##VIDEO ID:hD7XtxWoV28## good evening and welcome this is a regular meeting of the Princeton planning board on Thursday September 5th 2024 pursuant to section 13 of the open public meetings act adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the resolution of regularly scheduled meetings of the planning board of Princeton for February 2024 through January 2025 a copy was filed with the clerk of Princeton on January 8th 20 24 legal notice on the adoption of said resolution was published in the January 12th 2024 edition of the Princeton packet notice of this meeting also has been posted to the municipal website Princeton nj.gov calendar notice that all regular and special meetings of the Princeton planning board will be held electronically via Zoom was transmitted to the Princeton packet and the times and was filed with the clerk of Princeton on Tuesday January 177 2023 please note that this meeting is being recorded during hearings on applications for development members of the public will have an opportunity to opportunity to comment and ask questions questions may be asked after an applicant's Witnesses have testified public comment is heard by the board after an applicant's Representatives have finished their presentations and have been questioned by board members and staff the planning board also invites public comment on proposed ordinances referred to this board by Prince 's mayor and councel for our assessment of the ordinance's consistency with the Princeton Community master plan however Please be aware that the formal public hearing for all ordinances takes place before mayor and council at a council meeting not before the planning board those wishing to comment orally should virtually raise your hand by clicking on the reactions button or the rais hand icon at the bottom of your Zoom screen or if participating by phone by pressing star n oral comments will be taken in the order in which hands were raised we ask with respect that members of the public express your views in three minutes or less a countdown clock will be used to help speakers keep track of time and speakers who exceed three minutes will be interrupted inappropriate public comment containing obscenity hate speech or relating to matters not before the board will be muted Carrie will you call the role please yes uh Mr bimer presid miss capoli here Mr Cohen here Mr Macwan here miss Nuka present Mr odonnell here miss preter here miss saxs Mr Taylor Miss Claudia Wilson here Mrs Wilson here we have a quorum good um so oh and Jack is here to sorry I didn't uh see that um next up we have sorry announcements Jack are you able to I'm sorry to interrupt before the announcements even start can you activate your your camera Jack his computer's going slow but I think he's here okay um announcements Justin uh yes um so I just want to give an announcement about tonight's agenda uh it's a pretty packed one but it's not going to be so packed after this announcement um first off the Wasco subdivision case on Stockton Street will be carried to a date in October uh due to variance and noticing issues um so we won't be hearing that one tonight and then secondly uh the capital review for the Princeton Public Schools improvements to three schools has been postponed and will most likely be reviewed by the board at the next meeting on September mber 19th uh we'll go into further detail uh about each of these why they're being carried when they're being carried all that um when once we get to them uh but just wanted to give a heads up to anyone that was here that is is here tonight and doesn't want to spend their whole night just to see the application that they're interested in being carried but obviously feel free to stick around now Justin when we had talked about this is the staff level um we had the idea that we would take jurisdiction uh with respect to Wasco but then carry it is that still the idea that's correct yes yeah okay yep when we get to it good with any other announcements um from staff or board members okay my announcement is welcome back happy September um subcommittee reports um we have land ape subcommittee and site plan subcommittee who would like to go first all right Julie the landscape subcommittee met on Friday August 23rd at 10:00 a.m. to discuss 375 tune Road and uh we successfully uh worked through all the issues with Dan dber milski and um found resolution to all the issues and the um and the committee voted [Music] to uh to there were some um tree issues that had to do with the resolution and so we were able to clarify that plantings that sort of thing so um and gave the green light right yeah okay great thank you David yeah the site plan subcommittee met on Wednesday August 21st and we considered uh the application at 84 nasaw Street which was um to consider whether the um work that was done to the rear patio which was um done prior to submitting the application uh whether we considered that to be a minor site plan uh application and the work that was done was clearly minor um you know they um paved a portion of what had been a grassy area behind the t- room and they put in storm water management to or committed to put in storm water management and perious pavers to um ensure that the new impervious coverage uh complies with our stormm water or ordinance so the based on that uh commitment to redo the work on the patio the committee uh recommended that it be considered a minor site plan and be approved okay good thank you um next up we have minutes um the first set are from November 30th of last year obviously that's a really long time ago and it's unusual to um to take this long to bring minutes to the board but the board may recall this um those of you who were on the board at the time and maybe if you even if you weren't uh that that was a master plan um public hearing it was a long meeting it was really important to get all the detail right and so there went through several iterations and um I think they're in good shape