Controversial retail center plan is denied

Alocal developer's plan to bring a shopping center to Monroe Township has been denied for the second time by the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

"[I voted against it] because of the negative impact it would have on the quality of life for the residents of the nearby communities," board Vice Chairman Daniel Mann said of the March 25 vote.

Renaissance Properties, under the name Schoolhouse Road Associates, sought to build the Marketplace at Monroe, a 30,000- square-foot retail plaza consisting of four buildings, at the northeast corner of Buckelew Avenue and Schoolhouse Road. The board denied a similar application from Renaissance in 2004, when members of the public opposed it.

Residents from all over town turned out for the March 25 meeting, filling about 200 seats in the council chambers, with some standing in the rear. A police officer was on hand to keep order among the crowd, which included those both for and against the development.

Board Chairman Alan Plans was the only board member to vote in favor of the application for a use variance, necessary because the site is zoned for single-family residential development.

"I thought it was a good project for the site because it would serve and benefit the people of the area," Plans said. "I was surprised at the outcome of the vote."

Despite a prior application to build homes, Renaissance President RobertMc- Daid said he has never intended to build single-family homes on the site, saying that would be "pretty ridiculous" because of the firehouse and school bus depot located in close proximity.

"We're going to look at what our options are, but I have no intention of building single-family homes," McDaid said.

The developer's second hearing before the board consisted mostly of residents providing input on the project. More than 25 people spoke on the application, almost equally split in their stances.

Some praised the efforts of McDaid, saying his projects throughout the town have been well built and attractive. Supporters also said the shopping center would bring tax revenue to the town.

"That is not the job of the board, to attain tax ratable properties for the town," said Tom Nothstein, a resident opposed to the project. "If good tax ratables were the answer to lower property taxes, then Edison's tax rate would be zero."

McDaid won approval to build eight single-family homes in 2005, but recently switched gears to seek approval to move forward with the shopping center. As part of the new plans, the builder was willing to make improvements to the adjacent firehouse, including replacing the facility's septic system with sewer lines.

Changes to the intersection would have been required, including the widening of Schoolhouse Road to accommodate turning lanes. Though Harvey Yesowitz, a traffic consultant for the township, did not see the proposed center as something that would create a large amount of new traffic in the area, some saw it differently.

"I see a nightmare there," Mark Klein, an alternate board member, said.

Some residents agreed, citing the nearby school bus depot, as well as the new Oak Tree School and the new high school being built, as reasons why the shopping center would pose problems with traffic, and even safety.

"Please let our children be safe. Let them travel to school without increased traffic," said Douglas Rudy, a resident of Schoolhouse Road.

On the other hand, Anthony Colandrea, a father of three students in the district, said the construction of the new high school makes such a shopping facility necessary in the area.

"I think that the most pressing matter here is the removal of emotion," resident Richard DeMarco, who supported the project, said.

According to DeMarco, the adjacent bus depot is already a source of noise and pollution near the site, making the shopping center less problematic than some were claiming.

One group of residents hired an attorney in efforts to block the developer's plans. Michael Sinkevich, an associate attorney with Princeton-based Lieberman and Blecher, discussed the legal criteria that are required to obtain land use variances. According to Sinkevich, McDaid could not satisfy the three criteria, which consist of the builder proving that the project would promote the general welfare of residents, that it would not be detrimental to the town, and that it is consistent with the township's master plan.

Members of the group represented by Sinkevich, consisting of more than 20 residents, expressed relief after the application was denied.

"I am going to sleep so well tonight," Darren Kutz said. "It's been weeks since I've gotten a good night's sleep. I'm so worried about this. I live on that dangerous curve they were talking about [during the meeting]. There have been deaths there."

Though the group celebrated its success, Kutz pointed out that the battle was won, but the war was not over. He said it is likely that McDaid will attempt to have the site's zoning changed next year when the Planning Board and Township Council set out to rework the master plan.

"That's definitely an option that we will consider," McDaid said.