Bank of America to Add ATM Kiosks By Bagelicious?

Bank of America has been in discussions with the Aberdeen Zoning Board with plans to erect ATM kiosks at 217 State Highway 35 in Cliffwood. The address seems to be that empty paved lot at the corner of Route 35 and Cliffwood Avenue, next to Bagelicious.

The same text has appeared over and over again in the agendas of the zoning board, but the blurb really doesn't make much sense. Does someone know what has been approved? An interpretation of the rules? Why the either/or structure of a memorialized resolution? Here's the wording of the final memorialized resolution, as it appeared in the 27 Feb 2013 Planning Board Agenda:

SP12-514 (rev)/Bank of America
Applicant: Bank of America
Property Owner: R. Deal Holdings, LLC
217 State Highway 35
Block 233, Lot 2

Interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of drive up ATM kiosks (tie vote), or in the alternative a Use Variance and Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval with bulk variances and waivers for construction of a phased development of two (2) freestanding drive up ATM kiosks and related infrastructure, lighting and site improvements. Applicant seeks variances for minimum lot width, lot depth, front yards (2), rear yard, minimum gross floor area, number of parking spaces, number of attached building façade signs and sign setback, on property located in the Highway Commercial “HC” zone.

---------------------------

Bank of America has ATM machines inside the A&P grocery store across the street, but none outside. When that bank was Franklin Bank, it was in the building where the Cliffwood post office resides now. The parking spaces behind the post office used to be the drive-thru lanes. I guess the current bank couldn't get space for outdoor ATMs in the shopping center lot and had to opt for space nearby.

Aberdeen Township 2013 Reorganization Meeting Agenda Lacks Details

The Aberdeen Township Council reorganization agenda scheduled for 2 Jan 2013 lacks the necessary attachments to know who is being nominated and what policies are being proposed, etc. Who are the nominees for zoning and planning? What is the planned schedule for Council meetings this year? What are the official depositories for Township accounts? What is the interest penalty rate for delinquent accounts? What are the recreation fees? Will you be releasing the budgets and target enforcement zone designations? 

2012 Aberdeen Township Zoning Board

The Aberdeen Township Council was to consider Resolution 2012-2 at its 2 January 2012 reorganization meeting. With that resolution, the Council would appoint Thomas Bucco, George Falco and Sherry Gotell to four year terms (2012-2015) on the zoning board and David Phillips to a two year term (2012-2013) as Alternate No 1.

Mr Bucco was to be a reappointment, his 2008-2011 tour having just expired. Harvey Brenner's tenure on the board had also just expired, but he didn't re-up. He was moving instead to the Township Council, having recently been elected. The origin of the third person's four year term must involve Laronda Hobson's 2008-2011 vacant slot on the board. Mr Phillips was replacing Mr Falco as Alternate No 1 as Mr Falco moves up to full board membership.

The zoning board's reorganization meeting is typically held on a Wed eve in mid- to late January, so a meeting is due in the next week or so. Nothing is posted on the Township website yet. A new chair and vice chair must be chosen. The board will also go through the motions of selecting its other officers: attorney, planner, secretary, et al.

Below is the list of last year's (2011) zoning board members as it appeared on the unmodified Zoning Board page of the Aberdeen Township website as of 4 January 2012. (Tenures of service have been added based on research in past Council minutes, as indicated at bottom.)

• Harvey Brenner (2008-2011) - Chair
• Henry Arnold (2010-2013) - Vice Chair
• Maureen Camillary (2011-2014)
• Thomas Bucco (2008-2011)
• Giusseppe (Joseph) Ciaglia (2009-2012)
• Lyle Phelps (2010-2013)
  
• George Falco (2010-2011) - Alternate No 1
• Maxine Rescorl - Secretary
• Marc Leckstein - Attorney
• CME Associates - Engineer
• Coppola & Coppola - Planner

Past Council minutes provide these details about the tenures of the 2011 members above:

• Maureen Camillary was to be appointed to a four year tour (2011-2014) by the Township Council at its 4 January 2011 meeting, per Resolution 2011-2.
• Henry Arnold and Lyle Phelps were to be appointed to four year tours (2010-2013) by the Township Council at its 1 January 2010 meeting, per Resolution 2010-10. George Falco was to become Alternate No 1 (2010-2011).
• The contents of Resolution 2009-2, which approved Zoning Board members that year, are unavailable online, but the intention to nominate Giussepe Ciaglia to a four year term (2009-2012) was contained in the 6 January 2009 Workshop Minutes.
• Harvey Brenner, Thomas Bucco, and Laronda Hobson were to be appointed to four year tours (2008-2011) by the Township Council at its , per Resolution 2008-8. Lisa Aviles was to fill the unexpired term of Edward Wysmierski (2008-2009) and Sam Vinson was to serve a two year term (2008-2009) as Alternate No 1.

