Contentious Debate Unfolds Over Future of Former Johnson & Johnson Kenvue Site

Nicholas Mistretta

Montgomery — A special meeting of the Montgomery Planning Board on September 8 drew sharp exchanges between developers and residents as Equitable owner E Kahn Development outlined potential uses for the former Johnson & Johnson Kenvue campus.

Planning Board Chairman David Campeas opened the session by emphasizing its unique purpose.
“This meeting is of potential uses of the Kenvue site by the equitable owner, E Kahn Development,” Campeas explained. “This is not a formal application and nothing is being approved. No board discussion on the merits of anything presented here tonight.”

Developer Eli Kahn, joined by partner Matt Adams, introduced his firm as specialists in what he called “functionally obsolete corporate assets.” Kahn reminded the audience that in August 2024, his team presented a “by right” industrial redevelopment plan—one permitted under the existing zoning.
“We did not come into this town with the intention of building 417 houses and affordable housing units,” Kahn said. “We agreed to buy this property for the underlying zoning of the Kenvue campus and what it has been functionally used for and zoned for since the mid-1970s.”

He continued, noting that township leaders ultimately supported a housing-centered option.
“Through the course of the last year… the township ultimately preferred the plan they had accepted into the fourth-round housing plan,” Kahn said. “We believe it is because it fulfilled the need for affordable housing but also because it is by far and away the least intense, dense, and impactful plan that we presented. At the end of the day we hope many of the community members end up agreeing with the decision the township has made.”

Residents Push Back
The public comment period quickly revealed strong opposition.

Steve Bales, board member of the Sourland Conservancy, said the housing proposal conflicted with Montgomery’s longstanding commitment to environmental preservation.

“In light of the town’s history of advocacy for the Sourlands, we are deeply puzzled by the township’s decision to put 417 units of high-density housing here,” Bales said. “As important as affordable housing is, there is no justification for putting high density development in the Sourlands. We encourage Montgomery Township to return to its staunch support of the Sourlands by removing the Kenvue element of the fair share housing plan.”

Skillman resident Joanna Filak questioned the financial assumptions in the developer’s slide deck.
“Claiming $9.5 million in tax revenue would mean each unit is paying between $20,000 and $23,000 per unit,” Filak argued. “How is this affordable? The revenue and traffic numbers are way overstated… just to scare us.”

Neighbor Christine Newman echoed those concerns, criticizing what she called “scare tactics.”
“The report, I feel, is cherry-picked to scare us. It looks like you think we only care about taxes and traffic. We obviously care about water, our environment, the impact on our EMS and fire, our teachers, our police department. I don’t feel we’re the country rubes you think we are.”

Developer Defends Plan
Kahn responded forcefully, highlighting the proposal’s inclusion of preserved land. “We’re proposing 210 acres of dedicated open space in the plan we’ve presented,” he said. “How can that not be beneficial to the Sourlands? With all due respect, we understand the sensitivity of the Sourlands. It would seem logical to us that dedicating 210 acres would enhance the Sourlands, not detract from them.”

Addressing accusations of a “bait and switch,” Kahn said:
“The idea we are trying to bait and switch people is an absolute joke. We came in here with one plan, the by right plan. We’ve wasted a year presenting this to the community. After investing a year, we are now in the fair housing plan and we intend to stay in the fair housing plan. You can paint us as the bad guys… The reality is we’ve done everything correctly.”

When pressed on why the shift from industrial to housing occurred, Kahn insisted the change came at the township’s request. “Because the township asked us to,” he said. “We don’t bully our way into a community. We asked our host community. They asked us if we would consider something else, and that’s how we got to where we are.”

What Comes Next
While no votes were taken and no formal applications were considered, the meeting underscored the deep divides over the future of the 210-acre site. For some, the affordable housing proposal represents a necessary and less disruptive compromise. For others, it raises alarms about traffic, environmental impact, and the character of Montgomery Township.

As Kahn put it: “At the end of the day, we hope many of the community members end up agreeing with the decision the township has made.”

To watch full meeting, click here.

Photo Credit: Nicholas Mistretta/headlinenewsmontgomery.com