One item on the agenda was the approval of a subdivision application for the property known as the former M campus. This site, covering approximately 107 acres, will be divided into two lots: a 35.9-acre parcel designated Lot A, and a larger 71-acre area, known as Lot B. This division is important for the development of a data center, which is proposed to be situated on Lot A, taking advantage of its proximity to the road and the Garden State Parkway. The board addressed this item with significant interest due to the potential economic impacts and development opportunities it could bring to the area.

An engineer for the applicant provided testimony, confirming that the subdivision aligns with the town’s redevelopment plan, which requires any new lot to be a minimum of 10 acres. The engineer emphasized the subdivision’s role in financially revitalizing the property, allowing the owner to lease Lot A to a data center tenant while maintaining essential community infrastructure on Lot B. The board was assured that existing utilities, including a co-generation plant, would remain operational, supported by a reciprocal agreement for shared infrastructure. This strategic planning ensures uninterrupted services across both lots despite the subdivision.

Board members expressed concerns regarding the logistics of utility access and traffic management. The applicants reassured that all necessary utility easements would be documented on the final plat, facilitating future development needs. The conversation also touched on maintaining traffic flow and parking, with assurances given that these would be addressed in future site plans.

The board’s approval of this application was unanimous. A resolution for this approval is set to be memorialized at the next meeting.

In another significant matter, the board examined an application for a minor subdivision on North 21st Street. The proposal involved constructing two distinctive homes designed to blend with the neighborhood while offering unique architectural elements. Christopher Zander, an architect and planner, presented the designs, highlighting features like varied roof designs, exterior finishes, and craftsman-style entry doors. This effort to avoid a uniform appearance aims to enhance the neighborhood’s aesthetic appeal.

During the review, board members sought clarification on the commitment to the proposed designs and the implications of potential changes to building materials. Zander assured the board that any significant alterations would require re-approval. An open discussion followed, with members appreciating the improved architectural renderings and the applicant’s willingness to modify plans in response to community feedback.

A motion was made to open the floor to public comments on this application, but no public input was received. The board then proceeded to close the public hearing and continue deliberations. The application, having shown significant improvements and responsiveness to board concerns, received favorable consideration, with a resolution anticipated in the coming meetings.

The meeting also included routine discussions on procedural matters, such as the finalization of cross easements and the documentation required before recording subdivision deeds.