##VIDEO ID:WcMErdYoI4o## e e e e good okay welcome everyone to the planning board meeting for Bernard's Township December 17 2024 all rise for the salute to the flag please I flag United States of America One Nation God indivisible andice for all open public meeting statement I shall read uh planning board open public meeting statement 2024 in accordance with the requirements of the open public meetings law of 1975 notice of this meeting of the plan Board of the of burners Township was posted on the bulletin board and the reception hall of the municipal building located at one CER Lane Basking Ridge New Jersey was sent to the Bernardsville news in whipy New Jersey to The Courier News in Bridgewater New Jersey on February 7th 2024 and was electronically mailed to all those people who have requested individual notice the following procedure has been adopted by the Bernard Township planning board there will but be no new cases heard after 10 p.m. and no new Witnesses or testimony will be heard after 10:30 p.m. roll call please miss kefir um mayor AC here thank you um Mr Crane here Mr deman here Mr yorio here uh Mr linski here Mr MCN here miss Mand here miss Master Angelo here thank you uh Mr Seville here Mr Rabino here Miss Smith here Mr drill here Mr SCH here and for the record Miss Kefir is present chairman you have a quarum you may proceed just want to make a quick announcement that we have the mayor and we have M Master Angelo on telephones they're on vacation they're calling into the meeting I've rendered an opinion that for an administrative matter such as this they can participate by phone they don't have to participate by Zoom you don't have to see them you just have to hear them and they have to hear you so when I speak I'll speak to this microphone this is no feedback and if they want to speak at any time I'll face the microphone towards the two phones so we can hear them okay okay uh the next item on the agenda item number five ordinance referral which is a master plan consistency review there will be no public comment that the decision the decision of the chair um should the board over like to overrule the chair that someone can make a motion and if we have a second motion we can vote on it and you can overrule my decision so I'll just read the board rule one colon 2-1 provides in relevant part the chair shall decide All Points of order and matters of procedure governing meetings or hearings this is a meeting this is not a hearing unless overruled by a majority vote of members the chair's decisions on the aforementioned issue shall be deemed the decision of the board as a whole so does anyone on the board want to make a motion to overrule the chair that there will be no public comment since the ml does not require public comment and the board rules don't contemplate public comment for a master plan consistency review Mr drill uh I do intend to make a motion uh but before I get to that one uh I move to table this agenda item and I ask for second second M keer did you get who made the motion we have a motion by Mr MCN second by Mr Crane thank you Mr Crane um okay we should have discussion on that motion okay so my question to the board or to Mr MCN is what are the consequences um if you could if you could elaborate on the consequences of tabling this ordinance referral well first I would like to give my reasons please do um the the motion that I'm making here tonight what we're being asked here to do is make a finding regarding an overlay ordinance pertaining to a movie studio that was introduced by the township committee a week ago in someon substance what we're being asked to do is to make a finding as to where the proposed ordinance is consistent not inconsistent or inconsistent with the master plan I don't believe that any of us have what we need to make that determination and thus everyone here has been placed in a difficult position the good news is that you don't need to make that consistency finding at all tonight instead you can support my motion to take it a few days ago you were all referred this ordinance and a memo from our planner Beth mcmanis in my opinion the memo does not provide you with sufficient guidance to make a decision tonight can you just slow down to make sure that these two members can hear you sure and the two members on the telephone within the memo the analysis goes back and forth between competing issues that we are to consider as part of the consistency determination on page five of the memo M mcmanis says in her opinion the ordinance is not entirely con consistent with the master plan the board may find it is not inconsistent with the master plan but also that the board may find that the ordinance is inconsistent with the master plan we are thus left with no clear guidance on which way to go in terms of the consistency and we don't have the ability to question miss mcmanis the author of this memo on any of this because she is not with us tonight in my opinion it would not be responsible for the board to move forward under these circumstances with any consistency determination for all these reasons I ask that you support my motion to table uh does anyone have any comments anyone on the question was answered what would be the consequences of table this I'd be happy to answer that question if you will allow me to do so if you do vote the table this ordinance does not go back to the township committee for a vote on December 23rd but since December 23rd is the last meeting of the Year there will be no opportunity for the township committee to vote on the introduced ordinance prior to the end of the year and because all introduced but not adopted ordinances expire at the end of the year the ordinance would need to be reintroduced and re-referred to the planning board for a consistency determination if that's what the township committee elects to do in the new year uh on the other hand if you make a consistency determination then the matter goes back to the TC where it will likely be posted for a meeting agenda uh on December 23rd two days before Christmas and three days before Hanukkah for a vote on adoption um I believe that you all know deserve to know this uh information I also believe that the you also need to know that the statute that governs this affords this board 35 days to make this determination this is a big decision we're making here tonight you've been given very little time and very little guidance to do it