Kenvue Developer Invites Skillman Residents to a Neighborhood Chat on the Future of the 380-Acre Site at the Base of the Sourlands

By Barbara A. Preston | Posted November 6, 2025

Eli Kahn, the principal of E. Kahn Development Corp, is inviting Skillman residents to a neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, November 12 at the Kenvue campus, 199 Grandview Road. The meeting is scheduled for 6 pm. Kahn said the purpose is to develop a constructive dialogue with the community regarding the future development of the 380-acre site.

Kahn says he is the “equity owner” of the 257-acre Kenvue campus on Grandview Road in Skillman plus a 123-acre farm tract across the road. He is currently included in the Montgomery Township Affordable Housing plan to build 417 housing units. However, Montgomery officials and two community groups are now trying to remove Kenvue from the plan, following an outcry from residents regarding that plan.

In case Kahn cannot build the housing, he submitted an alternative plan to the township planning office in October to construct a 1.2 million sq ft industrial complex on the site. This would be one step in what could be a lengthy approval process. 

Kahn says his application is consistent with the current zoning for the site, which was once used by Johnson & Johnson to manufacture disposable diapers. 

The complex could include multiple flex buildings for a wide range of industrial uses, such as a brewery, bio-tech/lab space, auto-parts warehouse, packaging/distribution centers, or coffee roasters, he said.

According to Kahn’s application, the existing warehouse building located within the southern portion of the site is proposed to remain. The IM Pei Building within the northern portion of the site is proposed to be demolished. Nine additional buildings are proposed within the northern portion of the site.

Kahn told The Montgomery News, “We are not trying to be bad guys. We want the townspeople to know we submitted this plan. We have a 380-acre property [the corporate campus and the farmland across the road] and we have no idea what direction the township wants us to go in."

EKahn is one of four challengers to Montgomery's Round 4 plan. The other challengers include two non-profit residential public interest groups [Save Montgomery and Montgomery Neighbors United] and the Fair Share Housing Center, which is a nonprofit advocacy organization that uses legal, policy, and community-building strategies to fight for housing justice in New Jersey.

Kahn said his company is fighting to remain in the Montgomery Affordable Housing Plan, but that if it is removed, his Plan B is to build a light-manufacturing/industrial complex on the site.

"There will be some kind of a hearing shortly in front of a judge, per the law, in which we are going to say, ‘Yes, we are capable, and we are ready to proceed to build housing.”

If, however, Kenvue is removed from the plan, Kahn said he wants to be ready with a plan to develop the site as current zoning allows. He says his company, “already wasted a year” working with township officials trying to build what they asked them to build, which was a residential affordable housing development.

>> Montgomery Officials Put Kenvue in the Round 4 Affordable Housing Plan, Now Trying to Take It Out

(The Montgomery News August 22, 2025)

Key Upcoming Milestones

November 14: An affordable Housing Dispute Resolution Program settlement hearing will take place to mediate and resolve disputes between municipal entities and the state regarding the development of affordable housing. Montgomery Township Administrator Lori Savron, Township Attorney Wendy Rubinstein Quiroga, and planning consultant Michael Sullivan will be there. The challengers and their attorneys also will attend.

December 31: “The Program” must either approve or require changes to the housing plan, or they can revoke immunity from builder’s remedy lawsuits.

March 31, 2026: The Montgomery Planning Board must approve the amended plan during a public hearing, and the Township Committee must adopt any required ordinances.

Advertisement

Buy Back More Deed Restrictions to Keep Units Affordable

Montgomery Mayor Neena Singh says a new option has been developed in response to public feedback — including the extension of expiring deed restrictions on existing affordable units at Pike Run. Details are not available at this time, however, the township now plans to reduce the total number of new units that would need to be constructed by renewing more affordability controls on its existing 324 income-restricted units throughout town. (The township did have some extensions in its plan, but is now able to add a lot more.)

The state had granted density bonuses to developers, allowing them to build at least four market units for each affordable unit in their plans. The state only required those low-cost units to be affordable for 30 years, and they are now ending that term and all revert to market units.

The developer/owner may agree to extend the deed restrictions for another 30 to 40 years, at a cost of about $17,000 per deed. The township would have to come up with the money, or make a deal, to repurchase those.

SaveMontgomery Response

In a recent press release from the SaveMontgomery grassroots group that objects to having high-density housing on the Kenvue site, the group said:

“It is encouraging that Montgomery Township officials have reached an agreement with the owner of Pike Run to extend affordability controls on existing units, and therefore intends to remove the Kenvue site from the Round Four affordable housing plan.

“In response to our legal challenge to the current Montgomery Round Four Housing Plan, we will be participating in an Affordable Housing Dispute Resolution Program settlement hearing on November 14.

“While Township Committee has stated they intend to request that the Kenvue site be removed from the plan, this is a settlement hearing and nothing is guaranteed, so until that time the Kenvue site remains in the plan.”

SaveMontgomery also stated that any approval of Kenvue developer EKahn’s General Development Plan, to keep the existing “limited manufacturing” zoning in place, would be an egregious breach of the better interests of the community.”