Planning Board Tables Discussion of Symmes and Rt. 9 Commercial Development

Last night, the Manalapan Township Planning Board voted to table the public hearing and testimony regarding the OP-10  Zone, a portion of the amendment to the Manalapan Township Master Plan and the Land Use Plan Element which recommends the area be rezoned to allow commercial development.

The OP-10, or Office Park, district of Manalapan consists of the intersection of Rt. 9 and Symmes Drive and a portion of Craig Road. The OP-10 district located on Craig Road is currently developed, while the OP-10 district on Rt. 9 is currently undeveloped and adjacent to a C-1 Regional Commercial Shopping Center District.

Manalapan Township Planner Richard Cramer recommends that planned commercial development be a permitted use for the OP-10 Zone in the Master Plan amendment.

Township Committeeman and Planning Board member Ryan Green made a motion to “table the discussion of the OP-10 zone indefinitely.”

“There are some legal questions that the Township Committee has regarding some past litigation,” Green said. “I can’t elaborate on that. I did try to clarify it as best I could today but I didn’t get all the answers I was looking for.”

The Township Committee introduced an ordinance which amends the developmental regulations of sections of Wilson Avenue, the Millhurst and Smithburg sections of Manalapan, and the OP-10 zone at their June 20 meeting.

According to the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law, all ordinances referring to land use or zoning must be deferred to the Planning Board for review after their first readings and introductions. The review that the Planning Board conducts determines whether or not the ordinance is substantially consistent with the Master Plan.

Green said that the Township Committee “put the cart before the horse” in regard to this ordinance because they have not looked at what changes the Planning Board has made over the last several years. The entirety of the Board agreed with Green indicating that since not all appropriate recommendations are within the ordinance it should not be considered at this time.

“I’m going to urge the Committee to do a systematic, organized review of all of the work that the Planning Board has done,” stated Green.

The Planning Board decided, in a close vote, to not take any action on the ordinance, but would discuss the portions of the Master Plan amendment that did not involve OP-10.

Board member Richard Aaronson vocalized his concern that if the Planning Board does not hear the testimony and discuss OP-1O, the Township Committee may vote to approve the ordinance anyway, without hearing feedback from the Planning Board, at their Aug. 15 meeting.

“They could move forward with it in the absence of our comments,” said Attorney Ron Cucchiaro.

Green predicted that the ordinance would not pass the Township Committee. In order for a Municipal Land Use Law ordinance to pass the governing body, the majority of the Committee must vote in favor of it, or three Committee members. Additionally, the Township Committee would have to adopt a resolution stating as to why they are adopting an ordinance that is not substantially consistent with the Master Plan since the Planning Board has not yet approved the amendment to the Master Plan.

A letter will be sent to the Township Committee informing them that the Planning Board is not acting on the ordinance. The letter will also ask the governing body to not take any action on any portion of the ordinance until all of the Master Plan review process is completed.