that's why I'm moving to table can I make a comment after that sure um get into the microphone nice and Loud okay so just to let the audience or or citizens know I'm a fourth generation resident I am a retired land development manager with fast experience in planning and overlay zones this should be directed to the board yes yes it's directed to the board excuse me um so with that fast experience I've I've done this and uh I've never done an overlay Zone this is a a never done an overlay Zone without a concept plan the concept plan shows you what we're getting we've had four overlay zones in the past all of them had concept plans the concept plans really show what what you're getting what the impact is and to see if it fits then example would be size of basins Road access we have no idea where the driveway ways are on this yeah but John don't we get that at the application this is not in the ordinance you're getting ahead of here fin please this is going to be related to master plan consistency yes yes master plan consistency um so I Mr mcnali mentioned the planner is not here it's unheard of I've got an hour's worth of questions for the planner here easily we should be going line by line item here if if we think this is inconsistent we need to tell the Township committee so they can address this one by one it's just not a vote one way or the other we need to list all the items uh to see if it's consistent or inconsistent especially if it's inconsistent it's got to be sent to the township committee every line item that's inconsistent so that that that is uh uh why I uh I with an oath I can't I can't possibly make a intelligent decision tonight okay any other comments from the board comments I would like to hear if anyone else has deliberations please so he's asking theair and Mr Rino did you have a comment please yes yeah I'd just like to add there's a reason why we typically get can you guys on the phone here Mr Rubino yes just speak speak loudly please I believe there's there's a reason why we're afforded 35 days to evaluate these things and I think it's irresponsible to uh to move this forward uh without having the uh opportunity for us to do the due diligence with regard to the uh master plan um so I would I would agree that we this should be tabled that way everyone of both sides gets an opportunity to take a look at what the uh you know what the what they don't know today what may tomorrow 35 days is an important criteria here thank you any um sorry did um Master Angela wanted to know she wanted to hear other board members before they speak apparently Mr chair may I loud into that microphone please I am not in support of tabling this uh ordinance review the consequences of this board not doing its job tonight are severe and significant if there's any board member who had a question for our professional who I think this municipality is blessed to have the best Professionals in the state and did not receive a answer to their question I'd love to know that but we have gotten a very thorough opinion um the planner had made herself available for any questions and I have personally the information that I need to make a decision tonight I would encourage the sport to do their job and make that decision because the pardon me pardon me there's got to be order at the meeting okay out of respect let the board members battle this motion out without anyone laughing or making any comments it's just not respectful can you continue look I've said my my P Mr Mr let other let other let everyone who wants to say something you can have the round sure louder I'm done I'm done speaking Kathleen she said she's done speaking but I can I can repeat if you'd like do you want her to repeat anything should put the pH just the end of it yes please because there was some cut off with yeah there was cut off because of the audience if if the audience is quiet she'll hear M men the bottom line is we're we're understating the consequence of not deciding this tonight and in my opinion we have the information that we need from our professionals and I'll say it again we have the best in the state and I'd like to hear from any board member who reached out with a question to our professional and didn't get a response I can repeat it a third time if I if needed K did you hear that yes thank you okay oh I just had a question from Miss man how do you reconcile can you do loud into that yes very loud how do you reconcile that with allowing us the 35 days under about it's it's up to 35 but it's not required we've done things on shorter Tims many many times not of this consequence right but tonight's meeting is just the master plan consistency review we're not there's no application up here that we're pushing an application through and if you had an additional time up to the 35 days I don't think our answer is going to be any different because we we have recommendations from the planners from the professional planner it's right here memo clearly which is internally inconsistent in your memo itself and yet and yet it still provides enough information for board members to to render a decision perhaps you not me if that's so then you could abstain M chair Mr chairman if I can continue I think you know it's unfortunate that the public isn't able to see the document that that we have been shared with and I hope several members are able to see it actually 40 copies the memo is a public record in my opinion it's not like the memo from the planner sure is not like a draft resolution which is not a public record until it's adopted it's not like it's a draft element of the master plan which doesn't become a public record until it's adopted so how many copies of that memo are up there 40 that I made at my own expense Mr drill okay can I just make a suggestion can we hand them out absolutely and can I make a suggestion since we're also now including the here hold up hold up hold up identify yourself you the mayor correct yes please okay ready go ahead yes Mr Dr why don't we wait we wait everyone down the aing the memo out absolutely all right can I have everyone's uh quiet please yeah can you guys read the without talking so they can keep on going thank you mril you were saying yes thank you well I I I'm glad the fact that a number but not all individuals here in this room are able to take a look at the document unfortunately um you know it's kind of difficult to read all of that uh within just a few minutes uh