Zoning, Planning and Quality of Life in Aberdeen

The Aberdeen Township Zoning Board has agreed to allow used car and truck sales and service on a highway commercial (HC) lot along Route 35 where it wasn't permitted, according to SP-09-505 in the current agenda's list of memorialized resolutions. Just like the issue I brought up in July when the Planning Board's July 2011 agenda came out, the Township is being asked to squeeze ratables into lots that are far too small to be in compliance with accepted zoning standards.

In this case, the sales floor (?) will have only half the required square footage (roughly 1500 sq ft instead of 3000 sq ft). Parking and signage will offer only 1 ft setbacks where 20 ft to 50 ft are required. It has a billboard where one isn't permitted. And the lot was and will continue to be used for residential purposes.

Like I said previously, no one wants to be the bad guy and quash someone's dream. No single request for zoning waiver is outrageous on its own, but combined they signal an assault on community standards that were established to preserve quality of life.

I'd be interested to see a temporal study of requested and granted zoning exceptions by neighborhood over the past ten years. The study presumably would demonstrate the gradual deterioration of particular neighborhoods over time. I'd also like to see a study of the degree to which properties in the Township meet the zoning standards now versus ten years ago, irrespective of granted exceptions, again by neighborhood. That would provide a useful baseline. Perhaps the Boards already have access to this data? I don't believe it can be found in the Township Plan.

Main Street Developer Shuffles Units to Meet Code But Barely Reduces Total

The Independent offers detailed reporting on a 4 September 2010 revised submission to the Matawan Borough Planning/Zoning Board regarding a developers plan for the old C-Town site on Main Street. I would point out the developer will nearly double the number of 2-bedroom units and roughly halve the total 1-bedrooms to meet borough code, but there is no change to the height of the planned three-story edifice and only a 7% cut in total units, neither of which will assuage public concerns about the project's size. And lest you feel there is any sacrifice involved in reducing the number of units to make the place "smaller," I would point out that this shuffling of units is actually ever so slightly in their favor, according to my math.* 

* Based on average apartment prices, the net change in gross monthly revenue resulting from all this shuffling of units yields a net increase of $27/month* under the new plan. In other words, this change has made them money, if only a pittance. There appears to be no sacrifice on the residential side of the equation.

Ignoring the 3 three-bedroom apartments, which are the same in each plan, I came up with the following comparison of the old versus new plans:
OLD PLAN: 12 two-bedrooms @ $1423/mo plus 27 one-bedrooms @ $1065/mo = $45,831.
NEW PLAN: 21 two-bedrooms @ $1423/mo plus 15 one-bedrooms @ $1065/mo = $45,858.
NET CHANGE: + $27/mo

Long Neck Creek, Aberdeen, New Jersey

When I wrote my recent article about the Route 35 water main project, I couldn't find any information online about Long Neck Creek, cited as the place along Route 35 where the deteriorated main crosses the highway. Today, while reviewing the Aberdeen Township Master Plan at the Matawan-Aberdeen Public Library, I found a State Plan Policy Map that showed the creek zoned in the Environmentally Sensitive Planning Area (PA5). [See slide 20/31 in this State Development & Redevelopment Plan (SDRP) slide show for further information about PA5 status.]

Long Neck Creek looks to originate near the end of Roosevelt near Gordon in Cliffwood. It crosses under the New York - Long Branch train tracks between County Road and Cliffwood Road. It crosses Route 35 between those same two roads and feeds into Whale Creek near the end of Lenox Road in Cliffwood.

According to a 1999 NJDEP report, the watershed drainage into Long Neck Creek once received non-source pollutants from the Anchor Glass plant.

A Federal Writers' Project map on page 2 of Township of Matawan: 1857 - 1957, a book compiled by Mrs Frank Tiemann, shows the creek as the southernmost unnamed tributary of Whale Creek. By the way: the unnamed tributary pictured on that map as feeding into Long Neck Creek is likely the stream that crosses under Matawan Avenue and passes through the woods next to MAMS.

