where's oh you got the new a new yeah we had a new she she would gave me that you want to read it or you want me I'll read okay fair enough all right let's call the meeting to order y thank you Mr chairman if I can Public Announcement compliance this is the regular meeting of the fairen planning board adequate notice of this meeting has been given pursuing to the provisions of the open public meetings act at the time of board's reorganization in January of this past year the board adopted its regular meeting schedule for the year notice of the schedule was sent to and published in the Asbury Park Press on January 6 2024 and the two River times on February 1st 2024 as well as supplemented by published notice of July 11 to advise of the hybrid format the notice is also posted in the Bulet board border Hall and has remain continuously posted there as required by Statute copy of the notice is and has been available to the public and is on file in the office of the B code copy of the notice has also been sent to such members of the public ads have requested such information and accordance with the statute adequate notice having been given the board secretary has directed to include this statement in the minutes of meeting um Let's uh can we have a roll call Mr Gord here Mrs Bush M cot here Mr new Mr P here Mr Vault here Mr Nika Anderson here Mr here Mr Bailey here Mr fler here Al allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all so um so we don't have much um much on the calendar today so um we'll get uh we'll get right to uh the administrative items um why don't we uh why don't we just approve the minutes uh from the June 18th meeting um and then we can introduce Christopher G so I I didn't have any comments on the on the minutes I didn't know if any of the other members needed to comment before we uh before we approved just a update the the date of the tops is June 6th yes subject to that revision I'll make a motion to approve the minutes second yes [Music] I was done here Mr P yes Mr do yes I wasn't here Mr yes so um as you all know uh Christopher York was hired as as uh the new burough administrator and uh and he wanted to come and join us this evening um so Christopher floor floor is yours take a few minutes out of your meeting just introduce myself I'm Chris yor the new B administrator here in Fair Haven I Come From The Far Away land of Rumson just the other side of gu Vista um prior to that I was on the planning board for four years over in Rumson so I have experienced working with the planning board as well um I understand you guys will be talking about the master plan and discussing that um so I never did a master plan myself but um but I had been involved in aspects of it when I was in rumst years ago um so you know any help you need um obviously you know we be looking bud you know with our budget looking budget what the cost will be for 2026 right yeah it's a reexamination and so we're starting probably a little early I think but um given that none of us I I don't know bet you were here do to do the re-examination in 2016 or not I was you was so I I mean I've never been through a reexamination much less drafting a full plan so and neither anyone uh on the board so I think you know it's good for us to get an understanding early of what's necessary and what a timeline might look like um and that's what we're going to do over the next couple of meetings right uh get the planners in probably um well we're gonna talk about that right so we're gonna talk about all that tonight um and in our August meeting and um and come up with a you know with a with the skeleton of a timeline and then and then start to address or form committees to address certain elements of the plan if that's if that's what's necessary great great I said any any assistance you need any help um have you been did you go through a reexamination process through reation process when we did it in Ron I I want to say it was back maybe it was 20 200 2003 2004 um back we we broke up at different committees in different aspects of it we had different people assed obvious we had a planner and a board attorney had worked with it as well so that I am familiar with I've never done a full one so so that would be a undertaking that we'd all exp together um but I had been reexamined before so but I'm just want to make myself available anything you need um obviously my email address is there um contact stop and see me any questions and then um obviously any any cost budget and you know anything just let me know ahead of time so we can work that any early observations about the the work of the ongoing Fair Haven government versus uh well I start well I started my career here in Fair Haven actually back in '95 I worked here from '95 to 97 and I went to Rumson in '97 um you know so it's nice to be back um you know I haven't really been too far away so I've got to see a lot of it um there's differences you know I mean there's a lot that's the same there a lot that's different you know so certainly still in the evaluation phase of both but I have to say we have a great town here a lot of great professionals a lot of great boards I've been impressed by all the boards I've met so the volunteers are here is amazing and I'm glad to see you guys continue to keep it up thank you but anything anything you need feel free to stop up and see me anytime thank you thanks Chris okay thank you thank you so the next item on the agenda was was the continuation of the discussion regarding the reexamination so the we we said the to-dos last week was was for all of us to you know to take a look at the reexamination to look at at at Doug's memo which kind of outlined very well you know what generally had to be done um my to-do was to put you you know I put like a very G I mean it's this is a very general timeline I I think it actually leaves a amount of time and did you get one you got one okay okay so um you know I thought we could walk through that together Doug rely on your sort of expertise and and knowledge to let us know what you know what you think what we to do you know that kind of thing I thought we would take this meeting and probably next meeting we Dive Right In right so the first date would be next meeting where you you you know we as a board would come up with what we thought the process should look like um be kind of Final on that and send it to you know send it for Doug and for our planners to review and I thought we should have at least a draft of something uh to be reviewed by the planners before it went to Mayor and Council into the other boards right I mean otherwise like you know that so so um it is our plan right it is our it's our job to to run this process so you you know I I felt having our planners review what we were going to do and how or at least have the the timeline listed of how we were going to do it um review by the planners and then we can um in the September meeting um go over any of the comments that that the planners had um and then C at that draft timeline to mayor council zoning relevant committees for review and comment and then that way kind of we just end up at a point where um we have at least an overview