Ocean planners consider rezoning Apple Farms site

By KENNY WALTER
Staff Writer

OCEAN TOWNSHIP — Residents continued to pepper the Ocean Township Planning Board with questions about a planned re-examination of the master plan that could pave the way for construction of 100-plus housing units on the former Apple Farms site.

During a Jan. 8 special board meeting, the board and professionals addressed questions regarding the master-plan re-examination for the site at West Park Avenue and Green Grove Road, where developer Toll Brothers is proposing a 102-unit townhouse development.

Township attorney Martin Arbus cautioned that the site was once the subject of a builder’s remedy lawsuit and that if an application by Toll Brothers is rejected, it could lead to additional litigation and result in more intensive development.

“We had the [builder’s remedy suit] dismissed, but that doesn’t mean at some later date this doesn’t come back again for an application for additional units — much more than we’re talking about here,” he said.

Toll Brothers has proposed two options: a 114-unit project with 20 percent set aside for affordable housing, or a 102-unit development that would include a $2.6 million commitment to the town’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund, according to Arbus.

While only a handful of residents spoke, about 40 people attended the meeting. Those who spoke questioned the impact the project would have on issues such as traffic and stormwater drainage.

However, many of the residents’ concerns were deflected pending the submission of a formal proposal by Toll Brothers.

Township professionals did address several questions regarding the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) requirements and past litigation resulting from the township’s affordable housing deficiency.

Ocean Township has been mired in a builder’s remedy lawsuit since 2009, when four developers filed suit against the township over the alleged failure to comply with affordable housing quotas set by COAH.

“One of the litigants on this particular property was Avalon Bay, and they wanted to develop 498 apartment units with a 20-percent set-aside for low- and moderate- income housing,” Arbus said. “We felt that those numbers were ridiculous and would not work.”

According to Arbus, the suit was dismissed after two years, and shortly after, the township was approached by Toll Brothers with a proposal for 344 homes on the site.

Arbus said the 344-unit proposal was rejected, and subsequent 237- and 137-unit proposals were also rejected before the current proposal was submitted.

Township Planner James Higgins said the master-plan re-examination, which was not put to a vote at the meeting due to time constraints, is the first step that would ultimately lead to an application from Toll Brothers.

Higgins said the re-examination would focus on whether the property, located in the town’s R-1 (residential) zone, could qualify as an overlay zone, meaning it could be zoned for different standards than the rest of the zone.

“What’s being laid out in the re-examination report is the recommendation there be an overlay zone of this property,” he said. “The underlying R-1 zoning remains intact, but the property can then be developed as an overlay under separate standards different than the R-1.”

The property is currently designated as an R-1 zone, which would allow up to 75 townhouse units or 30 single-family homes to be built.

Higgins said the master plan would set various building standards for the overlay, including density, setbacks and buffers.

Discussion is expected to continue during the Jan. 27 board meeting.

Arbus said that if the board votes to approve the re-examination, the council could introduce a zoning ordinance amendment that would then be reviewed by the board for consistency.

If the council adopts the zoning change, Arbus expects Toll Brothers to make a formal proposal for the 80-acre site, which contains approximately 50 acres of wetlands.

One resident suggested the township purchase the site to prevent its development.

Arbus said that is not an option.

“The town can’t buy this property and the next property and the property after that,” he said. “Every time there’s an issue, the people closest to it don’t want it and they want the town to buy it.

“The town can’t buy every vacant piece of land, and that wouldn’t change the obligation to provide low- to moderate- income housing.

Other residents suggested scaling back the 102 units, but Township Manager Andrew Brannen said the township can no longer avoid meeting the state’s affordable housing quotas.

“Ten years ago, COAH really wasn’t the issue for the township that it is today,” he said. “We didn’t have to worry about our obligation, because at that time we didn’t acknowledge an obligation.

“At some point, it has to be satisfied, and if it’s not satisfied, the developers will use that as opportunity to scrutinize our plan and come in with even more outrageous proposals.”

Mary Beth Lonnergan, special COAH planner, said the township’s first- and secondround COAH obligation is to provide 873 affordable units. However, she said a plan has been submitted to the courts that has yet to be approved to reduce the number to 216 units because of a lack of available land.

Lonnergan said a court-appointed special planning master has reviewed the proposal and said the realistic development potential of the township is 240 low- to moderate-income units.