Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drc Trc Review Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Metuchen planning board debates role of DRC after applications arrive incomplete
Summary
Board members discussed whether a planning-board representative should return to pre-application reviews (TRC) or whether the current Development Review Committee (DRC) should be tweaked; members cited incomplete applications, timing differences and the need for clearer planner review letters.
Members of the Metuchen Planning Board spent a substantial portion of the meeting debating how the borough’s Development Review Committee (DRC) handles pre-application review and whether a planning-board representative should participate more directly.
Several board members said the former Technical Review Committee (TRC) sometimes produced better-prepared applications because it included planning-board volunteers who provided lay-review perspectives in evening sessions. Others cautioned that TRC had blurred roles in the past by creating the perception that passing through a pre-review guaranteed planning-board approval. The borough planner and other members stressed that the DRC was intended as a technical-review committee of paid professionals who meet during weekday hours and focus on checklist items.
Board members proposed possible middle-ground remedies: have one planning-board member attend some DRC meetings, make planner review memos more explicit about which recommendations were accepted or ignored, or require applicants to return to DRC with documented changes before appearing at the planning board. One planning-board member summed up the sentiment: the board should not be afraid to say no to applications that arrive incomplete or that ignore DRC guidance.
The discussion produced no formal action; board members placed the topic on a future agenda for further consideration and asked members to think about whether to propose ordinance changes or an interim procedural fix.
