Plan’s progress centers on

townhouses vs. flats debate

FREEHOLD TOWNSHIP — After nearly three hours spent presenting testimony to and answering questions from the Planning Board on Aug. 16, one key question remains on Hovbilt Inc.’s application for Adelphia Greens II. That question is this: Just what is Hovbilt proposing to build on land at Route 9 and Elton-Adelphia Road?

Adelphia Greens II is an extension of the Adelphia Greens development in neighboring Howell, although the applicant’s representatives said they would be treated as two separate developments.

Planning Board Attorney Francis Accisano said that since hearings on the Hovbilt application began, he believed the board was dealing with townhouses and all the requirements that go along with them.

However, Criegh Rahenkamp, a professional planner who testified on Hovbilt’s behalf, asked board members not to think of Adelphia Greens II as a townhouse development, but rather as an improved flat development.

Rahenkamp said that if the living units were townhouses, each would have a front and rear yard and be connected to neighboring townhouses only at the sides. Each proposed multi-level living unit would be connected at the sides and at the rear, thereby having only a front yard, more like a flat or garden apartment, he said.

But board members indicated they were under the impression that flats are one-level living units. This distinction could be important for a number of reasons. One is that Hovbilt has proposed constructing 96 units in 10 buildings (two buildings of eight units and eight buildings of 10 units). A township ordinance states that in a townhouse complex, the number of units per building cannot exceed eight. However, if Adelphia Greens II is viewed as a development of flats, the ordinance allows for 16 units in each building. If they are viewed as townhouses, the applicant will need to apply for a variance for the proposed 10-unit buildings.

The applicant’s representatives and the board members also disagreed on the need for a height variance. Most of the proposed units would contain two stories and what the applicant called a "habitable attic," or an attic that has been finished and designed for uses beyond storage. Several living units designated as affordable housing to be sold to people who meet regional income guidelines will have an attic, but the attic will not be finished and hence will be deemed uninhabitable and used mainly for storage.

The disagreement comes in the definition of a home’s level. A township ordinance states that buildings in this zone may not exceed two stories. Municipal representatives contend the habitable attic is a third level, while the applicant’s professionals said the habitable attic is a loft or mezzanine.

Rahenkamp said that in most building codes these mezzanines are not considered separate stories, provided that the mezzanine is no more than one-third the size of the floor below it. Hovbilt’s proposed habitable attics comply with that standard, he said. But Freehold Township’s definition of a story is any space between a floor and the floor above it, or if there is no floor, then the space between a floor and the ceiling above it.

Rahenkamp said that to take that definition in a narrow sense would be ludicrous, because this would mean the roofs of the buildings would have to be flat over the second floor. Accisano agreed with Rahenkamp’s sentiment but said it still did not answer the question of whether the habitable attic was indeed a separate story.

Board members agreed that an unfinished attic, unusable except for storage, would not be considered an extra level. Rahenkamp said that if the board did require a variance for the extra level, his argument in favor of the variance would be that if the space is there, why should the applicant not be allowed to use it?

Board members expressed concern that allowing the attic to be built as a habitable space could mean residents might make it a bedroom, adding to the occupancy in the units and making it an undesirably high number. Rahenkamp said a resident association agreement would contain a clause stating the attic could not be used as a bedroom but could be used for recreational space, hobby space or an office.

Board members asked how such an agreement would be enforced. Rahenkamp said that in his experience, officers of resident associations can be very aggressive in making sure the association’s rules are followed.

The applicant’s planner said that if the board does not want to permit Hovbilt to construct the finished attics, the applicant may consider proposing basements in some units, although that could pose a problem due to the area’s water table. Board members indicated that a basement, if proposed, would not be considered a separate level in the way a finished attic would be.

Another point in the application was that Hovbilt would have to extend and widen Halls Mill Road to help relieve congestion at the intersection of Elton-Adelphia Road and Route 9. Hovbilt has agreed to undertake the extension project.

The Aug. 16 meeting ended with the sides still disagreeing as to whether to consider the 96 living units townhouses or flats. Accisano suggested that the applicant define what the buildings will be and return to the board with that definition so it can be determined what variances, if any, will be needed.

Although no members of the public were present to comment on the application or to ask questions, the public portion of the meeting was kept open and continued to Sept. 6.

— Paul Godino