of a timeline um that gets us to the to the finish line which is August the August 18th 2026 meeting would be when we have to formally adopt the report so I'll pause there for questions Doug I don't know any any comments so far Betsy any comments based on how it worked in 2016 if you if you remember this we didn't have a timeline this so it's very awful okay so um so then I said okay so um we once we had the timeline sent to mayor council zoning it would have already been reviewed by the planners um we can begin to to um construct the survey right I thought we all agreed last week that the first step in the process would be to survey the town um come up with the survey questions um there was a survey I didn't I'm I didn't print it out but the that's how the reexamination was kicked off last the last time it was done was was through this survey and so I thought then while the you know the timeline was still being kicked around with formal adoption the timeline in nove at the November meeting of this year in October we could begin construction of this of the survey um whether we included the planners in that meeting or not we're going to be very conscious of cost so I I thought like and you'll see a theme throughout this thing is like some of the meetings have the planners in them some of them don't right so I thought we could start with a survey without the planners presid start with how we wanted to construct the survey the questions we wanted to ask the elements of the plan that we felt were important and needed to be brought out in a survey or important questions asked of of Town's people uh and begin the construction of that of that draft as a board on our own in a meeting without planners present uh can I just say one I think we have a burough engineer that is certified in many of these areas and we don't have to pay him extra to attend our meetings that's part of his job so I think it would be helpful to include him if if we don't want to play planners for attending every meeting we can certainly ask Mr Gardella to attend our meetings yeah I have you can see in some of the boxes I have include planners an engineer but we can just have Rich come to all meetings that's great definitely suggest that okay I have a question as well I would guess the planners might have a set of questions that they have used successfully so it would really be good since we're using them as a resource to maybe have a draft at least that we can look at not limit ourselves to what they're saying but if they would have a starting point that might help get us going as opposed to creating everything from scratch great idea and another question I have on page two you write first draft of reexamination report that's on Tuesday September 16th so that assumes 2025 2025 right that assumes that we will not be completely redoing a new not doing a new master plan I took I mean we should probably pause now right and and start that discussion that that kind of started before before the meeting started which would I I prepared this under the assumption that we were going to do a reexamination now we we I don't we really talk about doing a full plan versus a reexamination but I thought we had leaned towards a reexamination rather than a full redrafting at at the last meeting I I could be mistaken no that was my impression yeah that was my impression to that that was where that we were not going to do a full rewrite but we should talk about that now Ian is that our discretion I mean it's our process it's our process yeah so well the only thing that's that's mandated by law Doug is is is that we that that you have to every 10 years you have to you have to reexamine reexamine to make sure that your master plan isn't some Document Plus St that it's meaningful viable and serves your needs so we iterate off of the original one that we referenced from 901 that what every deade okay so so it's like a compounding thing right there's a reexamination from 97 there's one from 2005 from 2016 well not necessar the time was actually extended at one point time used to be shorter we actually have more now now it is the question I had was going through this update to 2016 lots of things where it said recommended I made a note in the margin we did that like you know because I've been involved for a while in various aspects of the town so oh yeah we did address that so does that then get incorporated into the 1991 master plan as we've addressed that so in other words is that 1991 plan a living document and that it gets changed as we address the concerns or is it static does that make sense yes my understanding what you again I wasn't here for your last gr exam right my understanding is it is a living document that's hopefully someone at some point in time either by way of attaching an addendum right right said okay these sections are no longer viable these sections are now added I I have not tracked that at this point in time and sometimes what your planners will do when they go through this process is tell you this is what happened this is what we recommended this was the result these are outstanding you should explore whether or not you should these are still viable and need to be addressed [Music] um almost by re-exam by re-exam by re-exam not going back to meeting time but at least I've seen a Time by out the last the last three re-exams particularly where you continue to have the same theme struck if it wasn't if it's that that's why I said one of the first starting points or I recommend to you one of the first starting points is to do exactly what you've done look at your last re- exam identifying issues how many have been tackled how many you been successful of the ones that haven't been tackled successful you know you rais a good point physically dug did someone make a Redline copy with the master I do not know if that was done okay so we should do that in the next meeting so in the August meeting we should go Point by point in 2016 and decide if there's anything in the in the master in that reexamination that hasn't been addressed I can tell you yeah right now if you go to page 23 in this and in the master the reexamination ream it talks about I mentioned it before me Sor say the the Flor area limitations for B12 the yard setbacks I mean the recommendation is that they be reduced because it's our it's our Main Street it talks about making that a Main Street the table hasn't changed since 1991 for that zone so with with the exception of the affordable housing overlay zones change it right so depending on which affordable housing overlay Zone you're in they were produced to somewhere between I think it's 13 and 15 ft so um that is a very narrow application so in some of those right applications it was I would you have grappled with floor area ratio yes gra area I know those have changed and I know Building height in the bus area changed and whether or not you could allow a third is it a third or fourth floor went up to I say it went up to 38t but but again you know some some of this stuff um was specific to the uh fair share housing plan that was done whatever five years ago that's coming up for re-review and some of it my view