now um but I just wanted to say something about that thank uh Carrie and Justin for um and and probably Jerry too for paying a whole bunch of attention to it over a long period of time um so would anyone like to move the minutes uh of November 30th 2023 so moved by Mr Cohen seconded by m chair yes sir uh I have a question uh I couldn't vote on at that time I did hear you know the rest of the testimony so should I just say I abstained from voting on this or were you there for the whole for the whole meeting on the 30th yeah then I you're qualified to vote yeah yeah okay would you like to Second them sure I'll second them sure that makes by Mr Cohen seconded by Mr mwen um let's do a roll call Harry thank you Mr bimer yes Miss capoli yes Mr Cohen yes Mr Macwan yes Mr odonnell yes Mr Taylor yes Mrs Wilson yes thank you motion carried great thank you um next are minutes from February 1st 2024 this was a regular meeting any any comments or edits or suggestions and if not would someone like to move those so moved uh was that you Nat that was me okay and Owen raised his hand so moved by Nat bimer segmented by o and odonnell all in favor please say I I any opposed or abstaining okay thank you um I'm going to turn to Owen to handle the resolutions uh portion of the agenda because I'm conflicted from one and I'm wasn't here for the other that we're considering tonight so Owen take it away thank you madam chair uh we have three resolutions on the agenda uh the first is from 10 acre Foundation it was a modification to M to Major site development at 884 and 953 Great Road it's file number p424 - 449 PD are there any questions or would someone like to move I would like to identify who is eligible to vote and then do a roll a roll call okay Cur vote uh that would be miss capoli Mr Cohen Mr mwan Miss Nuka yourself Mr odonnell Miss pearlmutter and Mr Taylor thank you for that I saw David Cohen raise his hand yes I move it to move is there a second I go I'm gonna go with Jack Taylor who's the first one that I heard uh second uh Currie if you take the the role please uh yes Miss capoli yes Mr Cohen yes Mr McOwen yes Miss Nuka yes Mr odonnell yes Miss pearlmutter yes and Mr Taylor yes thank you motion carried thank you very much the second resolution is estate Shore this is a minor subdivision with variances at 479 Jefferson Road file number P 2323 d403 Ms and this is going to be tabled for a future meeting uh Justin or Jerry do you have anything to add to uh yes uh thank you Mr chair um basically it just wasn't ready to go on the agenda today we expect expect it'll be on September 19th uh memorializing the case from June 25th and we'll post it to the website uh now that it's ready to go uh and uh you'll all be able to see it as will uh members of the public terrific thank you very much so we'll move on to the third resolution which was Anthony velli it's a minor site plan with variant located at 299 Witherspoon Street file number 22 23 2 22323 d435 pm uh are there any questions or comments on this uh Justin you have your hand up I have one very small uh correction um that we noticed after we already sent this out uh on page nine in condition five it states the canopy proposed for the solar parking area shall be solar ready uh there's too many solar in there um so I think if the board would like uh when you make the motion to modify it to remove the First Solar that would probably make more sense all right thank you very much uh Miss Wilson technical issue because I'm recused but is the file number um a typo is it actually 22323 or is it just 2323 2323 you're correct 2323 okay that was a typo on the agenda then sorry about that that's where I ready from all right thank you very much for that so the file number is 2323 435 pm thank you uh any other questions or uh someone want to move this with the modification that Justin those members who are eligible Mr bodimer M scapoli Mr Cohen Mr mcgallen Miss Nuka um Miss Claudia um Miss Wilson Anderson ronnell I'll move it with the correction noted by Mr leco thank you n second second David thank you very much for that and Curry can you take the vote Please Mr bodimer hi yes Miss capoli yes Mr Cohen yes Mr mcowan yes Miss Nuka yes Miss Wilson Anderson yes and Mr odonnell yes motion carried thank you all very much and with that I'll turn the the gavl back over to the chair thank you Owen um next up we have an application uh Justin already announced that uh this will be postponed but the um there's a little bit of business to be done in order to uh memorialize that related to noticing Etc so I'll read it all the application is Steven Wasco minor subdivision with variances this is a lot line adjustment at 537 and 561 Stockton Street it's block 931 Lots 11 and 12 file number p2323 368 Ms Justin yes thank you madam chair uh Jerry do we have jurisdiction yes we do the notice was uh sufficient and we do have jurisdiction well although will explain what what our thinking is at this point go ahead go ahead you need to swear me in for just this part yeah yeah I think I should um do you swear to you swear that you will or swear or affirm his you about to give will be the truth yes I do so want or affirmed thank you and thank you madam chair and good evening uh members of the board and members of the public I didn't say that yet um this application will not be heard tonight as I alluded to before staff has found additional variances and the applicant agrees that it would be best to reschedule the case uh reflecting these variances uh within our report uh and elsewhere um so we would like to carry the case until October 17th uh now um it would go to the HPC before so we're still finalizing when that date might be um if all goes well we'll be able to hear this October 17th if not we'll be back at this board moving jurisdiction over or there would be Ren noticing okay great um next up we have an ordinance referral um this is ordinance 2024 d32 um regarding roof mounted solar panels as accessory uses um Mr