[0:13] button

[0:22] extend agenda meeting

[0:27] soon announcement July 22nd, 2026.

[0:30] Transmitting into this packet on July

[0:33] 22nd, 2026 and filed on the township

[0:37] clerk on July 26, 200.

[0:40] » Mr. Patel,

[0:43] » Mr. Shtel,

[0:44] » Here.

[0:45] » Mr. Panco,

[0:46] » Yes.

[0:47] » Mr. Bake,

[0:48] » Yes.

[0:49] » Miss Bar,

[0:50] » Yes.

[0:51] » Miss Applegat,

[0:52] » Yes.

[0:53] » Councilwoman Jvers,

[0:54] » Here.

[0:55] » Vice Chairman Hoververman

[0:57] » Here. Mayor Marte

[1:01] and Chairman

[1:01] » Carpende

[1:19] line up everybody. [laughter]

[1:26] Um okay so comments

[1:32] uh first up on the agenda meeting

[1:34] finished May 20th

[1:38] comments changes

[1:51] question

[1:55] Um

[1:57] this

[2:09] president

[2:20] here

[2:23] I exchange

[2:25] Yeah, the meeting where we took the vote

[2:27] on you were here, but you couldn't.

[2:30] » So, you're saying you weren't here on

[2:36] you we

[2:42] » So you hear on May 20th when we did the

[2:44] vote, we asked you, okay, vote on on the

[2:47] uh on the resolution. You could not vote

[2:51] on the resolution because you were not

[2:54] listen to the application.

[2:56] That's why it's abstained.

[2:59] the people that are asking they will not

[3:01] hear that vote.

[3:08] Okay, good. Thank you. Um, okay.

[3:17] Second second by Sue

[3:22] are eligible to vote.

[3:33] Mr.

[3:35] » Yes.

[3:36] » Mr.

[3:37] » Yes.

[3:50] » Yes.

[3:53] » Yes.

[3:54] » Yes. Thank you. I'm happy you waited on

[3:56] the master plan.

[3:59] » Okay. Next up is um

[4:03] resolution

[4:05] 6-03

[4:06] Princeton Extend Development LLC signed

[4:08] bearings with Princeton down the road.

[4:12] Jerry just want a very brief summary.

[4:14] » Yeah, this was in there was a lot of

[4:17] discussion about whether it was

[4:19] sufficient, the size of it. Um they came

[4:21] back a second time. I guess they I think

[4:24] maybe never the PRC revises the uh the

[4:27] application and make the sign smaller.

[4:30] There are a number of variances of

[4:32] stillness they're on page two of the

[4:35] resolution that's um the min quantity um

[4:42] only one mined

[4:44] but

[4:46] and it has to be this is 50 ft back.

[4:49] This is 43 ft. So one thing to be done

[4:52] is the area sign and land sign and the P

[4:56] granted

[4:58] the application with those references.

[5:01] » Right. This is a resolution where we

[5:03] kind of help them shape the sides,

[5:07] » You know, and they took our opinions

[5:10] seriously. Okay.

[5:13] » Yeah. Was is there a conclusion to this

[5:15] one?

[5:16] » No. Um, so I the I think what happened

[5:18] was the general parameters were

[5:20] established, right? And they're supposed

[5:22] to for resolution compliance submit

[5:24] something to be reviewed. They haven't

[5:26] submitted anything.

[5:28] » They haven't submitted.

[5:29] » No, no, nothing submit yet for any of

[5:31] the resolutions. There's been no revised

[5:33] plans yet.

[5:33] » Okay. So motion to

[5:36] » Again. Sorry. Um over this month I was

[5:42] present on June 7th but I abstained

[5:45] because when it was initially discussed

[5:47] I believe it was in May at some point or

[5:50] April or whenever

[5:52] » Yeah was it was a May meeting I think

[5:54] and I I cheered it

[5:55] » Prior but they came back for the board

[5:57] simply for this uh sign.

[6:00] » So this was June 17th voted on.

[6:03] » Yes.

[6:04] » So I abstained but I was absent. So then

[6:07] she

[6:09] » On page nine, right?

[6:10] » Yeah, page nine.

[6:11] » Okay. So on page nine, Jordica said it

[6:15] says absent. She was here for one of the

[6:18] meetings.

[6:18] » Uh for June 17th because they said

[6:20] related to the voting on June 17th,

[6:23] right?

[6:23] » And you were absent that day.

[6:24] » No, I was you were here that day.

[6:26] » But you were absent for the first

[6:28] meeting.

[6:30] » You could

[6:31] date.

[6:32] » Okay. So

[6:33] » So this is it should be abstain.

[6:35] Absolutely.

[6:39] » But this one says absolute

[6:41] » Change.

[6:43] » But who's on first?

[6:47] » Change to abstain. No big deal. Just so

[6:50] you know, you can always abstain.

[6:52] Regardless of whether you're here and

[6:53] you don't want to vote, you can always

[6:54] abstain. You don't have to vote.

[6:58] » You can always abstain. Right. Isn't

[7:00] that right, Jerry?

[7:01] » Yeah.

[7:01] » Okay.

[7:01] » Yeah. There's no reason.

[7:03] » There's some people I've been here for

[7:05] 18 years. Some people like to not have

[7:07] their vote known. I know this is very um

[7:10] innocuous. This resolution, but there's

[7:13] some people that the application very

[7:16] contentious and they don't want their

[7:19] name associated with a vote, so they

[7:22] abstain. So, you're not required to say

[7:25] yes or no. You say abstain. I don't want

[7:28] to vote.

[7:31] I agree it doesn't make much sense on a

[7:32] resolution, but if the application was

[7:34] like you were dead set against the size

[7:37] of this sign on no way I'm voting yes on

[7:39] this sign, you know, but I don't want to

[7:41] piss off the people that wanted the

[7:44] sign. So, I'm not going to vote no. I'm

[7:45] just not going to vote. So, you can

[7:47] always abstain,

[7:48] » But this is that's not the reason.

[7:50] » I know there's a real reason why you

[7:52] want to see if you weren't at the first

[7:54] meeting and that's not a problem. It's

[7:55] going to get changed. But I just want to

[7:57] make sure that everybody knows that you

[7:59] can always abstain. You don't you're not

[8:01] required to vote.

[8:04] » Okay. [clears throat]

[8:04] » So So I just want an understanding on

[8:05] this. Uh so uh if the board member was

[8:10] not at the first meeting and did not

[8:13] hear the record of the first meeting

[8:15] prior to the second meeting where the

[8:18] board member was present, the board

[8:20] member still cannot vote. Is that

[8:22] correct?

[8:23] » That's correct.

[8:24] » Okay. Let me let me let me let me play

[8:26] this scenario out one further. Let's say

[8:29] let's say the applicant wants to put

[8:31] warehouses on a major site that goes for

[8:33] five or six meetings. The app the the

[8:37] board member can only vote if if they

[8:40] were absent for one of the five or six

[8:42] meetings that they uh listen to the

[8:46] record. So

[8:48] it comes down to a multiple meeting

[8:51] event. the the the one can only vote if

[8:55] one's heard previous record if not

[8:57] present.

[8:58] » Yes. Correct.

[8:59] » And then certify that.

[9:00] » I just want to make sure I understand

[9:01] this.

[9:02] » Right. Right. And that Jerry

[9:04] done that.

[9:05] » Right.

[9:05] » Okay. The motion.

[9:07] » Right.

[9:08] » Right. Right. The motion is still on the

[9:10] floor.

[9:10] » I I will I will move that motion if you

[9:13] didn't hear it.

[9:15] » Um

[9:16] » So is

[9:17] » 2603.

[9:19] » Okay. So ED2603 I have the motion to

[9:22] approve the uh the resolution by Simon.

[9:24] Anybody second?

[9:25] » Second.

[9:26] » Second by Alan. Uh please the role

[9:29] eligible with the vote.

[9:32] » Mr. Shtel.

[9:33] » Yes.

[9:34] » Mr. Pancco.

[9:35] » Yes.

[9:37] » Councilwoman Jvers.

[9:39] » Yes.

[9:40] » Mr. B.

[9:45] » Miss Bar. at stadium.

[9:47] » Okay.

[9:48] » Miss Applegat,

[9:50] » Yes.

[9:51] » Vice Chairman Hobberman,

[9:53] » Yes.

[9:54] » And Chairman Cart,

[9:55] » Yes. Thank you.

[10:01] » Okay. Next up on the agenda is

[10:03] resolution PB26-04

[10:06] BLG Westwind LLC amended final

[10:09] subdivision with variances one middle

[10:12] road block 911.