County Road Project Inches Forward With Zoning Ordinance Changes

The County Road and Route 34 housing projects are moving forward, slowly but surely. The 7 Sept 2010 agenda of the Aberdeen Town Council included a public hearing on Ordinance 20-2010, which would modify the township's Land Development Ordinance (Chapter XXV of the Township General Ordinances at ClerkBase) to include the category of Inclusionary Housing (IH) in the various definitions lists, zoning maps, etc. This is a minor but fundamental step towards the development of these sites.

Keep in mind that these two projects are the only reason for the IH Overlay Zone, so if you're following the County Road and/or Route 34 projects, remain alert for this expression whenever you read Township agendas.

Tab Ramos Parking Saga Continues Before Zoning Board

A lengthy article in The Independent tells all you could ever want to know about the Tab Ramos Sports Center's ongoing saga with its clients, the sports complex's parking contract, and the center's irate neighbors. The Aberdeen Township Zoning Board heard more testimony then moved to continue discussions in November.

Sections of Aberdeen Water Mains to be Replaced

Aberdeen Township is planning some significant water main work, as referenced in this blog back in February.

One project involves the replacement of the section of water main that crosses the Garden State Parkway at Cliffwood Avenue. This week, the town council agenda includes a one million dollar bond ordinance to fund the project. The NJ Department of Environmental Protection's Comprehensive 2010 Water Supply Project Priority List ranks Project 1330002-002-0-0 at #241 in the State and estimates its building cost at $995,000 and support cost at $457,700, for a total cost of $1,452,700. As of April, NJ DEP estimated a state certification date of 30 July 2010.

A 15 July 2010 proposal from CME Associates for engineering services related to a Garden State Parkway Directional Drilling Project, mentioned in the town council agenda, involves support for the placement of a water main under the GSP using modern directional drilling techniques. This approach will preclude the need to dig open trenches across the parkway and the massive disruption of traffic flow that such an endeavor would cause. You can read more about microtunneling and its use in the placement of underground utilities at Trenchless Online, including its 2009 North American Microtunneling publication.

A second project involves the replacement of a section of "deteriorated water main from Route 35/Long Neck crossing to and along County Road to improve the system's reliability, pressure, and fire protection," according to the NJ DEP document above. Project 1330002-003-0-0 is ranked at #240 in the State and estimates its building cost at $650,000 and support cost at $292,500, for a total cost of $942,500. This project also had a state certification date of 30 July 2010. CME Associates is providing engineering services for this project, too, as reported in this blog in July. (The reference above to "Long Neck" relates to a creek of that name that feeds into Whale Creek on its way to the bay.)

Too Close For Comfort?

Based on my reading of the Zoning Board agenda for its upcoming meeting, lots of folks want permission to build closer to the edges of their property than zoning rules allow. Undoubtedly the Zoning Board looks at each case carefully. And neighbors may come in and lodge their concerns about building plans. But who really wants to be the stick in the mud who keeps someone from building that deck or pool they've always wanted? I mean, why poo-poo a new jacuzzi just because its construction would put it a few feet too close to a property line? Case by case, I'm sure it is hard to hold the line.

Presumably these setbacks have some basis in safety and aesthetics, right? If the house next door catches fire and your deck is only two feet from the fence, is your house going to burn down, too? If your neighbor decides to begin selling Amway, should he be able to erect a commercial sign in his front yard? Zoning variances aren't automatic, nor should they be. But many get approved. Too many? Who's to say?

In the current agenda,, for example, Yeshiva Gedolah in Cliffwood wants to increase its student body by more than half, to 141 students, prompting the addition of variance requests to those already pending. Both the Yeshiva and a commercial truck painting company want to have signs up that aren't otherwise permitted, so they need use variances. There are three decks in New Business, and a deck and jacuzzi variance can be found in Continued Business.

MAPL has a couple of interesting books on zoning.

The Complete Guide to Zoning: How Real Estate Owners and Developers Can Create and Preserve Property Value, by Dwight H Merriam. (2005: McGraw-Hill). Its Chapter 21 (pg 217) focuses on variances.

