HOWELL — The future of the proposed Monmouth County Athletic Center (dubbed the MAC) is now in the hands of a judge.
Attorneys representing the developer and the Howell Zoning Board of Adjustment made their arguments before state Superior Court Judge Lawrence Lawson in Freehold on Nov. 6.
Lawson said he expects to announce his decision within a month.
The applicants who are proposing to build the MAC on Fairfield Road in Howell appealed the zoning board’s Dec. 3, 2007, denial of their plan to create an athletic training facility. Their request for a use variance required five affirmative votes and received only four affirmative votes when the motion was acted upon.
Zoning board members Charles Chirico, Kenneth French, Wendell Nanson and Chairman John Van Noy voted in favor of the project. Board members John Armata, Vice Chairman Steve Meier and Richard Ryan voted in opposition to the plan.
The applicants filed legal action on Jan. 31, 2008.
On Nov. 6, attorneys Gerald Sonnenblick, of Freehold Township, representing the developer, and Ronald Troppoli, of Neptune, representing the zoning board, presented their arguments before Lawson.
The developer of the MAC sought a use variance in order to build the project in a Special Economic Development and ARE- 6 Rural Agricultural/Natural Resource Protection zone on Fairfield Road. The project was designed solely as a recreational facility, which is a non-permitted use in these zones. Traffic and the site’s extensive buildout were cited as reasons why some board members did not support the request for the use variance.
Sonnenblick called the board’s decision arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious and argued that the facility would be beneficial to Howell on a number of levels.
“This is the appropriate site for this project. It would benefit the town greatly. The issue of traffic is a non-issue,” he said. “There are no prohibitions for height in this area. We are actually screening the second building from the road so that we will not impose on people who are traveling. We are in the middle of open space. There is no light or noise coming from the site. The reasons for their denial are insufficient and that’s in law and in fact.”
Sonnenblick said that based on the testimony given during the public hearings for the MAC before the zoning board, the applicants did not anticipate their proposal being denied.
“Howell [states] in its master plan that they want to provide a zone for recreation. We have a use permitted by the master plan, but not in any particular zone,” the attorney said.
In regard to traffic that would result from the construction of the MAC, Sonnenblick said there is no issue. He read a statement from the minutes of the zoning board hearings, quoting Howell’s traffic engineer James Watson.
“Mr. Watson agreed with our traffic engineer and found what we did to be sufficient. He confirmed that the proper modification to Fairfield Road and Route 33 was feasible and would benefit all applications that would arrive on Fairfield Road,” Sonnenblick said.
When it was his turn to address the court, Troppoli argued that the zoning board’s decision was appropriate. He said that during the hearings, Meier “was concerned about traffic, sewerage, and the extensive buildout of this site. He also pointed out that this project had a 30-mile radius and would draw people in from all over the region.”
“The zoning board is in place so it can place appropriate measures to scale down or minimize any impact a project like this would have,” Troppoli said. “It is also unknown that this project would satisfy any medical purpose or benefit to the town. Just because the lot is large, it doesn’t necessarily mean [this project is] fit for that zone.”
The MAC is proposed to include an adult health club and wellness spa, a 25- meter pool, a rehabilitation pool, a weight room for adolescents, four basketball courts, a suspended indoor track, a baseball field, 12 batting cages, a football field, a soccer field and a multipurpose field.
Both sides are now waiting for Lawson to issue a ruling on the matter.