[10:16] just very brief. Um,

[10:17] » Yes, that's a COGO chair resolution. Um,

[10:22] and that was actually approved some time

[10:24] ago. Um, took a little while getting all

[10:26] the input we wanted to get. Um, and it

[10:29] just provided that it was primed. uh the

[10:32] only

[10:34] changes that are necessary was they said

[10:36] this was a city if they were proposing a

[10:39] subdivision for tax purposes and because

[10:43] of the supervision line it necessitate a

[10:46] couple of variances so there really

[10:48] wasn't much to it at all

[10:51] » Right okay I'll entertain a motion to

[10:54] approve that well if I have changes or

[10:57] amendments or clarifications

[11:00] » So okay of motion to approve resolution

[11:03] PB264 by Jordan. May do I hear a second?

[11:07] Second by honest please call the role

[11:10] eligible to vote.

[11:15] » I'm not eligible. I was absent

[11:20] » You.

[11:23] » Yes.

[11:27] » Yes.

[11:28] » Mr. D.

[11:29] » Yes.

[11:29] » M. Yes.

[11:33] » Yes.

[11:35] » Yes.

[11:36] » Yes. Thank you.

[11:38] PB 26.

[11:41] Um, [clears throat] thank you.

[11:44] » Next up is PB26-05

[11:46] Woodstone Residential LX LLC Major Site

[11:50] Plan 2000 Far Road 86 58.02.

[11:56] Jerry, please very brief um description.

[12:01] [clears throat]

[12:04] » Yeah. Um application. This is part of

[12:07] the affordable housing program in the

[12:08] town. This was a um 80 um I think it was

[12:12] 80 units uh with a 25% set aside, I

[12:16] think. Uh was it 80 units?

[12:18] » No, the 35 units, I believe.

[12:19] » Oh, 35 with a 25% set aside.

[12:22] » Uh nine affordable units. Um it was what

[12:27] they they had originally had approved

[12:29] there was a commercial site.

[12:30] » Yeah. So the the original application a

[12:33] subly portion is a child care center

[12:36] child day school that's still under

[12:38] construction. The northerly portion was

[12:40] to be medical office. They subsequently

[12:42] then asked to be part of our housing

[12:44] plan. They were included. The site was

[12:46] reszoned for uh 35 total units including

[12:49] 26 market and non affordable. So this

[12:51] was a right across from Woodstone. has

[12:53] approved originally to be an office

[12:56] medical office building and now it's

[12:58] going to be uh residential.

[12:59] » Okay,

[13:00] » Great. Um any any um clarifications,

[13:04] changes, modifications to resolution?

[13:06] Yes.

[13:07] » So I was uh present on uh when this was

[13:11] approved and uh I will be yes

[13:15] it says absent here and

[13:18] okay

[13:20] you got that cherry for page 16.

[13:23] because uh yanked.

[13:26] » Yep.

[13:27] » Okay. Modification will be made. I'll

[13:29] entertain a motion to approve PB26-05.

[13:33] » So move, Mr. Chairman.

[13:35] » Okay.

[13:36] » Second.

[13:36] » Okay. U motion by Simon, second by

[13:39] Allan. Please roll for those eligible to

[13:41] vote.

[13:44] » Yes.

[13:45] » Mr.

[13:46] » Yes. Councilman.

[13:48] » Yes. Mr. D.

[13:51] » Abstain.

[13:53] Yes.

[13:57] Yes.

[13:59] » Yes.

[14:01] » Yes.

[14:03] PB26-05

[14:04] approved. Thank you. Last but not least,

[14:08] um resolution PB26-06

[14:11] Clark Plaza signage flavor 217

[14:15] Clarksville Road, lot 10, lot 14. Any uh

[14:19] mod changes?

[14:21] to this one. I know who's present and I

[14:23] will include yes.

[14:25] » Okay. So, Dorica, it's Lisa is absent.

[14:28] She should be a yay.

[14:31] Okay. Anybody anything else? Anybody

[14:34] changes? Um please uh a quick summary of

[14:37] this one.

[14:37] » Yeah. Um this is this is Village Square

[14:41] and of course they've had real problems

[14:42] with the uh with access and they've now

[14:44] proposed a um proposed a new sign. Dave,

[14:48] do you want to describe it real quickly?

[14:49] » Yeah, of course. Uh so this is the uh

[14:51] Clarksville Shopping Center or Clark

[14:53] Plaza. Um they have an older sign up

[14:57] front right now. It has a height about

[14:58] um 12 and 1/2 ft and 60 square uh 12 and

[15:01] a half ft tall, 60 square foot. Um they

[15:05] have been having a lot of difficulties

[15:07] uh for a number of reasons. The first

[15:09] being that the uh some of the buildings

[15:11] are set back far from the roadway.

[15:14] Secondly, probably more important right

[15:15] now is the closure of the bridge which

[15:17] is really cutting off a lot of traffic.

[15:19] um their individual tenants have been

[15:21] requesting a new sign to identify the

[15:24] individual units there. Uh right now

[15:26] there's just a sign that says plaza. So

[15:29] they uh asked for permission and

[15:32] received approval for a new sign to be

[15:35] 16.25 ft high, 12 ft wide and

[15:38] approximately 126 square ft. Uh it will

[15:42] have 14 delineated tenant spaces which

[15:44] will um encapsulate 14 tenants there

[15:47] with a font size of seven inches. Uh

[15:49] there's traffic testimony or the traffic

[15:52] memo that we submitted with that uh sign

[15:54] would be internally internally

[15:57] illuminated and um

[16:01] it's basically in the same setback as

[16:02] the prior sign and with a couple of

[16:04] conditions.

[16:05] » Yeah. One one correction on that. The I

[16:07] was over there for dinner tonight. It

[16:09] says the village shopper. Oh, the There

[16:12] we go. Yes. It's like an older name, I

[16:14] think. Yeah.

[16:15] » It's tragedy. What's happened with that

[16:17] bridge for them?

[16:18] » Oh, really?

[16:18] » I haven't been on I haven't been down

[16:20] there probably since the bridge went

[16:22] out.

[16:23] » And the other the other issue there is

[16:26] those businesses that are between their

[16:29] » Yeah.

[16:30] » Strip mall and the bridge. Yeah. They

[16:32] they're in the process of moving.

[16:35] » Yeah. You can't even get to them really.

[16:36] Those those those businesses

[16:39] » Used to support the

[16:41] » You mean the office?

[16:41] » Office?

[16:42] » Yeah, the offices.

[16:43] » Wow.

[16:43] » Oh, yeah. I can imagine there's probably

[16:45] a bunch.

[16:46] » So, they have to bring in new new uh

[16:49] Sounds like a warehouse is going to go

[16:50] in there.

[16:52] » World tape.

[16:55] » Scratch scratch. [laughter] What? What?

[17:00] » The county go business at the village

[17:04] » Store

[17:06] $10,000 each each.

[17:08] » Wow.

[17:10] » That was the county.

[17:12] » Yeah. Yeah. Also to France. They g

[17:15] [clears throat]

[17:15] » There was supposed to be a temporary fix

[17:17] that would allow at least one lane

[17:19] through.

[17:20] » There is one lane.

[17:21] » But uh

[17:22] » Is that ineffective?

[17:23] » Who knows when that's going to be

[17:24] » Oh, that isn't even

[17:25] » Is that even in effect yet?

[17:27] » No. No. Well, I mean it's it's in the

[17:29] planning.

[17:30] » It's

[17:31] » Uh I'll entertain a motion to approve.

[17:33] » So So6

[17:37] approved. Um a motion by Simon, second

[17:39] by Jica.

[17:41] » Uh please call the role of those

[17:43] eligible to vote.

[17:44] » Mr. Shakal,

[17:45] » Yes.

[17:46] » Mr. Panov,

[17:48] » Yes.

[17:48] » Councilwoman Jvers,

[17:50] » Yes.

[17:50] » Mr. B,

[17:54] » Miss Barry,

[17:55] » Yes. Miss Applegate.

[17:56] » Yes.

[17:57] » Vice Chairman Hobberman.

[17:58] » Yes.

[17:58] » Chairman Cart.

[17:59] » Yes.

[18:01] » Uh, resolution PB26

[18:04] is approved. Thank you.

[18:07] » Okay. Environmental commission. Anybody?

[18:10] » Yeah.

[18:11] » Okay. Please.

[18:18] So, um I was present at the last

[18:21] meeting, but uh I think in June,

[18:25] um I have a sen.

[18:27] So, there's there's a $1,500 hand check

[18:31] grant and there's discussion about

[18:32] putting the following model and some

[18:35] science related to that investments at

[18:37] community park.

[18:39] um a representative came in from Duke

[18:42] Farms and talked about preservation of

[18:44] fireplace to facilitate wildlife.

[18:48] Uh just something to remind the law the

[18:50] planning rules you can then develop

[18:52] applications that new developers are not

[18:54] blocking wildlife access to their

[18:57] habitat.

[18:59] West Township has partnered with

[19:01] sustainable Jersey and PSG to offer free

[19:05] home energy assessments to residents.

