Officials say builder should devise new plan
Redmond: A third of Woodhaven land could not be built on today
BY MARLENE CANTY
Staff Writer

"They wouldn't lose the parcel, because they own it, but they'd lose the ability to build on a third to a half of it." - Larry Redmond Old Bridge Planning Board

OLD BRIDGE - The developer of Woodhaven Village last week withdrew its request that the township extend a 20-year-old general development plan (GDP).

"I think they withdrew the request because they sensed it was going to be turned down," said Larry Redmond, chairman of the Planning Board.

Woodhaven's original GDP will expire around 2007-08 after nearly 20 years of what residents and local officials alike have characterized as mishaps and mismanagement.

The plan for the large-scale, multifaceted development that was approved in the late 1980s is being carried out in several stages.

Woodhaven I is already under construction on Texas Road by developer Atlan-tic Realty. A second phase of the project, known as Woodhaven Village, or Woodhaven II, is slated to have 773 additional homes built.

Under the current GDP, the two projects - along with a third, Woodhaven Plaza, which is a commercial component - are committed to building over 3,000 residential units and more than 1.1 million square feet of commercial space in the Texas Road area.

But according to Redmond, 15 years into the plan, the developer has built only about 300 residential units and has not yet obtained site plan approvals on part of the residential component or the commercial stretches.

In addition, the developer has incurred infringement citations from the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for wetlands violations and failure to make necessary road improvements.

Residents who moved into some of the homes in Woodhaven I are complaining about the work conditions around them and the expected additional homes that still have not been built.

"I want all that stuff to play itself out before they come back before our board," Redmond said, stating that the GDP has dragged on entirely too long, and even suggesting that protracted extensions could see Woodhaven coming before his grandchildren as an unresolved issue.

According to Mayor Jim Phillips, Woodhaven is a 20-year-old project that should have been scrapped because of dramatic changes in wetlands laws that no longer make it viable for the project to proceed as originally proposed.

"I believe there comes a time when you have to erase the blackboard and start again," Phillips said.

"Today no one would think of doing a project for 10 homes without doing a proper wetlands delineation or Letter of Interpretation (LOI).

"The Woodhaven application is for at least another 2,200 homes and over a million square feet of commercial space, but the developer has never done an LOI because back in the '80s when they first applied, the law did not require it," Phillips said.

The Army Corps of Engineers issued a wetlands determination for Woodhaven in 1988, and in 1992, at the developer's request, the determination was extended to 1997. But no wetlands reaffirmations have been made since that time, which means that any further filling of wetlands or encroachment of development could result in "an independent enforcement action by EPA," according to agency officials.

While the developer has repeatedly come before the Planning Board in recent months only to ask that the various Woodhaven applications be adjourned to a future meeting, officials wonder what will happen next. One possible scenario is that Atlantic Realty's GDP will expire before the project is completed and the developer will then have to come in and apply for a new GDP along with the corresponding subdivision and site approvals.

"They still own the land," Redmond said. "Nobody can take that from them. But having to apply for a GDP under today's wetlands laws, under today's zoning laws and today's stormwater laws, under today's rules, I'd be surprised if they could build half of what the GDP calls for. They wouldn't lose the parcel, because they own it, but they'd lose the ability to build on a third to a half of it. "

Other changes in the law since Woodhaven's initial application include density transfers and "wetlands swaps," an arrangement from the 1980s that allowed developers to donate land elsewhere in return for being allowed to fill in wetlands, Redmond said.

"I can't in good conscience let it go on forever," Redmond said, lamenting that he is faced with a GDP that dates back to the administration of former mayor Arthur Haney.

"We don't know exactly where to go with it because there are so many outstanding issues that haven't been dealt with. ... But we can't keep dragging it out. It's not fair to the [citizens] and I mean as far as roadways and infrastructure, until this is finally resolved one way or another, we can't effectively plan for Old Bridge's future."

Woodhaven attorney Ron Shimanowitz has not returned phone calls placed to his office in recent months regarding the status of the application.