is it's just not relevant to our community I mean some of these things require minimum lot sizes of 20,000 square feet we don't have very many of them in the business district we you know so there there are issues whereby the intent of some of these ordinances can't necessarily be acted upon because there are deficiencies elsewhere in the structure so I think that from my view it all needs to be looked at very holistically and uh so so there were by the way you know but but but but I don't think enough also right correct and actually it kind of went the other way and that it seemed like the master plan was saying a more compact business era but we went up high so is does that go against what the master plan was suggesting at the time well I think that direct result of the almost Builder remedy suit that was brought person so then you sort of lose your perview in in what you can can't do because it's got to be dictated by we may have we may exactly what wased in the master yeah I think it's a good next result of get the master plan see if we're Red Line see if we're amending right and see if them right and then we can go into the specifics different because I thought this this was a pretty good read I thought a thorough reexamination where there was you know comments on what could be done what has been done has not been done you know something that to put a pin in later I think there's plenty of them that are that are accomplished you know you even see things like Fair Haven feels Natural Area said it's the biggest land mass in all Fair Haven without an ad advocacy group and now we have we have somebody that we have a group they actually so there are some things that were accomplished I get ahead of it by talking point by point at this point thing right no we don't want to be talking point by point I I fully understand your concern like but let me ask question like if we like like if there's a recommendation here the the council has to pass an ordinance that would amend it right like there's not there like we can say we think it should be we could come back and say we think the setbacks should be X but the the council is the one that decides Council decides I think you have to make a distinction as to and this was a discussion you had earlier distinction as to what the ordinance says you will have to accomplish the goal of the master plan I don't want to take over this if it said we want mixed residential and commercial in our in our B1 Zone that's all the master plan has to say in terms of now what should the lot size be I mean we can make a recommendation that it should be compliable too because most of our lot sizes in these blocks can compromise the existing ones I mean we don't want to ignore what's already there most of these lot sizes are of this Dimension so we would think that in or would be supportive of that and then that gets fleshed out in the table that you're referencing the table isn't in the master plan the table's in our home it's invol it's invol it's easier to amend the ordinance and that's why I asked like what comes first like do you write ordinance and then come back like you know and it doesn't really matter it gets as long as it gets done you can get as detailed as you want in the master plan most of the time it's the here's the concept you we want to provide residential we want to provide commercial in some areas we want to have those uses mixed we want to have play areas we want to have areas for our schools we want a good circulation element and those are the kinds of things that are informed by the various elements that we want in the outline that I gave you here's where you got to do that you're when your planner comes in they're going to do additional things outside of the master plan which will inform your determinations if you suddenly find you have an extraordinary number of housing starts or as a result of the last census your age of your population has skewed one way or another say you let's say you have fewer seniors you're still going to provide facilities for seniors but you're probably going to begin to start gearing things towards a community what what does a younger population want because we'll be to touch this again in 10 years what does a younger population want we want playgrounds we want safe areas for walking we want bike paths we we've begun to do those things we want to be more cons just you know update our environmental resource inventory and take advantage of that data they're going to they're going to inform you as to what the last sensus was and how that change things that may tell you plus surveys know we heard a lot of people come and comment when we had Dunkin Donuts right people have brought people out what could we have changed in our management plan there I I don't know that you can recommend a total ban you probably can't based on the commercial entity but it's something to think about but the bone in build it out that new so so let's let's back up for a minute though and let's determine are we are we going to go the reexamination route or are we going to try and rewrite the that's what I was just thinking like I think the beginning conversation when we started talking about this two meetings ago I missed the last meeting was that we were redoing the master plan and it seems like the last meeting we went for a reexamination well I think I think we didn't decide anything right so I think the the the the meeting we had last month there was some discussion around costs and that the cost you know to to do and Sheila alluded to it at the top of the meeting that the cost to to do a complete rewrite of the master plan is significant and so that now significant I don't know what that means I don't know I don't know what that's where you're going to have to consult with your planners and going to add what's the cost of a master plan as opposed to a re exam so it might be worth getting the the planners in I mean I think next meeting is probably still a little too early because I think we still have as as we go through the rest of the timeline I think you'll see there's probably some more discussions that that we we as a board need to have did you well I'm just say what what is [Music] the what is the difference fundamentally between a a review update and a full rewrite if we're able to incorporate all the changes and recommendations that we believe the community would want into the rewrite if that's easier path and cheaper path forward maybe that's the way but I would say that you know we then need to go back and look at the 92 or whatever it was and the 200 and make sure that everything is incorporated into one document going forward so that we're not in a position where we're continually looking back they have to reference a document so like let's whether it's deemed a rewrite or you know reation or new you know better inflection points that that require new versus a re-exam if you're changing certain things I don't know that answer so I dou do you generally when do do do you know in your experience like how aged Master plans get before they're Rewritten I see few whole yeah very few I can't recall one of recent vage will tell you I'm