e e e e ladies and gentlemen the Red Bank planning board will now come to order this 10th day of April 2024 the time is 7:03 p.m. noce a meeting is being held in accordance with the public laws of 1975 chapter 231 one an adequate notice of the of the meeting has been provided by notice since the a part press two over times and posted in the main lobby of the municipal building as well as the municipal website roll call pleas mayor Portman absent Greg Bitz cherl here Thomas Welsh absent Christina bonatakis here D here L DEA here Barbara Bois here Massie absent wison B here itel Hernandez here Redstone and Ryan carigan here welcome ladies and gentlemen before we get started I would just like to Mark the the sadness of the occasion at the loss of our bur attorney Mike lexin who served with us here for 25 years and was a in addition to being a wonderful turny a great guy uh I couldn't get him to talk into that microphone for the 25 years but I will miss him very much nonetheless he was uh really a joy to deal with all these years so he will be missed and I didn't want the meeting to start without that secondly um I make a motion to kind of cify the fact that we had already hired his firm but his son Mark lexin who has served here in his stad for for many years as well um make a motion that that he will uh take over as the planning board attorney in his father's place so if I could have a second for that please I'll second that reer yes Christina bonatakis yes D manusa yes l d yes Barbara Boz yes Wilson B yes elel Hernandez yes and Brian carigan yes thank you all I appreciate it and I spoken to the mic and I appreciate the kind words about I'm never going to have to say that again I know but I kind of that I did so welcome thank you very much um before we get started just to do a a quick minutes minutes we'll do that at the end of the meeting um I want to welcome everybody appreciate everyone coming um those of you who've been before hear me say all the time how much I appreciate it that the public comes out to meetings so thank you in advance as you know we're here to talk about the study um done by our Professionals for the area need of Redevelopment so before we get started with that um Mark if you would please swear Susan in for us from bfj absolutely hi do you swear a testimony about the give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth self you got and just state your name for the record thank you push up the mic a little bit more so right up there yeah so as as usual when we've got a presentation um Susan's going to present the board will uh have an opportunity to ask her any questions and then as always we'll open it up to the public um because it's not a a normal development application we won't separate questions and comments like we normally do so when it's a Public's turn to to speak you're welcome to come up and do questions or comments all at once if necessary we will have our usual five minute limit per speaker and then if it's not too late and someone wants to come up again we may make make that happen depending on the time so just to lay some ground Ralls Susan we can get started short presentation cover um it's really just summarizing this study that weared on your behalf and happy to answer questions on the board again just GNA start with a quick introduction little bit about Redevelopment as a whole and then how we kind of got here's perspective what the process has been what what it is from the Saint's perspective in terms of development I'll take you through the the study area additions which is really based on site visits with B staff obiously our familiarity with the area master plan work phone New Jersey transit to get a sense of freight guard so there was a lot of information that came just give you a high level view of those conditions and then go through the actual Redevelopment criteria from the states statute to determine whether these Parcels do do not meet that criteria next steps in this process hang on one second can everyone in the back here Ben Jeff you guys are good all the way in the back thank you um so putting this into context in terms of the bur's planning I think you all are aware and you know that the transit planning and area around the train station has been for a long time an important part of Red Banks planning language planning you have enjoyed a destination historically by the state as a Regional Center in the state's Master BL Regional planning um that actually has expired but the burrow is in the process of trying to kind of reup that designation and I think that's in large part because of the existence of this transation makes you a regional center the likewise the transit Village idea and designation and efforts to gain that designation that's that's been ongoing for a number of years the B submitted an allocation back in 2019 early in that year and then do who is the state entity that program their response essentially the bur was well your overlay zoning isn't enough to get your Transit Village they wanted to see as of right zoning ordinances in place or Redevelopment planning in order to meet that criteria of Transit Village designation they felt that overlay zoning was a bit too speculative may or may not actually happen all result in any actual Transit ring development of to so with that sort of in the background the B has been restarting its Transit Village process it is a little bit delayed due to co um but certainly the master plan in 2023 recommended carrying that process forward restarting Transit Village um and looking at ear zoning replacing the overlay zoning district with either a targeted cood zoning district and as aide District or we in combination with um looking at the Redevelopment tool as a good option for this train station areal we'll talk a little bit about why Redevelopment is a good fit here within and how it can be beneficial to the gr so what got us here tonight is the Bal Council directing you as the planning board you're the body does this by Statute to do a preliminary investigation as to whether this station area and the Sur enforcements in a designated study area whether they all qualify as an area in need of Redevelopment so that's how we got here tonight um bit about Redevelopment from the state um it is embodied in the New Jersey local Redevelopment Housing law the LL and it really lays out Redevelopment as a tool municipalities to facilitate revitalization of problematic areas generally properties that various reasons and will go through those are unlikely to develop on their own or unlikely to see private investment that might carry them into revitalization so they need a little bit of extra help and so there's a whole process the state has laid out incl Financial incentives and and other tools that are meant to jumpstar that rev valorization process there is an imminent domain aspect to Redevelopment but it's up to the municipality to determine whether that actually is in play and in this case just want to be clear that imminent domain is not on the table here the bough Council was very clear in their direction to you all that this is a non-c compation study so there is no redevelop so excuse me there is no imminent domain contemplated with this Redevelopment study so once a designation has occurred and that would be based on the results of this study the next step would be appearing an actual Redevelopment plan to the area and that is a whole process into itself um but what that does is it essentially creates the development standards for the area I'll talk a little bit later in the presentation about what a Redevelopment plan contains but it is a little bit different than