Zoning Administration in New Jersey for Zoning Boards of Adjustment, Planning Boards, Governing Bodies, and Zoning Officers, by William Martin Cox. (1980: Rutgers University)

Independent Digs Deeper on Tab Ramos Parking Situation

The Independent has a detailed article about the Heather Glen Homeowners Association's dispute with the Tab Ramos Sports Center. It discusses the new fence being added as a buffer and how the neighbors don't think it will be enough to quell the noise. This blog recently discussed zoning waivers being sought by the center.

Aberdeen Zoning Waivers Sought for Tab Ramos Sports Center Parking

The agenda for this week's Aberdeen Township Zoning Board meeting includes new business involving an applicant's request for waivers to provide 103 parking spaces behind an 8 ft high fence for Tab Ramos Sports Center patrons. I'm sure the residents on and near Blair Street are excited to learn more about this, only the latest episode in an ugly story.

Great Coverage by Independent's Hlavenka

The Independent has great coverage of the recent zoning amendment meetings and the plight of our library. Jacqueline Hlavenka is doing a fine job covering the township's big stories. Plus the paper doesn't let the smaller stories slip through the cracks, either: check out the Mission Matawan story. Be sure to support your local town paper and shop at its sponsors.

Leckstein's Ten Minutes of Fame And Other Disappointments

At the Aberdeen Township Planning Board and Township Council meetings on Monday night, officials told their citizens that Aberdeen was on the precipice of a town planning disaster. Rest assured, they said, members of the board and council are just as upset as anyone else in town about this. It is an utterly regrettable circumstance. But the Commission on Affordable Housing (COAH) has tied our board and council's hands. Nothing can be done except what we've been told to do. After all, it's an ultimatum. (That's Latin for The bully says jump, so jump.) All our actions are procedural at this point, so there's simply no point in such a large crowd getting its undies in a knot over something no one can do anything about anyway.

At this point, Township Planner Richard Coppola put on his best storytime voice, grabbed a microphone and began weaving his version of how we got into the mess we are in and how things will have to go if we are to salvage anything from our soured COAH situation. I put a hand on my wallet, worried that either he or the Mayor was looking to sell me a time share. Didn't I at least get a free breakfast and use of the recreational facilities before I had to sit through their little sales spiel?


Once Coppola had spun his web, Planning Board Attorney Michael Leckstein proceeded to attempt to stifle public discussion. He proposed a ten minute public comment period to hear what was easily a hundred citizens present and waiting to be heard by their municipal officials. But this didn't sit well with the public. They rose from their seats, shouting and motioning at Mr Leckstein and the Mayor. The room went into an uproar. Ever the diplomat, the attorney threatened the crowd with police action. This provoked the crowd still further, causing things to nearly get out of control. I expected things might turn ugly.

But Mayor Fred Tagliarini stepped in and soothed the crowd. He reminded us that we all know him and that he is going to do right by us. I wasn't so sure, but people sat down anyway. The board had thoroughly failed to move this ordinance through the process without a public outcry.

Later, during the Council meeting, Township Attorney Daniel McCarthy provided his personal tour of events in Trenton six weeks earlier and reiterated what seemed to him the logical course of action: submit to COAH's demands or else.

My edited version of The Aberdeen Story: Our Township officials avoided meeting our Mt Laurel low income housing obligations for years and years. In January 2010 they were lulled into thinking that our savior Governor Christie would come into office and abolish the nasty COAH and free us from its bondage. But, lo and behold, after a 90 day waiting period we're back in the fray, worse for wear, even on the hot seat. On 10 March, Mr McCarthy found himself before an angry COAH judge, who was at wits end over our town's endless delays. Aberdeen had no proactive plan to meet its total COAH obligations -- unless you call being poked and prodded and trying to ignore it a plan. The judge settled in favor of local developers who had filed a complaint accusing us of unreasonably blocking construction of affordable housing.  We had until 21 April 2010 to meet our obligations.

So what are the dire consequences if the board and council hadn't yielded to the COAH judge? The story goes that if the township was removed from COAH's protective umbrella -- something that would have happened on Wednesday if the Council hadn't rezoned certain parcels of land on County Road and Route 34 by approving Ordinance 11-2010 -- we would have been vulnerable to builders remedy law suits. We would have totally lost control of planning and zoning matters regarding COAH, so builders would run amok with our town. We'd end up like West Long Branch or Farmingdale! Apparently we wouldn't be able to win against them, like Oceanport in 2006.

