of January. Then the New Jersey Builders Association filed an objection with the courts and
the program. The program was established to one of the components that replace COA. The program is a series of retired Mount Laurel judges who review all of these calculations and reports on on behalf of the court and then we are
placed into a settlement conference. Essentially the DCA and the state said our obligation was 284. Our report from the township committee stated or recommended that our fourth round obligation was 239.
We were placed into a settlement conference with uh with one of the Mount Laurel judges and a special adjudicator who's a planner assigned by the state to oversee and review both documents. And there is a settlement of 262.
After the mediation agreement, there is a court uh order that was adopted. And once that court order was adopted in April of 2025, that is our official number that both sides, the township
committee and the court and the DCA and the state of New Jersey have all agreed that 262 is Springfield Township's fourth round obligation, prospective need obligation. We quickly went into completing the housing element
fair share plan which was on file with the planning board on June 9th which is 10 days prior to tonight's hearing. The report was also posted on the town's website electronically. So if anybody from the public wants to see it is it is
posted on our town's website and it has been posted since June 9th. There's also been hard copies filed with the township clerk and the township planning board as well as the state office of planning advocacy and the union county planning board. So we covered our bases.
Everybody has a copy of the report and that was all done in advance of tonight's meeting on June 19th. This is very important because the the Fair Housing Act, the amended Fair Housing Act has very strict deadlines. Every municipality in New Jersey who has been
assigned a prospective and present need obligation for the for the fourth round must adopt their new housing element fair share plan by resolution by the planning board because it's a master plan document. So this is a planning
board document that has to be adopted by our planning board and endorsed by our township committee by resolution. We have 48 hours afterwards to submit the resolution signed and along with the plan down to the DCA through the program
on the portal. So it's a very tight time frame and that's why I asked for and I thank you for this special meeting tonight. By doing this action tonight and the committees act, Township of Committees action early next week, we will meet and we'll will meet the
deadline of June 30th, 2025. And for the record, we have satisfied every deadline that has been put in place. all of those deadlines. I'm not going to go through all of them, but there's pages of deadlines that this new law has set and
it's a very quick time frame starting last uh spring of 2024 through tonight's through tonight's meeting and the township has complied with every deadline there is. Um, so we're in very strong position and by doing so we
maintain our immunity and and in good standing with our affordable housing obligations. After tonight, after June, we've done our homework. We've done our work as a planning board and later as a township committee. Everything is filed. It is
all online DCA portal. Every municipality uploads all their information. Should anybody have an objection, challenge, question, or critique of the plan, there's a window of opportunity through July and August. Last day being
the last day of August. All objections, challenges have to be in writing and filed prior to September 1st, and then we'll go from there. As far as our prior round obligations, Springfield Township has a long history of compliance and addressing its
affordable housing obligations. As you can see on the next slide, our prior round obligation was 135. We satisfied that project. All of the outline, all of the credits satisfied at 135 uh obligation is
outlined in our report if anybody has interest on that. Also with the third round obligation, we satisfied our third third round RDP of 133. Um that was the third that is the third round that expires in a couple of weeks. So
Springfield Township has a long history of compliance and and with their affordable housing obligation and by adopting this fourth round plan, we continue that history of compliance. Before you go through the fourth round, I want to make
sure the board's aware, any members of the public that are watching and hear that this doesn't mean that these properties are going to get developed tomorrow. It could be year, year and a half. Our responsibility as a planning board and a township committee is adopt a plan that creates a realistic
opportunity to where these affordable housing units may be constructed in our municipality. That's our that's our responsibility. put the zoning density design standards ordinances in place. That's our job.
