As first reported here on FAA News, ignoring heavy opposition from numerous neighbors, Lakewood's Township Committee in December 2024 adopted an ordinance to permit for more dormitories, wedding halls, and mid-rise residential apartment buildings to be constructed in the Township.
The neighbors, who are represented by Attorney Vincent J. DelRiccio, Esq. of the firm of R.C. Shea & Associates have filed a major lawsuit seeking to overturn the new ordinance. Township attorneys are fighting to get the lawsuit dismissed. A major hearing is set for this coming Friday.
The ordinance creates a School Overlay Zone in the area generally located east of the Jackson Township/Lakewood Township border, northeast of Farady Avenue, west of Cross Street and south of Maplehurst Avenue.
The final version, which was adopted as Ordinance 2024 - 41 provides as follows:
- Any school shall be permitted to construct and maintain primary use, stand-alone dormitories.
Currently, dormitories are only permitted as a Planned Educational Campus which requires a minimum of 3 acres and is only permitted for a school which is accredited to give a graduate degree.
The new Ordinance eliminates the accreditation requirement and does not specify an acreage requirement.
- Schools shall further be permitted to construct residences for married students, staff, including teachers and administration affiliated with the school.
- Wedding halls will also be permitted as an accessory use to a school provided that sufficient verification, documentation and professional testimony that adequate parking has been provided for - which shall be reviewed by the Planning Board at the time of application.
Bulk standards for schools
Minimum lot width: 75 feet
Minimum front yard setback: 50 feet
Minimum rear yard setback: 25 feet
Minimum side yard setback: 15 feet with an aggregate of 30 feet for both sides.
Maximum building coverage: 40%
Maximum building height: 38.5 feet.
Accessory building setbacks: Minimum side yard 10 feet; minimum rear yard 15 feet.
Buffer requirements: Minimum of 15 feet shall be maintained as a landscaped buffer or privacy fence between the perimeter boundary of the School Overlay Zone and any development of property within the School Overlay Zone bordering a property not utilizing the Overlay Zone.
Residential Development - single family/duplex units, and/or multi-family housing owned by the school upon property that is either (a) the same property as the school; or (b) contiguous property sharing a common property line; or (c) property within 750 feet of the school's property.
For proposed residential development associated with school use, on lots with three acre minimum developed for schools, the maximum gross density shall be 28 multifamily units per acre, and one duplex (2-family) per acre based on total acreage. For purposes of calculating said maximum gross density, the tract area devoted to residential development shall be deemed to include any contiguous property owned or controlled by the school that shares a common property line with the school.
Under no circumstances shall the net residential density exceed 40 multifamily units per acre and 4 duplexes (2-family) per acre.
Bulk standards for Residential Development
(a) Minimum lot area: 3 acres
(b) Minimum front yard setback: 50 feet
(c) Minimum rear yard setback: 30 feet
(d) Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet with an aggregate of 15 feet
(e) Maximum building coverage: 45%
(f) Maximum building height for single family or duplexes: 35 feet
(g) Maximum building height for apartments: 65 feet with a maximum of 4 story residential and 1 story parking (consisting of 5 stories, 1 parking and 4 residential)
Parking
1 space per classroom
1of of space for every 250 square feet of Study Hall space
1 space per tutor room
1 space per library
1 space for office area
1.5 spaces per apartment
4 spaces per duplex unit
1 space per daycare staff member plus 1 space per 600 square feet of floor area
I space per dorm room for high schools
0.5 spaces per dorm room bed for higher education schools
- Any school constructed in the School Overlay Zone shall have frontage on a public roadway with a minimum paved cartway of 32 feet. All roads shall have adequate fire hydrants as per RSIS standards.
- All schools constructed in the School Overlay Zone shall be connected to potable water and public sanitary sewer facilities. No onsite well and/or septic system shall be permitted to service a residence affiliated with a school or the school itself in the School Overlay Zone (wells for irrigation are permitted).
- No new approvals will be heard and no Temporary Certificate of Occupancy nor Certificate of Occupancy resulting from a new application will be granted until sewer and water infrastructure is installed and there is a total of 3 means of egress (e.g., Franklin, Newport and Maplehurst or Brush) from the School Overlay Zone.
As previously reported here on FAA News, back in January 2025 the neighbors filed a 9-count complaint in New Jersey Superior Court in Ocean County asserting the ordinance is "inconsistent with the Master Plan, did not contain the clarity required of a land use ordinance, constituted an improper delegation of zoning power to the Planning Board, and violated other provisions of the Municipal Land Use Law (“MLUL”), including the MLUL’s prohibition against development moratoriums."
The complaint highlights that even the Planning Board agreed that many parts of Ordinance 2024-41 were confusing and unclear, specifying that it held contradictory standards for parking and acreage, and was “very vague."
In addition, the suit contends the Committee violated the Open Public Meetings Act by arbitrarily limiting the amount of time the neighbors could comment on this ordinance while, "later, at the same meeting the Committee allowed longer public comment for other issues aside from these Ordinances."
In addition to seeking to overturn the new ordinances, the lawsuit further seeks to recoup compensatory damages; pre- and post-judgment interest; vounsel fees and costs of suit pursuant to the New Jersey Civil Rights Act, Procedural Due Process, and Substantive Due Process.
Township attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss arguing it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Curiously, in part the motion contends that Judge Hodgson has previously upheld the Township Committee's 4-minute limit for public participation. The neighbors have just filed opposition to the motion, pointing out that Judge Hodgson's earlier ruling pertained to an instance where all speakers are limited to 4 minutes, whereas in this matter"at the same meeting the Committee allowed longer public comment for other issues aside from these Ordinances."
Judge Hodgson is set to hold oral arguments on the Township's motion this Friday, April 25, 2025.
The neighbors have also filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking for the Ordinance to be voided. Judge Hodgson is likely to schedule a hearing on that motion later next month.
To join the FAA News WhatsApp Status, click here.
3 comments:
As we all know the ordinance was written to help out the schools in financial distress and overall it’s a god thing
That’s not true at all. The ordinance was written to help certain developers with real estate holdings in that zone. The only way the committee was able to push it through, due to the heavy traffic it will bring, was by manipulating the public and placing a mask over the ordinance to make it appear like it was for schools. But what does approving a bunch of high rise apartment buildings have to do with schools?? Nothing. Cut the bull. We all know what’s going on.
This hogwash must stop! Why should the neighbors always have to sue, what happened to townships actually listening to the neighbors instead of the developers
Post a Comment