that said I feel I have enough information to render a decision uh the professional CL clearly states that uh this ordinance has a this overlay of an ordinance is a strong deviation from the existing low density and residential character of that area so it it's pretty reasonable based off of that sentence alone that we can move forward and uh without disclosing where I'm going to be voting on it um but it is pretty inconsistent from the professionals perspective and for mine as well and what I would also add is that uh in the sense of making recommendations um I look forward to not just citing the professionals recommendations that would uh render this decision uh inconsistent uh but also add my own so I look forward to sharing that with you all as well so um bear with me and the rest of the board okay the mayor again goad I think it it's fair to let everyone first round before we go into a second round mayor you're up yes thank you the township committee sent this to the planning board for simply a consistency review with the master plan that is all that is being requested and that is what needs to happen the consequences of this board not fulfilling will for the opportunity for the Democratic process for the community to fully share their opinions on this particular topic which is what the vote of the committee of 3 to2 want to provide the committee wants the opportunity for the public to share their thoughts and concerns in a public hearing on December the 23rd therefore I respectfully request that everyone do the role of the planning board which is to complete and vot with the information that is provided which is sufficient on this particular topic thank you has anyone not going in the first round that wants to go I would like to say something please Mr drill okay could you identify yourself for the record Kathleen Master Angelo uh Mr Dr I have a question for you uh Mr Crane brought up um specifics as to the inconsistencies in the ordinance um we do have a plan or memo before us but there we have not we would if we identify specific inconsistencies in the memo does the township committee then have to address those inconsistencies in their hearing on December 23rd all right I understand the question I'm going to give you a full answer as I tend to do so it might be longer than you guys like so just sit back and relax so under the ml the governing body the count commun is required to refer any ordinance and introduces to the planning board for master plan consistency review while the planning board under the statute has 35 days to do that the practice with this planning board since at least I've been the planning board attorney since probably about 2012 has been that when the secretary gets a referral she lists it if possible for the next meeting does the board have to do it tonight absolutely not legally now as to the options I'm gonna also suggest that we hear from Mr schide because he did consult with MC with Miss mcmanis on this memo so he's also here to be able to answer questions but the generally when an ordinance has been referred to the planning board for a master plan consistency review the board planner has rendered an opinion on it so be I'm just going to the end of page five of her Memo because her is very detailed and it goes on for you know a number of pages but on page five she has a summary of Master Plan consistency review and opinion and then she has recommendations on the bottom her summary of master plan consistency review and opinion is summarized in the second one sentence paragraph and she says in light of the above that's everything above in the memo it's my opinion that the ordinance is not entirely consistent with the master plan so she has an opinion that in her opinion the planning board should not say that it's consistent with the master plan now that said she has two additional opinions usually and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this but usually the board planner will then give an opinion on if the planner says it's not consistent the planner will then give an opinion on in his or her opinion is the ordinance not inconsistent which is a double negative but which is allowed or is the ordinance inconsistent so here's what Beth says and I'm reading now from the third paragraph on page five under the summary of Master Plan consistency review an opinion that said meaning she's already opined that it's not consistent with the master plan that said it is my opinion that the board may find that the ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan if it finds that the location is appropriate the level of intensity does not conflict with master plan objectives and in consideration of the required community space now that's referring to everything on the other four pages her Memo she says on the other hand this is like Fiddler on the Roof on the other hand I am also of the opinion that the board may find that the ordinance is inconsistent with the master plan if it finds that the location of the overlay zone is not appropriate and the level of intensity will conflict with master plan objectives what she's basically saying is she's on the fence on this and it's the board's got to do its job the board makes the independent opinion on this the board can follow the recommendations and and summary opinions of its planner but it doesn't have to so she's laying out two Pathways for the board to go so I said it's was going to be long so in my opinion there's nothing wrong with how she has structured the memo now the last question is what happens if the board says the ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan okay so the board they make a motion it's not inconsistent with the master plan and the board secretary sends a letter to the Township Clerk saying the board reviewed the ordinance for consistency with the master plan and found that it's not inconsistent then the the count committee has its hearing on December 23 what if the board finds that the ordinance is inconsistent what the statute says is if you find it's inconsistent you're supposed to list the inconsistencies so if you find it's inconsistent my advice is you go into Beth's memo on page one and two She lays out the ordinance and on pages three and four She lays out the master plan description of the R1 District the goals of the master plan she gives the page numbers from the master plans to the goals the land use management objectives she gives