We're not building anything. We're not builders. We're not contractors. We don't have 100% affordable housing project in this plan. So, as a community, we're not building any of these projects. We're not required to build any of these projects. Our
responsibility is to create a adopt a housing plan that says this is where our affordable housing units are going to be or can be constructed. And that's our that's our responsibility and that's what this plan does. Should the planning
board adopt this plan, it's endorsed by the township committee and like I said, it's all due by the end of June. That sets off a series of steps where the township committee now gets to work in adopting a lot of the ordinances because this is just a master plan. This is a
housing plan that says this is where the units are going to go and at what density and so forth. After that's adopted, that's the planning document. this summer and moving forward from July 1, there's more
deadlines that now turn on the township committee to enact the ordinances. So, this planning board will then see the ordinances coming back to them for consistency review saying, you know, we're going to have to enact the legislation, the ordinances that allow
for the density that I'm going to walk through in a minute. Next slide. I'm not This is just a reminder. I'm not going to go property by property, but we addressed our third round RDP of 133 and that's outlined on
the next slide. All the projects, most of you are familiar with those. Uh the the Garden Homes project um uh Patriots uh way is already under construction. The Sachs property is is primarily completed. Some of the others are still
under construction. So, we're still building out technically, no I should say the builders and contractors are still building out the third round plan. As far as the fourth round plan, fourth round obligations,
as I said earlier, our obligation is 262. Our plan has to address the number of 262. That's the bottom line. That's our obligation. That's our 10-year obligation that our township committee has agreed to by uh uh settling the
case. So, what does that mean? We have a fourth round, the plan says we have a fourth round RDP, a realistic development potential of 11. And those are the two projects I'm going to go through. I know this board's familiar with them, but I'm go go through them very quickly in a
minute. So, we have two projects creating 11 units. We get bonus credits out of those uh two projects of six. So you could see our number is 262. We have two projects that the township committee and the planning board have
recently adopted plan a redevelopment plans on the former Scotty's property and the former Bank of America property. So that leaves us with a fourth round unmet need of 245. Very large number. That's what we really
have to tackle through this plan because we have 17 credits. How do we address the other 245? That's the question on the table. Our responsibility is to provide recommendations that would provide a realistic opportunity to
address those 245 uh units. That falls into the second category of unmet need. What does that mean? The 245 unit the remaining 245 are what's called unmet need. We do not
tonight have a property, a developer, a plan, a concept, somebody ready, willing, and able to build those units. Our responsibility then is to identify areas of the town that could absorb that
level of density. That's our job. Um, we also have to adopt ordinances, draft ordinance which are co which are part of this plan that the township committee will enact over the summer that will allow for that density to to
be constructed. The areas that we're talking about putting them in is one of the areas is the PUD zone, which I'm going to go through in a minute, which is a potential redevelopment project in the future.
If somebody were to come in to the township with a pro possible project that doesn't fit any of the zoning mechanisms I'm about to walk through, we have what's called a mandatory set aside ordinance that's
adopted townshipwide to count to capture any affordable housing units on any property that's not already located within the plan. The key part of that is up until through June 30th, our mandatory set aside ordinance has a 15%
set aside for all rental properties, 20% for for sale. We we are changing that as part of this plan so that it is now 20% regardless any project that comes into our town whether it's through
resoning a redevelopment plan a use variance in front of the zoning board or any other mechanism. This updated plan requires a 20% set aside regardless if it's a rental or for sale project.
One more option is we're looking at potentially extension of controls. What are those? We're I already went through a lot of the credits that we've talked about earlier in the prior rounds. A lot of those credits are
coming due now in the fourth round. They were approved and constructed in the prior rounds. They had generally 20 and 30-year deed restrictions on those on those existing affordable housing units that we already have in our town and they're going to expire in the fourth
round. So, what we're going to look to do is instead of constructing more new more units, new constructed new construction, we're going to try to extend as many of those as possible so that we can obtain
credit in the fourth round for units that were built in the prior rounds, but those controls are now expiring. It's not very simple and it does cost a lot of money. However, the township has what's called an affordable housing trust fund, and we're allowed to dip in
and use those funds to extend units and extend controls so that we do not have to build new units in the town and we get full credit for them. I put to be determined because quite honestly, we put the the plan together
so quickly, I didn't want to guess or throw a range in there because I wasn't sure. It's we it's back and forth with the every deed is written differently and the ones that were written 30 years ago. It it's really deed by deed, project by project that we're going to
