Post by BrianSullivan on Aug 14, 2010 11:21:04 GMT -5
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO Staff Writer
The process of re-examining the document that guides Freehold Borough’s development is getting started.
Every five to six years, municipal boards, officials and professionals review the master plan, which contains the regulations that guide the growth and development of the community.
The Planning Board has been directed by the Borough Council to begin its review of the master plan. Borough Administrator Joseph Bellina said the previous review of the master plan occurred in 2005.
According to the council’s resolution, the Planning Board must eventually issue a report that addresses the major problems and objectives relating to land development in Freehold Borough at the time of the adoption of the last re-examination; the extent to which such problems and objectives have been reduced or increased since then; any significant changes in the assumptions, policies and objectives forming the basis for the master plan or development regulations as last revised; specific changes recommended for the master plan or development regulations, if any.
The council has authorized the expenditure of $8,500 to fund the re-examination of the borough’s master plan.
Councilman George Schnurr, who is the council’s liaison to the Planning Board, explained that the board wished to advise the council that the previous re-examination of the master plan occurred in 2005.
“The Planning Board considered applications and developments over the preceding year. The board has made recommendations and suggestions regarding land use and zoning in the borough,” Schnurr said.H
e said the failure to conduct a re-examination of the master plan could jeopardize the presumption of the validity and reasonableness of all of Freehold Borough’s zoning ordinances.
The Planning Board has also made the following recommendations:
• The board adopted a resolution for 2010 that implements a board rule allowing for informal reviews of certain applications. The board defers to the council as to whether this rule should be adopted into the borough’s Land Use Ordinance.
• The board
suggests that the council consider an ordinance requiring a fee for parking waivers. The board is frequently asked to consider such parking waivers due to what might be deemed a parking shortage in the downtown area. It was suggested that the fees collected be placed in a parking fund to cover expenses for that purpose.
• The board considered altering, expanding and otherwise changing the RPO District-Home Office zone, and adopting a similar ordinance to permit homebased offices in residential areas in town. There needs to be further study on the matter.
• The board suggests that the borough ordinances be revised such that any permitted use for a grocery store, taxi cab service or limousine service be changed to a conditional use. The board opines that such uses are too intensive to be permitted without board oversight, and should be changed to conditional uses with heightened site regulations. The board may also consider other uses to be conditional.
• The zoning ordinance should be amended to provide that if a homeowner can provide adequate on-site parking, he should not be required to provide for a garage in the R-5 zone, as the board feels the lot sizes are too small and could result in awkward architectural features. The garage requirements should remain for the R-7 and R-10 zones.
The process of re-examining the document that guides Freehold Borough’s development is getting started.
Every five to six years, municipal boards, officials and professionals review the master plan, which contains the regulations that guide the growth and development of the community.
The Planning Board has been directed by the Borough Council to begin its review of the master plan. Borough Administrator Joseph Bellina said the previous review of the master plan occurred in 2005.
According to the council’s resolution, the Planning Board must eventually issue a report that addresses the major problems and objectives relating to land development in Freehold Borough at the time of the adoption of the last re-examination; the extent to which such problems and objectives have been reduced or increased since then; any significant changes in the assumptions, policies and objectives forming the basis for the master plan or development regulations as last revised; specific changes recommended for the master plan or development regulations, if any.
The council has authorized the expenditure of $8,500 to fund the re-examination of the borough’s master plan.
Councilman George Schnurr, who is the council’s liaison to the Planning Board, explained that the board wished to advise the council that the previous re-examination of the master plan occurred in 2005.
“The Planning Board considered applications and developments over the preceding year. The board has made recommendations and suggestions regarding land use and zoning in the borough,” Schnurr said.H
e said the failure to conduct a re-examination of the master plan could jeopardize the presumption of the validity and reasonableness of all of Freehold Borough’s zoning ordinances.
The Planning Board has also made the following recommendations:
• The board adopted a resolution for 2010 that implements a board rule allowing for informal reviews of certain applications. The board defers to the council as to whether this rule should be adopted into the borough’s Land Use Ordinance.
• The board
suggests that the council consider an ordinance requiring a fee for parking waivers. The board is frequently asked to consider such parking waivers due to what might be deemed a parking shortage in the downtown area. It was suggested that the fees collected be placed in a parking fund to cover expenses for that purpose.
• The board considered altering, expanding and otherwise changing the RPO District-Home Office zone, and adopting a similar ordinance to permit homebased offices in residential areas in town. There needs to be further study on the matter.
• The board suggests that the borough ordinances be revised such that any permitted use for a grocery store, taxi cab service or limousine service be changed to a conditional use. The board opines that such uses are too intensive to be permitted without board oversight, and should be changed to conditional uses with heightened site regulations. The board may also consider other uses to be conditional.
• The zoning ordinance should be amended to provide that if a homeowner can provide adequate on-site parking, he should not be required to provide for a garage in the R-5 zone, as the board feels the lot sizes are too small and could result in awkward architectural features. The garage requirements should remain for the R-7 and R-10 zones.