the page numbers the non-residential development objectives page numbers the community facilities and infrastructure objectives she gives the page numbers traffic traffic and circulation objectives she gives the page numbers neighborhood conservation and protection she gives the page numbers the township sen Carter and roadway study she gives the page numbers so if the board finds that it's inconsistent then the board is charged with okay you have to tell the township Committee in which ways is it inconsistent now then the board secretary would send a letter to the Township Clerk saying the board considered the ordinance for master plan consistency at its meeting of December 17th and found that the ordinance is inconsistent and here are the inconsistencies then the township committee can still adopt the ordinance after a hearing however in order for that ordinance to be adopted they have to attach to it their statement of reasons of why are they adopting this ordinance if it's inconsistent and they have to address all the inconsistencies that the board fines Kathleen that's a full answer to your question did I leave anything out well yes okay I have another question okay that is relying upon be mcmanis memo only well for for now but Mr schy also is going to speak to this and I believe he may have found at least one additional inconsistency and I don't know what else he has found okay may I just finish my question yes so what if I have reviewed the master plan saying you know it's my due diligence to look over the master plan as well not just to rely on the board professionals based on my experience right so I can't just rely on this memo corre correct or I can use my own expertise as a board member absolutely and I'm sure Mr Crane is going to use his expertise as a board member to do the same thing am I right I think so I know Mr Crane that thank you for answering my question I would love to hear from Mr schy as I respect him very much well are there any other board members who haven't spoken did Tyler first round oh yeah Mr Ty never finished now you finished finished now I'm finished uh Mr linski please thank you I I don't like the idea of tabling this or uh pushing it off I think it's our job to discuss this a lot of people have come to hear us discuss it however on the other hand not having Beth here and having you know I think the her Memo was very well put but these last two or three paragraphs where she's waffling all over the place um doesn't give me a lot of confidence that if I had questions about this that came up during this meeting that we would be able to answer them uh Mr schay here uh certainly can answer a lot of them but she had something in mind when she wrote this uh and I'd like to know a little bit more about it I did not contact her because really you know this has only been a couple days that we've had it normally we' had we could have this for a little bit longer so um I think we've had it for about a we FasTrack for reasons I just don't Memo's dated December 13 that's how long you've had it that that's the fact four days okay any other board members want to go in the first round before yes may the board have the benefit of knowing why the planner has been excused from today she wasn't excused she literally could not make the meeting she had she was committed recommitted to something else if no one else on the board wants you haven't gone the first I haven't gone but I can wait till the second round I'll why don't you ask I suggest you ask Mr schl if you have any okay Mr Sly would it would it benef well I think it would benefit the public if you can explain the the master plan consistency review process is that is that something I think Mr drill probably be Mr drill I did again I just want them to understand we're not pushing an this isn't like an application and that's why we're not having a public comment tonight perspective I reserve on the motion for public comment if we get to a consistency review I from a planning perspective in your opinion what is a master plan consistency supposed to be what's the board supposed to do I I thought that I gave the the legal you know aspect of it from a planning aspect of it what's the board supposed to do with a master plan consistency review of an ordinance the board's supposed to nice and Loud into the microphone the board is supposed to review the ordinance in the context of the master plan and to the extent that the provisions of the Ordinance do not comply with one or more goals and objectives or other recommendations within the master plan uh the board would uh become aware of that and then make a determination whether it's inconsistent or consistent or not inconsistent uh and that's it in a nutshell is it can you add anything to can you speak into a microphone please you got to bring it right up to you is that better yeah repeat what you said I was just what I said the purpose of the of the board um the uh matter before the board is to review the ordinance uh against the master plan and uh determine where it's consistent or not consistent and um in the end come up with a um a final determination whether it is consistent it's not inconsistent or it's uh inconsistent the three options Mr SCH then can you add anything to M mcmanus' memo so that when the board is considering and going into the second round of their discussion of whether or not the table they have any additional information that you possess in your brain can you put it out into the record yeah there are really two two things that I would um comment on and uh add um and if you want me to just jump into that yeah I to jump in right now the first one is on page three uh under master plan consistency review um the following excerpts from the 2023 master plan are relevant to the board's consideration slow down and Loud the the this is under the The Heading master plan consistency review on page three and it says the following excerpts from the 2023 master plan are relevant to the board's consideration of the ordinance's consistency with the master plan uh the very first paragraph um where it says the master plan provides the following description of the R1 District uh and the memo goes on to say the R1 and R2 districts provide for residential development at uh basically a one dwelling per three acres and it goes on um with that however the uh the the point I'm making here is that the current zoning of the property uh as shown on the