look at and see which ones that the township committee has has the authority to extend. It's not a simple process because part of that process is if you can imagine an affordable housing unit that was
built 30 years ago. Sometimes, I'm not saying all times, but sometimes those units are not maintained as well as a market rate unit. And you are not allowed to extend a unit without having that unit being brought up to up to all
building codes and all ADA standards among many other regulations. Also have to negotiate the extension. building maintain. If the township wants to extend it, we can use our affordable housing trust
fund money, not township funds, but the affordable housing trust fund money to extend it and upgrade it or improve it, clean it up, builders, bring it up to code. Even though the builders are the ones who aren't maintaining their own
properties, I don't make the rules, but I I'm not blaming you, Mr. But it's all a negotiation with the developer because they're they don't want to extend the controls. They want them to go to market, right? We want to extend the
controls. So, we have to look at the deeds, what the language of the deeds, the condition of the unit, how much would it cost, and we have that's why it's to be determined because I don't want to guess tonight or I don't want to
guess in my plan it's going to be X and it turns out to be Y. And and then just for my own knowledge, is is that the only pot of money we could use to to do that is that housing trust or could the township uh
Township committee allocate additional resources. Township can always allocate additional monies. We always recommend obviously the we want to use it. That's one of the reasons why you can use the trust fund for an extension of controls and we we recommend that you we want to
exhaust those opportunities first before we go go elsewhere. new. Yes. My suggestion committee would be if Garden Homes, let's say, has some properties which he's going to talk to right now. They're going to do potentially a property
that's X buildings Gardens Homes owns that are already affordable housing. They actually own quite a few in the town. They have an awful lot of market rate. They have they have an awful lot of affordable units in the prior round and
in the third round and they are proposing developments in the fourth round. So there's opportunities there and should the township committee want to and I don't want to get ahead of myself but opportunities through redevelopment you're you can expand that
conversation and try existing. The bottom line is we're trying to capture as many of the units that we can and extend them. I just don't have the specific unit countd down data. I totally appreciate you going into this. My original point still stands that the
builders who choose to not maintain their properties or bring their buildings into compliance continue to get bailed out and make an exorbitant price off of us the taxpayers. That's my point. I agree.
So, we would have to have I mean, when we go down that road, we have to have our building inspectors inspect the units, see the conditions of them, and it would all have to be brought up to code should we go down that road.
Now, I'm just going to the next slide is I talked about the RDP of 11. How did we calculate that? We have two redevelopment projects that the township committee recently adopted ordinances adopting the two
redevelopment plans. One is 597 Morris Avenue. That redevelopment, we captured six affordable inclusionary units. In that project, this is also known as the Scotty's uh pub, which has
now gone through redevelopment. So, we're capturing six inclusionary units and those are age restricted units on that site. Next slide is a rendering of the building and this redevelopment plan has just
recently been adopted and now it's heading towards our planning board for a site plan application. So, in this project we will have capture six units that go towards our fourth round. Next slide is 175 Morris Avenue
redevelopment plan. This is the vacant Bank of America building. Another redevelopment project where we are capturing five affordable units mixed within the 30 total units on the site.
Township committee adopted the ordinance approving the redevelopment plan. Came to the planning board for consistency. Went back to township committee. So this project has been fully approved. The next step is they're going to come forward to our planning board for site plan approval. So we get another five
units to towards the fourth round. Next slide is a couple of renderings. I I I'm just so show showing two of the many that were submitted as part of the redevelopment plan just to remind everybody what the architectural elevations look like of the building. So
those are the two that we recently adopted through redevelopment to capture a total of 11 units. We get six bonus credits. So we just picked up 17 credits towards our fourth round. The question to ask yourself as a board
is we go to the next slide. Affordable housing AHO-1 zone. Affordable housing overlay one zone. Remember our obligation is 262. I showed you two projects that are
creating a total of 17 credits as a township. How do we address the other 245? That's the hard part. And what we did through all the committees and all the meetings is you could see on this slide
there's three areas highlighted in yellow A, B, and C. It's in those areas are overlay ordinances that are in our land use and zoning ordinances today. It's called an affordable housing overlay a-1
zone. There's the acreage is on the left hand side. Collectively those three areas are 115.41 acres in the third round. Today in our ordinance, as part of a third round
unmet need compliance mechanisms, the township committee adopted an ordinance that established an overlay if anybody wanted to if a developer wanted to build in those areas at 16 units an acre and there was a set aside 15% for rentals,