going through this process in don't we're we use the underpinning of the 1989 master plan and we just had a hearing last night to amend the master plan not a exent but to amend the master plan because our environmental resource inventory needed to be updated it had been updated in we had incorporated into the master plan 2008 as a result of a couple of storms that came along since 2008 our environmental resource inventory had been revised but had not been formally incorporated into the master plan so we had a public hearing on that last night just to incorporate the updated environmental resource plan because we're also going through state cross acceptance reg we want to make sure that was up so the so we were eligible for sustainability yeah I don't know if this is that material but you know we're for the environmental commission we're doing the same thing and we're cracking open the ER and that's our active process are you looking for sustainability certification I think that's part of it so but it's also trying to look at there are cross references between the documents like er references back to the master plan oh a lot of a lot of the data the soils data you got there going to be the soils out of in the ministry plan the water resources are going be the same you know you're going to have a lot of that um would there be any benefit to asking our planners what their opinion is on this I think I think I mean I'll call so we should probably invite the planners and Rich to the next meeting then right I wantan to I would like to have an idea of what we're going to do because we're talking about something we don't really have I know it's it's information on and a planner would Rich gello would I mean that's their job let's see what they're we don't have to agree with them but let's see what their recommendation is I I think that's probably a good idea um so let's let's continue to so so we have to decide whether we're going to do a re a rewrite versus a re-exam can we wait and hear from them I mean is that yeah a logical like yeah I mean we're not going to decide that tonight we're gonna I mean I mean like I said the purpose of this was to just get all the dates and and kind of sketch out what a process could look like at a very high level and then try and put some you could ask yourself need to have a planner do this you don't need to have an attorney do this but if you if you want to work and say going back to the first comment what does our present Red Line master plan red line is my short inter definition of all the reexaminations what got put into the master plan what didn't get put into the master plan what does our master plan with all the iterations of the recommendations that either did or didn't make it what does it look like that will again I think tell you whether or not how live a document is and where has it been stack your m play is going to be static in terms of your SCE it's going to be it's going to be static in terms of your vand it's going to be static in certain years that you're not going to touch but drainage will have change because because for for no other reason CH yeah and they we're going through the storm water we just did Chang storm so is that something that the burrow administrator would be tasked with like to look at the master plan and then those things the professional ask yourself to do that a committee to grab the master what do we think the master plan is and how has it been modified since the very beginning and you'll know what your document looks like so are you suggesting that we that I just you could tell you can hire somebody to do that but I'm I'm just saying so so what you're suggest though is I just make sure I understand right is you're suggesting taking the original document then taking the updates from I would look at the last three Re updates I mean maybe the last two the last 20 years worth of updates and then plug in the 91 document all the things that have changed what has changed in that document so you know what you're it will tell you whether or not you need to do a whole revamp if we've kept current and it's a live document well then maybe it is yeah maybe it is easier just to but potentially it has been stagnant and it's being referenced I it's in a know that I don't I'm saying that's that's what we're discussing potentially it has been I would I would say if there's a binder upstairs that has the original 91 and has the print outs of all the reexaminations I'm sure it is in that same binder so it's all collected already so in a sense it's it's not right it's not like if if something changed in no that's what I'm saying I'm what I'm saying is if you go and look at the 90 all you can see is the 91 version of the master plan no one's gone back and taken a red pen right out B1 is now12 right or changed the circulation element updated correct with the updated right so I I don't know we may be debating like nothing that matters like the expert can come in and tell us what here are the top if you go to the table of contents there's like 10 topics I would like to just best practic right of what you do you have to touch all those 10 topics now whether you want to call it a master plan and and republish it as such versus a more thorough reexamination that you know looks a little bit beyond kind of like some general suggestions it actually gets into the teeth of you know these are things that we've been talking about for 15 years maybe we should be a little bit more clear with our rec ation rather than more general you know what I mean that's a decision we make though as we're going through that process but I think either way you're touching on recycling you're touching on land use you're touching on like all those topic areas that are in the master plan anyway right you know I don't disagree that anyone has said so far other than other than that we what we don't know is how static I think it's you know stag I think my my concern through that is it starts to get watered down well and also really confusing like how are you supposed to I mean how are you supposed to make judgments against which is what we do as a board make judgments against a master plan if the original document is 1991 as updated four different times for the for any for any one element like what are you opining against right and and what you're saying now Doug or what you said is like you see very rarely towns rewriting the plan I don't know that we would rewrite the plan more than consolidate it in some way and take done I mean that's sort of an you know when you reexamine you would think that you then this almost becomes a dead document because it's been incorporated into this right you almost take the document and you edit it Redline it and amend it every 10 years the Constitution yeah that's yeah yeah you're still dealing with 1776 now that we put an amendment yeah right yeah 80 never mind so it's not that I like I'm not saying I advocate for rewrite the other and I'm just saying it felt like that one it just I felt like if we do that kind of process again it has the potential continue to be diluted yeah I continue to know which end is up SP year you spend a year plus