township zoning map is R1 3 Acre residential uh however I think it's more accurate um when citing the master plan recommendation for this property uh based on the land use plan the actual map within the uh master plan that's figure uh Roman numeral 2- three uh the site is shown to be within the CR2 District which is CR meaning conservation residential it's one of the two conservation residential districts cr1 and CR2 let me understand what you're saying is the it's in one zone but the master plan has recommended that it be in another Zone the master plan yeah includes this site among many other sites that are presently in the three three ACR Zone to be recommended for the 7 acre zone or in some cases 10 acres but in this case CR2 is the 7 acre um recommendation and that that is based on the um basically the ability of the land to accommodate septic systems because most of the uh the CR conservation residential districts are in areas that uh don't have public sewer that that was the really the main criteria for designating areas um as conservation residential however there are some of the larger lot zones some of the uh the existing R1 3 Acre zones that are uh that do have uh are within the sewer service area but still have the conservation uh residential recommendation okay that's the first item you wanted to add you said you had a second yeah the second item is just not here um and the um if you go down to the bottom of page three the paragraph that says land use and management objectives and then on page four it goes on to list other objectives non-residential development objectives and Community facilities and infrastructure objectives and then traffic and circulation objectives um not listed among these groups of objectives are the housing objectives um and I I don't know why that is but on page 14 of the master plan there are uh under the title of housing objectives uh there's three housing objectives uh and do it nice and slowly because I'm taking notes and I want them to be able to hear you sure uh there's there's three the first housing objective is a reasonable diversity of housing should be maintained to serve is that too fast number one a reasonable diversity of housing should be maintained to serve various household needs okay and number two the township should continue its commitment to providing its state constitutional fair share of low and moderate income housing okay and number three the township should maintain the affordability of low and moderate income units within the community we effectively amending this memo on the Fly no he's I'm just giving you my comments on memo he's giving you his comments on it he's also with a board planning expert so in other words um in your opinion the memo is incomplete uh well I I think of those three housing objectives uh at least two of them relate to issues uh that the board may want to consider um just like the other lists of objectives um but that's not on the printed page correct no no that's not there at all and on on on on on the first uh issues that you had identified not this one um are you pointing out an inaccuracy within this memo or a lack of complete accuracy a lack of complete accuracy I think that's an important um to note that this is uh this is not recommended to remain a three acres Z it's recommended to be a lower density Dave at the end of the day does it change the three at the bottom three paragraphs where she talks about non-consistent not entirely so at the end of the day let's try to simplify this okay right okay okay just so just so all the board members this board appointed two planners right Beth and Dave right she asked what his opinion is he's just he just added two things okay so we have Beth's memo in the summary section she has three basic options if you will she basically says in light of the above it is my opinion that's her opinion that the ordinance is not entirely consistent right then she kind of waffles a little bit and she says the board may find so she's giving us an out but then she says it is not not inconsistent and then the next paragraph says the board may find the ordinance is inconsistent so one what is your opinion two the board can discuss we can go door number one door number two door number three by the process of elimination pick one of these three and be done or we table it we're we're going to you have a pending is to table this discussion is whether or not the board is putting out there whether or not they want to table some the board members have said they didn't have enough information I just think factually get whatever information Mr SCH has and then have a second round on whether or not the table well I would add if this was omitted what else is omitted we need 30 days to to examine that and see that's what you should say in the second round I think we should hear what Mr SCH has to say about it also was was uh did did Beth consult with you before she put out this numbero no planning boards there two planning uh experts on this board right this is her Memo okay so you work I reviewed it and I yeah I didn't do a a separate comprehensive analysis um but I I just picked up a few things and those are the two things that I picked up on that I would share with the board thank you so just to be clear you you said that this was a comprehensive analysis and that's yes and and aside from the few things that you added that this is pretty comprehensive yeah well like I said I didn't do my own independent comprehensive analysis but it seems pretty comprehensive to me I I agree with everything in there thank you and so getting back to my question before what's your opinion what's your well I I going to page five on the summary where in in light of the above it is my opinion that the ordinance is not entirely consistent with the master plan that's the statement in the in Beth's memo I would definitely agree with that and just uh going to the first thing that I commented on about the conservation residential designation basically this memo cites is calling the uh designation R1 3 Acre designation which is low density whether it's low density or whether it's even lower density as I pointed out the conservation residential that would certainly not change my opinion that that there uh it's not entirely consistent with the so we kind of focused now right so he not done and the second as far as the the later statements about you know if the board forms an opinion