The most discussed item was the proposed redevelopment of 65 Mortown Road. The property, recognized as an area in need of development in 2019, was purchased by the borough in early 2024. A request for proposals from developers resulted in the selection of 15 Sansbury LLC to undertake the transformation of the existing structure into a low-volume classic and collector car dealership. The plan included a provision for limited automotive repair services specifically for classic and collector cars, raising questions about the number of repair bays and the placement of garage doors.

The board scrutinized potential amendments to the Redevelopment Plan, specifically the changes to parking standards, which proposed one space per employee and one for every five cars sold. Some members found this potentially inadequate and recommended obtaining more detailed information from comparable businesses. Concerns were raised over the inclusion of automotive rentals, previously prohibited. Clarity in proposal language was emphasized, particularly regarding the distinction between parking and display areas for vehicles, as the current plan prohibited front-yard parking.

The debate extended to the requirement for sidewalks, with the board suggesting adherence to local pedestrian infrastructure standards to maintain consistency with adjacent projects. The board’s findings and recommendations were to be summarized in a report for the borough council’s consideration. The board also discussed the potential visual appeal of the dealership.

Discussions also covered potential amendments involving garage door placements, with a preference for side or rear placements to avoid safety hazards and maintain aesthetic appeal. The necessity of managing parking for special events was highlighted, encouraging businesses to plan strategically for peak demand without imposing constraints on the board’s recommendations.

The board concluded this segment of the meeting with a motion stating that the amended plan was not inconsistent with the master plan and outlined three specific recommendations for the council: reaffirming the inclusion of an eight-foot sidewalk, clarifying the parking ratio, and refining language related to garage bay doors and event space considerations. This motion passed unanimously.

In another significant agenda item, the board addressed a property initially misidentified within the D Zone but later confirmed in the Redevelopment Zone, specifically Quimby Lane subsection six. This revelation led to a plan amendment to increase the project’s density from eight to 18 or 19 units per acre on a 5.2-acre site. Despite positive feedback on the design and materials, the board expressed reservations about the project’s size, initially proposing eight units, which the applicant later reduced to six.

The application process included a series of hearings, with a notable incident leading to a shift from virtual to live sessions. The applicant presented various experts, but the board remained skeptical about granting approval due to the project’s scale. The applicant emphasized maintaining the design, landscaping, and materials, with modifications reflecting the reduced unit count, addressing stipulations such as a stairway from Claremont Road to a brook and a conservation easement for a walking path.

The meeting also involved a discussion on impervious coverage and steep slope disturbances, with requests for variances exceeding allowed figures. The applicant argued that these slopes were altered by previous construction. Architectural plans included a parking garage concealed by a wall and privacy screen, with necessary revisions to be made before the next meeting.

Waste management for the proposed residential units involved a private hauler for waste collection, with residents depositing waste in designated common areas. An easement dedication for a future walking path was confirmed, with the applicant constructing a stairway for public use.