20% for for sales. What's the difference and what do we how do we what's the number one mechanism the plan in includes to address this number of 245? Well, as a group we decided we didn't we we don't want to continue and this is
very important. We didn't want to spread the density higher densities into our quiet suburban single family residential neighborhoods. We don't want to disrupt disrupt the character of Springfield. At the same time, we have a very significant number
we have to address. So, we decided to increase stay within the areas that are already on our zone plan today and increase the density and we get the credits for the increase density within
those areas. Also, we are required under the fourth round law, the amended fair housing act two, there's a look back provision. It requires the township to look back to its third round plan and provide a statement and ask yourself,
well, how did we do? We you put this zoning mechanism in the third round at 16 units an acre. How many units did you collect with that overlay ordinance? And the answer is zero. And then we're supposed to respond to that. So, we're
actually by increasing the density in existing areas only, we're doing it's a two-prong attack. We're we are including we are collecting the net increase of density that we are increasing in that
area and we're addressing the compliance mechanism of the look back provision into the third round. We're identifying that we did not produce any units in that in that zoning mechanism and we are adjusting it. At the same time, we're
also and it's in bold on the slide, we're increasing the set aside from 15 to 20%. So, in my opinion, there's a threeprong improvement that we are taking within these areas and we're satisfying three
very critical components of our plan all at one time within the same areas that were already established by prior township committees for overlay zones, if that makes sense. So, we're essentially keeping the density, the
inclusionary housing in areas A, B, and C. Sure. Um, very quickly now, I'll try and speed it up because that's really the the the main point of the presentation. I have three slides. Area I just said area A,
B, and C. Area A within those areas, the fourth round law also requires you to identify properties that are quote unquote likely to redevelop. And that's exactly what we're doing here on slide three. These are the
office buildings behind the Wawa on Morris Avenue, 673 and 675 through 679 Morris Avenue. Again, these are buildings that are already within the affordable housing overlay one zone
today. So, it's nothing new. And we've identified these as potential properties likely to redevelop. A developer has reached out to on these properties and if they were redeveloped at the new density of 25 units an acre, it would
create 54 total units and there would be 11 units set aside. Uh we haven't gone that far. We haven't figured that out yet. Township committee and the planning board jointly figuring it out. We just have to stay within. We have one age
restricted project already. The Scotty's project is age restricted. Out of our total fourth round obligation, we are capped at 30% of our units can be age restricted. So we have a little bit of room, but we have a we have other
requirements. 50% family requirement also. There's a lot of nuances in the fourth round law that are that are really pushing the family rental for a compliance mechanism.
Area B on the slide is uh on Route 22. Again, it's already part of our overlay area. This is the Christmas tree shops and and the Macy's furniture gallery area. There's a 7.14 acre within the AH1
zone already as areas that could fall within likely to redevelop. Wait, that that entire area is 7.1, right? Yes, that entire yellow, not just the that Christmas tree shop, correct?
Longhorn. Longhorn. Yes, it's already in there. Yes, that was And then slide number three, the next slide. I'm sorry. Can you just Alex's question was this showing area B B. All of B is 7.14
acres. No. No. All of B site. Yeah. If you go back to Wait, the Christmas tree shop with Longhorn is 7.3 acres together. Those two. That's That's just seven acres together. So, you're we're we're
talking about 173 potential units on the Christmas tree lot and the Longhorn steakhouse. I'm I'm not saying anything. I'm just trying to clarify. No, no, no, no, no. That's not That's in that whole That's in that whole B section, not on just
those. So, it's not just the highlighted red. Uh uh uh right. area that's the entire yellow area 7.1. So there is no way it possible that one developer would
be able to link would be able to build the plan the it should have been more clear to to show that the the properties that are identified in the heading on top. Okay. 841 South Springfield Avenue
and 350 Route 22 westbound block 3701 lots 12 and 4 are collectively 7.14 acres. However, you're right. Yeah. However, section B, which is part B of
this area, if it were to be fully redeveloped, it would be 173 units and we would collect 35 units. Maybe update that when you go to the comm all of B 35 affordable and the builders get 173
units and that's it. That's drives home my point before. And that's all of the section D. All of the yellow. No, no. The 173 units is just that red. No, no, no, no, no, no. That's that's
there's Go ahead. You you explain it. I I know. Go ahead. We we're we have a sub area which is it says sub area of AHO-1 that we're talk we're highlighting the sub area which is the 7.14 acre
properties. Those are those properties that I listed up on top. The B section is all of the yellow. All of the yellow, not just the ones that are highlighted in red. If they were to be fully redeveloped under their amended
ordinance that we're going to adopt, we would collect 173 units and 35, which is 20% would be affordable in that entire B corridor. The next slide is C, subsection C.
