##VIDEO ID:Xp6rteZJpPE## [Music] thank you very much good evening everyone this is the Highland Park planning board meeting for October 10th 2024 this meeting is called to order in accordance with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting was provided to the home News Tribune The Star Ledger on the Highland Park planet on January 23rd 2024 and was posted on the burrow website at www.hpb.com and on the bulleon board at Burrow Hall 221 South fth Avenue Highland Park New Jersey and has remained continuously posted as required by law fire exits are located to the left and right of council chambers and please remember to speak into the microphones uh so take roll call please miss H here Mr brusher Mr Chin here Mr is dorer here miss hadhazi here Mr H here Mr lar Mr mle here Mr Perlman here Mr St cardal M Brew Williams here Mr Lynch here Mr cenza here Mr Cot here all right very good first up on our agenda is a review of our July 11th 2024 minutes revised from our last meeting anyone on the board have any comments about the July 11 2024 minutes nobody excellent revisions look at that all right um can we bundle this in with the next set of minutes as well or do we have to do them individually okay all right uh can do we need roll call we don't need roll call minutes we can do all in favor all right so I'll solicit a motion to approve the July 11 motion to approve seconded all right all in favor I all opposed any extensions Mr Williams abstains I also abstain because I wasn't there Mr Chin abstains but even still that was enough eyes to make it passed the motion passes moving on to the August 8th 2024 minutes does anyone have any comments about the August 8th 2024 minutes one once twice all right I'll solicit a motion to approve our August 8th 2024 minutes motion to approve second all right all in favor I all opposed any extensions I'm sorry that was Alvin Mr Chin and mat all right and with that the motion carries very good moving on from our minutes we have resolution on the consistency review for ordinance 24-29 2 and the recommendation of the 810 North Second Avenue Redevelopment plan fill out 24 block 503 we already had a motion on this last week this is just um approval of the actual written resolution right we all we all approve the or at least the board said that the uh Redevelopment plan was not inconsistent with the master plan and I think this resolution is just memorializing that so does anyone on the on the board have any comments on the language for the resolution of memorialization for the consistency review of the A10 North Second Redevelopment plan yes uh just a word um after the SE on page two after the line that begins the city of New Brunswick I think that should be Edison Township ah yes it's not East Edison Township it's just Edison Township point sure spell my name correctly oh no Al l l all right and we absolutely need to correct the spelling of Alan Lam's first name ah yes gonna make it hard to sign that when it's spell with a frch accent in all right any other comments on the resolution no all right then I don't even think that needs a motion right just sign it the resolution all right then once it's all right then I will I will trust Roger directive that apparently we do need a motion do you think we need a roll call on a motion to approve the just do a roll call yes all right so so wait wait we didn't have a motion yet I'll solicit a motion to approve the resolution of memor memorialization so move as all right second second multiple seconds we pedrick Malay will okay all right and then we'll take a roll call please Mr Chen yes Mr icorer yes M ha obain Mr ha yes Mr mle yes Mr Perlman yes Mr Williams yes yes I'll by once it gets corrected get it okay last but not least we have a consistency review of ordinance number 24-29 and ordinance amending and supplementing chapter 230 d124 the zoning map and 230-4 attachment for in order to update the zoning map within the burrow of Highland Park as a reminder our role as a board is to ensure that the ordinance is not inconsist consistent with the master plan the master plan can of course be found on the Burrow's website at www.hpborrow.com for those of you following along at home if you want to check for consistency as you play along so with that being said I'm going to turn it over to Chris to review this ordinance so that we can get some background on it sure thank you U so this is an ordinance to really update the zoning map really three parts um the first two parts are to oops make the corrections that we didn't do back in 2004 and 201 which was actually update zoning map as needed when ordinance changes or zoning map changes were made at that time by Tex Amendment um so when Bruce's office CME did the zoning map in 2013 and when lrk did a zoning map in 2019 simply weren't aware of those changes um during our research actually I mentioned at the last heing about 8 10 more second redel plan that's at the time we discovered there's something off with the zoning map and that was predicated upon doing a research of the property itself adjacent to the P E1 Zone which is the district that created The Crossings the building plan unit development um along Cleveland Avenue um when we were doing the research or really taking a step backwards we're wondering why did this property not get developed as part of the townhouse development if it's in the pur1 district so we did some more research we looked at the zoning ordinances and as you know in any zoning ordinance it'll say last amended by ordinance number this dated this and in the zoning uh map section 110 230-240 ordinances so Earl Clerk and I Jennifer Santiago spent entire day searching through the clerk books of the ordinances that adopted for the last 20 years and we've pulled out all the ordinances that made zoning map changes and we discovered there were two ordinances that were adopted but never made its way onto the map and that's what this ordinance meant to do is really recapture those out scrap which spots those are and the third part is obviously since 2019 the last time lrk did the zoning map uh there were several Redevelopment plans adopted so this map incorporates