Acknowledging the community’s strong emotional investment in how local developments unfold, a council member expressed gratitude for the mayor’s encouragement of open discussions. The council collectively agreed on the importance of incorporating community input to ensure that any developmental options were thoroughly vetted and understood by residents.

The council’s mission to expand the community’s understanding of affordable housing complexities was reiterated, emphasizing the necessity of transparency. Past decisions, reportedly made without sufficient public awareness, highlighted the need for the council to bring more discussions into the public domain. The council expressed its intention to engage the community more openly, particularly when it came to the vacant land analysis, which seeks to identify potential sites for affordable housing development.

The vacant land analysis was a focal point, with discussions revolving around changes in property status since the last review in 2018. The council retrieved a list of properties coded as vacant from tax records, identifying potential sites for affordable housing. However, a specific lot, despite being newly vacant, faced environmental restrictions that might hinder its development. Moving forward, the council plans to consult the building department to compile an updated list of changes in the city since the last analysis.

Further deliberations addressed the distinction between “big R” redevelopment, requiring formal plans, and “little r” redevelopment, involving repurposing existing developed properties. The council stressed the importance of creating a detailed list of properties eligible for redevelopment, while also addressing concerns about residents potentially fearing the loss of their properties if they appeared on such lists. The historical stance of the city towards the exercise of eminent domain was discussed, with a preference against aggressive use, yet the council acknowledged the need to explore all redevelopment opportunities.

The conversation also touched on previous efforts to meet affordable housing obligations, particularly the challenges faced by property owners. Heritage Village was mentioned, with only a portion of its units credited to Lambertville due to funding arrangements with other municipalities. The council reiterated that only 25% of obligations could be met through age-restricted units, sparking discussions on how these had been applied in past rounds.

The council examined various properties for potential development, emphasizing the need for clarity and organization in tracking potential sites. A church property, noted for its architectural features but lacking parking, was a topic of interest. Despite its structural integrity, the property required significant restoration, notably with its windows, posing challenges for residential development. Discussions included the potential for transforming commercial properties and residential lots, like the area behind 204 North Union Street, into viable affordable housing sites.

In addressing these property options, the council highlighted the importance of documenting details clearly to facilitate future discussions. The council aimed to develop a more organized format for tracking potential properties, stressing the need for transparency with the public. The intent was for community members to easily comprehend and visualize the options available.

The dialogue continued with considerations about the Tasting Room linked to River Horse Brewery and the implications of an overlay ordinance adopted in 2020. Questions arose about whether the ordinance covered the Tasting Room or only the rear portion of the property, pointing to gaps in knowledge about the ordinance specifics. The council proposed creating a comprehensive list of properties categorized by immediate viability and long-term potential, integrating environmental considerations.

As the meeting drew to a close, the council members emphasized the necessity of substantial work between meetings to advance the initiatives discussed. They proposed dividing the list of properties for individual review to ensure detailed attention. The council underscored the importance of a clear communication strategy regarding property inclusion and development opportunities, acknowledging the delicate nature of these discussions to prevent public backlash or misunderstandings.