on some of the certain other goals and objectives uh they may find one way or the other I would just add um with my suggestion about the housing objectives I think some of those should be considered in addition to the uh objectives that are pointed out in in the mcmanis memo you got all that Mr drill we got all that so now I think you should go to the second round now hear from everybody after hearing everything that heard from the other board members and so before we vote to table you should go for a sec in my opinion yes we will do that that's just to give everyone an update on where we are yeah Mr MCN still has a motion motion pending to table and I'm suggesting after every board member has heard the other board members you should have a second round and each board member should weigh in where they are in the motion to table it might be exactly the same as it was on the first round but maybe someone has changed their mind uh as the movement can I go first yes yes Mr MCN thank you very much um I think we heard from Mr schide that there are issues with this memo and when Mr SCH was asked what's your opinion I believe that the chair was trying to solicit from him is it consistent not inconsistent or inconsistent and Mr schl did not answer that question directly he did he said it's not entirely consistent he said he agreed with with uh Beth MCM first one he's saying he's saying that he didn't hear Mr schide comment on two and three correct that's correct so ask uh um I I just want to say I object to the notion that has been suggested that this board is not doing its job if it tables uh consideration of this tonight you're under no legal deter uh compulsion to determine consistency and if you do so you're making a conscious Choice based on incomplete and inaccurate information given the timeline and absence of full guidance I don't think it's fair and I don't think it's reasonable to ask you to make that determination and just to close out on this so people know and this board knows as a reminder you know you have a memo that was provided to you that has issues with it a a a planner who wrote it who's not here a memo that's dated December 13th uh 2024 four days ago and to paraphase Mr SCH our charge is to compare these findings against the master plan and the 20 the 2023 master plan is 257 pages long and so if you think you can do that I don't know how you get there and so I ask you to support my motion to [Music] T anyone else uh Mr Crane loud and into the microphone I would just loud I would just like to emphasize in case you didn't hear um my background and my experience I've I've been in involved with three Master plans been a land development manager for uh 43 years a major Builder I'm a fourth generation resident and and uh senior member of environmental commission I'm a senior member of this planning board so this is why I'm basing my opinion that there isn't enough information that it's in my industry it's unheard of not to have a concept plan quick question you said that before explain how the concept plan would help with the master plan consistency with you I think it would bring out uh certain items if they were complying or not like uh Street uh Street setback uh Street uh driveway entrances um there there's a host of things U this in this process this is my opinion this is a very rushed way of doing something uh not Norm to the industry that I'm used to or or or have the board has acted before um the question is you should have called the Planner on the on the phone that's one approach but I'd like to hear everybody her answer to everybody and it should be at the public meeting so you can hear the answers as as as far as my comment about rushing it I picked up this CR2 Zone when I reviewed this so it's uh it's it's something uh that was obvious to me but my sense is she might this planner might not have the proper time and if she had more time there might have been a better memo out so I I'll I'll end to that okay so I was going to go next look we know the memo is not perfect on the last um master plan consistency review which was two weeks ago I believe that memo wasn't perfect am I correct David didn't we have to make some changes to that one am I I think so okay so these memos don't come in perfect but we did have a professional planner review it we've got a five-page memo it was also reviewed by Mr SCH who's also He's our town planner and um theist the planning board was put we were put in a difficult uh tough position tonight okay because this came through the township committee late and and this has happened to us in the past last year we had an ordin I mean sorry I believe it was a master plan consistency review for the uh was it the Westgate project or some other project that uh yes at the at the last minute the end of the year here and at the end of the day we have to support the township committee we have to step up put our big boy pants on and and and make the vote now we're going to have a vote whether or not to table the meeting but this ordinance shouldn't die here in this planning board that would be an embarrassment let let them take it back to the township committee and and they can duke it out there they can have you can have your your public comments there but not here in the planning board this is a simple master plan consistency review that people are making a big deal over because of for whatever political reasons so if it comes back as an application if it comes back as as an application why excuse me excuse me excuse me can you guys please be respectful Let Them All State their positions and they'll eventually vote every time you do that the two board members that are on the phone can't hear we have a task at hand the task at hand is to is to do the consistency review it's it's it's fairly straightforward it generally is um but we have a lot of noise in the room not you know there are other issues it's very controversial we realize that but take it back to the uh the um Township committee and they can and you guys can all um have your public comment there and Duke it out there but having said that is there anyone else that would like to speak Mr chair briefly yeah yes please I just you know we've talked length about the professionals that we have to help us to guide us but more importantly we have the brains on this board these people us drafted the master plan over the period of months if not more than a year with the exception