During public comments, which took the board a half hour past its scheduled time and the council til 10 pm, resident after resident stood up and asked their representatives to fight COAH and the developers. It's the American Revolution all over again! Let's fight! We're willing to take the risk. But the board and council each refused. The attorneys said it was irresponsible. Greg Cannon suggested it would be a suicide mission to challenge Trenton, sort of like running directly into murderous machine gun fire.

Maybe our municipal leaders were right to shy away from confronting the authorities over COAH? Maybe we have been derelict in our duty to meet affordable housing obligations? And maybe we would have just gotten our heads handed to us and ended up putting other Aberdeen neighborhoods at risk of uncontrolled development? But why should we believe our municipal leaders in such important matters when they tell us they don't know the names of the principals of the development firms they've been dealing with for quite a while now? How could that be? Why should I buy any assurances or guidance they offer?

Planning Board Agenda Omits Blocks and Lots

The agenda for the special meeting of the Aberdeen Township Planning Board set for 19 April at 6 pm has been hurriedly published tonight after a rowdy Zoning Board meeting earlier this evening. You'd hardly notice what they plan to accomplish at this special meeting regarding the previously thwarted Cliffwood and Route 34 development projects if you didn't have a scorecard.

Where are the block and lot numbers, the mentions of County Road and Route 34, and the titles of the projects? How can anyone tie these mundane-sounding matters to the dreadful projects we all despise without someone pointing them out? I guess that's the whole point.

Be sure to attend the meetings on Monday.

Stealthy Aberdeen Twp Ordinance No 11-2010 Would Let RCM Bypass Zoning Board

There is truly no end to the shenanigans the current Aberdeen Township Council and Planning Board will engage in to push low income housing on the dear residents of Cliffwood. The Renaissance at Aberdeen may have seemed a vanquished project when the Zoning Board announced tonight its receipt of a 14 April letter from RCM officially withdrawing its application for a variance on County Road Block 196.04 Lot 27 and Block 228 Lots 1 and 2. But unbeknownst to the Zoning Board, that letter was mere theatre, sleight of hand, an illusion. But the leaders of the Cliffwood Homeowners Association weren't to be fooled. Kudos to them for their dogged pursuit of the truth on this issue.

If things go as "planned", those same blocks and lots on County Road are destined to be in the hands of RCM by early next week. On Monday evening, the Township Council and Planning Board will be voting on Ordinance No 11-2010 (see below), which creates a dedicated zone for these specific blocks to suit RCM's building plans. This stealthy piece of local law was somehow presented and approved for first reading at the 6 April Council meeting. The ordinance was conveniently left off the published agenda and the minutes of that meeting have not yet been published. I spoke to one person in attendance who took copious notes at the meeting and refuses to believe this ordinance was discussed and voted on without him/her noticing.

To add to the drama, the Planning Board has agreed to a special session to review the ordinance for conformity with the Master Plan, a necessary step, on Monday evening 19 April at 6 pm, just prior to the Council meeting scheduled that evening at 7 pm. RCM's new application for construction of low income housing on County Road will then go directly to the Planning Board, as it was explained this evening at the Zoning Board meeting, bypassing the less agreeable Zoning Board completely.

I should point out that the Village at Aberdeen project on Route 34 would also be rezoned as part of this ordinance. Block 114 Lot 4 would be getting this dedicated Inclusionary Housing Overlay Zone (IH) status along with the Cliffwood properties.

BTW: Since fewer people are reading newspapers these days, maybe the Township should be posting its required public notices online as well as in the classified ads? Oddly enough, the government is able to avoid Sunshine by publishing their notices in the paper.

Here's a copy of the public notice, which was only available in a cached version of the APP Classifieds online.

TOWNSHIP OF ABERDEEN ABERDEEN TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE NO. 11-2010 PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PENDING ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY The ordinance, the summary of terms of which are included herein, was introduced and passed upon first reading at a Regular Meeting of the Township Council in the Township of Aberdeen, in the County of Monmouth, State of New Jersey, on April 6, 2010. It will be further considered for final passage, after public hearing thereon, at a Regular Meeting of the Township Council to be held at the Township's Municipal Building, One Aberdeen Square, Aberdeen, on April 19, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. During the week prior to and up to and including the date of such meeting, copies of the full ordinance will be available at no cost and during regular business hours, at the Office of the Township Clerk for members of the general public who shall request the same.

