BY JESSICA SMITH
Staff Writer
Developer Michael Alfieri is back before the Old Bridge Zoning Board of Adjustment, hoping to win approval for a 22-year-old plan that calls for housing, offices and a hotel.
The board in February refused to grant Alfieri an extension to his general development plan (GDP) approval from 1985, but a state Superior Court judge remanded the application back to the board.
“The GDP expired, so we [did] not want to hear his application at all,” Zoning Board Vice Chairman Kiran Desai said.
According to Desai, a Superior Court judge ruled that the board has the authority to extend the developer’s GDP vesting period, and that it should allow his applications to be heard.
Further, Alfieri sent a letter threatening to hold every board member in contempt of court if he was not allowed to complete his testimony before a final decision is made, Desai said.
Alfieri’s plans are collectively known as Metropark South, and would be located along Laurence Parkway near Garden State Parkway Exit 120. The plans consist of 83 single-family homes, 15,000 square feet of retail and commercial space, and a 168-room hotel with 171 parking spaces, all along Laurence Harbor Road.
Representatives of Alfieri gave testimony at the Zoning Board’s May 3 meeting, and the hearing will continue with questions and rebuttals on May 17.
“It’s hard, because both sides, Alfieri and the township, don’t agree on what the judge’s ruling was,” Township Planner Sam Rizzo said.
The board is appealing the court decision, Desai said, because its members do not feel they have jurisdiction over a GDP that was approved more than 20 years ago and is expired.
“Once we say the GDP is not valid, then the application, there is no point for it to be heard,” Desai said.
In 1987, two years after the GDP was approved, the board passed a resolution to grant vesting periods that spanned as far as 20 years. The resolution made Alfieri’s 20-year vesting period retroactive to 1985. According to Desai, the language of the resolution clearly states that the vesting period would extend from the date of the approval.
Vesting periods are like pacts between a municipality and a developer, protecting an applicant from changes in zoning as time passes. Their determination depends on the breadth of a given project, and how much time it is estimated to require. The inclusion of tax ratables such as offices and a hotel were likely seen as positive components that prompted the board to grant the 20-year vesting period in the 1980s.
Council President Pat Gillespie is working toward repealing the township’s GDP ordinance, citing litigation with Alfieri and two other major developers as the reason. At most, Gillespie said, he would like to see a five-year vesting period for development projects in Old Bridge.
“Circumstances have changed, and the scale of this development is huge, and I think that maybe in the 1980s’ way of thinking, it made sense at some level,” Gillespie said.
The proposed changes in the ordinance were referred to the Planning Board for review, Gillespie said, and he met with the board at its May 1 meeting to discuss the ordinance. A subcommittee has been formed to specifically address the matter, and Gillespie said the issue will likely be discussed again at the Planning Board meeting on June 12.
According to Gillespie, Rizzo raised concerns about losing the ability to impose certain restrictions on builders if GDPs are no longer granted. With GDP approvals, developers are often required to set aside areas for open space and recreation in their project plans. In further discussions, Gillespie said, township officials will try to strike a balance that will allow them to do away with GDP approvals while hanging onto the restrictions.
“We’re trying to have the best of both worlds,” Gillespie said.
If the ordinance is repealed, instead of coming before the Planning or Zoning Board for a GDP approval, developers would have to seek different forms of approval.
Alfieri’s representatives have cited market conditions as a reason for needing an extension, and Desai has said that such arguments confirm suspicions on the part of the board that the developer only wants to build residences.
The board had responded by saying that if the market was not conducive to the project now, an extension of a couple of years would not make a difference.
Michael Alfieri, whose company is based in Edison, did not return phone calls seeking comment for this story.