The most prominent issue discussed was the designation of block 2011 lot 1.01 and block 202 lot 42.2 as non-condemnation areas for redevelopment. James Clarkin from Foresight Planning presented a detailed report, describing the properties’ deteriorated conditions and the presence of hazardous materials. The smaller lot, block 2011 lot 1.01, was depicted as a disorganized storage site with no approved use, while the larger lot, block 202 lot 42.2, featured three structures with significant disrepair and improper outdoor trailer storage. Clarkin cited police records indicating incidents of theft, illegal dumping, and criminal mischief.

The board members engaged in a discussion about the criteria for determining the need for redevelopment. Clarkin emphasized criteria A, B, and D, particularly highlighting safety concerns associated with the Western building. The conversation underscored the potential benefits of redevelopment for the community, with visual evidence supporting claims of hazardous conditions and overall neglect. Reverend Kenny raised questions about the status of trucks on the property and the broader issue of illegal dumping.

Following the discussion, a motion was made to designate the area as in need of redevelopment, which was seconded and received unanimous approval. This resolution will be recommended to the township council for final designation.

The meeting also addressed an amended Redevelopment Plan for block 9201 lot 4620, known as Rivendell Terrace. The redevelopment plan, initially adopted in 2017, transformed the area into a multi-family residential community, Rivendell Meadows. The proposed amendment sought to add new recreational amenities, including two pickleball courts, a tennis court, and a half basketball court. These additions were intended to enhance the existing facilities and benefit the residents. The board members approved the amended plan unanimously after a brief discussion.

In another significant decision, the board granted final approval for River Road Estates, a major subdivision project creating 14 single-family homes. Representatives confirmed compliance with all preliminary approval conditions, and no further testimony was deemed necessary. A motion for final approval was made, seconded, and passed without opposition.

A discussion centered around a General Development Plan (GDP) for a multi-phase project. The applicant representative noted landscape buffers and sought clarity on the vesting schedule, which is critical for determining the development timeline. The board debated the timeline for project phases. A motion was made to limit the GDP to five years, emphasizing accountability and timely project completion. Concerns about the project’s duration and the need for due diligence were highlighted, with the board retaining the authority to review specific site plans as the project progresses.

The topic of the Town Square’s design within the GDP arose, with a recommendation to consider relocating it to a more central and pedestrian-friendly location. The conversation also touched on the inclusion of pocket parks, cohesive open spaces, and the bike path’s placement. The board emphasized the importance of integrating these community features effectively into the overall project.

Finally, the board discussed specific applications for signage deviations. An attorney representing an applicant requested deviations from the Redevelopment Plan to install address logos on warehouse buildings. The proposed signage aimed to improve wayfinding and public safety by aiding drivers in identifying the warehouses from a distance. Witnesses detailed the benefits of the signage, arguing that it aligned with municipal land use law objectives and promoted public safety. The board approved the signage deviations unanimously after confirming that the signs would not create visual obstructions or negatively impact aesthetics.