[19:07] Residents can receive a free home energy

[19:10] assessment to understand their home's

[19:11] energy use and discount ways to reduce

[19:13] waste.

[19:15] Uh plus it looks like energy saving

[19:17] products and store with low cost

[19:20] some use on the program.

[19:22] » I'm sorry can I interrupt? How do you

[19:24] how do you apply for the home

[19:26] assessment?

[19:27] » I believe it's on the website.

[19:28] » On the website okay

[19:31] » Send email time to time. I got the email

[19:34] from PNG that they can have US.

[19:36] » I I went through that a couple years

[19:38] back. It it was very uh

[19:39] » I know somebody that had it done and I

[19:41] thought well they live in East Windsor

[19:43] so I was thinking that maybe

[19:45] » I don't know I have to I I don't

[19:47] remember getting an email. Okay, thank

[19:50] you. I'm sorry.

[19:52] Um yeah, so some of the um u gadgets

[19:56] that they, you know, they might be

[19:57] willing to install or one of the

[19:59] recommended um smart thermostats, LED

[20:02] light bulbs, faucet heaters, efficient

[20:05] flow, shower heads. They're obviously

[20:08] not installing heat, but shower head

[20:11] adapters, advanced power strips, water

[20:14] heater byation.

[20:17] » Okay, that's nice.

[20:18] » Thank you.

[20:20] Okay.

[20:23] Okay. Next up,

[20:26] work session on revision to RP1 district

[20:29] ordinance amendment to AV redevelopment

[20:32] plan pursuant to settlement agreement

[20:33] between township and AB.

[20:37] » Okay.

[20:38] Anyone?

[20:40] » No.

[20:41] » No.

[20:42] » Work session.

[20:43] » Got it.

[20:45] » Okay. I have a I have a question before

[20:48] we start on this. A couple questions

[20:50] actually that you can maybe Who's gonna

[20:52] start?

[20:54] » Um David.

[20:55] » Yeah, I can start. Well, yeah. Um

[20:58] » Let let me go to my questions. Couple

[20:59] things. We don't we don't have the

[21:01] reference docs, you know, the original,

[21:03] you know, the docs from the um you know,

[21:06] with the site plans and all that stuff.

[21:09] So, it's hard for you know, to remember

[21:13] what I looked at

[21:14] » With location.

[21:15] » Yep. location and what we agreed upon.

[21:19] That's number one. Number two, um, and I

[21:22] guess we'll get to it. Like, did Chief

[21:25] Lynch opine on anything with the changes

[21:28] to the height of the buildings? And

[21:30] maybe I I you know, maybe I'm jumping

[21:32] the gun here.

[21:33] » That's good question.

[21:35] » Well, it is. Yeah.

[21:37] » Yeah. I was I was curious. I don't know

[21:40] how how how tall is it story? Like it

[21:44] says 85 feet, six stories. To me, I

[21:47] always thought a story was 20 feet.

[21:50] » No. No. Um

[21:52] the tip of the story depends on what

[21:54] type of building it is, but generally on

[21:56] a ground floor, you see a story height

[21:57] of maybe 12 feet or so and 10. But it

[22:00] depends on what type of building is. So

[22:04] there's something say for example

[22:05] special needs housing or senior living

[22:07] housing. If there is some sort of

[22:11] medical component involved in that, you

[22:13] will see a higher floor to ceiling

[22:14] height for that type of equipment.

[22:16] » I guess I'm, you know, I'm used to

[22:17] Manhattan, so I think those stories are

[22:20] 20 feet probably because they have

[22:21] equipment in there, high ceilings and

[22:24] Okay, so that's why I wasn't I was

[22:26] saying 85 ft, six stories seems a little

[22:29] low.

[22:30] » I know. So this is um so to refresh

[22:34] everybody about where this is, right?

[22:36] » I'm gonna say one thing before you

[22:37] start. Sure.

[22:38] » Uh to add to Michael's uh intro, um as

[22:42] we go through this this process, uh I

[22:44] really want to know the why of all the

[22:47] changes as we go through things instead

[22:49] of just the nitpicky this is the change.

[22:52] » Uh the short answer is and I don't hate

[22:54] to say it like this, but short answer is

[22:56] because we have to um as part of a

[22:57] settlement agreement.

[22:58] » We have to

[23:00] be the short answer. I can give you some

[23:02] of the background but the short answer

[23:04] is

[23:04] » An agreement with Avon

[23:07] » Uh with Avan. So

[23:09] » When when we submitted the house fair

[23:12] share plan it was approved by Judge Ali

[23:15] but there was one and the program member

[23:18] who was Judge Jacobson with one caveat.

[23:21] Um Avalon at this point had objected to

[23:24] the plan because they were saying that

[23:27] the uh

[23:29] assisted living facility which is

[23:31] immediately adjacent to the train

[23:32] station um and it was over 200 units as

[23:36] I recall etc.

[23:38] » It was 155

[23:39] » Originally 135

[23:40] » Originally 135.

[23:41] » Okay. Right. But it was like a 20% set

[23:43] aside and Avalon came and say you know

[23:46] what we had a partner they bowed out. We

[23:48] we can't do it. We just can't do it

[23:50] anymore. So, we're we're objecting. We

[23:53] wound up settling with them to get it

[23:55] finished uh of they can build up to 170

[23:58] units, 10% Medicaid beds, which we could

[24:00] which are affordable housing beds. Um

[24:03] and we we would have a an amendment to

[24:06] the redevelopment plan, which we've

[24:08] agreed to with them, and an ordinance

[24:11] implementing the changes to the zoning.

[24:13] We didn't think at my office's end that

[24:15] we actually needed an amendment to the

[24:17] zoning ordinance because we thought the

[24:19] redevelopment plan was sufficient, but

[24:21] they wanted to do it. That's what's

[24:22] before you. They basically prepared

[24:25] that, but we signed off on it. Um, and

[24:28] what what's going to happen, this is now

[24:30] going to go uh basically the council,

[24:32] they have a meeting on I think the 8

[24:34] introduction on the 18th and then uh a

[24:38] second reading in September. Um if this

[24:41] is approved then we're finished with

[24:44] that but they have to come back in for

[24:46] site plan review right then. So

[24:48] » Yes don't they have to come before the

[24:49] board to um lay out their plans after

[24:53] they need site plan they they'll need

[24:54] site plan approval.

[24:55] » Good.

[24:56] » So I just wanted to give some background

[24:57] here.

[24:58] » Yeah and that's 100% right. Um just to

[25:01] Mr. German answer your question.

[25:02] » Um isn't it this is the W squ.

[25:05] » Yep. this W square. So this right next

[25:07] to the Z that lot right next to the

[25:09] train station. If you guys remember that

[25:10] you have

[25:11] » And I'm going to I'm going to this is

[25:12] going to be correct for the record but

[25:14] I'm going to use my hands to demonstrate

[25:15] everything.

[25:15] » There's lot there's open lot there's

[25:17] lots there where I guess they're going

[25:18] to put some of this stuff.

[25:19] » Yeah. So, if you know where the train

[25:21] station is, then you have kind of that

[25:22] uh plaza area with the two mixeduse

[25:24] buildings on either side

[25:26] » Originally. And then right ahead there's

[25:28] that uh condo building supposed to be a

[25:30] hotel.

[25:31] » To the left of that,

[25:33] » The township approved a

[25:36] uh senior living building that 35.

[25:39] » It's between the parking garage and Vond

[25:42] drive extended. That is the empty site.

[25:44] » It's so crowded there.

[25:46] » Yeah. I don't know how they're going to

[25:47] fit this that stuff in to be honest with

[25:49] you. I when every so often like I'll

[25:51] drive in to see the progress they made

[25:54] and it is packed in there.

[25:55] » Yeah, it does it. It is. Yeah. I mean

[25:57] that was the whole point in a high

[25:59] higher density mixeduse area.

[26:00] Unfortunately, when you get as much

[26:01] commercial as we originally had uh

[26:03] envisioned in that area,

[26:04] » We got a day some

[26:06] » We got a day.

[26:07] » Yes.

[26:08] » But but we didn't we had initially

[26:10] initially conceived this as the new

[26:12] downtown for this. kept getting scaled

[26:15] back and scaled back. Let's

[26:16] » What about the the property on the other

[26:18] side of the train tracks? What's I'm

[26:20] sorry I'm digressing here.

[26:21] » No, which which property?

[26:22] » The uh

[26:22] » Slumber.

[26:23] » Slumber property. That thing's been

[26:25] vacant forever.

[26:26] » Uh we looked into that. It's still very

[26:29] contaminated.

[26:31] » Okay.

[26:31] » Now, just and this is a very technical

[26:34] term, very contaminated still.

[26:36] » Oh. So, don't aren't they responsible

[26:38] cleaning it up? They are, but the

[26:42] » Just

[26:45] to be clear, the um

[26:48] the special special needs housing is a

[26:50] separate building.