traditional zoning it kind of creates the Zoning for the regulatory environment for the re Development Area and it can go a lot farther than traditional zoning it can include very detailed design requirements it can look at the form based approach as opposed to traditional zoning so what the buildings look like how they relate to each other where they're placed on the site what kind of amenities there are in terms of indings and bikes spaces lots of things can be on the table there um the public improvements infrastructure some human have even used development to to get improvements to their public buildings themselves so there's a really wide range of that you can look at when government that makes it really useful tool properties that that do meet that criteria and we'll go through those criteria they are very specific and you are meant to go through item by item and make sure that you're taking a very careful look that they do or do not meet these these criteria so a quick overview of the study area hopefully most of you can see it um it's outlined in red this is essentially the trans station area the mons and then a number of key Parcels sort in and around that station area it's a little bit oddly shaped because the the actual parsal Lin so you see this very long skinny north south lot that is the New Jersey TR Transit rail yard and it's just the nature of that that lot is why it's kind of a long skinning triangle um but it's a total of about 13 acres um and it includes I mentioned the entire train station area surface parking the rail yard the BW facility building um which is running on Chestnut Street um and then several primly owned Parcels that are also included in this area the largest L use is surface parking and we'll talk a little bit about that and the condition of that parking and then if you look at the zoning which is on the next slide it is a real mix of of business zoning industrial Light industrial and reg industrial zoning and then that train station overlay so there's a number of different districts that are place in this area and then also a portion of the northern portion of the area is a part of the B's existing designated Rehabilitation area which is also was designated under the lrhl but slightly different than a Redevelopment area here you see on the left this is the land use map and you'll see that that gray color if you can discern that that's all parking lots mostly owned by New Jersey Transit then there's sort of a dark teal that's the sort of railroad infrastructure that would be the rail yard as well as the station itself station building an immediate area around that you see a little bit of a mixed use business some sort of nonprofit use and then of course the blue is the Burrows DBW facility in terms of the zoning which you can see on the right you see the different zoning districts in place the the green hatched area which is actually just outside the study area is uh the burs affordable housing overlay that has been developed out as affordable housing residential uses so that is sort of in the context but it's not in the area itself you can see in the yellow hash area that is the rehabilitation area that covers a portion of the northern part study area so that's land use and zoning and then we looked also at property ownership and the tax information you know ownership is an important consideration and even though there are a number of parcels in play here there's only five owners New Jersey Transit owns the largest portion that is all of the Bots the infrastructure so total of nine different Parcels in about eight and a half acres and then Den Holts properties is the largest private property owner here um they own a total of five properties in the area and I know you can't all see the arrows but I'm just go through the top level um the B itself has the DPW property which is technically two Parcels um and that totals about um 1.2 Acres One Acres um and then there's a property that's owned by count basy Theater which is sort of support that b office um use for their their main use obviously here on Mama Street classroom space reversal space you know props that type of thing costuming so really providing all that backround support that's about an acre and a half and then there is one um small privately owned property um really at the northeast corner which is the Mex restaurant and some apartments above right there at the corner above the total assessed value of this entire assemblage is about $1 13.5 million however uh the most recent tax year Revenue was only about 110,000 uh in taxes and that really is reflective of you know the municipal public property ownership of a lot of this this study area so it is not generating a lot of tax because of the nature of ownership and the use so this is a very very top level um sense of the side conditions the study actually went through block by block each parcel looking a photo documentation sense of what the conditions currently are but we do have some takeaways here and I think it's not news to anyone um that there is a significant amount of underutilized surface parking here it varies and we've been out there at different times of the day interestingly I think the parking that's actually closest to the station is less used and parking that's a little bit farther away is more heavily utilized um largely because of all that impervious surface which is in very stages of condition some of its crafts most of it's in decently good shape but it does create a lot of issues with drainage and this is a line area I'm sure you all are aware in The Heavy Rain ponding backs up and so a lot of these properties do experience pretty frequent rain flooding um in terms of the built environment itself with the buildings generally they're in Fairly good shape I would say the big exception which I'll talk about is thew facility but otherwise the privately owned buildings are you know reasonably in good shape there's always maintenance issues um that they're obviously in play and some are maybe a bit farther along than others some of them do have some AG these buildings most of them are quite old um the DPW property is is really the exception um I spent a good hour hour and a half there with your your DPW CH and you walking through every aspect of that property there's a lot of issues there the trailers are 20 years past their life like they um they're quite deteriorated the buildings themselves that are not trailers have their own issues as well overall there's just a real lack of functionality um it's a tidy space there's a lot going on it happen to be there after snowstorms so there's salt snow plows you know trying to kind of jockey all in their positions on the site um that is quite small and also provides public parking for the the offices themselves so there's a real lack of functionality in circulation there's a lot of um issues with the actual storage space these buildings are being required to do a lot and so some of the equipment is not a able to be stored indoors it has to be stored Outdoors that lessens the lifetime of your your public equipment so that is a real issue just generally that property and then um it is an environmentally contaminated site it's a Brownfield it's being monitored on a regular basis by the state um there's no emminent issue there but it is in their system and they do have to have monitoring by the state um otherwise um otherwise in the study area there's a couple problematic uses there is um a tiny sliver of a property that is used for billboard um which in the master plan talks about that not being an ideal use for Town we'd like to sort of see fewer Billboards obviously