as a board doing something and I just putting a 30 40 page thing together that doesn't that isn't really Complete because you need the three or four other documents together to understand really Advance the ball like are we really advancing some of the things that have already been said in 2005 and 2016 right I'm totally on board with we I mean in there was the police station yeah yeah it's so funny seeing these things yeah you're right things that have been ticked off the things that haven't been tackled yet this could be the opportunity where you know if the survey information comes back it still says it's a high priority item in certain areas like maybe that's the the emph is for us to push for that next week now that a lot of those Capital Investments well you know that it is a do the way in which we started the B gr for the new for your new originally the police turned into a community center was to put that not priority and then you know it allows mayor and councel look the master plan this is what we need to do how do we go about doing that you check that off if it's a cost perspective certainly a cost aspect to it that you know but I do I am gen generally confused about what we reference I mean is it the 91 version or is it the 20 you look at you look at several you look at the 91 version and I would say probably the last two iterations of the re-exam which will have information in it about what was done before okay these were the priority items during our last week sure they talk about what the 2005 reexamination was changes in assumptions and recommendations they talk about then what happened your circulation plan got changed these things got done and you go to major problem s in the 2005 what was done problems then in your next examination ter second 2016 we did these we didn't do these These are no longer relevant and if you find out that everything is relevant maybe you are a if you find you've been tackling these things and you can continue to do that you're going to find that's probably a more cost effective way than start scratch because again most of the base work is there I I wouldn't suggest I I think what we're all suggesting and and subject to talking to the planners into rich I I think it's I know for me I think we at a minimum need a consolidation so you need to take somebody us or as as we go through this process we need to take the 91 plan and swap out all the paragraphs that have been amended in the different reexaminations and then decide if we're going to be and and then obviously there's going to be things that we as a board add in this process and then we end up with one single document because I I think trying to piece together five different it would be the 91 what is it 95 2007 and 200 I mean there's four documents that need to be there's four reexaminations since 91 that oh there's four so five doc ailable online no yeah but but I mean there's five documents that conceivably you have to sort of together pop around to kind of weave together exactly where we are in current day and so I think at a minimum we need we would need to consolidate into one document but that's I mean we should let the planners and Rich and everybody you agreed How You Gonna task that you g to task that so well I think we're gonna so I think next meeting we have we all agree we probably need the planners at the next meeting at least yes no I think planners and en Rich the next at least you get us started yeah they need to do their homework before they they come they need to come with suggestions or and not to not to pile on but you mentioned there's the it's fa housing afford just that document as well there's a River Road study from 2007 that's probably has some relevant still relevant items in that so not to pile on but there are other you know there are other things that touch this our active Transportation plan too there are how many Bo 12 I think so including the alternate so is there the ability and there may not be actually but to just bate it up and say you're taking pages one through 20 you're taking you know but then yeah but then how do you then when we go to the next master plan if there's no thread through it how do we know that you know Betsy isn't reading 20 through 40 there which correlated to one through 20 here which I read you know so we I don't know I haven't read it so the the right what what I was envisioning would be you know that everybody take an element or that there would be a topic area that that each member will be in charge of maybe you know if a topic is significant you may need two members to bifurcate it in some way but you would go by either housing ele I'm sorry you'd go by plan elements and do it that way um and then have you know that's kind of as as if we continue to go through the timeline right we'd have to formally adopt the timeline um and then when you got into 25 you'd start with the survey would be the first thing you did we'd have an open meeting to discuss the survey results um and then that's when once we had the survey results we would then go through the different plan elements and given the survey results plus what we as a board feel need to be addressed we would then divide up that work and then over the next six months you'd have each element would have its own open public meeting where you you know you would you would go through I don't again this is what the planners need to tell us how it's normally done right but I would Envision having some kind of discussion or open you know open debate or whatever by topic to come up with you know to really make sure we understood what the survey results that came back and then be able to incorporate what you know be able to synthesize what the public is telling us into you know how the documents should ultimately look and and and say at the end of the day would the topics be um starting on page 16 through Page 20 um did document that we were given at last meeting the 2016 master plan reexamination those topics it looks like they start with Community facilities then circulation open space Recreation yeah those are the those are the those line up to the elements so then those were the topics yeah and then and then we have Doug's memo saying things that we might need to address right or that well these These are they were not intended to buy generate thoughts right so so like for example like there's there's a statement on Smart growth storm resiliency and environmental sustainability climate change related vulnerabilities you know do we you know that's something I guess is showing up in plans right do we do we have sustainability check do we need it right I mean panabas legalization re-exam I mean electric vehicle Supply Make Ready parking spaces like are these some things that we're going to want to address or put in the plan we made side we don't feel like doing that nothing else to say though there has been a change in legislation since 2016 already stand the governing body has taken steps to implement ORD is statute plan our master plan recognizes these find are consistent with the master plan and and move on or they're not so again I there's an ordinance out there we've already reviewed