Again, all of the yellow is already in our ordinance today, but we just want to highlight it and bring your attention to it for two reasons. One, this is the third area where we are increasing the density because we have to find more
area to address that large unmet need number. So, we're staying within areas A, B, and C, increasing the density, and we're also trying to highlight that you could see the other redevelopment projects that are going on in that area.
The Bank of America highlighted in the green, uh the Church Mall, Black uh Black Lane property, the Gomes property, all falling. And we're trying to keep the density within those yellow areas that are on these slides. Those are the
areas back in 2016. The township committee has designated where the new density should be located and we're building upon that rather than spreading it out into other areas of the township. Last two slides are
Park Place and there's two slides. The first one says Park Place third round unmet need sites. And on a slide much earlier in the presentation, it says TBD to be
determined. What does that mean? The developer has already included, well, I should say the township committee has already included these two properties that are highlighted in yellow in our third round unmet need sites. So, these
properties are already in the third round. Nothing happened. They were not redeveloped. Nothing additional was constructed as part of this the Parkplace PUB site, but the developer has reached out and in order we had to
find more areas to address our unmet need. And then rather and instead of placing them for example on Mountain Avenue or other parts of the township, we agreed if you flip the page to add
one more property in the Parkplace PUD for our fourth round. That property is 955 South Springfield Avenue. It's an existing office building. The
two that are highlighted in yellow were already in the plan. We're not adding those. That's part of our third round. And they have asked that that one office building and the property surrounding that, that parking lot to be included as part of a fourth round unmet need
mechanism. Remember, we have that 245 number. We're trying to find a way out and address it. And at the bottom it says proposed units to be determined. There has been no development proposal. There's no sketch. There's no plan. I'm
I'm hearing that it's in the works. town. It'll go directly to township committee and we'll take a look at it. And that's one of those opportunities where we have also to work out a redevelopment option and extend some
controls on some of the units elsewhere in the town. But this is very early on in the planning process. I don't have a density. I don't have any type of development or anything more to share with you tonight other than lot block
street address is going to be included in the plan and those are the mechanisms that we address our un fourth round unmet need. Keeping in mind our prior round our third round unmet
need. None of the prior round numbers that are explained in all these slides they don't go away. they carry forward. So why is this plant so thick and complicated? You got to go all the way back and address third round. And that's
why we also included these properties because we're supposed to if nothing did occur on the properties. We're supposed to address it by either increasing density or by expanding the the areas.
And we've chose not to expand the areas but just increase the density in areas where the township committee already agreed to in 2016. That's my presentation. Great job. Really, really great job. I apologize for that one slide. It's not it's very
it's confusing about the sub area, the red area, the yellow area. It should have been more clear. Perfect. You'll fix it. Maybe when you fix it, you can give it back to Jen so we can update it on the township's website so they can see it. So, thanks again. I know that you worked very hard on this uh for a year with us.