[26:52] » No, no, it's my understanding that this

[26:53] would all be something that would

[26:55] replace that uh previously approved 135

[26:59] unit building. That's my understanding.

[27:00] So that new building would be some sort

[27:03] of senior living building that would

[27:05] have some sort of combination of whether

[27:07] it's age restricted um nursing home,

[27:11] special needs, assisted living

[27:13] » All would be in that building.

[27:14] » The the basic idea was um now with 170

[27:20] 10% this is fewer than we had planned on

[27:23] when when we did our compliance plan.

[27:25] So, we worked out a um an arrangement

[27:29] with with uh Avalon where whatever fee

[27:33] that has to be paid by them for um for

[27:36] the the affordable housing improvements,

[27:38] they would now put put in place five

[27:43] special needs uh beds. And those would

[27:46] those would be basically group homes

[27:48] where they would shift existing market

[27:51] units in their development both both

[27:54] east and west to to a couple of two or

[27:57] three um

[28:00] um group homes in uh w with total of

[28:03] five beds. So we would pick up five more

[28:05] beds and there'd really be no increase

[28:07] in the number of units or the density.

[28:10] So the group homes would basically have

[28:12] just the beds in there for special needs

[28:14] and whatever else goes along with that.

[28:17] » Exactly. And you would get a credit for

[28:18] that.

[28:19] » They'd have their own living facility,

[28:21] kitchen, somebody.

[28:22] » Yeah. Right. Exactly.

[28:24] » How many of How many of those are there?

[28:26] » They would the the contemplation is

[28:28] five.

[28:29] » Five. Okay.

[28:31] » Five is okay.

[28:32] » Yeah.

[28:36] » Would those count to the next round? the

[28:38] round four of

[28:39] » No, this is actually counting for round

[28:41] three.

[28:41] » They would count for round three.

[28:43] » They allocated for round three. They

[28:44] just haven't been yet.

[28:46] » Exactly.

[28:47] » And and the way we came up with five is

[28:49] when you added all the credits we

[28:52] thought we could take for where we were

[28:54] with round three developments and that's

[28:56] basically pretty much everything.

[28:58] Although we have um

[29:01] Frank Petrino on behalf of Tri-State and

[29:04] WWM claiming, you know, a lot of all a

[29:07] lot of these things are never going to

[29:08] be built, etc., etc., but if we ever get

[29:11] to a hearing, we're going to show that

[29:12] in fact they're proceeding. Um but when

[29:15] you added the numbers now with the

[29:17] reduction of 10% of the 170, we were

[29:20] five short of a required number. That's

[29:23] how we came up with a five. Yeah.

[29:26] » Yeah. It's a lot of it's, you know, I I

[29:30] you guys all like the affordable housing

[29:31] process. A lot of it is sometimes more

[29:34] mathematics than it is planning.

[29:36] » Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Okay.

[29:38] » Uh but this is essentially and Jerry hit

[29:41] the nail on my head too. This is step I

[29:44] want to say step one because that was

[29:46] probably the second but this is step

[29:47] three in a 20step process. So

[29:49] » Exactly

[29:50] » They will have to file an amended site

[29:51] plan application. they will have to

[29:52] appear in front of you and every

[29:54] question that you guys might have in

[29:55] terms of safety, in terms of

[29:57] circulation, parking, everything like

[29:58] that.

[29:59] » So, so the Chief Lynch memo would take

[30:03] place during their application process.

[30:05] » Okay, that makes sense.

[30:10] » And I believe, yeah, probably a minute

[30:12] site plan.

[30:13] » Yeah, because they already have a site

[30:15] plan approval for the 135 with a 20% set

[30:17] aside.

[30:19] Now, are we okay with six stories in

[30:22] some places?

[30:24] » Uh, I believe we only plan for six

[30:26] stories in some other affordable

[30:27] » As long as it's no big long larger than

[30:29] 85 ft tall.

[30:31] » Yeah.

[30:32] » Yeah. So, for example, the R5E district,

[30:34] which is um the former BMS site, we're

[30:38] allowing a height of up to Oh, no, I

[30:41] just Sorry.

[30:45] I had that lined up and I just lost it

[30:47] for you guys. Sorry. Oh, six stories and

[30:50] 70 ft there. So,

[30:51] » Six stories, 70 ft.

[30:53] » Yeah.

[30:53] » Why is this one 85?

[30:56] » Uh, that was something that was

[30:58] discussed with them. I think just to

[30:59] allow for that flexibility and again

[31:00] understanding that if there is special

[31:02] needs or some sort of nursing home or

[31:05] assisted living, it is a larger door to

[31:08] ceiling height.

[31:08] » Okay.

[31:09] » Uh because again, you need to fit that

[31:11] equipment in

[31:13] that

[31:14] » Statues. No, it's it's architectural.

[31:17] Yeah. Uh when we were we've done a lot

[31:19] of work with like certain hospitals for

[31:21] example. Um so we had to do a lot of

[31:23] like Florida ceiling height studies and

[31:26] because of the medical equipment you

[31:27] will see it for a to ceiling height then

[31:30] it hit like family resident.

[31:34] » Yes.

[31:36] » Yeah. We uh you know uh Valley Hospital

[31:39] in Ridgewood they open.

[31:41] » Yeah. We represent Valley Hospital. How

[31:43] how tall is the height of the parking

[31:45] garage?

[31:47] » Pretty big.

[31:49] » The one that's right next to the site,

[31:50] right next to the other

[31:51] » The one off of V.

[31:53] » How tall is that? That's pretty big.

[31:55] » I can see what the allowable height is

[31:56] there. I forget what the

[31:59] height was. But I believe we actually

[32:01] did an increase. I think that goes back

[32:03] to another zoning amendment for this

[32:04] site where we increase the allowable

[32:05] height there.

[32:07] » Yeah,

[32:08] » I believe they had another four. We give

[32:10] people

[32:11] » I think we increase that that was when

[32:13] they the idea was a hotel right

[32:16] » Um I I I forget the patient there

[32:21] is

[32:22] » You remember

[32:24] it's pretty massive you think they got

[32:25] to fill that up

[32:28] » Uh based on their projections

[32:33] » Okay

[32:35] » So people could walk around and shop

[32:40] Yeah. [clears throat]

[32:41] » Okay. Well, parking free in the Wallace

[32:45] road block on weekend. So,

[32:48] » Um the parking structures, we did do an

[32:50] amendment to the ordinance. They are

[32:51] allowed to be up to six levels.

[32:55] » Okay.

[32:56] » So, here's a question. On the third

[32:58] page, um at the end of permitted uses

[33:02] before parenthetical number three,

[33:04] there's pet daycare facilities.

[33:05] » Yeah, I know. Is there a requirement for

[33:07] exterior space for a pet daycare

[33:09] facility?

[33:10] » No,

[33:11] » Not at all.

[33:13] » Don't forget most most of this is the

[33:15] existing RPA.

[33:15] » Yeah, most of that is existing. So, that

[33:17] was another amendment that we did for

[33:19] » I I remember I think it was a planning

[33:21] board application when we did the

[33:22] veterinary place next to the Starbucks.

[33:26] » Yeah.

[33:27] » Yeah. Near Lowe's, you know, that had

[33:29] exterior space for the facility

[33:31] » The because it was a pet related

[33:34] facility. though and would that would

[33:36] the requirements for a pet daycare

[33:38] facility be elsewhere in the zoning code

[33:40] for that use?

[33:42] » You mean the standards?

[33:42] » I mean it's listed as a permitted use

[33:45] but that yeah that's what we had

[33:47] exterior space for the pets.

[33:49] » All right. So um we did adopt an an

[33:52] amendment to the ordinance for pet

[33:54] daycare facilities in the RP1 district

[33:56] which is specific to the RP1 district.

[33:58] » Right.

[33:58] » It has um separate standards that are

[34:01] unique for that zone. Um buildings and

[34:03] or tennis spaces must be soundproofed to

[34:05] a certain uh vessel bullet rating. All

[34:08] buildings shall be of adequate

[34:09] construction maintain a good repair and

[34:10] secured in order to protect animals from

[34:12] injury or escape. Proper and ample

[34:15] ventilation of all animal areas and

[34:16] building shall be demonstrated to the

[34:18] satisfaction with uh board. Um all

[34:21] animals housed in the facility shall be

[34:23] kept within the confines of a building

[34:25] between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 8:00

[34:27] a.m.

[34:28] » Provisions shall be made for the

[34:30] removal. page. Which page?

[34:33] » Oh, it's on the top page.

[34:34] » The pages the pages that are not

[34:36] numbered.

[34:44] » And it was actually

[34:45] » Thank you. Thank you for no outdoor

[34:47] facilities were to be permitted. So,

[34:49] you're actually not allowed to have an

[34:50] outdoor facility for

[34:53] » Me. It was something from that.

[34:54] » This answers my question. Thank you.

