Downzoning promoted in Upper Freehold
Planner suggests changing lot sizes from 3 to 6 acres
BY JANE MEGGITT
Staff Writer

Upper Freehold Township Planner Mark Remsa proposed an idea he called "radical and shocking" at the Oct. 12 Planning Board meeting.

The Planning Board has been working on revising the township's master plan since early 2005. During the latest discussion on the matter, Remsa proposed reducing the township's base zoning - in other words, downzoning.

Remsa proposed that the township change its current 3-acre zoning to 6-acre zoning. He also said the township should increase the few areas in town with 5-acre zoning to 10-acre zoning.

The goals and objectives of the township's master plan have been to preserve the township's open space and farmland while preserving landowners' equity in their land, according to Remsa. He said the question is how the township can achieve its goals in a smart, sustainable manner while avoiding suburban sprawl.

Remsa said the answer to that question is to transfer the potential development densities of rural areas in Upper Freehold to places in the township that are more suitable for development. He said the township must create an economic incentive to encourage landowners to opt for these density transfers. He proposed reducing the township's base zoning as that incentive.

"You can't marginalize the incentive," Remsa said. "It needs to be substantial."

Remsa considers downzoning enough of an incentive to make property owners and developers look at their options.

To further encourage density transfers from rural areas to other specified receiving areas in Upper Freehold, the township would not only give landowners credit for what they could build on their land, but also a 35 percent bonus density.

"The idea is to reward the developer and landowner to take units from a rural area and put them in areas deemed appropriate for development," Remsa said.

Remsa said sprawl makes the land no longer viable for agriculture, and that the town should pay for the development rights of property now in order to avoid future costs down the road.

"We will pay you for preservation," he said.

Under current farmland preservation rules, the state pays 60 percent of the preservation funding, according to Remsa, while the county pays 24 percent and the municipality pays 16 percent.

Under Remsa's proposed concept, the township would pay a premium so the landowner would get full equity and the township would get the quality of life it is trying to achieve, he said.

According to Remsa, if a landowner does not opt to place his or her property into farmland preservation, to transfer density and/or to house a receiving area, then his or her property would fall subject to 6-acre zoning.

Remsa said developers must come before the Planning Board with a schematic test qualifying plan to determine the lot yield of their land.

For parcels that measure 20 acres or more, Remsa said the township mandates clustering, which increases the total number of lots a developer can create on a property because the bulk of the land is left as farmland or open space.

Landowners with properties less than 20 acres would have a choice between clustering lots on their tract or using conventional zoning, which under the new plan, according to Remsa, would require 6 acres per lot.

He said the plan is to make it as easy as possible for agriculture to work in Upper Freehold and to have a "box of tools" to address land use issues.

"One size fits all fails," Remsa said.

He called his proposed plan "a very progressive, innovative concept" that aims to preserve about 9,000 acres of township land while sacrificing 1,300 [other] acres as receiving areas for development.

Remsa said he is sure some Planning Board members are "shocked and overwhelmed" by the idea he put forward.

When Planning Board Chairman Richard Stern asked if 6-acre zoning would cause more suburban sprawl, Remsa said developing the whole town at 6 acres across the board would be sprawl. Remsa said the goal is to create strong incentives to preserve land while giving the landowner equity.

"It's a difficult balancing act," he said.

Stern suggested that the township change to 5-acre zoning so land could not be assessed as farmland, which requires a 6-acre minimum.

Remsa said that technically, planners are not supposed to do fiscal planning in place of physical planning.

Board member Bob Freiberger said additional equine lots would be a benefit of larger-lot zoning. He said if a 20-acre lot is mostly wooded, it would be better to carve it into 6-acre lots rather than to cluster the property and destroy woodlands.

Remsa said the proposed plan allows for flexibility.

Board member William Search told Remsa, "I like your presentation tonight. You've come a long way."

A public hearing on the proposed plan is scheduled to take place at the Planning Board's Dec. 14 meeting.