it said it's consistent it's not it's not inconsistent to decide where certain area should be or should not be it is now in your quote unquote not permitted use category in this instance or to the extent that recreational is there are certain guidelines just just a recognition of it in your current re exam that it didn't slip through you the cracks there's there's a planning our planning document addresses it we got the ordinances it may be a little bit of you know back asswards the way we did it in this instance but we've recognized it so I if I can I'm going to try to bring you together because I've heard a couple of things and want you to keep beating yourselves up I also think you might do well and we can probably ask um maybe Sheila can find for us the last say 10 years worth of the zoning board annual reports to you right the zoning Board of adjustment annually prepares your report that it shares with us to show you what variances they've granted what applications and things they haven't granted that may inform and we see certain things on a regular basis Zoning Board of adjustment routinely addressing storm water we should heighten those types of things maybe if we take a look at adjustment annual reports it may tell you here's an area that we can look at that works already done for you now it's not riew do we need to incorporate or don't we invite your planners and you may ultimately decide we're going to invite everybody for Round Table discussion get your thoughts and then we may just hire one lead planner you know get an idea of all right like your idea don't like your idea you give us a proposal then you walk upstairs when you decide which way want to go walk upstairs and say this is what we think it's going to cost so now you're in Fr with your Administration we're going to need a line item maybe a little bit 2024 maybe a little bit 2025 you know to make sure we get all of this done do we know if we've got any funding set aside to help us with this for 2024 I mean we haven't we haven't had the planners at any and I'm sure there's a line on in the budget for planning that we I mean we haven't used one penny of that this year we have line items for professionals but they're not necessarily broken down they're not okay how they're ding down it's like a shared po of money yeah draw from for 2024 now for 2025 I I I mean we're gonna probably have to have we're gonna have to have when when is when is that budgeting it's in the process yeah our problem is is that you're only owed to raise the cap by 3 and a half% which gives us somewhere around5 to $550,000 more in 25 that's not dedicated to planning our Recycling and trash cost would have 97% yeah so that's going to take at least half if not more of that three and a half percent so we have a budget problem do we know if they've allow the state's allow of stories no when will that be um pretty much we've been denied so uh it'll be formalized um Chris York told me it'll be formalized in September but pretty much we're not what the reasoning that they gave if there's a reason I don't know our ask are there things for sustainable growth where we might be eligible for Grants and we can put money towards those things begin to right well we need to have those conversations yeah yeah but I'm I'm just giving you the reality oh no no noost question our healthare costs are going up 177% prescription 33% so that's going to take a big chunk out of that three and a half% increase I have a question that might alleviate some of our concerns about the master plan the the 1991 master plan could we look at just the guiding philosophy of that master plan to see how much it's changed from you know our broad vision of what we would like to see in the town and the reason why I'm asking is because all these things you know like that breakdown that I just talked about with those different topics that's always going to change you know there because those are the moving Parts but is like that guiding philosophy is that something that needs to be changed and if not if we read that and say it's still yeah this is pretty much what we agree with it's it's all online yeah yeah I mean it's that a little Saturday time on the rainy day to to go review that so I think I think what we need to do for the next meeting is we need to invite the planners and we need to invite Rich because I I think we I mean I think we need some guidance right absolutely like like just we you know in terms of how to approach the process and what what we as a board you know need to be doing right now and into next year right because if you look at at how this works or how I I think it would work we would have to have a final draft by you know I would say no late I have it here at the January meeting of 202 26 but you would I mean theoretically you'd have some time but we we would have like to avoid any problems right like I mean theoretically members of the public can show up at any time right and and make comment or while we're still in draft form and then we would need to address that in some way and make sure you know we as as I indicated in my memo to you this task has to be complete by August of 2026 the only good dates that I could give you in my memo was then okay let me walk let me walk back from the drop dead date yeah when our ordinance no longer have the underpinnings of a master plan how much time to get the final final draft you June you'd have to have do final final dra by June right so that you can then have you know whatever hearing you think you need if there's any additional survey information you want that so you want yeah we all know that in June when you think it's done the public ises not want get ju but this timeline is predicated on the fact that over the summer of 2025 while we're drafting the report or or sort of you know going through the necessary process of of coming up with the the different elements or changes to the elements that there's public engagement throughout that process and then the draft the draft comment final happens in 20 so the the that final process in 2026 assumes maybe foolishly so that there's not going to be some last last month kind of of back and forth or debate because we would had already had that debate and then further we before it goes to mayor council zoning it's already been reviewed by the planners and and attorney so that all we're left with is you you know you you know it's been blessed by the people that do this for a living and then it goes to Mayor and counsel to be looked at then those comments can come back and we have plenty of time to incorporate those comments or not it's our it's our plan not not mayor counil bu I I agree with you I think a key part like throughout the process is good communication with the public right I you know when we're opening for public survey and for public comment and not just on the agenda for the planning board but maybe consider email blasts that know specific that this planning board meeting we're hoping the public comment it's not going to eliminate the uh chance of last minute surge of residents in here by little maybe mitigate some risk of that yeah I mean we're going to have to