[34:56] » Yeah, I think it was something from that

[34:57] one. Paul

[35:02] probably due to the due

[35:03] » Yeah. Right.

[35:07] » Um I don't recall I don't think they

[35:08] ever follow a cipher application for

[35:10] pandemic.

[35:19] » Anybody else?

[35:20] » The other other change I'll point out um

[35:24] and you might ask why it seems silly. Uh

[35:27] senior housing um we reduce the parking

[35:30] requirement from 7 to 0.5.

[35:33] » Um

[35:34] » Oh yeah,

[35:34] » That lines up more with um

[35:38] residential site movement standards for

[35:39] assisted living which is actually 0.5

[35:41] parking spaces per unit.

[35:43] » I I could I mean it makes sense for

[35:46] lower parking because if there's seniors

[35:49] there they could be single, right?

[35:52] because one spouse unfortunately passed

[35:54] away or and a lot of them don't drive

[35:57] anymore.

[35:57] » Right.

[35:58] » Right.

[36:00] » So that kind of makes sense

[36:02] » Which is good that it's near a transit

[36:03] facility.

[36:04] » Yeah.

[36:04] » Right.

[36:05] That's

[36:06] » They had proposed at one point that they

[36:08] would be willing willing to do a project

[36:11] with um more more than 10% set aside but

[36:14] it wouldn't be non-agger restricted

[36:16] » And the thinking at the in the side of

[36:18] the township was keep it as age

[36:20] restricted which has a lot of

[36:22] implications financially and yes schools

[36:24] and in terms of site design too. on a I

[36:27] guess slightly related note. I saw that

[36:29] uh I think West Windsor Plainsboro high

[36:32] schools have the highest SAP scores or

[36:34] some of the highest SAP scores in the

[36:36] » Highest what?

[36:37] » Highest SAT schools in the state.

[36:39] » Really?

[36:39] » I think that the the schools were number

[36:41] two and number three.

[36:42] » Very number one was

[36:45] » Our two high schools.

[36:49] » Average SAT score that is

[36:51] » I believe it was I think it was SAT.

[36:52] » It was it was an NJC article. Yeah, like

[36:54] yesterday heard David work.

[36:56] » Oh, I got to check it out. I saw it.

[36:57] » Well, Odysius is uh Matt Damon who went

[37:00] to West Plainsboro, Ohio.

[37:02] » Yeah,

[37:03] » Matt Damon.

[37:04] » Yeah.

[37:05] » No, Matt. No, you're thinking of Ethan

[37:07] Hawk.

[37:07] » Ethan Hawk.

[37:08] » Oh, okay.

[37:08] » Matt Damon's from Massachusett.

[37:09] » Ethan Hawk went to the Hunt School.

[37:11] » I thought Matt Damon was a New York.

[37:13] » Ethan Hawk is a Hunts school graduate.

[37:15] » And Matt Damon grew up with Ben Affleck

[37:17] in Massachusetts in Boston.

[37:18] » Yeah. New York. No.

[37:20] » Everything what I've been telling

[37:22] everybody. They're both [laughter]

[37:24] » He's in Hawk.

[37:25] » They've been humoring you, J.

[37:26] » He's in Hawk went to school here and he

[37:28] went to Hunt.

[37:29] » Okay.

[37:29] » And And he didn't give any money to Hunt

[37:31] as an alone.

[37:33] » Just so you know.

[37:34] » You would know. You would know.

[37:35] » I would know. So So where are we in the

[37:38] review of this? Uh this

[37:39] » We're still reviewing Matt Damon and

[37:41] Ben. [laughter]

[37:43] » Uh as from one Greek tragedy to the

[37:45] next. Um

[37:47] » So St. P

[37:49] no

[37:51] St. page further down um on both does it

[37:55] mean that

[37:57] isn't that

[38:00] is there a regulation you know or I see

[38:04] requirements

[38:08] » No that so that is a um that's actually

[38:10] an existing regulation and

[38:13] um it does make sense so the way we

[38:18] crafted or the way this redevelopment

[38:20] ordinance was originally drafted was

[38:23] come up with those types of standards

[38:24] based upon the totality of the

[38:26] redevelopment area. Because sometimes

[38:28] what happens is in these larger

[38:29] redevelopment areas where you have

[38:32] different entities that are operating,

[38:33] right? You might have one developer or

[38:35] one operator for one housing unit,

[38:37] another for another type, then the

[38:39] commercial, they'll get chopped up into

[38:42] different lots just for financing

[38:44] purposes. Much like that happened with

[38:46] the fog of the show. They're not

[38:48] supposed to be operating independently

[38:51] from one another. So sometimes when

[38:54] ordinances are a little bit too strict

[38:55] in that, they'll apply say F coverage

[38:58] setback requirements to those individual

[39:01] lots when really they're not supposed to

[39:03] be functioning individually. They're

[39:05] supposed to be connected. So sometimes

[39:06] you'll see those FS spike up because the

[39:10] lot line completely encompasses the

[39:12] building, right? Or they won't meet the

[39:14] setback much like the photo to show. So,

[39:17] when it comes to the individual lots,

[39:19] how they're being arranged for financing

[39:20] purposes, it doesn't make as much sense

[39:23] to apply individual

[39:26] um bulk standards to those chopped up

[39:28] lots as it does to the entirety of the

[39:30] district because you're making the

[39:32] assumption that everything is going to

[39:33] operate as one cohesive development even

[39:36] if they have different operators for

[39:37] different lots.

[39:40] I'm sure. So are you saying that it

[39:43] doesn't make sense to describe how

[39:46] descriptive they are or see?

[39:49] » Oh no no no we we No no no no if it's

[39:52] like do so for example if you look on

[39:55] » Just for

[39:56] » Just for the individual lot for the

[39:58] district we have for the overall

[39:59] district we have an improvement coverage

[40:01] of 95%. for example, that's for the

[40:03] entirety of the district. But when you

[40:05] chop it off into individual lots, you

[40:07] might have one lot that says surrounding

[40:09] a building just for financing purposes,

[40:11] » That'll have a 100% coverage, but then

[40:13] maybe the plaza has 20% coverage.

[40:15] Really, it's the totality we care about.

[40:18] » I I have a question regarding um 7D

[40:21] parking struct on there's no I don't

[40:23] know the page number.

[40:25] » Parking structures attached to buildings

[40:27] or principal permitted uses may be up to

[40:29] six levels of 70 ft.

[40:31] » Yes. Yes. Now, you're talking about a

[40:32] standalone parking structure like a

[40:34] garage, that big garage. Because to me,

[40:37] when I read that at first, I'm thinking

[40:39] like you have a townhouse and next to

[40:41] the townhouse is a sixtory,

[40:44] you know, you have apartments and then

[40:45] next to a six stories and garage can be

[40:49] I don't know how you get the car up to

[40:50] the sixth story, but but you know what

[40:52] I'm saying? It needs maybe a little bit

[40:54] more specific there.

[40:56] » Well, those were already built.

[40:57] » Okay.

[40:58] » Yeah. The only things that are getting

[41:00] changed in this ordinance are in red. So

[41:01] that that parking structure attached to

[41:03] the building that's already

[41:04] » That that's that big massive parking

[41:06] structure. Okay.

[41:07] » Building E5 and E6.

[41:09] » Okay.

[41:10] » A shame at least know those numbers at

[41:12] this point.

[41:14] » Yeah.

[41:16] » That's fine.

[41:22] » Anything else in here we need to

[41:26] exchanges?

[41:28] Yeah, that's all we that's all we focus

[41:30] up.

[41:31] » What's that?

[41:32] » Yeah. Number two, the senior housing.

[41:34] » Yeah, that's where the that's where the

[41:35] p the changes are.

[41:36] » Yeah. You know,

[41:37] » And again, we're keeping the number of

[41:38] family units the same. It's just senior

[41:41] housing, which is kind of an

[41:42] all-encompassing term for um age

[41:46] restricted

[41:48] needs, nursing home.

[41:49] » What was it before? It says in addition

[41:51] to the 800 family dwelling units, the

[41:53] redeveloper may

[41:56] um construct up to additional 170 senior

[41:58] housing units. Didn't we have allocated

[42:01] some senior housing prior to to this

[42:04] change?

[42:04] » That was originally going to be the 135

[42:06] number.

[42:07] » Okay. We need we need to make we need to

[42:09] have that kind of language in there that

[42:10] says that it was increased from 135 to

[42:13] the 170 as opposed to it looks like it

[42:16] wasn't any uh proposed and all of a

[42:18] sudden we'll put in 170 additional

[42:24] am reading it incorrectly

[42:27] » Probably

[42:32] » Yeah normally you wouldn't put that in

[42:34] an ordinance that like more of like a

[42:36] wear ass Okay. Okay. Got it. Yeah. No,

[42:39] that's

[42:39] » That makes sense.