leco do you want to do you need to be sworn in order to yep talk about this too or no no okay thank you madam chair right ahead uh as the chair said uh Council has referred ordinance 2024 32 to the board for master plan consistency review uh I'll summarize my memo dated August 28th which was included in your packet and on the municipal website uh the purpose of this ordinance is to allow for more opportunity for residents to add roof mounted solar panels to their property uh without necessarily having to go to the zoning board uh for variances that ultimately cost time and money uh this is really craft it based on inquiries that staff has received from residents uh who want to add solar panels uh based on our existing regulations which do allow them this is just a kind of slight modification uh the ordinance would apply to one and two family homes in all residential districts in the former Township and all before uh of the zoning districts in the former burrow the reason it only applies to those homes in those districts is because solar panels end up being regulate it on Commercial educational or other properties through site plan review at one of the boards um this board knows that well uh by requesting a lot of solar panels um one thing I should mention is those zones aren't changing from what's allowed now uh but essentially what this ordinance does is allow allows solar panels on structures uh structures uh keyword in those residential districts not just dwellings as it states now uh this means you'd be able to put roof mounted solar panels on detach garages sheds Etc uh which by the reading of the ordinance you can't do currently um it also allows uh or it raises the permitted height of the solar panels to be8 inches from the roof uh rather than the six inches allowed for allowed now so slight uh increase and lastly language was removed and additional language was added to clarify the intent of the ordinance uh to allow for these roof mounted panels on both existing or future structures so I'll turn to the master plan now for this consistency review in my opinion this ordinance is consistent with the Princeton master plan in many places uh the vision of the princ and of the future in that plan states that we will be sustainable resilient and carbon neutral uh then the utility element includes a goal to promote renewable energy including solar panels uh the energy subsection of that utility element speaks to creating opportunities for on-site power generation as well as specifically uh it speaks to streamlining the permitting and review process for the on-site renewable energy uh by removing barriers and addit costs such as a trip to the board uh if you want to put panels on your shed or eight inches above your roof let's say and don't think I forgot about the Green Building and environmental sustainability element of the master plan which was carried over into the new master plan uh the vision in that element actually goes further uh than the overall vision and that is of a truly sustainable Princeton where all energy comes from renewable sources um as a result of that Vision uh the element uh states that using renewable energy um it repeats that throughout uh throughout the element um and this ordinance is one small step uh in the right direction uh the Green Building element Al specifically mentions quote Solar friendly zoning and permitting end quote uh so then more broadly going back uh to the other parts of the plan a land use goal of the plan is to reduce the costs of development and increase investment by streamlining procedures and this would uh accomplish that um also within that L land use element we have our first ever climate change Hazard vulnerability assessment which was recently required by the state uh and the climate res resiliency recommendations of that climate change Hazard vulnerability assessment uh speak to hardening the grid uh by increasing on-site renewable energy generation in public and private development as a response to our increasingly severe uh weather patterns and one last thing I want to mention is that the historic preservation Comm uh commission created and adopted guidelines for the installation of solar panels in locally designated historic districts uh in 2022 I believe um this ordinance does not change the hbc's processes in any way when a home is in a historic district and wants to put up solar panels they would still go through the hbc's process based on those guidelines um it does however align with the goals within those guidelines uh for homeowners to investigate alternative uh alternate locations for where solar panels might go on their property um you could imagine someone now installing the panels uh if this is approved by Council installing the panels on a newer garage uh that they have on their property rather than on their you know 300y old historic home uh without having to go to the zoning board again um additionally those guidelines from the HPC speak uh to discouraging the visibility of of panels on historic structures um and I think the modest increase from six to 8 inches above the roof line really respects that and you know is in line with that um but of course these would still go to the HPC for review based on uh what the uh based on those guidelines and what parameters that the proposed panels meet um so that being said I'm happy to take any questions that the board might have uh Mr Weissman is here as well and he should get all the credit uh along with councilman Cohen and others uh for helping to shepher this through thanks Mr lco um see Jack Taylor's hand went up what's up Jack well first and foremost this is positive and every respect and clearly deserves our approval my questions are probably reflective of my legal background but I need or I would appreciate clarification in the following three respects first of all I understand what a dwelling is I'm not clear what a structure is or an accessory structure in the definition proposed and