creating revenue for that property owner but it's it's an offsite billboard and then generally auto storage there's some Auto Repair auto storage happening in this area again not the most ideal use for sort of a downtown War environment um and then maybe not necessarily unique study area but certainly it's affected by the railroad tracks and just the nature of an atg grade railroad The Pedestrian environment Le some something to be desired there there are sidewalks generally in the area they vary by condition there's some inconsistency there but just the nature of the tracks and the condition of the the sidewalks as you cross those rare tracks make it a little bit problematic desing standpoint and there is no designated bike structure there's one bike lane on Bridge Avenue uh is near the study area but it's not within the study area so there's really no dedicated bike facilities obviously there's bike parking but there's not dedicated B Lanes and then the last thing which is a little bit interesting is you do have those high tension electrical wires that are coming sort of north south through the parking lot it's work be okay for the parking use but it does create a lot of issues in terms of future development or different uses of that site that is something that will have to be well and that is an impairment for future development that's a very high level look at at the conditions and here it's just selection of photos we have a lot more but you can see sort of underutilization of the station parking this isort of close to the station area itself um you can see the issues of drainage this was after the snow and largely melted but the water is still there you have ped lots and varying issues with with surface you see the billboard here um the bottom left photo is the closest we get into the rail yard um that is a whole other area there's Transit Rail Yard long skinny piece of property that's mainly being used for obviously infrastructure related to the railroad itself but also a lot of parking for employees so they're using that on street parking the DPW garage building this is just one of the buildings on the property you can see both windows this is this is actually storing a lot of stuff in that that one building and so it's not really weatherproof um 100% it's got a lot of cracking both in the foundation and really throughout the building itself um and then the count bacy property is actually interesting because those buildings that are on that property there's a couple of them are actually in good shape they're fine the parking lot is fine but the rear of the property is sort of this Hodge pod that you see um down here at the bottom right which I think is also being used as overflow for DPW a bit and so you got a lot of sort of random storage very much pitted ground no drainage back there really it's a bit of a place back there so that I think is is one reason why that property maybe was included in the study areas some issues back in the rear of that property and certainly we heard from from DW that that is where there're seeing some flooding along those property lines so that's a real high level of condition and stud goes into I want to take you through the actual criteria in the state statute um eight and they're applicable in various ways here we're not okay quickly go through the first criteria crary a is really looking at the condition of the buildings um whether they substandard whether there safety issues unsanitary some level of delamination obsolescence is a very common use of this criteria if there's lack of light a space and all these that are combined to create issues of unhealthiness make that be problematic to to occupy or use so that one applies to some of the properties I'll talk about um criteria B uh is discontinuance or abandonment of buildings for at least two years consecutively uh which creates them def fall disrepair think we have that in here in any way um C publicly owned or un improved vacant land um that make it for 10 years or more which is not likely to be developed um in the private sector because of very issues particular to the lot and that property ownership topography conditions Bel lot talk about whether this applies or not um D is similar to a but it's looking more holistically at the site including the buildings and so again it's looking at issues of dilapidation obsolescence overcrowding is there just generally problem with the conditions that is making it unsafe or unhealthy um e is um relative to a couple of these which I'll talk about the properties are unutilized there's particular issues with certain properties whether that's issues of title and ownership other conditions that really preclude development and f and g are not applicable here um f deals with sort of natural disaster fire issues that create those problems and then G is properties that are in an Urban Enterprise Zone you are not but H is certainly applicable to much of this study area as I'll talk about H is the newest Criterion Criterion here and it's smartw planning whether we development here with the property itself would be consistent with smart growth planning so I'll quickly take us through um but in addition to these eight criteria there's a couple things to think about you look at the sort of legal context of Redevelopment planning um and there's this important section of the law section three which makes clear that even if an individual property or block or lot that's within a larger study area if it doesn't need one or more of these criteria um it can still be included at AAL designation um because you're the overall nature condition of the area um so it may be that including that particular site um is important to effectuate redevelop even if that site itself doesn't meet the criteria so we'll talk about where that may or may not apply and then the the sort of last caution here on the the new the newest criteria Criterion H which the smart growth criteria um it's generally not seen as good best practice to you know use that as your sole basis hang your hat on smartphone um but to use that in combination with another that together they might help make that um that designation met so we've been keeping that in mind too and generally uh when I'll take you through the relevant criteria here we've tried to be very conservative um there is a lot of case law that um you're not meant to just take a very loose flexible approach you really need to go through the and think carefully about whether they do or do not apply so we we've been I think pretty conservative as to whether they do or do not apply so I do have a summary table but I will say that um there's a few Lots or two actually the DPW lots that do we think meet that Criterion a substandard dilapidated and obsolete buildings we certainly saw it on the property whether it was the two trailers or the buildings themselves there's a lot of obsolescence and just problematic um issues or condition there um Criterion B is the discontinuance or abandonment um issue and that's not in place here in the study area and likewise Criterion C which is that public or vacant land which is not likely to be able to develop on its own um in this case you do have a lot of obviously publicly owned land but we don't think it quite meets that threshold um there's there's not particular issues with the properties and the condition that really would preclude those potentially being developed if the public entity wanted to sell them or make them available so again being conservative we don't think that we're not convinced that Criterion C is met however Criterion D which is again looking at sitewide conditions obsolescence