[42:43] In addition to the up to 800 family

[42:46] dwelling units. That sounds weird.

[42:48] » In addition to the up to 800.

[42:51] » Yeah.

[42:52] » Yeah. The wording doesn't sound right.

[42:54] Get rid of

[42:56] » I agree with

[42:58] » Oh, yes. In addition to the up to

[43:01] » So maybe in addition to the maximum up.

[43:03] What I would I I think there's I think

[43:06] there's a number of language

[43:08] improvements that could be made. This

[43:09] was actually drafted by Avalon Bay and

[43:12] just for for simplicity of of process I

[43:16] would just leave it the way it is. It's

[43:17] going to be before council. Well, it's

[43:19] going to be before council and first

[43:21] reading in uh in August second reading

[43:25] September and if we want to make changes

[43:27] then that would be that would be a place

[43:28] to make them.

[43:29] » Okay. Um, but something that I agree

[43:32] with you, Jerry, but something like

[43:33] stands out like this, it just really

[43:35] makes no sense. We should fix that. But

[43:37] and then I agree with Jerry that when it

[43:39] goes to council, then that's when the

[43:41] final verbiage takes place.

[43:44] » You express that to them.

[43:46] » Well, we're going to get um there'll be

[43:48] another session to to

[43:50] » For us

[43:51] » For us to um nail down the final

[43:54] verbiage.

[43:54] » Yeah, it's going to come back to us

[43:56] after first reading. It'll come back to

[43:57] us.

[43:58] » Okay.

[43:59] Well, we should change we should change

[44:01] this language because it's it's not even

[44:03] clear.

[44:05] » So, let's let's change that. And then

[44:07] again, you know, let's not nitpick now

[44:09] because the final uh version um will

[44:12] come back to us

[44:14] » Where that's I agree with you

[44:15] » One senior traveling unit that whole

[44:18] thing can be moved up to

[44:21] another sentence already. I uh that will

[44:25] be done at the later stage but I this

[44:29] addition to the up to 800 needs to be

[44:31] fixed.

[44:32] » Just make it maximum

[44:33] » I would say um

[44:35] » A maximum of

[44:37] » The maximum of

[44:40] units. Yeah, something like that.

[44:43] » Yeah.

[44:44] And then you know when when we re when

[44:47] we revisit this and we come up with the

[44:50] final version that's going to

[44:52] » Then we need to wait till

[44:54] » Until it's all cleaned up and then

[44:57] » Right when when does this come back to

[44:58] us Jerry

[45:00] » Those changes are significant

[45:02] » In September

[45:02] » We go back

[45:03] » No then we'll change we'll change the

[45:05] verbiage we'll change the words we don't

[45:07] like this sentence we'll remove it we'll

[45:09] move it up we'll move some down

[45:12] Okay.

[45:13] » Right. We're gonna nitpick now and then

[45:15] they come up with that version.

[45:17] » It may not it may need to be totally

[45:20] redone anyway.

[45:21] » So, let's all do it all at one time.

[45:23] » Yeah. And I think um

[45:24] » Am I understand this correct?

[45:26] » Yeah, I I agree.

[45:28] » It's usually something like this. It's

[45:30] it's

[45:32] » So council in a separate work session

[45:35] and and asking all sorts of questions

[45:38] and stuff.

[45:39] that they introduced. Then we got 45

[45:41] days to get it back to the plans board

[45:44] » And then you have to

[45:47] » So can can we have another working

[45:49] session that gets closer to a final

[45:51] ordinance uh ordinance for council?

[45:54] » We can this this is um going to go to be

[45:58] introduced by by council on the 11th. So

[46:00] that's a very short time period.

[46:03] » The next

[46:05] » Oh the 18th I'm sorry the 18th. No, it's

[46:08] the 23rd, right?

[46:10] » August 11th

[46:14] » Through the 25th.

[46:17] » Okay.

[46:18] » Yeah. And also

[46:19] » Yeah.

[46:23] » Yes. 24th is the next

[46:26] » And also I noticed,

[46:29] » Right?

[46:30] » Yeah. And and Jerry, I just realized

[46:32] too. Um,

[46:34] so I I we had worked on a separate

[46:37] draft. Uh, this was from Malan. I I

[46:40] think the numbers are wrong, too. Um,

[46:43] » Because this would allow for

[46:48] » Yeah. Which I thought it was going to be

[46:49] 9.

[46:50] » Yeah. 903 all together.

[46:52] » 903. No, 970.

[46:54] » No, I know. I don't think it's Yeah, I I

[46:56] don't think it's supposed to be that

[46:57] many. It's 800 plus 170.

[47:02] » So then we

[47:04] » Oh, they slipped with the numbers.

[47:06] » So that needs to be fixed 100 that needs

[47:09] to be fixed like right away

[47:12] » Because if originally

[47:16] » So then there's not 800 right now

[47:19] because if you say it was 135, now it's

[47:22] 170. Didn't they already build 800 there

[47:26] » Or is it seven totals?

[47:28] » So, um they were approved for eight

[47:33] 68 I thought.

[47:34] » That sounds familiar

[47:36] » Because they originally had something.

[47:38] » They originally allowed 800 units as of

[47:40] right and then if a hotel was not

[47:43] constructed, they were allowed an

[47:44] additional 68 units, right? So, that

[47:46] would be 868 total units they were

[47:49] approved for. Oh. of which 135 were

[47:53] senior, right? So 16 or 868 minus 135 is

[47:57] 733.

[47:59] » And then if you add now 170, that's 903.

[48:06] » Okay, now that now that makes sense.

[48:08] » Yeah. So I I

[48:11] » But the way this is written, looks like

[48:13] they're going to put a they're going to

[48:14] squeeze in another 170 senior housing

[48:17] units.

[48:18] » Yeah. I don't know if that was a

[48:19] conversation after the fact, but when I

[48:20] had first looked at this,

[48:21] » No, this language, no, this language

[48:24] needs to be fixed because

[48:27] you're getting from 9003 there's 970

[48:30] there's an additional 67 units that was

[48:33] not approved.

[48:39] » So I don't this language needs to be

[48:41] cleaned up and fixed

[48:44] » Before it goes before the 11th.

[48:48] I mean, I guess one week before good

[48:51] » Catch uh the meeting on the 24th is when

[48:54] the council president set the agenda,

[48:56] but sometimes it's a date or two later.

[48:58] We go out to the public

[49:01] on a Thursday,

[49:04] » Right?

[49:10] » To me, it's a little confusing. I think

[49:12] it be 800 units. I know.

[49:16] Isn't it interesting? They they they

[49:19] crossed it out.

[49:21] » Look at the number they crossed out

[49:22] there.

[49:24] » Cross this out.

[49:25] » I don't know.

[49:26] » 68. See the 60? It was 67, I think.

[49:29] Right.

[49:30] » What a 68. The 68 is crossed out.

[49:33] » And then how conveniently they added the

[49:35] 170 back in.

[49:38] » Yeah. What I would recommend is

[49:43] um

[49:46] Establishing a maximum of 93 dwelling

[49:50] units

[49:53] of which at most 170 shall be

[49:58] senior housing, assisted living,

[49:59] whatever it is. Um,

[50:05] most

[50:06] » Because they already have the rest of

[50:08] the residential constructed. So, we're

[50:10] only doing those seven

[50:14] and it was in um

[50:17] think that was a ceiling as well. They

[50:18] weren't willing to agree with just in

[50:20] case

[50:25] a quick question

[50:27] number two 68.5%.

[50:30] What is the exact

[50:31] » Oh, that that's Yeah, I would have to

[50:33] work those numbers that this has become

[50:35] almost like a Frankenstein ordinance.

[50:36] Um, it doesn't this these numbers don't

[50:39] add up. I see the 800 and I see the 68.

[50:42] That's your original 868.

[50:45] But then there's nothing no mention of

[50:47] the 135 originally approved senior

[50:50] housing

[50:52] and and then the 68 goes away. It all

[50:55] instead of they just add back the 800.

[51:00] It should be 800 less um it should it

[51:04] somehow the know they're playing with

[51:06] the formula

[51:11] right it should be it maybe up to um

[51:17] » It should be

[51:19] 170 senior units

[51:22] less

[51:25] » 868.

[51:26] » Yeah, that's the um 68 or something.

[51:29] That's 67

[51:32] to get you to 103

[51:37] » Or up to additional 170 senior units

[51:40] which in which includes I don't I don't

[51:44] know what the right verbiages you just

[51:46] don't know

[51:48] » As an example

[51:52] » I just know the numbers don't jive so

[51:55] gets picked

[51:59] So they're squeezing they're they're

[52:01] they how Avalon Avalon is the one that

[52:05] crossed the stuff out, right?

[52:07] » Yeah. The edits.

[52:08] » Okay. So then Avalon is trying to pull

[52:12] one full fastman.

[52:14] » No.

