Planners reject another housing application
Jackson board turns thumbs down on 130-home section of Leigh project
BY DAVE BENJAMIN Staff Writer
Whether or not the Jackson Planning Board's decision to deny an application filed by the Leigh Realty Company will kill the project permanently may be determined by the applicant's development team in the near future.

On Oct. 15 board members voted 9-0 to deny the application, which had been remanded to the board by state Superior Court.

The denial was specifically for 130 homes (combination of multifamily units and singlefamily homes) in Section C of an application known as Leigh at Jackson, West Commodore Boulevard. The overall Leigh at Jackson proposal, which has been pending since 1989, was for 1,641 units (311 single-family homes and 1,330 multifamily units).

Items to be considered by the board included sidewalks in Section C, the proposed final site plan design, and whether a safety plan was required to be submitted.

The board's planner Alan B Dittenhofer said the original design did not include a cul-de-sac and said the change in the cul-de-sac significantly alters the site plan layout.

As a condition of approval, the applicant had to show he was in compliance with all requirements in the engineering report, and according to the Fair Share Housing Plan, the Leigh project is responsible for providing 164 low-income and moderate-income housing units.

"The applicant is subject to and required to provide a complete affordable housing plan in accordance with the affordable housing regulations, Dittenhofer said. "The applicant has not provided any information regarding the client's disposition and agreement."

Attorney John Russo, who represents Jackson on affordable housing issues, handed out three documents to the board members: a cover letter regarding the affordable housing issues for the application, a legal opinion regarding the inclusion of the application as an affordable housing project, and a legal opinion regarding the status of Jackson's preliminary approvals as it relates to the court remand.

In order to ensure that Jackson's interests are protected and ensure that Jackson receives proper crediting for its affordable housing obligation, the attorney said he was asked to attend the meeting.

Russo said the project must follow all the requirements, including the phasing in of units as the project is constructed and that the affordable housing units not be segregated in one area. Instead those units must be distributed throughout the Leigh at Jackson project.

"There is no reference to affordable housing anywhere in the documents submitted to the board," Russo said. "Right now we don't know what this application is from an affordable housing standpoint."

Attorney Denis Kelly, representing the applicant, said his client was only before the board for Section C by court order and not for the entire project, which received preliminary approval in 1989.

"How are you going to get final approval for this site unless we know the affordable housing plan?" the board's attorney, Gregory McGuckin, asked Kelly.

"The affordable housing regulations do not require that there be affordable units until you develop so many market priced units," Kelly responded.

"What I'm hearing now is 164 homes just in Section C," Chairman Kenneth Bressi said.

"We don't know that," Kelly said.

"Well, that's what we have to find out," Bressi responded.

Russo said if the preliminary approval was for the entire project and is still valid, and the applicant was before the board on one section then it would be possible for the applicant to tell the board where the affordable housing would go. Then it would be possible to consider the plan, he said.

Russo said it is possible that the prior approvals may no longer be valid.

Kelly argued that the other sections of Leigh at Jackson were approved in 1989 and said there were extensions in 1997 and the extensions were for the entire project.

"We came in with (Section C) before the expiration," Kelly said.

"If the board takes action on this project tonight and the remaining projects do not get built for whatever reason, the township would have to go back and redo the plan," Russo said. "Maybe it's not viable. We would have to revisit this issue. They may have been viable in 1989, but today they are not viable."

"The board should not be speculating as to what will happen in the future," Kelly responded.

Russo suggested that the applicant revise the plan and explain how the affordable housing units will be provided, not only in Section C, but throughout the entire project.

The applicant agreed to provide sidewalks as requested by the board.

During the public portion of the meeting resident Elaine Manion said there are water problems and quicksand problems in the area. There are cougars, snakes, bears and deer in the area, she said.

Resident Denise Garner said she is concerned with the water table on the property proposed for development.

In summation, McGuckin said sidewalks have to be installed on both sides of the streets, there is no phasing plan and the affordable housing issue must be addressed.

The board members then voted to deny the application.

In a subsequent interview, Kelly said plans to return to court have not been discussed yet.

"We have to meet with the development team," the applicant's attorney said. "I don't know what we might do. I have to get a copy of the resolution first from the board memorializing this denial so I can see exactly what the resolution was."