I know Alex was on the subcommittee was on the subcommittee, two people from the zoning board, Jody Cohen and Michael Wex. So, we had a lot of people review this. So, it's been uh cross a lot of folks eyes on this. So, at this point, um I'm going to open it up to the board. Uh Mr. Want to go first with any
questions or concerns? My only question that I would have and I'll throw it out there is I want to make some sort of emphasis senior housing first. If our number if we can put like we said 30% that's 60 units that should be our target first or even half senior half
whatever it might be to give us to give our schools some sortability won't solve the problem with police fire and EMS which which discussed but at least it'll help put the burden on the school. Mr. I mean, a lot of concerns. Look at the
microphone. Um, I I realize this is a homework assignment with like a lot of impossible things to try to solve and that this is, you know, given all the square pegs and round holes, like this could be the best
we could do. But, um, just a I have a couple clarifying questions that I'd like to have you try to address. Okay. Sure. So just the examples that you showed with respect to trying to get to the 245
number of unmet the plan for area B where there's a proposal of 173 units with 35 affordable. Where's that proposal coming from? That's just the increase in the density
from what is there today to what the the new density is. Uh the existing density was 16 units an acre today in the third round. Okay. What we're going to do is we're increasing the density to 25 units an acre. We get the we get the net
increase and then take 20% because the 20% is what counts for affordable housing. Okay. So having said that, how come in the I guess the call it the Parkplace additional building, how come we can't
come up with a number of a number to cap at in order to back from 245 and net out the 173, net out the others? Why why is that number not to be to be determined? Is it because we
haven't seen a plan? We haven't I I have I would be guessing we we have been we have been provided no information on the constraints on the layout on the density on the height. The if the project moves
forward at least the initial proposal would be through a redevelopment plan. That redevelopment plan would be customized for that additional property that would be added. And since I Again, I don't like guessing or even providing
ranges because without having any information, the density that we have in the AH1 zone may be too high. We may want a lower density in that area. And if I be able to park it is what they
Okay. But then will that let's just say that's the first development proposal that we hear for address or that hasn't already been approached. Once a number is determined as to what the number of affordable
units are does that now reduce the number overall for the other expanded redevelopment? Unfortunately no. Thank you. and an and the reason why is if buried in this report we have to talk about the prior round unmet need which
still hasn't been satisfied and those other two properties that are highlighted in yellow on the park place site there's a there was a very significant number that was incorporated in the third round plan
there was a proposal our third round plan says that Those two rectangles, those two other properties on the Park Place site will produce 130 units and 26
affordable housing credits in our third round. And that never took place. So, there's a little bit of making up, if you will. I don't know if we can get those. I don't think I don't know if we could I could say here tonight that I we
could address the third round obligation on this site, let alone the fourth round. So, by including that one extra site, we could potentially have a lower density and spread it out amongst the three properties, but I can't make any
promises. Okay. Well, that I just feel like this is presented as a plan that that the fourth round obligation is the cap and that's not going to be the case. We could go far above that number
through the township can can end up going far above that number. They could. I think it would be very difficult to do that though because under the unmet need the numbers that I have in this plan would
would be they're projected imagine it this way. Every single property in all of those sub areas fully developed at the maximum density. And if and the likelihood of that happening in the last 10 years, we haven't had one
property develop in any of those three sub areas at the density that was approved in 2016. So again, we do the planning, we put the zoning in place. If it's approved, that's our responsibility as a
municipality. We don't build anything. But yeah, I just want to make sure the town has the proper protections and controls in place as things come forward for redevelopment to not overdevelop beyond what the obligation is.
Um, wow, we talked for a while and I forgot my second question. Sorry. Can I reserve the right to to bookmark myself and come back? I have I'll probably reserve most of my comments for Tuesday night just as I sit
on the council and I don't have any comment any necessarily more questions this evening but do want to thank you for all the work I do worked very hard Jen and the administration put together
this project. I'm a firm believer in affordable housing. We need to do more to meet the demand from the people. Uh I think this plan helps balance that. But there is still a
lot of money to be made by a certain group of individuals taking advantage of the system by not providing enough affordable housing units and and and disguising it in in luxury apartments and making a lot of money off of everybody. And it's just not fair. I
think we have to do more in affordable housing. I would love to see those numbers, but that is criminal to say that they can't make money off of 173 units and only for 550 is insane to me or 35, whatever it was in the notes. But
thank you to everybody and I'll I'll reserve most my comments for Tuesday night and be more articulate. Then for other side of the board, the the only thing I wanted to bring up is and I think we've addressed this is if you find property X somewhere else in town
and it gets developed like gas station now through healer and everything that will also reduce the numbers. Yes. And we could again this is this plan is not etched in stone. We can amend it if other development happens in an area
that is not within those three areas or and or the the Parkplace PUB then we can address our number through some unforeseen num development and we could end up coming back and amending the plan to remove other properties. So we're
allowed to do that. And for the record, I should have mentioned this, but I didn't I I we this plan does remove properties that were in our third round. And I should have mentioned that as part of my uh presentation before. And the only other thing is I again want
to reiterate the, you know, we're able to do 60 senior homes plus or minus. That should be our first start of the development that comes in as much as we can to reduce the burden on the schools. I know again it doesn't help police, fire, and EMS who are very
overburdened to begin with, but unfortunately one of the one of the new regulations under the amended act that we're under right now and all municipalities are struggling with this is there's a requirement that 50% of your number has to be addressed through
family rental units. So, whenever we can maximize it, we should maximize. It is designed for children. It's designed for families and 50% of our obligation must address that that requirement. Every one of my municipalities loves the 30% age
restricted. That's really the easy part. So, it's the 50% for families, 30% for age restricted, and the remaining is usually bonus credits of some sort. Maybe the the reason I bring up age restrictions is the Park Place because that will help
maybe some dynamics with that board having development again. My recommendation question. Yes. Are we required to have like recreational facilities on these sites?