[52:16] » No.

[52:20] Um, yeah, I have some preliminary

[52:23] numbers about what I I thought the unit

[52:25] counts.

[52:25] » I don't know how to word it, but I know

[52:27] the numbers don't

[52:28] » I I would I I I would keep it relatively

[52:31] simple, right? I would say 93 units

[52:35] total at most 170 senior housing.

[52:39] » Um, work backwards. Now, the set aside

[52:41] for the family units is going to be

[52:44] slightly more at 16.64% 64%

[52:48] » And 10% for any new

[52:50] » Okay

[52:51] » Senior housing

[52:52] » Well the 903 total units which can can

[52:56] include up to an addition which can

[52:58] include

[53:00] 170 senior units take out the 170 you

[53:02] get 733

[53:04] » Yep.

[53:05] » So 733

[53:07] is the 86080 minus the original approved

[53:10] 135.

[53:11] » Yes. Somehow you've got to word

[53:14] wordsmith that.

[53:17] » Yeah, I Yeah, I I I will work with uh

[53:20] I'll work with Jerry. So,

[53:21] » Because it can't it it can't stand the

[53:24] way it's it is because it looks like

[53:27] whatever they have there, they're going

[53:28] to stick another 170 senior units there.

[53:31] » Yeah, I think the 800 family devel

[53:36] approves this, they're breaking ground.

[53:42] So you have to have to come before the

[53:46] new

[53:48] » Hard.

[53:49] » Yeah,

[53:51] » I don't like it at all.

[53:52] » I'll entertain a motion to change this

[53:54] paragraph.

[53:57] [laughter]

[54:03] » I'll agree with that.

[54:05] » I'm having called a role.

[54:09] Can they separate out the senior um I

[54:13] think

[54:13] » Housing units versus the family dwelling

[54:16] units?

[54:16] » I think David has it right that we

[54:18] should say they can build up to 733

[54:21] family units and up to 170 senior units

[54:27] and that's and that's it. That's what

[54:29] we're all saying I think.

[54:30] » And then and do we know what number

[54:32] that's there now? Right now they're

[54:34] approved and how many is physically

[54:37] built because they're done building.

[54:39] » Oh, no. I I mean they I don't know how

[54:41] many have been coed, but it's going to

[54:43] be 733.

[54:45] » Oh, so they they know there's 733 there

[54:48] or broken ground or maybe maybe not not

[54:52] COD, but the build the frames are up,

[54:55] the buildings are up and

[54:58] » Yeah, that's okay.

[55:00] » So that then Okay. So then

[55:03] if you if this was approved

[55:06] [clears throat]

[55:07] » They would probably put another

[55:10] 67 to get up to the 800 and then shove

[55:13] another 170 in there.

[55:15] » Yeah. I I again I haven't been too

[55:17] involved in discussion but I I thought

[55:18] it was just the 170 for senior. Uh

[55:22] um

[55:23] » So yeah, you got to word smith it to

[55:26] total of 93 units with up to 170 senior

[55:29] units. However they want to do it,

[55:32] right? They have 733 there. Well, then

[55:34] they can max out at the 170.

[55:37] » Mhm.

[55:38] » Right. You can't have the the number 800

[55:41] in here.

[55:42] » Yeah.

[55:44] » Yeah. I agree. Well, I I think as I

[55:47] said, I think the most straightforward

[55:48] approach is just to say you can build up

[55:50] to 733 family units and up to 170 senior

[55:55] units.

[55:59] » Like how do they do that? Unless are

[56:02] they going to say the senior units are

[56:04] all in one building or are they going to

[56:06] be

[56:06] » Oh, they're going to be that's the

[56:08] assistant living.

[56:08] » Yeah, but to say that it's all senior

[56:12] senior housing will shall be in like one

[56:14] building.

[56:15] » Oh, in the

[56:16] » Two buildings or whatever it is.

[56:17] » Well, we think the assistant living

[56:22] » Everything else is built out. So, they

[56:24] only have that like vacant space towards

[56:25] the like the westerly portion of the

[56:27] site. That's where this building goes.

[56:30] » Space for 170 seat. Is there enough

[56:32] space for that?

[56:34] » Yeah, that's why they're hanging on the

[56:36] floor.

[56:37] » Yeah, but they have the footprint for

[56:39] that for building that size

[56:41] » Footprint for the

[56:43] » Hotel.

[56:47] That's a lot of units.

[56:48] » Shares of parking.

[56:51] » Okay, got it.

[56:53] So, it's not shares.

[56:55] » Okay. because that's a lot of units in

[56:57] the one building.

[57:03] » So, just so it's clear, it's going in a

[57:05] separate separate building, the senior

[57:07] housing.

[57:08] » Yes.

[57:08] » Does it say that?

[57:09] » It's it's attached to the garage, but um

[57:12] does does this say this?

[57:14] » Does it say separate building? No, I

[57:15] don't think so.

[57:16] » How how are they doing that?

[57:17] » What do you mean?

[57:18] » I mean, how

[57:20] the senior housing units, let's say the

[57:23] 170, where where are those going?

[57:25] They're not distributed with the u

[57:29] one building.

[57:29] » Okay. Does does this say that it be a

[57:32] separate building for senior housing?

[57:34] » Yes and no. So it doesn't say separate

[57:35] building, but senior housing buildings

[57:37] are allowed to be

[57:38] » Up to six stories. So they're they're a

[57:41] separate building height established for

[57:43] senior housing. So presumably all those

[57:46] units are going to go to that sixtory

[57:48] building. They in this language they may

[57:53] have the option if they choose.

[58:09] » Yeah. I mean

[58:13] » Yeah it's it's gonna end up being in one

[58:14] building but Fran is right. The way this

[58:16] is rain, it would allow for

[58:17] » Each unit have different amenities

[58:21] » So they could move them.

[58:23] » Yeah, because every floor has an

[58:25] elevator. So that's one or

[58:30] I think

[58:33] units with an atrium.

[58:38] Stairway

[58:40] to the

[58:41] top floor.

[58:45] Here's

[58:48] if you start distributing senior housing

[58:51] throughout then the other buildings they

[58:54] go up to six story they say well wow we

[58:55] have some senior housing in here senior

[58:57] units for the rest of market

[59:00] » Yeah regular family

[59:02] » May maybe uh maybe

[59:06] » Buildends

[59:14] to be a higher

[59:17] add

[59:22] » And those are technically both already

[59:24] mixeduse buildings and so even if they

[59:26] did have senior living in there right or

[59:28] an age restricted unit or two which

[59:30] again I don't think they're going to do

[59:31] but because they're mixeduse we have a

[59:33] separate height or mixeduse building so

[59:35] they'd be to that

[59:37] » Yeah they they wouldn't mix a se

[59:39] designated quote unquote senior housing

[59:42] unit in a regular building that wouldn't

[59:44] make any sense.

[59:46] » Well, part of

[59:47] » A lot of things in this didn't make any

[59:49] sense.

[59:49] » No, I know. But that wouldn't make any

[59:50] sense cuz what what's the benefit of

[59:53] having a senior unit inside a mixeduse

[59:56] building? There's no there's

[59:59] » You know there would have to be in I

[1:00:01] guess income restriction that would that

[1:00:03] make it an affordable unit. You know,

[1:00:05] you the apartment 2D you have to be 55

[1:00:08] and over. I I you know I don't know if

[1:00:10] that

[1:00:14] » It's going in a separate building.

[1:00:16] » I think it's got to be

[1:00:16] » I think we're overthinking this.

[1:00:18] » Yeah, I think

[1:00:19] » What what is wrong with with saying you

[1:00:21] can do 733

[1:00:24] family units

[1:00:26] » And you can do up to 170 senior units in

[1:00:30] the assisted living facility.

[1:00:31] » That makes sense. I like it.

[1:00:33] » Yeah, I like that. Simple.

[1:00:35] » Yes.

[1:00:37] You got to be clear that that's what we

[1:00:39] want the

[1:00:40] » Senior living facility.

[1:00:42] » Yeah. Yeah. That make that makes sense.

[1:00:44] They're designated that the senior

[1:00:45] housing goes into the assisted living

[1:00:47] building.

[1:00:52] » And it's really unfortunate that we

[1:00:54] actually have this because as I said

[1:00:56] earlier um we we've already done

[1:00:59] amendments to the redevelopment plan

[1:01:01] which deals with all these issues,

[1:01:03] » Right?

[1:01:03] » Um and they said, "Well, we need an

[1:01:05] ordinance also." So I said we don't

[1:01:06] think you do but

[1:01:08] » Um

[1:01:09] » If you want to do the ordinance you can

[1:01:10] but you know it's created as many

[1:01:12] problems obviously.

[1:01:14] » Of course absolutely

[1:01:17] » What do

[1:01:18] » Yeah.