dilapidation we do think that most of the properties here in the study area do me that when you look at the entirety of the sites um the exceptions here are there's one lot which is currently being used as only house um and house could use a little bit of Maintenance but generally it's in pretty good condition so we don't think it meets Criterion D um and likewise the two commercial properties frontting on M Street with an AO service facility and then the restaurant The Corner departments above those buildings are in reasonably good shape as are their their General sites so we're not suggesting that they meet the criteria and then lastly the account basing property as I mentioned the buildings and the parking generally are in good condition there is some stuff in the back that I talked about but we're not that that really reaches the level of of making the entire site meeting this criteria D okay so e is looking at whether they're underutilized or stagnant properties that have some issue whether it's ownership title um other issues that would include their development and here we do think you have a couple one is the property that has the power Lin in it obviously those power lines aren going anywhere so that that does imp future development and then the other one is the Billboard property that's a revenue generator it's trally difficult to get Hill boards off property so that is at least one issue see what so we think they need criteria e as I mentioned f and g we think we're not applicable here anywhere in the study area but then Criterion H is the Smart growth criteria and here we really looked to the master plan because the master plan did designate uh a specific area to be looking at for potential Redevelopment planning and or potential to Zone and it really included the study area um at least watch of the study area area except it did not include the DPW account basic so again being conservative we think you could make a case that those two sites would fall into the smartone they're very close to the train station but because they have not been designated in the master plan which're just being conservative and saying we don't think that they quite meet the S criteria and then the last one which I mentioned is that section three thinking about are properties that don't meet another Criterion on this list maybe they need Criterion AG but nothing else but should be considered for inclusion in the entire area and we do think there's a few that fall here that single family house um because of where it is located it's kind of a corner including it in a Redevelopment area would allow you to kind of square off the development potential theide even though it's uses single family home it's actually owned by V holes so if there's common ownership with a lot of the properties in the area so that actually makes sense to include um and then likewise with the auto service property same thing it allows for a larger more squared off development site and it is also owned by DS as well and then the third one here we think makes some sense for section three is that count basy property only because what's happening on a portion of it in the year it's not being used by count basy that is sort of hodge podge right now and and has the potential when you think about how it might be combined with the ew property to effectuate some includ there so just thinking for positive planning um components we would suggest that those three properties do meet the section three criteria okay so here is the summary table which I know you can't read all of it but it's really easy to see which criteria most we met and you see that Criterion D which is looking at the side conditions overall dilapidation obsolesence as you can see in mention both most of the properties in the studing area do fall under that Criterion um there's a couple that beet Criterion a a couple Criterion e and most also meet Criterion H and for a few in section three so um most of the sites in the study area meet at least one uh and those that only meet those that that meet Criterion H there's only a few that only meet that one so most meet more than one and so then therefore would fall into designation mean that criteria so that's summary here um oh yeah sorry it was it was the teal above let's skip right over um the only one this is in the study as well the only lot that we really don't think meets a designation criteria uh is that restroom property the one on the corner it's not that's restaurants above building's fine business is active the Departments seem to be occupied um it really doesn't be the threshold of any of these Criterion except for smart growth and as I mentioned you can't really hang your him solely on Smart growth so the uh the two that um that also only meet SM growth you do think can be included um for section three that's the basic property and the sing property and the auto service so um summary the entire study area set one lot would recommend or designation Redevelopment what is the lot block of restaurant property l Restaurant is umot 41 Lot 8 41 Lot 8 thank you so that is really what I think is is under under consideration tonight public obviously is we would recommend you back to the council they are asking for your recommendation that is your role in terms of jurisdiction that you would recommend that the council consider designating the entire area with the exception of block 41 8 as an area in need of Redevelopment and then the next step if you and the council for an agreement we be the council to make a resolution effectuating that and then they would direct you to prepare a Redevelopment plan which is really the next major phase of the process we are very much here at the beginning um and it's important for the public to know that if you all go down that path and you are directed to do a Redevelopment plan that is a separate process it includes additional Community engagement it's going to be a planning process um pretty expensive and so the requirements for the Redevelopment plan are you really looking at land uses appropriate density of buildings and population traffic and circulation how the interplay with Transit works and that includes buses too recreational Community amenities are there um are there potential improvements here ways to get benefits for the community um the the Redevelopment plan gets very specific on the land uses and the particular building requirements site requirements set coverage all the things that zoning typically controls are laid out in detail in the development plan um if there is uh relocation of residential uses there's requirement that you have provision for that relocation of residence whether it's on temporary permanent basis any identification of property to be required as I mentioned emminent domain is not this Redevelopment planning effort um you have to look at the relationship to other plans both in Jason municipalities and the county and State you talk about affordable housing there is no affordable housing or designated affordable housing that's in the study area so that's we think not applicable um in terms of replacing it but there may be opportunities and we do think there will be opportunities to create your affordable housing here look development tools um and then lastly you also state to look where you're going have your your vehicle charging in terms of EV space so um this would be the next step in the process we would be involved we have an Urban Design Architecture Firm if you choose to do Redevelopment planning Council chooses to do that um there would be engagement with the community we get really detailed into design of buildings and sites and