The developers of a proposed 96-student Jewish University ran out of time last week, forcing the Ocean Township Zoning Board of Adjustment to deny the application.
The board unanimously ruled against the Yeshiva Gedola Na’os Yaakov’s application on Dec. 1 after developers opted not to seek a time extension to extend the hearings further, which forced the board into a vote.
The developer’s attorney, Jennifer Krimko, of the law firm Ansel, Grimm & Aaron, said despite the applicant granting several time extensions past the state mandated 120-day window on board applications, the developer requested to conclude the hearings prior to the new year.
“Time ran out a long time ago, but we continued to extend the time,” she said.
“We gave fair warning that we were not going to extend the time and we wanted to conclude and the board took action by denying it to avoid an automatic approval.”
The plan called for the renovation of a former elementary school building on 2.9 acres at 1515 Logan Road between Park Boulevard and Grassmere Avenue, and the conversion into a two-story, live-in yeshiva for 96 male students, ages 18-22.
The applicant sought several variances, including a use variance and a parking variance.
Krimko explained that, if the applicant did not grant an extension and the board did not act, the proposal would have been automatically approved.
“If the board fails to take action, then the applicant can assert an automatic approval by order of statute,” she said. “The purpose of it is to make sure that applications don’t languish and that boards do what they are supposed to do.
“If they did nothing last night, arguably the applicant would be in a position for automatic by failure to act.”
Prior to the denial, Krimko and co-counsel Donna Jennings, of Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, requested the board secure an additional December hearing or limit public participation to five minutes per speaker in order to conclude before the New Year.
After the board denied both requests, the applicant continued with testimony from planner Andrew Janiw before the board ultimately voted on the application. However, Krimko said the applicant will have the opportunity to appeal the board’s ruling and all future litigation will be handled by Jennings.
An appeal cannot officially be filed until the board passes a resolution at a subsequent meeting substantiating the vote.
Jennings did not return phone calls seeking comment.
Residents have vehemently opposed the project since hearings began in 2014, with many citing noise, safety and traffic concerns associated with the proposed use.