Following the cancellation of the final Township Council meeting of 2021 due to COVID concerns, the Council stated that all matters listed on the agenda would be deferred to one or more future meetings.As such, the agenda for the cancelled meeting, described below, offers a glimpse of the actions and discussions that are expected to be on the docket at the start of 2022.Ordinances Four final hearing ordinances wereFour final hearing ordinances were expected to be discussed during the cancelled meeting. They will need to be reintroduced as new ordinances in 2022, though some may not be, as three of the ordinances had already been carried for several meetings.One ordinance would permit the township to accept a perpetual easement and right of way from Livingston Corporate Park Associates, LLC. The property, block 6101, lot 45, is commonly known as 220 South Orange Avenue. The township wants to access a portion of the property to construct a portion of its water main. There was to be a related resolution on the agenda as well.An ordinance to amend chapter 170 of the code to establish a new inclusionary development zone, designated as the “R-5L Residence Overlay District” for lots 25 and 26 in tax block 6101 had been discussed during Council meetings for several months.These lots are located on more than three acres of land along Passaic Avenue and Volker Lane. The purpose of this ordinance is to permit inclusionary multi-family residential development of not more than 72 units, including a 20 percent set-aside of affordable units in the district. Inclusionary zoning requires a given share of new construction to be affordable housing.In November, Deputy Mayor Ed Meinhardt and Council member Al Anthony again met with the developer to discuss their concerns, specifically relating to the proposed height of the building. Previously, a meeting with the developers resulted in an amended ordinance to accommodate a greater setback from the roadway. At that meeting, it was agreed that the language in the ordinance would be more explicitly stated. The height of the building was listed at 59 feet, but it did not specify whether or not that included a pitched or flat roof. Should the roof be flat, the building would now not be able to reach the 59-foot height.It was also agreed that the developer would put part of the parking level for the building below ground. In total, this could mean ...