there are U elements in the master plan that have kind of laid out some overall goals and some kind of principles we would look to build on for the for the Redevelopment plan but that it's all dependent on um your decisions and council's decisions okay information have to take questions thanks so much Susan does anyone from the board have any questions for Susan no I do go uh Susan um is there any Merit to um looking at the application of section three to areas that haven't currently been designated for the study that would overlay with the proposed uh trans oriented District I mean from a planning perspective and I'm going to Council on this um I'm sure that there are adjacent areas you can make an argument for um if you were only being directed to look at the designated Parcels that are in the study area so that's sort of limit what you can look at if there are marals that you think are inside the study area that might make sense to look at um probably suggest that it's just a recommendation but it's not any kind of no I think you said it exactly correct they this this board is only empowered to decide whether or not the properties that have been designated already by the by the burrow Council meet the definition of a non-c condemnation area Med development you can't add to it um and I always like to say this isn't that you think it's a good idea a bad idea that's not up to the board the board is just simply right now to decide whether or not the criteria applies to the properties that have been designated by the council uh thank you a follow-up question uh for internal uh who owns the uh moving forward on the transit oriented uh District planning and application to the state Village transill yeah Transit Village we would do we do that yes that would be done in Mar okay but some of that is moving ahead now like you're doing background work on that until we the only thing that's left for our Transit Village application is to have a Redevelopment area in within that that area um so once if Council decides to designate the areas the area in need of Redevelopment we would then send that information to um trans not Transit but um do under our application because right now it's incomplete so that's from their point of view that's their last check box pretty much and it's some minor yeah okay thank you anyone else on the board have any questions for Susan think yeah just a quick question um for the DPW site could you explain why the Criterion C was not met for which property bro for the DPW site as a Brownfield you could make however it's it's not like an active spill it's been stabilized it's obviously been monitored by the state doesn't ground nature doesn't include a use of that state you're going use it for residential or something more intensive probably has to be a different level but for its current use and for many other po a ground field designation isn't necessarily impediment and could you make a casee could be made public site it has some issues that would Le that difficult to develop yes and then assuming you know if the board agrees to all the Criterion that have been designated for all these particular sites what's the process now this goes then to the state and then they review determination no it goes to the Council okay uh this board this board does of course does not make the designation all you do as the board is determine whether or not the criteria in your opinion has been met and then it's referred back to the council the council could could decide we're not going to do it it's it's completely up to the council you're not having any actual designations okay it is a local matter it's local so State can dictate obviously into Transit is Major St they certainly be involved in the development planning process property owner they're they've been clear that they're interested in development around the station so they would certainly be involved in that process but it's your local planning do okay thank you anyone else from the board have any questions okay folks now's your turn I already regret saying I was going to put comments and questions together so if you can if you have both a comment and a question I'd appreciate it if you led with the question to Susan um you're welcome to ask the board any questions but right now I'd really like to focus on Susan's testimony and you are as I said also welcome to make comments but if you have a question please lead with that so whoever wants to come up first can come up to the other microphone Dan I see your hand um speak right in the microphone as always you need to be sworn and give us your name and address sir do you swear testimony about to give would be the truth the whole truth about the truth self you got just state your name and your address thank you Mr Ruden yeah pull the mic in close so we get you on the record good then yeah so um just wanted to make sure I understood correctly that if a property does needs no other criteria that it shouldn't be designated part right in terms of that's a best practice speak fairly new criteria that haven't been at least in the the state statute that haven't been specific criteria developed for smart grow there's other state agencies that have criteria for smart gr look those um but no generally you shouldn't use that as the only Criterion however as I talked about you can also look to section three so you've got that a age criteria but also section three so that can also support in addition to crer aging um and just to clarify I think I heard you say that the transit Village application can move forward with either an area in needed Redevelopment or Zone making the overlay Zone actual my understanding more recent contact with the SA yes that is true you can do either one um you can change the standards for the VR1 Zone which this is where most of these properties F fall into um or you can do a Redevelopment um area but we should be clear that's really not a consideration for this board right that's that the board the board can't decide we're not going to find these as an area of Redevelopment because the council could pursue another action that's not the question that's before the board right now the only question before the board you have take politics out of it you got to take everything else out of it the only question and we have to talk in a vacuum is whether or not these properties meet the criteria as studied by the planner and that that's it that's the only question before this board tonight that is allision correct at all correct and again this is just a resum recommendation anyway that whether or not it meets the criteria it has nothing to do with what might happen at the property the board has no involvement at that at this stage and shouldn't play any role in their decision- making it be improper for it for them to do so I'm happy to move on to comments or I can come back no com if there were hundred people here I'd make you wait but there aren't so go ahead with your comment so she I'm gonna make her stay all night so go ahead I'm here you're so uh I I object strenuously to the idea of a Redevelopment plan uh I'm going to put my objections into three categories I object on principle I object I think it's a violation of the rules and I object because of the Practical outcome so the principle the reason that this exists which is in in the the Redevelopment uh report is because the New Jersey Constitution allows towns to take states to take uh steps like this for lighted areas I don't see any place over there that's BL DPW a little bit on the blight side but otherwise there's nothing lighted there there's nothing there that um prevents someone from redeveloping