Articles Affordable housing
Where Things Stand: Montgomery Township, September 2026
A status report on the four open questions about the former Kenvue campus — the housing plan, the redevelopment study, the data-center ban and the lawsuits — setting out what has actually been decided and what has not.
Four separate questions about the former Kenvue campus at 199 Grandview Road are open at once, and they are easy to confuse. This is a plain-language account of what has been decided, what has not, and how to check any of it yourself.
First, the property, because the numbers in circulation contradict each other. The township’s own 2025 housing plan puts the campus at 382.771 acres, comprising Block 14001 Lot 2 and Block 13001 Lot 15. Its Limited Manufacturing core is about 257 acres — that is the parcel holding the buildings — and the 160-acre figure some coverage uses is only the commercially assessed portion of that core as one resident read it out of the assessor’s records at the June 23, 2025 hearing, with an adjoining 97 acres in farm qualification — her arithmetic on the night, not an official subdivision. The September 2026 redevelopment study covers only Block 14001 Lot 2.
The housing plan: changed, but not certified
Montgomery’s Fourth Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan, adopted in June 2025, put 417 residential units on the Kenvue campus. The amended plan the Planning Board adopted on March 9, 2026 does not. The site, along with 23 Orchard Road and the Thrive assisted-living credits, is out; the obligation is met instead by extending affordability controls on existing affordable homes.
That change is real and it is on the books. It is not, however, the end of the case. On September 17, 2026 the township attorney told the Township Committee that Montgomery has reached a settlement with Fair Share Housing Center, but that the settlement “is not final until it is reviewed by the court and approved by the court in what’s called a compliance hearing” — and that the judge had said he would not hold that hearing until the township sat down with the property’s owner, E. Kahn Development Corp. (video, 56:40) — meetings the township says it has since held, through a two-member subcommittee of Committeemen Ahn and Martin.
Asked from the floor what happens if there is no compliance hearing, the township attorney agreed Montgomery would not be in compliance and added, “we could lose our immunity from builder’s remedy lawsuits.” Earlier in the meeting the same point was put the other way round: getting the hearing “extends our immunity from builder’s remedy lawsuits.”
So: no compliance hearing has been held, no Judgment of Compliance and Repose has issued, and the township’s protection against builder’s-remedy litigation remains conditional. Anyone telling you the housing fight is finished is ahead of the record.
The site itself: nothing has been heard
E. Kahn filed a by-right site plan application in April 2026 under the property’s existing limited manufacturing zoning — a term worth getting right, since officials and coverage have both said “light manufacturing” and “warehouses,” and a resident corrected the Committee on it from the floor in September. It was declared administratively complete on June 9, 2026. As of September 17, 2026 the township attorney said it “has not been scheduled yet due to some of the issues that we’re dealing with through the affordable housing process.” No Planning Board hearing on that application has taken place.
The concepts the developer has shown are not one plan, and should not be quoted as one. In September 2025 the by-right scheme was roughly 1.6 million square feet plus 13 residential lots, with 402 truck trips a day and over 8,000 total trips per 24 hours. (The township put the car-trip share at 7,820 at the June 23, 2025 hearing.) A smaller scheme the developer showed at community meetings, reported in February 2026, was roughly 1.2 million square feet plus 9 single-family homes, with 300 to 400 truck trips a day over a 20-year buildout.
Both sets of figures originate with the developer’s own traffic engineer, Dolan & Dean. A township professional read the 402-truck and 7,820-car figures into the record at the June 23, 2025 Planning Board hearing, describing them as coming from “the traffic summary sheet that the developer gave us” — but no independent township traffic review of the by-right scheme has been presented at a public hearing.
The redevelopment study: the first step of several
On September 17, 2026 the Township Committee adopted two resolutions, each 4-0 with Committeeman Mike Martin absent. Resolution #26-9-260 directs the Planning Board to investigate whether Block 14001, Lot 2 meets the statutory criteria for designation as a non-condemnation redevelopment area. Resolution #26-9-261 authorizes an escrow agreement under which E. Kahn Development pays the township’s professional costs for that study.
Two limits are worth stating plainly. The study covers only Lot 2 in Block 14001 — not the second parcel, Block 13001, Lot 15, which the same four LLCs hold. And “non-condemnation” means a designation would carry no eminent-domain power. The study itself, in the township attorney’s words, “does not authorize a plan… does not green light any project.”
Three further facts belong with it. Asked from the floor whether the resolutions were the developer’s request or the Committee’s idea, the answer from the dais was “That’s his request. Yes. It’s his request.” The township’s stated reason for agreeing is fiscal: Kenvue ceases operations at the site by the end of 2026, and Mayor Singh said Montgomery expects a resulting gap of roughly $1.4 million a year in tax revenue, and the owners’ appeal of Lot 2’s 2026 assessment has been pending in the Tax Court since February. And the tool is not new here — the Committee directed the same Planning Board to investigate 23 Orchard Road for a non-condemnation designation in October 2025.
Both September 17 votes were 4-0 because Committeeman Martin was absent. The 4-0 votes of June 18, 2026 were 4-0 for a different reason: the fifth seat was vacant after Deputy Mayor Vince Barragan resigned that day, with Patricia Taylor Todd elected Deputy Mayor the same night. Neither should be written as “unanimous” without the explanation.
The data-center ban: adopted, challenged, not yet served
The Township Committee adopted Ordinance No. 26-1779 on June 18, 2026, by a 4-0 roll call, prohibiting data centers and detention centers throughout Montgomery Township. On July 31, 2026, E. Kahn Development Corp. sued in Somerset County Superior Court seeking a declaration that the ordinance is invalid and unenforceable, plus an injunction against enforcement.
Several outlets reported in August 2026 that the suit sought $300 million in damages. That reporting was wrong. On September 17 the township attorney said the complaint had been read and that “there is no demand for $300 million in that lawsuit,” attributing the figure to coverage of a different municipality’s case (video, 1:03:10). The township attorney also said the township had not yet been served, though the complaint has been filed.
What nobody knows yet
- When — or whether — a compliance hearing will be scheduled.
- What the Planning Board’s redevelopment investigation will conclude, and whether the Committee would designate the area afterwards.
- What the actual damages demand in the data-center complaint is. Patch and NJ Monitor both quoted the complaint in August 2026 but reported it differently, and neither published the document itself.
How to follow this yourself
Every claim above comes from a public record you can open. The township’s board calendar is the authoritative schedule, because all three boards move and cancel meetings:
- Township Committee — generally the first and third Thursday of the month, 7 p.m., Chambers Room, Municipal Center, 100 Community Drive, Skillman.
- Planning Board — generally the second and fourth Monday, 7 p.m., Municipal Building.
- Zoning Board of Adjustment — generally the fourth Tuesday, 7 p.m., with the fourth Thursday used only as needed.
Check dates against the township’s board meetings calendar before you go. Agendas and approved minutes are posted in the Agenda Center, and meeting video is in the township’s video archive. Where this site quotes a meeting, it links to the timestamp so you can hear it for yourself.
About this site
Save Montgomery is a grassroots group of Montgomery Township residents. We are not opposed to affordable housing. Our objection has been to the process by which high-density development was proposed for the Kenvue site, and now to a redevelopment designation over it. Where the township has a reasonable argument, we try to say so. Where the public record contradicts something we would like to be true, we publish the record.
Questions or corrections: info@savemontgomery.org.