JACKSON – The Jackson Planning Board has reversed its previous denial and granted preliminary site plan approval for an application that proposed the construction of 551 single-family and multi-family units in the Cassville section of the municipality.
The applicant, Jackson Parke, proposed the construction of 551 residences on a 226-acre tract off Perrineville Road. The application is referred to as the Jackson Parke north section and it includes 120 affordable housing units.
Following a public hearing in 2019 during which residents opposed the application primarily due to environmental concerns, board members denied the Jackson Parke plan, which had been included in a municipal affordable housing settlement.
The applicant, El At Jackson LLC, filed a lawsuit on Jan. 27 and named Jackson Township, Mayor Michael Reina, the Township Council and the Planning Board as defendants. State Superior Court Judge Mark A. Troncone, sitting in Toms River, ordered the board to reconsider its denial of the north section.
During a Planning Board meeting on April 20, following an executive (closed) session that lasted several hours, the board members reconvened in public and granted preliminary approval to the Jackson Parke north section application.
The board’s chairman, Robert Hudak, cited the applicant’s lawsuit which asserted that the board’s initial denial of the application violated Jackson’s affordable housing settlement agreement. The Jackson Parke north section will include affordable housing.
“It appears clear from the record that when the (affordable housing) settlement was reached in 2017, the township and those who voted in favor of including this (Perrineville Road) site in the settlement simply did not appreciate the environmental conditions that would have to be overcome in order to fulfill that housing obligation on this site.
“It is not for me, nor this board, to speculate why it remained (in the settlement). The fact is that the (Perrineville Road) site did remain and we are now in the position of having to deal with that fact,” Hudak said.
He said the board members explored and studied all of their options related to the Jackson Parke application.
“The board does not want to be in a position to expose the municipality to the potential of significant over-development should the (affordable housing) settlement agreement that was reached to protect and limit the number of affordable units to be required … be overturned.
“Nor does the board want to take the risk and completely lose its oversight role as developments that are in the settlement agreement come before it.
“We do not want to trust more bureaucrats or alleged professionals to tell us what is necessary to protect the township. We want to protect our oversight role and do the best we can with that role,” Hudak said.
The chairman said the board members were troubled by the environmental constraints that will have to be dealt with by a builder if and when development occurs at the Perrineville Road parcel.
“We remain concerned, but are stuck, through no fault of our own, in attempting to strike a balance. We recognize that the court order laid out a binary decision: either continue with the (2019 Jackson Parke) denial and take the risk the entire judgment of repose protecting the (affordable housing) settlement is breached, and take the further risk that a special master would be appointed not only to address this application, but all applications in the township’s housing element, or approve (Jackson Parke) with the vast majority, but not all of the agreed to reasonable conditions,” Hudak said.
He noted that a proposed connector road that would provide access to adjacent county roads for trucks going to and from the Perrineville Road development site is not a condition provided in the case management order.
“We debated and discussed (this application) and there is no doubt we are torn. However, each of us volunteered for this position with the goal of doing our best to protect the township. We believe we have come up with a reasonable compromise.
“I ask the public to recognize that because the memorializing resolution is in essence a settlement document, such as that there is no debate, nor public input into that determination.
“However, the board has been and remains deeply concerned that the process ordered by the court inhibits the transparency the board strives to achieve,” Hudak said.
“I do not think any of us take kindly to the corner the judge has put us in and the position he has put us in. As I mentioned before, when you are dealt lemons you try to make lemonade and that is what we are trying to do right now.
“Our obligation is to move forward and work with the applicant to make sure their development is in line with what Jackson needs going forward,” the chairman said.
All of the board members expressed their reluctance to reversing the 2019 denial, but they expressed their belief that approving the application would be in the best interest of Jackson.
The applicant has also proposed the construction of a Jackson Parke south section to consist of 549 single-family and multi-family residences on a 129-acre tract off West Veterans Highway. The south section includes 100 units of affordable housing.
A public hearing on the Jackson Parke south section has been scheduled for May 18 and attorney Jason Tuvel, who represents the applicant, said he would be prepared to proceed that evening.
The court has ordered the Jackson Parke south section hearing to be concluded before May 25.
