The developers’ presentation, led by a representative named John Wisneski, introduced the proposed apartment complex, which would cater primarily to individuals seeking to downsize or young professionals. Notably, the project’s proximity to the D&R Canal and towpath was highlighted, with the developers assuring that the new structure would be discreetly placed over three football fields away, minimizing impact on the area’s views.

The project engineer’s lack of immediate information on the height prompted a promise to consult with a landscape expert and return with details. Further, the proposed landscaping plan, featuring over 1,000 trees and shrubs, dark-sky compliant lighting, and a community gathering area, was scrutinized for its lack of evergreens, which the committee deemed necessary for year-round screening.

Deliberations also touched upon the economic aspects, including the potential for increased patronage to local shops due to the renovation, and the environmental considerations, such as reducing open lawn space to mitigate climate change effects. A member raised concerns about the new building’s modern aesthetic within the historic district, sparking a debate over the importance of mirroring historical architecture versus prioritizing the visual impact on the current surroundings.

Attention turned to the practicality of the site’s design, particularly the parking plans. Concerns about increased auto theft in the surface parking lot prompted a comparison of safety measures between surface and underground parking options. The committee explored the idea of a paved plaza to connect residential and commercial areas, though opinions on its execution varied.

Addressing the project’s suitability for families, the committee noted that the development, primarily targeting active adults, was not expected to house many children. The planned amenities, including a pool and passive recreation areas, were deemed appropriate for the anticipated demographic. The committee encouraged the developers to consider the inclusion of native plant species and a combination of deciduous and conifer trees to enhance the site’s green spaces.

In response to committee feedback, the project engineer and other professionals expressed a willingness to revisit and adjust plans, particularly regarding landscaping and the alignment of drive aisles to increase green space. The developers were also advised to research case studies to soften the building’s facade and incorporate elements like sloped roof mansards and a more neutral color palette to better blend with the historic district.

Beyond the new development, the committee addressed a request for a new roof on an old two-room schoolhouse in East Millstone. The discovery of an original cedar roof beneath asphalt layers led the committee to deny a temporary roofing solution, requesting that the applicant provide additional materials for consideration.

Internal administrative topics included a review of a Section 106 report related to cell towers, updates on open space and land use, and the potential rescheduling of the June meeting due to a primary election. The committee also extended the minor application subcommittee appointment and scheduled their next meeting for May 7th.