figure out I mean right now we have no way or maybe we do I just don't know do we have any any way of communicating in Mass with the public yeah she'll she'll I mean disseminate any information that needs to know that right I mean they did it for the um for the uh leing brush committee and for garbage collection contract the workshops so there's a lot of communication about all those issues I think we should coordinate there physical voting or physical survey location did I hear that in the last examination that you could write like you could go fill out a survey was it all done on well there's there's one online it's a handwritten one so yeah there only one that's online scan of a handwritten one right they they open houses for the um for the community C I'm sorry DBW open houses there I mean that's what I envisioned I mean I don't know I mean we probably don't need open houses for every but I would assume we're GNA we're going to want certain open houses for safe shape that would be a time to include this the public you know before we finalize anything but at least we have something to share with them you may find that your survey highlights that very clearly where the VL of the work is going to be in the Public's perspective we may also want to come communicate with our Department of Public Works where do we anticipate different changes in our circulation we might have to address what is the status of your byly your physical plant I know you guys Ser on a regular basis DPW but that's also how we what planned our new facility again was like ideas what we were going to do that we had some great open houses there was a lot of community involv yeah and but that that happen sort of more at the you know how many how many iterations did we do for the police a lot yeah just for the DPW same we the public wasn't engaging in every iteration was as we got to the end and had to make the important decisions that the that we had the open houses okay you know we got it down to three choices or three ideas right um and and we took we took survey they voted on the public that in a sense was a physical survey because you came in and you put the color that you like on the architectural rendering that you preferred yes okay so next time have a round have a robust Round Table discussion with your planners let them know let them know you know we're at the very beginning process like we' like IDE we'd like ideas as to how we might tackle this process could we ask them to come in with some questions the draft questions so we can kind of get the ball rolling question we're also in the process of producing a survey we would encourage you to come with some questions that do you think would informed or's decision making process and that can be just a quick letter email out to our key planners Rich Cardella I would make sure that we copy our business administrator yeah each step of the way that should not cost you you I mean it's a meeting they I think a fix rate for a meeting no they charge by okay okay I mean I think we need it I mean I I are we early but in addition to that coming into that meeting I would I would task yourselves to have a pretty good knowledge of the underlying master plan and the reexamination reports that have come since then or at least those that are online yeah um you know summer times a hard time to so much happens with family you're looking at a guy who's youngest is 28 so I'm pretty much useless to him um but C yourselves to do that determined whether or not you think the document can simply be amended one more time or is it so out of whack because even if there's something you really want to do that's that you may think is radically different you know you've you've got a good resource inventory youve you've got a pretty you've spent some time for the circulation plan I you know your surveys is going you don't know what else you want to have yet there are certain mandatory elements and then there are certain optional elements and the optional elements are where you custom make this thing for you guys really and Tru you know you can we are in our in in another municipality I've tried to incorporate into here I think you have it we have a technical review areas before it gets to this board a professional sit down because I I don't know that you want to get into the minutia of the size of the water pipe that's presently serving you know let let those professionals say okay we're going to Hash this out with the applicant and an informal we've got somebody from the Department of Public Works we've got your planner sitting on that he about an engineer on a very complex application so that when it finally comes to us we do our planning we just in another municipality decided that we've been doing this backasswards all this time because as a condition of approval you will check with the shade tree commission why don't we have a member of the shade Tre Commission on the technical board you and from the very beginning if we know because their jurisdiction is limited get the reason their jurisdiction is limited to your streets they don't go private property tree cutting permits but if we know that there's a gas line that you're not going to put in sha tree there why are we going to task the applicant for putting sha trees there we know full well we're never going to put them there because that's where the gas mine is this is a contribution issue you know those kinds of things so you're finding out you know and and I'm I'm certainly finding out here but it's true in that me IP ality trees are important in Fair Haven they're important as as an ornamental resource but also as as as something that takes care of some of your storm water trees drink up a lot of water you clearcut something and suddenly you got flooding we can't figure out why weren you know 10 trees on the property sucking with that water those kinds of things do you want to have an improved sustainability list and we're going to have to get some again I'm just Ying get it from your your planners at the at the end of the day I become your spride I try to I try to Corral your ideas I think you're I think you're a good idea to bring your planners in some recommendations or survey questions begin to work on your survey ask yourselves looking at your nest and and your reexamination reports and lot I can tell from some come you've already started to do that okay anything else I mean I think we're at an impass at this point I I just would like mention one thing yeah on the timeline our October meeting is scheduled for October 15th but that's also the night of AAL council meeting I I don't know if that's I I just counted third Tuesday oh okay so maybe then for that I didn't have theu for I'm sure so we're going to do the following week I'm not sure okay find out but I know that we we definitely en counted for that in the beginning of the year and shifted some dates thank you didn't reference one or two aren't official till you till your publisher and we haven't yeah we haven't detered what those so sh that's it I I don't think we have anything else do everybody knows what their homework is read master plan and I'll I'll get we'll get the