it's an area that could be redeveloped without having to go through the process of creating Redevelopment uh Zone Redevelopment area and I think the best evidence of that is that this developer developing right next to the Redevelopment area with no uh big Chang to Zone with no uh tax breaks it was just a regular development we got whatever the 15% formal housing out of it um but Mr Mr Ren again I'm sorry as you heard me before you're making arguments that are better made to the burrow Council that's the board has no authority to make a decision based upon objections as to whether or not the area should be in uh Redevelopment because there are other Alternatives that could be done that's not it's illegal for the board to be considering what you're asking them to consider and I want you to understand that the argument you're making is completely appropriate to make before the burrow counsil go before the B Council if the board decides that it meets the criteria and say hey there are other ways to do this I'm objecting to a Redevelopment this board can't decide we don't want to go towards Redevelopment because of everything Mr Reen just said so we're not going to do it so your argument is in the wrong place right now so uh rules rules rules that obligated to follow are design properties that can't otherwise be developed there are several criteria that you can use in determining that the primary determination is this is a blighted area it can't be redeveloped unless we take exceptional action the exceptional action R development so in particular on the rules um only two criteria that most of the properties meet uh but six of them maybe are crer H so H as we've heard it's not really enough stand on so so it really comes down to C and I don't see how any of those properties possible exception of DBW again are detrimental to the safety Health morals for welfare of the community so in addition to the the fact that they're dilapidated that they're obsolete those those things those may be true I don't see how those par lots are dilapidated or obol their paron but even if they work they can only be criteria if they are off and to an extent that they are detrimental to the safety Health oral the welfare of the community I don't feel unsafe while I don't think it's impacting my health I don't think it's corrupting my morals I don't think that is bad for my welfare so I don't think any of these properties okay I'm not eager to go into any of those DBW buildings but I don't think any of the other properties come close to being detrimental to our health or morals or welfare um so I think the rules are being Twisted because something else that got one more minute Mr R okay um and then the my big uh my biggest problem is the Practical result so you have two possibilities when you want to give somebody breaks on zoning um their area of need of Rehabilitation and area need of re development the only two reasons to pursue an area in need of Redevelopment which is the more stringent standard the more difficult the blighted area the only reason to declare an area bled is to take it by m domain or to give somebody a 30-year tax bre okay so Mr again I'm going to repeat what I said before the argument you are now making is not within the power of this board if you you're now you're now making an argument why they shouldn't declare it an area of Redevelopment because you feel they should be doing something else where there's some ulterior motive for doing it that's an argument for Council not for this board this board does not play any role whatsoever in giving a pilot which is what you're referring to or or to find something a blotted area we have nothing to do with that you're you're in the you're in the wrong place making this argument saying that this should not consider consequences of that actions it's not this is not a this board is not authorized to make it determination we don't like Redevelopment we're not going to we're going to say no they don't have the the right to do that it would be illegal and I don't mean illegal that the police are going to come in here and start arresting board members I mean it's against the law that's not their role their role is purely to decide based upon the study made whether or not these properties meet the criteria everything else that you're talking about are proper arguments to go before the council too but not for here the one the one part of your comment regarding zoning changes is very much a part of if this moves forward the next step that this board would take would be to actually work on a plan I don't mean a site plan for the actual site that's even further down the road if it were to happen to actually talk about the Zoning for this area height density everything so that part of it is involved but not at this stage down the road it is there'll be public hearings there'll be meetings about that but then after this step if this happens really either way if this happens the council is the next step and then we talk about an actual plan for the whole area then we would talk about an actual site plan and an application from a developer so this is really just the first step and we are and I don't like it all that much either Bound by what we're doing here tonight it's a very very specific charge so even if the board considers this pointless you still have to prove the board does not have discretion to as I keep saying board does not have discretion to say we don't like Redevelopment so we're just going to say no they do not have the right to do that it's as the chairman said there a very very limited jurisdiction that the board has tonight which is solely to to look at the properties based upon the planner's report and and decide whether or not these specific properties meet the criteria to be to be eligible for redevelopment that's the only job this board has and the board finds it meets the criteria but we don't like it so we're just going to vote no that would be illegal they're not allowed to do that again those are political arguments this is not a political question right here what you're talking about are are the politics of it that goes before the council and this action tonight doesn't mean that anyone would ever get a pilot or not that's up to the council what it does mean if it if something happens here is that next step where we all and I'm we the public everyone gets an opportunity to talk about what this site might look like from a general zoning standpoint and as I said the step after that is what it might actually look like it does give every Council current counil every Council in the future forever the power to give any of those properties that they it it they have it anyway they don't need this from us to give a pilot Mak it does but they could do it without us but we should not Mr chairman we should not even be dis again we should not even be discussing Pilots because Pilots have nothing to do with this hearing tonight uh the board doesn't have the board doesn't have the power to Grant a pilot and it shouldn't even be in your consideration if it's in your consideration or your thought process then you're not doing your job as a board member so I guess the only things I have to say is those parking lots are not blighted and I don't feel unsafe or unwell and all I have to say your time is up but thank you it's good to see you I haven't seen you in like four years at least okay who's who's next that's it really I told my wife I'm G to be home till like 11 Mr Havens come on up well you're gonna have to do it over the course of the next four years at five minutes at a time that's so I'm just going to swear you in I'm just going to