JACKSON – An issue related to the application of four Orthodox Jewish private schools proposed to be built on Chandler Road was referred from the Planning Board to the Township Council during a recent township planning board meeting.
The application by Chandler Holdings, LLC was a continuation from a prior Board meeting, and involved property at 390 and 394 Chandler Road. The applicant requested that a private road leading to each of the four schools be deemed public but the Board opted to deny this request. This means a variance might be required through a proposal before the zoning board.
Attorney Donna Jennings, who represented the applicant, loudly expressed her displeasure over the vote during the meeting. The attorney has previously been known to threaten litigation against the Jackson Planning Board if her clients’ applications aren’t given a green light and this is what happened during that meeting.
Jennings urged the Planning Board to pass the application, which would allow the schools to be built. The Board chose to defer a decision until the Township Council decided whether to grant the request that the entrance drive to the schools be deemed public, as opposed to private. The council is the only governing body authorized to make such a determination.
Should the council deny the request as well, variances would be required that would cause the applicant to appear before the zoning board.
It was noted by Planning Board Attorney Robert Shea that “the applicant was making a choice which was to deem it a public road as opposed to a private road and while the applicant is within their right to do that, the choice establishes the standards being presented to the Board and whether variances were warranted.”
It was stated that in this situation, the interior driveway that was going into the application would create variances and deemed by Shea as a ‘threshold’ issue which was defined as “a critical matter that has to be satisfied and specified as to what is being presented to the Board and they have to evaluate it appropriately.”
“It has to be vetted from every angle,” Shea said. He added that to do that it required “governing body guidance.”
“We’ve never seen this as a board before,” he explained to Board members when he recommended they first approve that it was a threshold issue.
After hearing the Board’s decision, Jennings immediately remarked, “Okay, I’ll see you in court, because you don’t have an extension of time. That was terrible advice you just gave your board Bobby so I guess I’ll be seeing you in court.”
Planning Board members were heard saying her comments were uncalled for. She responded, “but it is the truth. It is absolutely ridiculous. You have the application for two and a half years. This is (expletive deleted)!”
She added that all the Board members would be named in the lawsuit. Jennings said her applicant would not extend that time as she walked out of the room.
Jennings remained in the hallway peering into the room to hear the Board’s unanimous vote that was proposed by Board member Joseph Sullivan to deny the application without prejudice.
The applicant’s engineer is Dynamic Engineering Consultants.
Place Of Worship Application
Also, on the agenda that night was an application for a place of worship on two lots, 140 and 146 South New Prospect Road. The variance free application that was approved, involving a major site plan to consolidate the two lots by deed.
Master Plan Review Status
Township residents have expressed concerns about overdevelopment during recent planning board and council meetings. The township is currently reviewing its master plan and is expected to complete that process by the end of 2024.
During a September 9 Planning Board meeting a status report was offered noting that a meeting was held with the Board’s consultants. The Board is continuing its review of the Master Plan elements with a focus currently on land use and climate change.