those Redevelopment plans areas um so go going back to the first ordinance U ordinance number 1633 adopted on April 20th 2004 so we're talking over 20 years ago there was a a series of math changes done by Tex Amendment and they never made it way on map so this new map corrects that among those changes uh they're listed in section one of the ordinance so when you see outdate zoning map here attached here to a uh and a b and c those changes are not made this is this is from 2002 uh so in subsection a it talks about certain Parcels that were in the sea commercial Zone a couple blocks on North Baran and several blocks on Woodbridge Avenue going up to 11th Avenue those slots again this 20 years ago they were in a SE Zone they actually the CPD they're generally coincident with the boundaries of the Main Street holl park Improvement so it makes sense why that was done it done 20 years ago uh another series of map changes was on Cleveland Avenue the south east block along Cleveland Avenue which was thought to be light industrial actually has been professional office for the past 20 years that's reflected on this map and Third change was the third out four changes was the one large plot in the Northwest part of town in the basically in the olical preserve boundary one parcel was in Rae actually been reson back to CR which is conservation Recreation and this map shows it as all green in that area as it should be uh one final change in that 2004 ordinance was to adopt an overlay Zone which was the stream uh stream Corridor protection overlay Zone again adoped in 2004 uh we found a map that was prepared by another consultant back in 2004 and we incorporated the data layers onto this map um the print out that you have is a little muddy a very very dark blue that's basically goes on to Donson Park Johnson Park as well as two Brooks in the burrow those are the overlay zones it's basically a distance from the top of banks of the of the uh the creeks and water bodies or waterways rather and then 100t distance from the FL PL line so that that area all that red is in the Stream qu protection overlay Zone um a version that you see online is much cleaner U available to the public hopefully much e to navigate and use has more of a strap a strike patch as opposed to a solid blue that you have in front of you um another ordinance change back in 2010 uh this is a result of litigation between the burrow and R A so at the time the right a property was in the5 development plan area part of litigation uh settlement uh it was agreed at the time that their properties would be removed from the 2005 re develop plan areas and subject to underlying zoning at that time which is CBD so if you look at the center of the map between uh South for South Third you'll see uh only a few properties are situated in the number one the blue R be area that's the 2005 we plan areas it doesn't apply to right 8 more and the parking lot behind it it's just everything else on that block uh including I believe the parking lot off the South thir that was 200 10 coordinates now made it way back on its map basically making 2005 plan slightly smaller and of course I discussed all the re plan areas that were adopted by ordinance uh in the past five years which include 433 Cleveland Avenue the downtown re plan for tracks a through D the 420 424 basically stop shop now Super Fresh site the recently adopted upper ridan Avenue plan and the 8101 plan so the map is as far as I can tell finally updated corrected and that's really all this is no new resoning just really reflecting all the changes including sometimes picking up other changes I will want to say at the defense of the burrow this is not an uncommon issue I've work in other towns and it's it's not uncommon especially in a small town to uh have sometimes zoning map changes slip happens all the time to put you on the spot at all had a quick question I noticed that the uh development where the Old Law used to be that's now penus place which is at the corner of riton and South Adelaide as well as the large townhouse development on Cedar and River Road are both in a Zone called quasi public I'll be honest I don't know what a quasi public zone is or why those townhouse developments would be in a quasi public Zone I don't have the information of what's permitted in those districts off hand but that's information we the second one uh it's the the big townhous development that went where I believe it used to be a NY perh right and then um that the other was the Y right yeah the Y P place I don't I don't know what quasi public means I'm just curious why those two developments are in this seem to be the only ones in this particular named Zone and far as I know they're not public I believe they both went to the zoning board because of that yeah one thing you might want to do in the next Master Plan update which be five years from now is to consider rezoning to reflect buil conditions and that's not uncommon change um I do agree there these auds uh unless the bur wants to control use variances through a use variance application that's another way to keep really keep the way it is but sometimes it's better just clean up the ORS yeah I I know both those are in there before they return to the tow houses were quasi public areas there was the Y and there was the Seminary y so I wouldn't be surprised if those were the old I'm surprised on an updated zoning map those old zones are still there that's all on yeah there's no ordinance to change it and if there's um or approved by news expans that'll explain why still it stays away it is until it's reson interesting hear that mat something to clean up put that on the to-do let me ask you about the the Redevelopment areas so some of these Redevelopment areas that they've actually been built some of them have not been built um are all those Redevelopment plans and all those plans do the the develop Redevelopment standards supersede the underlying zoning uh in this case they all do if they were overlay I would use to Overlay hatching but yeah all the plans are adopted including 2005 they're all sueding placing why put the uh stream overlay on the zoning map I mean it would seem