The summary of such ordinance is as follows:

Title: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REVISED GENERAL ORDINANCES, LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ABERDEEN, SECTION 25-3 REGARDING ZONING AND CREATING A NEW INCLUSIONARY HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE

Purpose: This Ordinance amends the General Ordinances, Land Development Ordinances of the Township of Aberdeen to provide for revisions to the Zoning Districts and Zoning Map and to create a new "IH" Inclusionary Housing Overlay Zone adding Lot 27 in Block 196.04 and Lots 1 and 2 in Block 228 and Lot 4 in Block 114..

This Ordinance shall take effect at the time and in the manner provide by law.

KAREN A. VENTURA, RMC/CMC CLERK, ABERDEEN TOWNSHIP ($51.84) 122319

Zoning Board to Review COAH Plans, Cliffwood Homeowners Association Plans to have a Word

The Aberdeen Zoning Board is having a meeting this evening at city hall at 7:30 pm. The public are invited to attend.

The APP reports that the Cliffwood Homeowners Association plans to show up and resume their protest of RCM's 132-unit COAH development.

Since the last Town Council workshop on 6 April seemed to show that the council was willing to vote that same area into reserved open lands, the issue could be moot. At that meeting, the council members spoke of putting designated lands from the inlet at Whale Creek all the way up to land near Wilson Avenue (much of which are wetlands or woods) into a trust, and then seeking immunity from the burden of the COAH requirement.

Sports Center Disturbing Its Line Road Neighborhood

The Tab Ramos Sports Center has been getting some attention lately from the Aberdeen Township Council and the Aberdeen Police due to neighborhood complaints, according to comments recorded in the minutes of the 16 March 2010 town council and a verbal report from this week's council meeting. The center, which is open until 2 am, offers adult parties in four-hour blocks complete with beer, wine, and house liquor. The center's clients are reportedly causing concerns among the local residents due to vehicular traffic into and out of the area, especially late at night, plus there's been a rash of illegal parking. The police have been issuing summonses and the center has hired police for Friday evenings until the season drops off, but the neighbors complain that the situation has changed their community for the worse and they don't want to have to move. One Councilman who has been to that street three times says it is a zoo. The 3/17 council minutes say that the center is being cooperative plus the issue is being dealt with by the Zoning Board, but the whole thing flared up again at this week's council meeting.

Here's a map showing you where the center is.


View Larger Map

RCM Awaiting COAH's Demise; Zoning Board Willing to Wait

APP doesn't say exactly what the extensions have been for, but RCM was granted a third one by the Aberdeen Township Zoning Board on 24 February. They now have until 31 March to do what they are supposed to do. APP's article before the meeting was no clearer. This game has been going on so long, I don't blame APP for forgetting what the extensions are all about.

The Independent said back in November that RCM has been filing for use variances as part of development plans it wishes the Township Council to approve. RCM withdrew its plans under pressure from Cliffwood residents, who didn't want the township's COAH effort to be directed totally at their neighborhood with the building of 132 low income rentals. I personally was concerned that the use variance involved building homes in an environmentally sensitive wetland area, but no one seemed to much care about that aspect of this.

The Christie Administration came into office in January flying the battle flag against COAH but has yet to kill it. Aberdeen Council is supportive of the effort against COAH, having passed non-binding resolutions in support of the state legislature, so the Township is granting RCM more time to wait out the process in Trenton.  Not only does the Council want COAH banished; it wants RCAs restored.

Presumably the ultimate outcome of postponing these developments will be the abrupt demise of the County Road project, which will become moot if COAH is upended. RCM will build its fancy market priced townhomes along Route 34 and make lots of money. The Council can then set about finding poor towns to trade its low income housing obligations to under a restored RCA. And then all will be right with the world.

Aberdeen Council Likely to Support Eliminatation of COAH, Restoration of RCAs

The agenda for the Tuesday 16 February 2010 Aberdeen Township Council meeting includes Resolution 2010-50, which supports Senate Resolution 1 to abolish the State Commission on Affordable Housing (COAH) and restore Regional Contribution Agreements (RCAs). This writer agrees that it is time for COAH to go but opposes a return to RCAs without significant modifications to the process. (see blog article)

Another resolution would encourage state legislators to oppose changes to the time of decision rule. The Senate and Assembly versions of the bill each favor developers by keeping local governments from changing zoning rules after an application for development has been made. The NJ State League of Municipalities opposes the state legislation. Environmental groups like Sierra Club also oppose the legislation. Click here for a detailed discussion of the legal issues involved.