that's number one number two I note in your memo Justin that it suggested that this will be applicable to all but four zoning districts in the burrow I don't understand the implication of that and lastly the third point it it was necessary apparently to make it applicable to all residential districts in the township and it's not clear to me why was that necessary what was missing MH uh so tackling the second and third ones first um the uh so because this is only for single family homes one and two family homes um it only or the residential districts in the township are the only ones that allow for single family homes so of course we wouldn't then put it on the you know Service District or anything like that um and similarly for the former burrow uh those four districts I don't remember them off the top of my head but one is uh you know I believe where the uh the dinky bar and that Arts entertainment Transit area is um and three others that are similar like that so like I said um if an application were to come in in any of those districts it would most likely it's going to a board one way or another uh so at that point the board uh can discuss whether or not the solar panels This is really to and incentivize people with houses on Lots right now uh or in the future from not having to you know go to a board to put these on um and your first question I'm sorry can you repeat it definition Wellings the the definition of structure or accessory structure in the context of dwellings I mean I think I don't have the exact definition uh as it is in our code um I could probably look it up uh Mr Bridger would probably know it off the top of his head but I think dwelling is clearly a place for people to live whereas structures are you know any of the other things that we allow on a site um so of course the detached garages or sheds um a pool housee I think would probably fit that description and other things like that yeah any construction above the the ground level both great thanks Jack um did that answer your questions it does thank you good uh Mr Cohen yeah I just wanted to comment in case anyone was wondering um the council code Review Committee also considered um allowing ground mounted solar panels but it seemed like a bit of a heavier lift in terms of um vetting what restrictions would follow that and uh staff has not in receiving requests for ground manage so it didn't seem as urgent so it is something we're going to be looking at as an accessory use in residential districts it's just not in this version of the ordinance thank you um I had a qu oh Freddy go ahead yeah I don't have a question but I just want to say you know from an environmental standpoint since I am the environmental commission representative I mean clearly this is something we would strongly support and anything that helps the environment and certainly solar does and making it easier to do it um is something that the environmental commission would stand behind right thank you for that um in moving from uh six inches to8 inches I guess this is the question for Mr Weissman does that allow for panels to be mounted above um a low green roof like a a green roof made with um you know those very low growing succulents is that part of the rationale for the 8 inch allowance versus six or just or not just curious it it wasn't considered uh part of of uh this review the the main reason behind the raise from six inches to 8 inches is that certain types of flat roofs uh require a little more clearance um for the structural members that would be supporting uh the the solar panels okay all right thanks um Mr Cohen I just also wanted to comment that panels can go more than eight inches above the roof they just can't if the existing roof is close to the height limit right so we have we have you know a 35 foot is a typical height limit in most of our residential neighborhoods if you've got a 25t roof you know you could certainly do the kind of thing that um you were asking about with plantings under uh the panels but they would have to be raised higher above the roof than um just the8 inches but that that 8 inch provision is specifically about what is allowed um above and beyond the height restrictions that are in the code okay good right thank you um other questions uh for for Justin or Dan or David questions or comments um would someone like to move uh that the board binds this order ordance uh fully consistent with the master plan and uh applauds the council for moving it Forward moved may I do so 7 second please moved by Freddy pearlmutter seconded by Nat bodimer um uh Carrie would you call the role please yeah that that should be substantially consistent with the master plan okay there's no issue but we want to be consistent from yeah riew yeah I might have been a little over the top there thank you uh Carrie Mr bimer yes Miss Capi yes Mr Cohen yes Mr McAn yes Miss Nuka yes Mr oonn yes pearlmutter yes Mr Taylor yes and Wilson yes thank you Mo car thank you Carrie your voice is uncharacteristically quiet and distant oh I'm sorry I'm having an allergy attack so that's okay no it's like feast or famine with your audio sorry that's no that's perfectly fine we could hear you yeah the pollen is really strong yeah yeah uh next up we have a a capital review which Justin um noted earlier is uh postponed but this is a Princeton Public School site improvements to Community Park Elementary School Littlebrook Elementary School and Princeton Middle School um so Justin you want to say a little bit about the the postponement and what we hope and expect um uh in terms of the agenda that we can put it on and then maybe if there are questions for you or for Mr M about um our role uh as um to to review something that really is under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Education uh that that would be helpful too I I I don't think we need to go into excruciating detail on that point because it'll be repeated on uh when we actually do the review but just to just to