to confuse things it be better to have a separate map um I mean that that's something that we could probably do uh one thing I do want to ask the administration is if there's a appetite for an interactive zoning map and that that'll be EAS way to toggle through otherwise I could speak to Administration whether they create a separate map basically turning everything off except for stre I mean if you look at uh The Meadows over the far right hand corner by the river you would given how it looks you would think it's a very small area and it isn't it goes all the way to the river if it's um printed in uh or uh if the printing uses the hatching as shown on the digital file then it won't be as opaque yeah um that might be a printing error I'm not sure yeah that's what I said the beginning that this map is a little muddy when it came out of the printer it should not be solid as shown on your physical print out it should be hatched as it is in the legend yeah does the scam have different development C to there are regulated activities including prohibited uses I didn't really look into exactly what those standards are is an over just saying if if it has if it has different standards then it ought to be on the zoning map if at all possible otherwise you can't picking up the zoning map doesn't tell you right where to look yeah it's appropriate here as an overlay Zone as it's intended that's how adopted I think to Mr Williams point it may be useful have a separate map everything's turned off except for that um there's a version of that exists in the office 2004 but it's not digital so it shouldn't take too long to do that if that's something that the mayor council and the for administration want to see does being designated to Central business district by default mean that you can have multiuse property because I know that in our Redevelopment plan we have heavy mixed use plans for retail commercial space on the bottom and apartment housing or condominium housing on top um and I don't see anything in the legend that designates anything for mixed use so does central business district designate the allowance for mixed use properties uh it does uh for example you have Apartments over non-residential space so for certain districts it implies mixed jues allowed for certain districts like the ra R zone obviously you can't more than one house or one either one single thing or two that's applied to be only single use but generally in the CBD to a certain extent the C Zone all lot for Mi that's what is going to be my followup question is is that extended to commercial uh to a certain extent you can have two different principal uses on a lot but if I recall correctly the C Zone does not prevent residential which was what precipated the need for AR plan for C which I think as we discussed might be a better idea to stretch that to the entire for I have a a comment in a question comment is as planner you see municipalities with this not issue all over the state proba over the country it is a very common thing espe as small as that so you know no you know no head on the town this is this is this C of challenge especially over Decades of Z so I the question um I asked is just if you could talk about the sort of you know filing a zoning ordinance and and how you know how that works and then you know is is is The Zing ordinances as we update and now do we have GIS we have a sort of a GIS layer that we update regularly and then are we filing that okay maybe we should and then you know then it speaks to some sort of interactive interactive map for the public they could see what zone they're in and so then pull down the the bulk standards that they have to look at um but also you would file also the county you all towns filing their zoning uh ordinances with the county so that there's a at least County Mount that could be developed just talk a little about the process uh well that process I'm not familiar with the county I think it's filed with the county and the gis it department just really Maps it I know the county recently went went through an effort and when I saw the data for Holland Park and touching other Town work for I looked at whoop there's mistakes with that information so there's clearly a miscommunication effort or and I know the county did a great job grabbing all the data but it's only as accurate as the data it's given to them um but going forward we're certainly going to have a with with me especially with me being involved being nitpicking with this process we're going to make sure that information gets to them and uh I made a pledge to the mayor and Council and administration that anytime we do a reed Plan update including one you're gonna be getting soon we also update the map so this type of ordinance is be having much more regularly especially in tune with the r plan we don't we we don't have this issue of well that plan was adopted three years ago we're just going to wait until we had money for it this doesn't take long to update now that we have all the data um this information is more graphic based illustrator in design um through the adob suite program but we are I'm internally I'm going through the effort of bringing this information into GIS so that we could potentially make an interactive map uh through a story map and through edre much more efficiently uh and my hope is to do exactly what you said sure there are plenty of graduate plan graduate students planners living in the town to do this for one of their GIS projects I'm pretty sure we I'm talking to recers for a project in another town I think this will be a neat one that to take with especially since all the hard work's been done now it's a matter of digitizing so in um up and down W avue in the central business district there are number of residential homes that kind of like dot in between some of the businesses like for example there's a house that's between the funeral home and crowers and then like there's just kind of these like oneoff properties um those homes uh are clearly all residential they're not like Mi use but if someone in the future was to purchase one of those properties and knock it down and want to build something else