You would we would negotiate that with the developers site by site, project by project, especially if you go through a redevelopment process. develop a redevelopment plan and we always push for both indoor amenity space and outdoor wreck area as much as we
possibly can. That's why a lot of these say to be determined because we would want to negotiate a reasonable concept that we could all live with that benefits the the new residents, the families, the children that are going to be brought to these developments. And we
don't have layouts yet. We don't have densities yet. So, we're going to take a one at a time, but to answer your question, through the redevelopment process, yes, you can address can, but is it required by the law? It is not required by the law. However, the law,
the new law does in uh encourage the use of redevelopment because you get more bonus credits if you use the redevelopment, local redevelopment and housing law. So they're push you they're pushing municipalities or encouraging I should say incentivizing by giving bonus
credits should the township committee choose redevelopment. If you go down the path of redevelopment you can get very creative and develop plans that really get into the architectural style use of building materials setbacks landscaping
large amenity space interior and outdoor wreck space and so forth. Then you can customize that redevelopment plan for that community property by property just like we did with the Bank of America building and the Scotty's property. You
recall American One other question. Sure. There is a proposal for one of these designated areas. Are we can we refuse that or is that required to accept? Well, should this plan be
adopted, it says this is the location at this density where we're going to create this opportunity over the summer and the summer months and fall months. Ordinances will be drafted. There already draft ordinances required to be
part and they are part of this plan, but the ordinances will be perfected and they will be introduced by the township committee. And once that ordinance is adopted and it's on our books as part of our zoning code, if somebody comes in
with a compliant plan, that plan's going to end up being approved. So, will they be allowed to ask for variances or waiverss? You know, that's all part of the site plan process. They wouldn't be you wouldn't be able to reject it. I would you would have to have a really
strong reason and I would if it complied with the zoning code that we're about to adopt. No, you're not going to you're right. Yeah. I mean where we'll be able to control the look, the feel, things like that. If it's you like to deal with, you know,
company developer XYZ, you don't want to deal with that. If they come up with a proposal, you have to take it. Yes. if it's if it's compliant with the zoning ordinance that will be adopted. Now, if they ask for variances, you take them one at a time and you evaluate them. I
also want to commend you. I think you made it a very possible complicated issue and I think you explained it really well. Made it very outside of a couple of slides. I apologize. Yes. Thank you. Now, that don't don't There's no such thing as true perfection. Anyway, was just trying to hammer my
point ahead. Don't don't I I just want to confusing my last word of the evening. This is this plan is not etched in stone. It is designed to not be adopted and forgotten about for 10 years and put on a shelf. We're going to it's going to be it's properties are going to
be added. Properties are going to be taken out and they're going to be modified as we move forward. And and just to drive that home that that's happened in the third round, right? We we originally thought there was going to be projects developed in certain parts. We didn't anticipate other projects being developed and it all worked out in
that 10-year period. 10 years, hey, it goes quickly, but it is a long time as this the two and a lot of things change. So, it's a living document. Well, thank you. Really has no questions. David Barnett, want to say Mike, thank you so much. I
know this was a huge job and you did a tremendous job. So I appreciate all the work that you would put into this. Thank you. Basically at the end of the day, you think we can get to the number the 245 in the yellow zones abs? That's my I
can defend this plan. I think it's a sound plan. I think it's a good plan for our township and for our existing residents and it does provide uh opportunities to address our obligation. So I think it does both and I think it's a good plan for our town.
appreciate all the work that Thank you. Great. Okay. The board has no questions. I'm going to take this time. Oh, no. She said no. Um, do you have a follow? I I did. Okay. Go ahead. So, more of a hypothetical
situation just so I can fully digest some of the things that could happen. So let's for instance pick a existing apartment complex that is not in one of the zones. Okay.
