December 6, 2017

representing the Township on a variety of planning matters since 2009. He stated that since 2012 he held the title of Township Planning Director, only because Township ordinances require that someone must hold the position. After the prior Director went out on medical leave, the Township asked him to perform the duties on a part-time basis, through his firm, based on his prior work on the Township Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance. His firm currently had a contract with the Township; it was an annual contract with a set fee amount that allowed for additional work on top of that amount. Mr. Grygiel stated he was not, nor had ever been a Township employee. He was an employee of Phillips Preiss Grygiel, the consulting firm. He stated it was common practice throughout the State of New Jersey for a consulting Planner to fulfill the role of Planner for a municipality. He stated it was not unusual for the Planner to perform the duties for the Board and also complete Redevelopment Studies, Redevelopment Plans, and Master Plans. He stated that any assertion that there was a professional conflict was without merit. He stated he had worked with the Board for several years; he opined there was no question regarding his objectivity. He stated he was the primary representative of his firm to the Township. Mr. Grygiel stated the only other item he had to discuss was to summarize the report and his major findings. He stated the Study Area included approximately 70 acres on 6 tax lots with varied conditions. There were existing businesses on both properties; there were a number of issues with both the retail shopping center and the office complex including the high vacancy rates previously cited. He stated there were broader issues including the age of the buildings, their conditions, site layout and their deficiencies, visibility, the obsolete loading arrangement at the shopping center, and building design aspects such as low ceiling heights in shopping center retail spaces and the antiquated layout of the office buildings in vogue during the 1970s and 1980s. He stated there were larger trends in retail and office markets that would impact the Study Area’s future viability. He stated older office buildings and complexes throughout New Jersey were being redeveloped or lying vacant when action was not taken. The Township realized the potential danger of this property becoming

stated older office buildings and complexes throughout New Jersey were being redeveloped or lying vacant when action was not taken. The Township realized the potential danger of this property becoming vacant as far back as 2010; the specific area was discussed in the adopted 2010 Master Plan Update. He stated those reasons warranted consideration to designate the area an Area in Need of Redevelopment; it was for the Board to decide if the criteria was met. He concluded his testimony. Chairman Bagoff asked the Board if they had questions for Mr. Grygiel. Captain Keigher asked Mr. Grygiel to confirm the Board would not be voting on the allocation of any funds or tax abatements; the Board would just be voting on whether the Study Area met the statutory criteria, and it only took one of the conditions to meet the criteria. Mr. Grygiel confirmed only one condition was required; he stated he had cited criteria “b” and “d”; he confirmed that the only task before the Board was to decide if the Study Area met the criteria; there were no other redevelopment issues before the Board. Mr. Trenk asked Mr. Grygiel to confirm the area did not need to be blighted for redevelopment consideration. Mr. Grygiel stated the redevelopment law criteria options went beyond bordered up buildings, broken windows, and contaminated sites. He cited