would they have to build a commercial mixed use property or could could they rebuild a residential property what's the borrow sort of stance on that is it more trying to encourage more commercial property or would someone be able to replace residential with residential if the residential house is originally um built in the Central District area and that's like throughout Highland Park so throughout Highland Park or specifically Woodbridge Avenue well I'm just using Woodbridge Avenue as an as an example but throughout uh Woodbridge Avenue and up and down Ron Avenue there are like res the main street is kind of interspersed with residential homes yes are you talking about pre-existing non-conforming uses correct and future development so they'll give up the they'll give up their grandfathered rights and they will most likely have to apply for zoning or whatever baring is to get Conformity with the with the more modern zoning ordinances Okay so any other thoughts or comments on the proposal to update the zoning maap um I have a question about not not necessarily the uh the stream overlay uh Zone itself but the ordinance um it mentions using the uh the 100-year flood plane as a uh as the uh reference point for where the extent of the U overlay Zone would be uh do you know if there's in the ordinance any mechanism to revisit that the extent of that zone if the uh reference map produced by FEMA is ever changed I don't recall there being like a dynamic change to it but I think whenever the FEMA information for this quadrant is updated we would update this map accordingly once the data layer is given to us um can can you can we do that without an ordinance this this is a a Zone without an actual fixed boundary it does have a boundary but if it's defined uh in in relation to a different uh Federal Zone yeah it's not not you know it's not the def defined by in terms of meats and Bounds uh it's defined by this uh environmental condition and you know few maps are contested one one might well be in a position when I was in private practice I had situations where there were competing ideas about where what the boundary of flood plane was and argue that the FEMA map was outdated uh and not that wasn't the real 100-year flood plane uh and so I'm a little I'm made uneasy now this is not a problem for us here right this is a problem in the ordinance but um but since it's been fact here I would just say I'm made uneasy by by a Zone where the boundary is sort of floating so to speak I don't think anywhere in the ordinance it says that the map can be dynamically updated I understand it's a reference to a map n BR control so by in for inst it's dynamically updated but I think it would hit the same problem that we currently have that someone actually has to go and update the map even if all the referenced related maps have been updated and that's how we end up with this situation well but but the problem is the problem with the or the problem with the map is someone who comes in and says what can I do on this site they look at the map the map gave them wrong information that's a serious problem and I'm I'm happy that we are updating it because that's a problem on which hundreds of thousands of can turn you know you know you make a contract to purchase the land because You' looked at the map and the map says I can do X when it really turns you can't do X but you can do with something completely different so that's a serious thing um but this is a different problem this is a problem of um we seem to have an ordinance in which um the boundaries of the Zone might move uh without any any public action at the municipal level and that is I won't say it's illegal I just say it's weird so maybe what you could do is label that it's based upon feema map dated such and such such and such then then it would be definite and then recommend that the whoever is reviewing it should check with FEMA for any updates that's right I'm I'm more comfortable doing it that way saying this is came about such and such a date and then if if it changes that's then then you need an ordinance amendment to change that change that notation so now it's the FEA map not the not the 2016 map but the 2028 map so where do we where does the reference for the stream Corridor protection overlay Zone currently come from case on the ordinance has adoped in 2004 and it references 100y year flood plan okay in multiple places and it's 100 feet from that FL plane line so the concern is rather should the 100-year flood plane change in the future which let's face it it probably will a three foot change yeah so it's not implemented yet that's why I was doing this nothing else do we do we by any chance know the dates of the current that but it's coming yeah it's like July 6 2012 it's the current map yeah but there's a new one coming so well then it it sounds like perhaps part of our recommendation back to council would be to add an me there are six I see under subsection F there are submission requirements um for the applicant uh under F1 a through a through F and it's they do there is a time for decision provision so I mean we clean it up and in terms of definitive uh map that have been drawn up the current fuma map I mean but obviously this is a hybrid situation I mean water Wetland boundary lines AR definitive I I I mean I also think that you know updating this map I mean the flood planes are going to change whether or not we update our map and they're going to be imposed as an overlay to whatever our zoning map says even if we don't update our map so having being able to definitively say this overlay is reliance on these female flood maps is just to signal that but there could be more updated ones so you should check for those as well I think they can do that by inference uh so whenever the flub maps are changed I think it'll be our D Duty due diligence to update it accordingly so we have upda that way there's less time of okay confusion I have one recation so so there's a designation for professional office and it seems to be outlined where professional offices presently exist and that's what's being designated on the map but I would think that that is limiting to