Board rejects increase in Crossway Creek units Developer proposed housing increase due to market conditions BY MICHAEL ACKER Staff Writer Adeveloper's proposal to increase the number of housing units in his Sayreville-approved plan has been denied. The Planning Board voted Sept. 5 against PRC Group's proposed amendment to the Crossway Creek Redevelopment Plan. The existing plan allows a community of 83 upscale town homes. The amendment would have increased that to 96 units. The new development is to be located just east of the Garden State Parkway, near Prusakoski Boulevard and Gondek Drive. Planning Board member Frank Bella said later that the board did not think the developer justified the increase in residential units. "Since the [John F.] Kennedy administration, we have looked to curtail development here in every way legally possible," Bella said, "and this was one of those situations where the developer had an approved application and they were coming back for a second bite at the apple." Approximately 15 residents were in attendance at the public hearing on addressed Crossway Creek, Bella said, and voiced concerns that ranged from the impact of development on property taxes, to traffic on Gondek Drive. "The residents were so vehemently opposed to additional development," Bella said. "That is the sentiment all over town." Planning Board Vice Chairman Thomas Tighe said stressed that the redeveloper still has approval to build housing on the site; and only the amendment was denied at the Sept. 5 meeting. "We just didn't approve the more dense population of the site," Tighe said. The developer tried to convince the board that the increase in housing units would benefit the borough by bringing in more tax revenue, Tighe said. He noted that the developer's request was partly in response to the changing market place. "The market flipped on them," Tighe said. "I thought that there was enough density down there and so did the rest of the board," Tighe added. The planning board only has the power to make recommendations to the Borough Council on whether the plan should be changed. The council resolved to follow the board's recommendation at its Sept. 17 meeting. Planning Board Chairman Dr. John Misiewicz said increasing the density on the site was an unpopular idea. "Even though they are age-restricted [units], the neighbors came out and complained of traffic and increased density," Misiewicz said. Regarding market conditions, Misiewicz noted that home prices have been going down, and the developer requested more units in an effort to make up the difference. "We don't go to you and say 'Your profit margin is high enough, make less,'" Misiewicz said. "So why come to us if your profit margin drops and try to build more? It becomes a quality of life issue, and the board is very sensitive to that." PRC has changed the plan before in light of the fact that active senior communities are not as economically viable to build as they were in the past. At the developer's request, the borough amended the plan last year to allow one resident of each unit to be younger than 55 years old, as long as another is at least 55. However, children will not be permitted to reside there. PRC's original plan called for 272 housing units, but was decreased to 83 last year.