swear you in okay do you swear any testimony you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth s be God and just state your name giving your address thank you I think it's a wide consensus across the entire United States of America today use parking Mar service parking are terribly wasted dirt and light doesn't even come such a way to they should be reused way well maintained thank you anyone else from the public have any comments or questions I'm just going to swear you in also the swearing testimony you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth s you God and just say name and give your address please took me a minute but it took me a minute thank you I understand just your address and just get close to the mic please so we can pick you up on the recording for the it really is almost that I know so just to be clear I understand your point to be that that what happens here has nothing to do with the tax abatement and the tax abatement a tax abatement is not required if a Redevelopment designation actually is a down the line is that correct yeah that that's correct yeah sure Dan um I was intrigued um by your comments I don't remember your first name say Susan um by this idea that the Redevelopment designation actually gives the burrow more control over what is that what is actually built there in terms of design zoning and so forth correct that is one of the benefits of Redevelopment is that you can get into details of design that legally works like this can't with reg zoning so you can look at um building and facade design and massing and materials you get really into the weats a little bit if the bar thinks it's appropriate for this area in ways that tradition and and to to let me just interrupt to to highlight the importance of that if I had the nerve I would name all the ugly buildings I've approved in town that I hate the way they look but I couldn't deny them because they look ugly the we now have that opportunity in a Redevelopment Zone to really have a far more significant impact on what something physically looks like than we have ever had before one of my major concerns is that I feel with all the development that's going on with undersized high G City departments we're really losing uh the ethnic and economic diversity of the town which always made Redbank unique and very different from its more influent neighbors and I would hate to see us lose that um and I know a lot of this development has been we've pursued it in uh as a goal for more affordable housing but we're now at a point in Red Bank where we have more homeless people than ever that are coming from all over because they know they can at least get a meal here and I would hope as a planning entity you know we would look at what the unintended consequences of some of our actions are but my con my question to Susan is would then with this added flexibility would the arrow be able to increase the set aside for affordable housing because we have approved more than 700 units of new housing in this town and we have actually EXA bated the uh lack of housing for Working Class People and lowincome people and we are actually pushing a lot of our people who work um you know in landscaping in restaurants in child care we're pushing them out of town actually so could we say instead of the 10% or 15% or even 20% could we say to the developer hey we want 4 40% and we want those those units to be suitable for families now I don't know if I want families with children really living in close proximity to the railroad tracks but I think one of the problems here is none of these buildings that are going up and I agree with you Dan they are ugly they're very homogeneous there's nothing you need um you know can but they're not suitable for families with children either and when you bring up the restaurant on the corner of West and Mammoth you know bitos like that's a unique property that's a beautiful property the owner of that property you know really enhanced that area of town as did a lot of the other small business owners long shes very evant so can we do that can we say okay Mr Den Hol was on record in Red Bank Green in an article in March of 2022 being very clear that he's going to come back and whatever you give him he's going to ask for more that's that's a done deal right there so can we do that can we say Mr denos we want 40 units 40% of those units to be for affordable and we want them to be suitable for families with children can we do that we could do that as brother reel plan we could we could do we can do almost we can ask for almost anything we want by the way I've never met a developer who didn't have ask for more so I don't blame him I don't like it when they do but and everybody does regard irregardless we're we're not talking about familial status and whether something is suited for a family or not because it's against the law to do that but we can ask for whatever we want I'd love 40% affordable housing but to get 40% of affordable housing is going to cost me something that I'm unwilling to do and that's like a ninstory building because the only way someone's going to give us 40% of affordable housing is that they want more density so there is a balance of we can we can ask for up to 20% well the ordinance is 20% once you reach a certain number of units I think it's a little more than 200 but yes we can go to 20% could we negotiate more yes it'll cost us something I don't know what it'll probably be height or density but that's the the whole next phase of this and you can Mr Lexy wanted to cut you off through so let me keep I'm going to keep saying none of this has anything to do with what we're doing here next step it's all the next step it's we are not taking I'm I'm I'm humoring you because it's only 8 o'clock um this is all Next Step stuff we can't take any of this into account tonight I my question and I no no I welcome com and I am and I appreciate it comments on certain things you can comment on you can comment on whatever you want we just can't take any of that into account in our decision tonight we very much will in the next steps well then let's get back to the study you have about a minute left Mr ween said you know it's criteria D and it's criteria H but Susan agrees that D is kind of questionable about most of these properties with the exception of the DPW which really does need to be repaired replaced and you know what we can't wait 10 years for this process to go through for that to happen I think that has to go through a lot quicker than this whole lead development so the the idea is that most of the properties in this the areas covered by the study the Lots covered by the study don't meet the criteria they don't meet it I'd like to respond to that I just want to be clear that I actually think the Criterion be does apply I said it to most of the study including parking lots there's a lot of case law in New Jersey that parking lots the earlier comment are obsolete that it's not the best use of land in downtown then has been supported by the course it's Criterion a which is looking at buildings themselves that I think applies well forgive me CTI but you got 10 seconds idea is these Redevelopment you do the Redevelopment designation because property is unappealing for development but we are under Siege by developers in this town right now and I don't think we have to do anything to bring them here and spend their money and they all make very big Prof F thank you sir you raised your hand first you hereby designate the young lady next to you may come up and speak I didn't mean you Jeff you weren't coming up were you you're not young or lady just going to swear you in