use of that land and use of that space for future use should someone decide to sell their building and not use it as a professional office I think that having the central business district designated for different areas on the central business district should probably apply to everything that you designated as professional office so that if someone vacates a building and a building's for sale someone comes in and says hey that would be a great location for a restaurant but is it it's not zoned for Central business district it's zoned for commercial that's limiting maybe we should get rid of that professional office designation and just designate everything Central business district I I think that's a recommendation that Council would have to change the zoning ordinances I don't think that's something well we certainly don't have the power to change but I would just recommend maybe considering that yeah soest that's number five on the no I mean it's just recation give it more flexibility and you know like more possibilities in the future I mean you know anything happen anything change like you know buildings burn down and get built back up again maybe it could be something else and I would hate to see someone not take advantage of an opportunity because it's zoned for office when it so close to the Main Street it could be something else yeah um to that point I think in the future the burrow Council were to consider that good thing is the master plan already supports transition zoning so I think a lot of those things could be accomplished without having to really necessarily re-examined a master plan and just so you know as a reminder in a PO Zone a single family home as well and I'm very grateful for that all right um wonder why before we get into a motion I just want to clarify the thought process on the flood math reference um or would the clarification be that as the flood matter yet changed the overlay needs to be updated accordingly or a reference to the whatever the date of the current flood map that applies to this zoning order be added for clarification we could reference a different part of the B code of section 1973 actually lists the maps and dates of the maps uh that uh that are regulated according to the FL preven flood damage prevention ordinance that's a that's a clean way yeah I think that's a great recommendation do we know that they're current even if they're not we can say that's what we're my only concern is that reference is a different chapter it's not in just chapter 230 I think it you need to keep it the way it is because it's based on the zoning okay well my recommendation was not for not for this ordinance but that um that in in in reviewing the map we have noticed a potential pres problem with the ordinance that designated the screen the the stream uh the Stream area stream overlay and that that orance is going to be changed to make reference to a specific a specific me so so it's unambiguous with the understanding that when those maps are updated which will affect other things in the municipality that ordin that that that ordinance should also be updated that's what I was proposing I appreciate that as well so it sounds like it is more accurate to say that this needs to be a recommendation referencing the zoning overlay ordinance that's correct as opposed to a change to this particular ordinance that's how I was understanding yeah all right anyone have any thoughts on that okay last chance for comment comments one more comment go ahead um just looking at this map and looking at the area that is um between fth Avenue and 7th Avenue um so I guess that's below North or South South sorry South Fifth South 7eventh um and then like there's this kind of like speckled area if I'm looking at this key correctly that's single family residential e ethological preservation is that correct yes is this this is all Al where proposed apartment building is going yes that's Buck Woods the buck Woods is in the overlay with the multi family residential overlay with the crosshatch black that's where buff this is it right here okay so I'm just making sure I'm seeing that correctly okay okay no then no question okay then I will open up to comments from the public on our consistency review of ordinance number 24-20 n6 seeing no members of the public are present I will close the public comment portion anyone observing us at home please feel free to come down in order to participate in our meetings you have to physically be present here at our meeting so please join us next time if you wish to be heard so that being said at this time I will solicit a motion on our consistency review of ordinance 24-20 96 that is not inconsistent with the master there's any re specific recommendations that we want pass on to the council that I'll put them on the it doesn't seem like for this vter is correct well we want to the recommendation doesn't affect this ordinance but it is sent along in order to make comments on references we do want them to re review the stream overlay Zone standard we recommend that the ordinance stream overlay be reviewed in order to make sure we don't have a moving Target going when people look at these Z Maps Okay right anyone want to make a motion sure I Mo with that we determine that this this ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan um noting that we are also making separate recommendations is there a second second seconded by colia will'll take a roll call vote Please Mr Chen yes it's not inconsistent Mr ior yes M haing yes Mr Hal yes Mr Malay yes Mr Pearlman yes Mr Williams yes his hand yes all right motion carries and with that normally I'd ask Scott for any of the latest gossip in town but he chose not to come tonight so I will ask the board if anyone has any last minute comments about things not on the agenda they want to talk about anybody okay do I have to open up to the public I think I have to open up to the public one more time but seeing no members of the public I will close the public portion comment of the meeting and with that I will solicit a motion to adjourn motion to Second all in favor I thank you very much everybody thank you always appreciated good