planners enrich at the next meeting and um oh I so we have a oh are there people yesy Cole people we're going to open up the we are doing this in the modern era right hi everyone can you hear me hi J yes am I one of your first uh hybrid attendees I think all right um well I'm joining tonight as a resident um it's hard to remove the Hat entirely but um my my background's in planning and Landscape architecture but specifically my work was in primarily um downtown revitalization work which involves a lot of different disciplines but I want to participate tonight and stay engaged with you um I applaud you for beginning these conversations um I want to tell you like I hear how conscientious everyone's being about costs which surely we all you know we're going to be confronted with cost bu no matter what but I think an Outreach to our B bur administrator and our finance team to understand how to fund uh a reexamination versus a Master Plan update would be a worthwhile um exercise and and and I don't even know what that'll look like ultimately I have some thoughts but um ultimately as a resident as council person as a professional that spent time in the field I I don't want to see us do anything with our master plan on a budget right like this is one of the most important pieces of work that you will do for Fair Haven and and it is one of the most it is the most important planning document for all of Fair Haven and surely will be for the next 10 years so if there's anywhere where we don't want to let um um you know this is not we're not going to clip coupons to get our master plan right this has to be done properly and I'm glad you're going to bring the planner in um I personally have had experience with master plan updates I've read all our planning documents and the reexamination was one of the first there's really five things that were remaining outstanding and the reexamination I'll try to keep this brief but you know there's like five things big things that came out of the reexamination ation report and which is just an exercise of going through the 1991 master plan and every 10 years you look at it to say oh is that still something we haven't done is it still relevant okay we'll carry it over to the new reexamination and it's almost like a to-do list I'm oversimplifying but it's a to-do list that hopefully gets shorter every 10 years um but it's not a 30,000 foot look at hey what changed since 1991 well if enough things have changed and that can be everything from weather patterns to shifts in demographics to um uh water quality issues with there are a number of large factors that we can't control that impact the Future Vision of a community and if there's enough of those and then there's a reason to do an update and and I'll say um Red Bank just did a very thorough update of their master plan and the good news is Mr chairman because I mean I can imagine the weight of this responsibility that you might be feeling but the good news is when you retain the right planning team because it isn't just one but it takes a team of professionals to take a community through a master planning process the good news is they came up with they'll come up with the plan they'll tell you this is this is a 12 to 18 month process we're going to have four public meetings we're going to do this type of public engagement from the beginning the middle the end the report outs are going to like that you're they're going to that's like their initial work product they're going to give that to you after you've had all the back and forth and talked about it together but I guess I wanted to say I'm paying attention I'm thrilled that you're taking this up um this is one of the most important things for Fair Haven and uh I just encourage you to think big and and know that I think at least as far as I'm concerned and I know Betsy she and I both know how important this document is so we're going to be prepared to support your work thank you when you when you say Red Bank did an update yeah that they they rewrote their master plan is that is that what you meant by that y they re or they just did the re-exam they did so the state requires as Mr Doug go as Mr kovat said the state requires if we want to retain our land use regulation Authority and make our own decisions about how we're going to develop our community we have to have uh a master plan and and so every 10 years is minimum requirement to keep it updated that I think of the update as a touchdown whereas the reexamination is sort of a punt where you get close but then you're like e you know what we're just going to rework the list and come up and and and carry it over for another 10 years so it technically meets the state's um requirements I see so so the update goes a step further it goes a step further because it allows you to look uh a broader lens you know I I call that 30,000 foot list view if we were going to ask ourselves what does the future Fair Haven look like what what do we want to look like that's what our master plan speaks to it's a very forward-looking Vision with goals and I think of it is almost like the skeleton um it it's goals and Concepts whereas the regulatory language some of which was discussed tonight um is the muscle and the tissue that brings those bones that skeleton to life so that when you do drive down River Road it looks like a main street instead of a hodge pod of um you know Wonderful stores that we all love but it's the built environment that we're looking to create and that happens through land use law and Regulatory underpinnings but that it's very we've been doing a little bit as Mr kovat said a little bass award sometimes but hey that's the way it goes but if we can get our vision very clear through this master plan process then we could tackle those regulatory um and land use issues with a lot more and we there's no reason we can't continue to peace meal it in my opinion because the sooner we address it the better uh but if we have to do a peace meal so be it in the meantime um I would just encourage you to think about the Long View if this is the document that we're going to live with for the next 10 years it uh should not just be right um an ongoing checklist but a real a Visionary document one that gives us a view of the future that we're all aiming for um and they will be informed by the values of the our fellow residents and the people we all live with thank you Tracy thank you for your good work waiting I will yeah motion close there need to go into executive session I have no no executive session does anyone else have anything they need to discuss s just to recap I want to make sure it is clear by my comments me no no no I do I do I tend to look at everyone Trac is right that's why what I was saying to you at the very beginning the reason sometimes what you do in the same hearing of adoption of the reexamination we should also list it as a master plan up the two separate but you're now you're saying not only did we complete our reexamination check off our 10year requirement and now we're going to put those right into the master plan we go back to the question that you asked okay after you did that did you did the red line