0:23One of the primary topics was the necessity to update the checklist design standards used for planning applications. The existing ordinances do not adequately address these advancements, leading to ambiguity during application reviews. Board members acknowledged that the checklist must evolve to include these new requirements. This would help prevent challenges during reviews when members encounter requirements not explicitly stated. Alongside checklist revisions, the board discussed aligning these updates with the town’s ordinances, noting that changes to one necessitate corresponding updates to the other.

The board recognized the importance of collaboration with the township committee to facilitate these updates, emphasizing that changes to the checklist and fee structure are interconnected. A member suggested that increasing the fee structure could alleviate this issue, as applicants frequently express surprise when additional funds are needed. The board expressed a willingness to engage with the township committee to streamline processes and improve the efficiency of planning applications, focusing on making the process more applicant-friendly while maintaining legal compliance and review standards.

15:42Another discussion point was the challenge of incomplete submissions from applicants, which often result in continuances and additional review meetings. Board members noted that many applicants do not fully prepare their documents, leading to frustration and delays. It was suggested that applicants make “calculated decisions” to omit details, believing they can navigate the process without complete submissions. To address this, there was a proposal to provide a “cheat sheet” for applicants, detailing the consequences of inadequate preparation. Moreover, the board considered being more proactive in determining application completeness early in the review process, potentially saving time and reducing frustration for both the board and applicants.

The board also explored the idea of a preliminary review process to address incomplete applications before in-depth discussions occur. By presenting a summary of missing elements at the beginning of meetings, board members could identify significant gaps early on, potentially deferring applications when necessary due to insufficient information. This approach was seen as a way to enhance the review process, saving time and resources.

28:00Concerns about the appropriateness of waivers and variances were also discussed, with a suggestion to have professionals outline these at the start of meetings to better prepare board members for applicant presentations. Ensuring clarity on requested waivers and variances would prevent discussions from veering off into broader site plan concerns, such as aesthetics and safety, rather than focusing on specific nonconforming issues.

The discussion also touched on the role of the planning board secretary and the importance of maintaining neutrality during the application process. The board emphasized the need for thorough documentation to make informed decisions, considering establishing a completeness subcommittee to assess application standards before presentations. Such steps could streamline processes and improve outcomes for both the board and applicants.

41:28The possibility of aligning guidelines with ordinances was suggested as a way to reduce the need for additional committees. Board members agreed that while improving the checklist is a starting point, establishing a subcommittee could further address persistent issues during the review process.