[1:01:22] » Well I think they still I I think the

[1:01:24] limit is still the 733 right now and the

[1:01:27] up to 170. Let's we'll make these change

[1:01:31] and we'll we'll get off to them. doesn't

[1:01:32] do that.

[1:01:34] » Did Did they send us information about

[1:01:37] us

[1:01:37] » In your housing?

[1:01:38] » No, they just sent it a few days ago

[1:01:40] actually.

[1:01:41] » Yeah.

[1:01:41] » Includes nursing home, senior citizen.

[1:01:45] » Yeah. Yeah.

[1:01:50] » This was was this was part of the

[1:01:52] settlement?

[1:01:54] » No. This

[1:01:55] » Or No.

[1:01:55] » No.

[1:02:00] » So, where where do we go from here? We

[1:02:02] we reddraft this section. Dave and I

[1:02:04] will do that. We'll get it off to Avalon

[1:02:06] this week.

[1:02:08] » Good.

[1:02:08] » Yeah. I Yeah, I have link already done.

[1:02:11] Um

[1:02:12] » Every everything else that's not in red

[1:02:14] was the existing ordinance.

[1:02:15] » Oh, yeah. Everything

[1:02:18] Yeah. Okay.

[1:02:19] » We're adding in the um description of

[1:02:22] special need. Does that have to be put

[1:02:24] in?

[1:02:26] » Yeah, we want to keep we want to keep

[1:02:27] that in. Yeah. But in the definition

[1:02:30] section at the beginning of the article,

[1:02:33] you're a whole different cate.

[1:02:35] » That's a good point.

[1:02:36] » Yeah.

[1:02:38] » Um,

[1:02:39] special needs housing is defined as

[1:02:41] housing of a bed that is reserved by. So

[1:02:44] if we have an ordinance book that has

[1:02:46] definitions that need to be included

[1:02:51] » Special

[1:02:54] » Well it says it's defined in NJSA 341B

[1:02:58] » Whatever

[1:03:00] » That's a state code

[1:03:01] » So okay

[1:03:03] » Yeah but it doesn't say special needs

[1:03:05] housing for seniors or senior I

[1:03:07] » I think we could keep it I think it's

[1:03:08] best keeping in this section tell the

[1:03:10] truth

[1:03:14] Special needs housing is separate from

[1:03:16] senior housing. It's se it's a separate

[1:03:18] item.

[1:03:19] » Yeah.

[1:03:20] » Could be a senior.

[1:03:21] » Yeah. It could be anybody. It could be a

[1:03:22] senior or it could be a kid.

[1:03:23] » Anybody.

[1:03:26] » Yep.

[1:03:31] » Well, they want to make sure that it's,

[1:03:33] you know,

[1:03:35] microscope.

[1:03:36] » It's group homes for people with special

[1:03:38] needs. Yeah.

[1:03:41] » Are we going to discuss windows too,

[1:03:44] » Anderson or Pel?

[1:03:47] » No. No. Whe the bedroom has a window or

[1:03:49] not.

[1:04:01] » So, so it has to have a window.

[1:04:05] » Well, that was for

[1:04:06] » No, when We've we've we've resolved that

[1:04:10] elsewhere.

[1:04:11] » Okay.

[1:04:12] » Yes. Thank you, sir.

[1:04:13] » Okay.

[1:04:15] Anything else that Jerry and um David

[1:04:19] are going to rework that? I think

[1:04:21] everything there's no

[1:04:24] Is there nothing else in red that we

[1:04:26] need to revisit?

[1:04:28] » No.

[1:04:34] » My

[1:04:35] » Okay.

[1:04:38] have what leads you about.

[1:04:41] » Well, yeah, you have the first page you

[1:04:43] have the special needs housing.

[1:04:46] » Then you have

[1:04:47] » We need to define that, right?

[1:04:48] » Yeah.

[1:04:49] » And then B2 you have everything there

[1:04:52] regarding um the number of units

[1:04:56] that needs to be revisited, re uh

[1:04:58] worded. We're

[1:05:01] » Yeah, I think on page one under tube A,

[1:05:04] it's sufficient the way it is now.

[1:05:06] » Okay.

[1:05:07] But do we need to add this definition to

[1:05:10] the ordinance book under definition?

[1:05:14] » No.

[1:05:14] » Why? Because it's already defined.

[1:05:16] » It's defined right here. You better off

[1:05:18] here rather than having somewhere else.

[1:05:22] » Sometimes it could be used.

[1:05:24] » Yeah, I believe. So, yeah. So, it's just

[1:05:27] defining it to that.

[1:05:29] » So, then B2 needs to be rewarded.

[1:05:34] Uh we're okay with the six story. It's

[1:05:36] 85 ft. We're okay with the parking is

[1:05:41] um.5 versus 7.

[1:05:45] This time we have

[1:05:48] » The six stories to have the chief

[1:05:51] comment on that. Well, that'll thatation

[1:05:56] » But the c well the council would um

[1:05:58] introduce folks right before the plane

[1:06:01] and board gets

[1:06:02] » Well. Do we need an opinion from him

[1:06:04] that you know

[1:06:13] » Address?

[1:06:27] » Well, we have five. I don't want to have

[1:06:29] to buy another $2 million fire truck

[1:06:31] because half doesn't go off that high. I

[1:06:33] I I honestly I don't know.

[1:06:36] » I would want to know now.

[1:06:45] » Yeah. Exactly.

[1:06:48] » And this is

[1:06:51] again I know it's a different product

[1:06:52] and different population living there,

[1:06:54] but originally that hotel was supposed

[1:06:56] to be six doors and 85 CD. Okay. So,

[1:07:00] nothing's changing

[1:07:02] » As far as the height is concerned in the

[1:07:04] storms.

[1:07:06] » Yeah. I mean, the maximum height of the

[1:07:07] hotel is supposed to be 80.

[1:07:08] » So, he

[1:07:10] » Do we know do we know if Chief Lynch

[1:07:13] will find on the sixtory hotel?

[1:07:17] » I think Chief Lynch will be fine with

[1:07:19] » Okay.

[1:07:20] » They have long host. He has he has a

[1:07:23] very long host, Chief Lynch.

[1:07:24] » Right. So basically, like I said, then

[1:07:26] he's going to have a valable needs in

[1:07:28] the building,

[1:07:29] » Right?

[1:07:30] » And if and and if he doesn't have a

[1:07:33] ladder truck that could reach that, then

[1:07:34] he's going to insist on sprinklers.

[1:07:37] » This ladder truck will reach it.

[1:07:41] » I heard he has a very long hose

[1:07:46] » For neighboring municipalities.

[1:07:50] um points five parking spaces and that's

[1:07:53] pretty much it. Okay,

[1:07:57] » We're good to go.

[1:07:58] » Yep.

[1:07:59] » Okay, we're good to go.

[1:08:00] » Yep.

[1:08:02] » So, David's going to

[1:08:03] » David and Jerry are going to re

[1:08:05] » I already have I already have some like

[1:08:07] draft language specializing on numbers

[1:08:09] and then reooking the set aside.

[1:08:12] » No, no,

[1:08:13] » No,

[1:08:14] » No, no, no. We're going to get it off to

[1:08:15] to Avan.

[1:08:17] » Sorry. to

[1:08:18] » I think we've gotten the in we've gotten

[1:08:20] the instructions we need. If we get it

[1:08:22] back to the board, this will go on

[1:08:24] » For an extended period of time.

[1:08:27] » Okay. You you know what we want. We want

[1:08:29] no more than 93 units with 170 total um

[1:08:33] max senior.

[1:08:35] However they get there, she's fine. And

[1:08:37] since they already have 733 built

[1:08:40] already, they're locked in for no more

[1:08:42] than 107,

[1:08:45] right? They're not getting away with an

[1:08:46] extra 67 units. They're going to squeeze

[1:08:49] in.

[1:08:50] » I That's my story. I'm sticking to

[1:08:56] » Okay.

[1:09:03] » Okay. Um

[1:09:08] council would be introduced and 45

[1:09:11] review by the planning board ordinance

[1:09:14] that's introduced. Yes.

[1:09:15] » And it comes back to council if

[1:09:17] something passes and eventually either

[1:09:19] side of plan.

[1:09:24] » Yes.

[1:09:27] » And and before there's even a site plan

[1:09:29] application will be TRC meetings about

[1:09:31] this first. So look at it technical

[1:09:35] details. So there's a bunch of steps

[1:09:36] done

[1:09:40] staff meetings.

[1:09:46] Okay, we don't vote on this vote. Okay,

[1:09:50] » Any other business?

[1:09:52] » Close the motion to close the public's

[1:09:54] hearing.

[1:09:55] » So move.

[1:09:56] » Moved by Allen. Second.

[1:09:57] » Second. All in favor say I. I.

[1:10:00] » Okay. Media journey.

[1:10:04] » Look at that. Not bad.

West Windsor Planning Board Meeting 08/05/2026

Transcript