the swearing testimony you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth s you got and just state your name for the record and your address thank you and Anna just pull that mic a little closer please start talking and we'll let you enough show up name is Anna I'm ju's daughter my father has own BOS for about 30 years now so we are just um worried as a to see if this affects us on our property um and as mentioned in the study our our property does not meet the criteria so we were just wanted to see if this will affect our property I I can answer that and and Susan you correct me if I'm wrong it's it's not going to be included in this in in the recommendation if the board finds that uh that the study is going to be adopted so no it wouldn't impact your property yeah and if it if the board disagreed with Susan and felt it did meet the criteria it still wouldn't really affect your property because it's a non- eminent domain study which means that means the borrow would not have the P power to take it from you okay right and also I just wanted to add if the board decided to keep your property in it you could be the redeveloper of your own property you can request to be the redeveloper of your own property so you would benefit from whatever um comes with being a bre developer meaning if if at one of the future meetings we lay down Zoning for this area and your property was included and you wanted to develop it maybe keep the restaurant on the first floor and go up three floors or do something completely different you would probably benefit and I'm not suggesting us to be in the plan I'm just saying that the that that opportunity would be you could perhaps do something with it that you could wouldn't do right now but for the As far I we hav talked about this but we're not really interested in including that if you wanted it to be included you'd probably have to go to the mayor and counsel at some point about that you got a pretty good thing I wouldn't mess with you I agree thank you thank you two minutes and 12 seconds by the way feel free anyone to keep that under under I mean anyone next have any comments or questions it's hard to believe really is you could have all stayed home and watch this on Zoom teams teams I agree all right uh do I have a motion to close the public portion of the meeting I'll move second second all in favor I any opposed okay um shaa Mark or Susan do you have anything you want to say conclude with or add yeah I think we made ourselves clear Mr chairman and this is essentially the board has to decide whether the properties meet the criteria or not if you find that it that it does as Susan is recommended you would vote to adopt the report you look like you wanted to press the button over there hi I'm gonna press the button because I'm confused there were there were several areas several sections that were definitely belong there there were a couple that were a little foggy um if we improve the whole thing when the council gets it can they change change the areas or what I mean if if those some of those foggy areas um like that single family home and yeah bar I understand your question and the question is yes you don't have to accept the I show said this earlier you don't have to accept the report exactly as it is written You can disagree with Susan's report you can say uh we find that these properties do meet the criteria but we disagree with Susan that these other ones do and you can exclude them from the report uh from the recommendation rather you don't have to necessarily take the report as a whole um and the council would have that same power to do the actual designations if you recommend the entire report they don't have to uh take the entire uh the entire area in in total and the owners there are five owners granted the the there are two fairly minor owners but not every property in the area that we were designated tonight necessarily will get developed oh great so you know the count AC could say great I don't want I'm not involved I don't want this the single family house if if some if then holds doesn't own it could stay out of it we're not taking anything we're not forcing anything on anyone that doesn't want to develop their property it cre it creates opportunity but it doesn't create a requirement I have a feeling some people aren't going to think it's opportunity um but um just from listening um okay that clarifies for me thank you from the board have any questions or comments would anyone on the board like to offer uh a resolu a motion for us to consider uh having heard uh having read the report heard uh the testimony um I think the area is in need of I'd call an area in need of coherence um and I do find that the criteria particularly with respect to the obsolescence of the train station and it's part it's its Associated parking lots uh meet the criteria and I would move to um adopt the plan as presented is there a second second may I ask another question um historic train station how does that fit into this in the next phase when we talk okay right a plan that that may just wanted to make sure that it was you know next time that might be my favorite building ined think predevelopment mostly add your hisor assets including aof there too that's older than the building yeah um and so it would look at the interplay between future development okay we vot for the motion to recommend the mayor and councel that the Zone uh be an area need of rment with the exception of the site that thew and just to clarify you're not recommending that the area become an area need rment you're you're recommending that the that you find it they the area meets the criteria for an Area Redevelopment correct they're not taking a position on the Redevelopment itself yep understood all right GRE darl yes cha bonatakis yes L Demento yes Barbara boas yes Wilson BBE yesel Hernandez yes Ryan peran yeso while I don't love the idea of the order in which the state puts this process in I vote yes thank you I that okay ladies and gentlemen as always it's a pleasure to see so many people here I know you have the minutes minutes minutes um oh yeah sure let's do the minutes first so if anyone wants to hear the resolution we've got it ready it this is like the old days in the 90s um we have the minutes of March 4th our regular meeting minutes March 4th 2024 does anyone have any additions or corrections to the minutes of March 4th there being none I'll make a motion to approve the minutes is there a second second and all in favor all in favor I I any opposed abstain I was not present so we have a resolution handy we we do and Mr chairman the the resolution is it just basically goes over that you're adopting the report um and that it excludes the block 41 uh lot eight as not meeting the criteria and that others do and you're adopting the report for your reasons for doing so want to make a motion to accept the resolution some move second all in favor no no you have to do roll call First and Bon C fitzgeral yes Christina bonis yes samusa yes L Demento yes Barbara Boz yes Wilson B yes Hernandez yes Brian faran yes thank you uh as has been said should the council continue to move forward with this there will be public meetings and hearings and uh you'll be hearing a lot more about this so thanks again all for coming thank you Susan for your firm and you all of the hard work on this we very much appreciate it motion to adjourn second second all in favor I good evening ladies and gentlemen Monday next meeting is Monday we have an agenda yes yes Monday next meeting is Monday we're going to straighten out the schedule at some point this year all Wednesday really can't do Monday e e