of I believe Todd are you here Todd I think Todd was the only one that came to the master plan meetings this board knows the master plan forward and back and while we take guidance from our professionals we're the ones that make the decision we're the ones that drafted the master plan in the first instance so I I do not support Mr MC's motion with all due respect I think the board should do its job tonight we are end running the T of committee's power over this ordinance by letting it die on the vine that's inappropriate and it's disingenuous to imply that this board hasn't acted within 35 days or less many many times years if not decades under many similar circumstances to these it's disingenuous to imply that today is the first time we as a board are acting under 35 days thank you Mr Tyler yeah I I think one thing I would just want to add is uh for those individuals that would want to table this uh motion I would wager that they would also render the decision inconsistent and so it would be interesting to determine why that would be the case if they felt that they were not informed enough to make a decision if we took a straw po right now I would imagine the majority would be finding that this overlay Zone this ordinance would be inconsistent um so I don't know if we're able to do that uh Mr chair or or John drill uh whether or not we can take a straw poll to determine whether or not we would find it inconsistent not to play around with these other definitions but find it consistent I will get there look we may not get there Mr MCN has a propos motion to table the to table the uh yes but this is just a straw poll this is not an official vote I have a motion yeah right so all right if there's no other comments no I have something please okay is this um Miss mangelo mangelo Miss thank um so we have 35 days statutorily correct Mr drill correct correct and what we are at how many days now the ordinance was referred on what date um it was referred last Wednesday so last Wednesday was what 11 six six six days ago the issue is this you're absolutely correct legally it doesn't have to be done tonight no question about it what some people are arguing if it's not done tonight this ordinance has been killed killed so some people are arguing that so be it if we don't have enough information to do it it should be killed the other people are arguing that it's not right to have a planning board kill it and what Mr cevil just you know suggested is if he did a straw pole he's betting that there'd be more than a majority saying it was inconsistent so why not just vote on that I understand what Mr Bill is saying I would like to just have the answer we have more time correct you have 35 days to do it but and do we have another meeting within those 35 days no you do not well January we don't have any more any meetings this year yeah there's no more meetings this year if you said you're going to do it in January there's nothing to review for master plan consistency in January because the ordinance dies because whoever on the board mentioned that is absolutely correct that there's a an Olde believe it or not from the 1800s the late 1800s that every Municipal attorney in the state follows and it says that you have an ordinance that's introduced in one year it has to be adopted in that year if it gets past the end of the year it dies and I believe the township attorney has also rendered that opinion can the ordinance be reintroduced in 2025 absolutely now my other question question is to Mr SCH the concept plan that we do not have Westgate commercial that was re was commercial or was affordable hous had a concept both correct Westgate had a concept plan but it was commercial and affordable housing that's right correct but we had a concept plan to consider yes that's correct it the concept plan was part of the ordinance yes in other words they didn't the the concept plan was attached to and made part of the ordinance correct correct okay so when someone mentioned that Westgate I think it was Mr Dem mergent was adopted quickly at the end of last year we did have a concept plan when in my recollection when we reviewed that ordinance that's correct okay um okay and I would just the record that I was a on the board when we did the master plan and I was one of the three editors of the master plan so I'm very familiar with the master plan our former chair kitb Pichi myself as Vice chair and Paul demerin as current chair did an extensive um review to make sure all the changes had been made so I am very familiar with our very dense master plan would just like to say that um I have said enough I will turn over the floor no no don't turn it over yet because I'm taking notes this is kind of a straw pole on the motion to Table in this second round so I heard what you said but I don't know if are you in favor of tabling or in favor of not tabling wait we never say I'd like to see if anyone else would like to before you put me on the spot like that thank you okay Mr no no no no I said I said this is like some people are saying and I know when they're saying I know what it means I didn't she said stuff I didn't know what it meant I'm sorry I withdraw why don't we just I'm very sorry I want to over I just want to add in a bit okay so Kathleen are you finished yes thank you uh Julian no you yeah thanks we're sharing a mic tonight sorry I had an exciting weekend of thinking about this um I you know I appreciate the board professionals yeah I appreciate everybody on this board I think when we're here and we're live and we deliberate we usually come out with a great our finished outcome is fantastic I think we're missing a bit of that now as much as I'd like to just move this thing along and try to get this thing moving and do our job I feel as though what we did get from the board planner while great it leaves me myself as I think about it I can go either decision and I feel in this particular case I need a little more I need some live conversation I need some back and forth which we often times Mr Crane will say something and then that makes me understand something better back and forth so for me I'm leaning towards tabling that's where I stand at the [Applause] moment I'd like to join in that in that response I think I'm also very troubled by the fact that as a board we are tasked here today to make a decision as to whether the ordinance is consistent inconsistent or not inconsistent with the master