BRICK – Dozens of residents protested a proposed 264-unit housing complex that could be built on 23 acres at 975 Burnt Tavern Road.
As part of a settlement agreement with the state’s Affordable Housing Program, 53 of those units would be set aside for the township’s Affordable Housing obligation, but the council had to pass a trio of ordinances on their final reading that amends the township’s master plan in order for the plan to proceed.
Council Vice President Derrick T. Ambrosino said the court has determined that the township needs to include 975 Burnt Tavern Road in order to settle with Fair Share Housing.
“There’s a good chance it could get developed, but it also still may not, but we have to allow it as part of [the settlement agreement],” he said. “We did not have a choice in that.”
The project has not even come before the Planning Board, Ambrosino added.
During public comments spanning the four and a half hour meeting, residents expressed concerns about additional traffic, overcrowding, stress on local services, a decrease in the quality of life and the fear that Brick is losing its character.
Resident Justin Tschinkel said he has multiple concerns, from dust when the current existing warehouse is demolished to an increase in traffic.
“They’re going to develop this,” he said. “They’re going to have to add a [traffic] light out of there…they’re going to have to redevelop that whole intersection – it’s not going to be pretty.”
Resident Sidney Nebus said the proposed development does not benefit local residents at all. “The traffic is horrendous,” she said. “It’s impacting our quality of life…Brick does not have the infrastructure to handle this.”
Bert Kears, who lives adjacent to 975 Burnt Tavern Road, asked if there are any past studies on townships that voted against Affordable Housing mandates.
“What happened when they did? And how many of them were there? What happens when people say yes to it – do you have a case study for that?” he asked.
Township Planner Tara Paxton said she could only respond from the most recent available data from Round 3. Some of the non-compliant towns had builder’s remedy developments that were not included in Master Plans, including Cranford, which had 419 units approved, Milburn Township had 75 approved, Edison had 135 and Lambertville had 139.
Every town is required to provide a certain amount of affordable housing based on a very old court case. The number of units is calculated and the town has to meet that number in 10-year increments, called rounds.
A builder’s remedy lawsuit takes place when a town chooses not to allow the affordable homes. Builders take the town to court, saying the town is discriminating against the poor. The “remedy” is that the court oversees the development rather than the town.
Attorney La Bue said the obligation and the number of units for affordable housing is going to exist whether the ordinances get passed or not.
The three ordinances passed along party lines, with the four Democrats voting in favor and three Republicans voting against.
Council Vice President Derrick T. Ambrosino said that while he agrees that “this is something that is being forced upon us…we should unanimously, whether we like it or not, pass this ordinance. Doing so ensures that we retain immunity from builder’s remedy lawsuits,” he said.
“Losing that immunity would mean no control over development and it would be disastrous for our town,” Ambrosino said.
Council President Steve Feinman, who voted yes, said “this is not a small bet – this is big…this is like insurance where it’s going to protect us, because if we don’t, it’s gonna be worse.”
Councilman Greg Cohen, who voted no, said “This is not a gamble, this is our town where we live. This is our future and the future of our children.
“Tara [Paxton], you did an amazing job – this has nothing to do with the work that you did…you have been incredible in fighting this from the beginning,” he said to the township planner.
He asked if the worst case scenario – a builder’s remedy – is guaranteed to happen. Attorney La Bue said it is not guaranteed.
“We all stand where we stand on this,” Cohen said. “Our town has changed so much – it’s starting to not even look like Brick anymore…we need to do what the residents of the town want us to do.”
Vice-president Ambrosino said “If we vote no, there will be a 500-unit apartment six story building there…some smart people say the best way to win at gambling is to not gamble.”
The final resident to speak, Vic Finelli, said, “Things ain’t gonna stay the same…there’s no undeveloped land anymore – it’s built up everywhere, so to have the hope that everything is going to stay the same as it was 20 years ago, that’s not realistic.”
