The board dedicated considerable time to reviewing the township’s housing element and fair share plan for 2025, a crucial component of Bedminster’s master plan. Mr. Banish, who was tasked with presenting the amendment, detailed the township’s housing obligations dating back to 1987. He explained that the Council on Affordable Housing (COA) had calculated an obligation of 154 units for the first two rounds and an additional 225 units for the third round, spanning 1999 to 2025. Through proactive development efforts, such as those at Timberbrook and The Hills, Bedminster has already exceeded these requirements by producing 694 affordable units prior to 1999.

The township’s strategy for the fourth round obligation of 72 units includes utilizing 812 available credit units, with 683 designated for sales and 78 for rentals. Mr. Banish emphasized the township’s strategic use of excess credits to satisfy current housing needs, noting that the township is well-positioned to meet its obligations due to these efforts. The board approved a resolution to adopt the housing element and fair share plan as part of the master plan, aligning with statutory deadlines set for June 30, 2025.

Discussion also centered on the status of the affordable housing trust fund. Michelle Hoffman, a member of the public, raised concerns about the fund’s inactivity, questioning the use of over $2.8 million sitting idle since the last spending plan update in 2018. She argued for the allocation of these funds for capital improvements in communities with affordable housing units. The representative clarified that the funds could only be used on properties still under affordable housing designation and that the township committee, not the land use board, holds the decision-making authority over these funds. Hoffman expressed frustration over the lack of direct answers from township officials and confusion about who manages the fund. The representative reiterated the complex nature of the process and the need for court approval on any spending plan amendments.

The meeting also addressed other notable topics. The board discussed the completion of applications for Tigerclaw and Varnish, which are scheduled for the August meeting. Additionally, a resolution concerning an AT&T matter was approved after initial confusion over its context. The board members deliberated on issues affecting the village corridor, such as signage regulations and parking challenges, emphasizing the need for revisiting zoning requirements to support local businesses’ viability.

Community engagement activities were highlighted, particularly those at Grace Fellowship Church, which serves as a hub due to its various services and events. Plans to enhance community interaction, including potential street fairs and collaborations with local businesses, were discussed. Parking concerns persisted, with businesses like Design Appliances and Mediterranean expressing their challenges, prompting suggestions for reviewing zoning requirements.

Updates on local businesses included mention of Cats Pharmacy and the anticipated opening of Fresh Pet, which is pending resolution of a sidewalk issue with the Department of Transportation (DOT). The planning board’s preference for a sidewalk closer to buildings, rather than along Highway 206 as suggested by the DOT, was noted as an ongoing discussion point.