plan because if we find that the ordinance is inconsistent with the master plan we must also then identify all such inconsistencies and we've already identified or I should say Mr schy has already further identified um inconsistencies that unfortunately the other planner did not uh did not speak to so I think that with additional time there may be further inconsistencies that we may discover um and that is something that I that's my personal opinion on the matter but I am leaning toward tabling but but if we already have inconsistencies correct and what you're saying is there may be more correct but but don't we all don't we have enough right now do we need to to have even more inconsistencies in order to make it to the Chairman's um to what he said something earlier was that we're not just tked with indicating whether or not there's inconsistencies because I do believe that this is inconsistent I don't I don't know that anyone on the board is questioning that at this point but we must identify each of those inconsistencies and then a letter will be sent to the township I don't think that at this point in time we have all the information necessary to identify each and every inconsistency [Applause] David yes yes mayor yes I'd like to again Ask the board to focus on what is being asked at hand in similar situations this board has delivered the consistency review as requested the same thing is being asked here unfortunately with of the communication and drama and the unfortunate communication driving people to a meeting that doesn't have an open public comment put undue pressure and I think it is unacceptable to treat our board Volunteers in that manner I'm going to ask again that the board Tak charge seriously and based on their expertise and their knowled of the master plan in addition to the letter and Mr SCH feedback to complete the assessment as asked it would be a terrible disservice to all of our residents in our community to not permit an actual public hearing on this topic we are asking the township committee sent this to you because we would like ultimately a public hearing on this topic because keep in mind public comment and further information is needed before a decision is made for some members of the township committee a decision has not been made but yet we need that information so finally we need this board to do its charge which is simply determine consistency and to return it back to the township committee so that information can be gathered and the township Comm committee can take the proper action thank you thank you uh does anyone else uh Mr Rabino additional comments Mr when you say when did you say we receive this memo MC Manis the memo last is dated December 13th and I believe that's when it was emailed out the ordinance was introduced on give me that date again Mr MCN the ordinance was introduced on WE December December 10th so the ordinance was introduced December 10th the memo and after it was introduced it was emailed out to the board the next day the next day so on the 11th and then the memo came dated December 13 and emailed on December 13th so I guess it's fair to say we had about four days well today the 17th yeah four days I just want to reject thetion both do respective chair and any other member of the board that says that we're not doing our job we don't come to a conclusion today I categorically reject that in in four four days these past four days the past seven days I've been working non-stop I've got events I've got to attend I've had some time to go over this but in no way enough time that I need to do the due diligence that's necessary to look after the members of our [Applause] [Music] community fair enough uh Mr Rina but let me ask you if you had 35 days would your would you have done the work no we would be relying on Mr sly's I'm going to take a week's vacation in January look through it all how about that okay okay can we just be mindful pres that this board is is looking to set that we are incapable of making decisions when the pressure is on I no pressure maybe some of us do nothing all day but I work fair enough listen I I appreciate everyone's work in the board you know that Mr Rino okay we may disagree on some I'm protecting our our community I [Applause] understand this project doesn't affect me I'm looking out for the community I and I appreciate that that's what we're all here to do you're absolutely right who's making a decision after 4 days okay is doing the community service yes okay so I think everyone has weighed in on the second round so I think something I'd like to add because I heard the word Focus okay I'd like to this this project from what I understand and I don't even know right because I just found out about it but I understand it's been out since July kind of subvertly right so if it's been out since July if it's been out since July this should have been introduced to one of the other 10 meetings that existed between then and now not at the 11th Hour where everybody celebrating the holiday season it came to us a week ago so and we have no control over that on this board I didn't hear about this until a week ago so I'm going to wrap up with one more thing I'm going to say because I heard the word Focus I would ask my fellow members on the board to focus I agree we should all focus on making sure the due diligence is done for this project and take the time necessary it's not our fault that the calendar year changes in that 35 day time period okay we would have adopted this in October if it was brought to us okay so we should focus and not be strong armed by people are attempting to do that to us [Applause] now we Let's uh let's uh um Miss ke for roll call on the motion to table and by the way that's there are nine regular members of the board those are the only nine that can vote correct so this is a vote to table a yes is to table a no is not to table all righty Mr Crane yes um Mr roro yes Mr linski yes uh Comm MCN yes Miss Mandu no Miss Master Angelo yes uh Mr Seville no chairman deeran no Mary C no okay the motion to table passes 5 to four Christmas Merry Christmas don't forget the lotion yeah okay next item on the agenda comments from Members I have a com merry Christmas happy Hanukkah happy New [Applause] Year CR crane have comments no no anyone comments no notion I just want to thank everyone for coming out thank you so much motion tojn motion toj motion toj motion toj motion Mr [Music]