Okay. And it has I'm going to just make it up 40 units today and it has zero affordable units. Could that property owner essentially at the end, you know, not renew the leases of the tenants they have and then come forward with a plan
to build, you know, 80 units, 20 of which are affordable and it's outside the current zoning. Is that a possibility that that would then if if adop a um ordinance was adopted to
include that property, would that then 20 number be able to take down the obligation of 245? Yes. Okay. And that could happen one of three ways. They could either approach the township and the township can reszone the property to allow it. the developer could approach
the township and request to go through the redevelopment process and a redevelopment plan is prepared and customized for what you just described or three that developer can approach our zoning board and submit a use variance application or a density variance
application and go through the zoning board process. So there's at least three different ways that could happen. And again, it's we we do have this mandatory set aside ordinance, which to me it's very important. One, we up we increase
the set aside. So no more 15% set aides. Everything is 20%. And that mandatory set aside ordinance is designed to capture exactly what you just described. If a project comes in, any project that creates more than five units anywhere in
our town that's not within one of these areas I just described tonight, we're protected and we get our 20%. Okay, that that satisfies my concern. Thank you. Okay, no other members of the board have
any questions? Any members of the public that wish to speak on this? [Music] I just did your name and address and uh Apoo 220 Shump Pike Road. Thank you very much. Um I'll keep it very brief. I know
you already know my concerns and you talked about them earlier about the effect that uh age restricted housing has on public safety. Um but it also has effects on for example our recreation department and the senior citizens programming that they provide. So, I just encourage the board to keep that in
mind for all the future conversations you're having. I know that's not going to change anything tonight. I'm not asking for that. Um, one question for Mr. Mella, and this may uh address some of Committeeman Kaiser's concerns, possibly. I don't know. Can any of that affordable housing trust fund money be
used for something that's not specifically for that project? So to hire an additional police officer to do I I don't know other the other things the that are created as the impact of creating this higher density. The
affordable housing trust fund dollars can only be used for very specific affordable um items to move forward with affordable housing either rehab or new construction. Okay. It can that money
cannot be used for secondary impacts caused by the developments that I discussed tonight. In other words, that money can't be used and placed into the township committee's general fund or budget to offset the cost of teachers or
employees or police officers or firemen or anything like that. It can there are provisions where it can be used to increase or improve infrastructure that is necessary to support one of the
projects I talked about. So infrastructure, pipes and so forth, utilities, it could be used if it's demonstrated that that development, this affordable housing development or inclusionary development needs to
upgrade a storm source system because of the development. We are there are provisions we can use a small percentage of that money for that improvement, but it's a very narrow lane I just described. So, we can't use it for police, fire, or
anything like that? No. Couldn't use it for staffing. Could you use it for expanding the police department's physical footprint? No. Okay. I wasn't sure the definition of infrastructure. No. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, the board. Thank you. And thank you for your tremendous work with EMS. I know that
you spend a lot of time and dedicate a lot of time of your personal time to this. Thank you. Any other members of the public wish to speak? Seeing none, I'm going to remand it back to the board for consideration. So, basically, there's a resolution that was out there on the Google Drive that
we would adopt our fourth round housing plan element, send it to the township committee for them to endorse. So, if everyone's had a chance to review the uh resolution, um what we want to do is have a roll call a motion to adopt
the resolution as as so here uh with sending over to the township committee to so that way they can endorse it and adopt the I have a motion. Second. Second. Can I have a roll call,
please? Mr. Mayo? Yes. Min Kaiser. Yes. Mr. Barnett. Yes. Mr. Walker. Yes. Mr. Cedarquist. Yes. Mr. Wishna. Yes. Tiger. Yes.
Perfect. So, I want again, you heard the board, so I don't have to thank you because they already did. So, great job. Um, so our next for the any any members of the public wish to speak on any all business before this board? Seeing none, I'm going to close the matter to the public and just make one announcement
that our next planning board meeting will be on July 14th at 6:30 p.m. via Zoom. If anyone's interested in attending, they can look at the township's website for the agenda and the link to watch via Zoom. Anyone else with anything before we adjourn? Scott's going to make a motion
to adjurnn. Motion. All in favor? I. All right. See after we should have made an announcement that everyone attended before I already made that announcement before you got here.