give us the context yep absolutely thank you madam chair uh so so as was stated the planning board was slated to provide a capital review for proposed improvements by the Princeton public schools for three schools uh at tonight's meeting uh the review has been postponed until we receive a copy of the school's long range facility plan which was amended at the end of August and I do want to clarify there are some things out there in the media and elsewhere uh with concerns about the lack of transparency or communication uh regarding the removal of this Capital review from today's PL uh board agenda uh and just kind of going back a little bit uh the schools submitted a request to the board uh for the board to review these applications in Late July uh after we as staff had a sitdown meeting with their team earlier in July uh once we realized in mid August that their long range facilities plan was last updated in 2018 we asked the schools if they had a more recent one uh in an email to their Consultants staff land use attorney and Acting Superintendent um they advised a week later that they submitted what's known as a major Amendment uh to this long range facilities plan to the State's Department of Education uh regarding the improvements to these three schools uh and we requested this document to see you know the major Amendment essentially the update at long range facilities plan uh one uh well you know because of good planning uh and the ability for us as staff to provide you as the board with the information that you need to review um but also two because of requirements of the state law guiding the long range facilities plan uh and its interplay with the municipal land use law uh that this board knows all too well we don't necessarily need to get into what those state laws are tonight um though I will have more information in my memo when this uh Capital review does return um in order to like you said Madam chair make sure the board understands their task um so then going back to the timeline uh on Wednesday August 28th uh that was last Wednesday we informed their team via their land use attorney that the review would be postponed uh without having received that longrange facilities plan as it was being created uh to our knowledge the next day uh which would have been last Thursday a week ago we adjusted the planning board meeting agenda accordingly uh the day after that last Friday uh we received a note from their attorney that their updated major Amendment to the LA longrange facilities plan was approved by the State Department of Education so obviously the decision was already made to postpone the hearing by last Friday when we received that update um but even if it hadn't been I don't believe we would have had enough time to adequately provide guidance to the board based on the information that we had at our disposal uh once we received the updated plan Municipal staff will prepare a memo for the board as we always do uh ref ing both the updated plan as well as our prin master plan uh and we anticipate being able to do this at the board's meeting on September 19th um assuming we get the relevant documents to that long range facilities plan that we've uh ask them to provide um we remain fully committed to working collaboratively with the schools team uh to complete this review process so just in summary there's been communication throughout this process as it has been rapping rapidly evolving and frankly continues to evolve um and we have a path forward that I know will ultimately benefit the municipality the schools and the people of Princeton that we all serve great thank you um anything to add Jerry no that's pretty much it um we we we've gotten some material from the the Board of Education we're not sure whether it's actually the the submission of the long range facilities plan uh and we don't have anything on the response by the Department of Education so we have a letter out to them saying please get us by the 12th so we could put it on for the 19th the long range facility plan approval which we're supposed to do um the capital review approval which is going to be based on the longrange facility plan and if we need amendments to the um um master plan we could try that too but obviously there's noticing for that so hopefully what we'll get is something from um the Board of Education and I think we will uh the attorney for the board has been very Cooperative which says here's what we submitted and here is how they respond they being the the State Department of Education responded right okay uh Mr Taylor Jerry I'm I'm pleased that you've taken the approach that you have of all the issues that arose in the discussions across the community about the master plan one that I find continues to pop up is the relationship between the planning board and our role and responsibilities in those of the board of education at a critical time in planning with capital implications that are extremely important yeah concerned in the community so I simply want to say great I think you're asking all the right questions I think it's extremely important that we make any consideration of planning board and and and board of education issues a priority understanding that the community is deeply concerned yeah thank you yeah I agree yeah thank you for that Jack um so no action required tonight um I just wanted folks to have a little bit of background does um anybody have any any other questions before we ask Mr Cohen to move that we I'm not seeing any hands go up uh so what what I expected to be a long meeting is is a fairly short one um this evening but um uh we'll be back back on the 19th and with the with the full agenda um Mr Cohen I will exercise my cerimonial role and move to a Jour thank you is there a second I'll second my acclamation um thank you all in favor please say I I I thank you everybody appreciate it very much and we'll see you next time if not at next week's Farmers Market good night have a good night good night