Sweetmans Lane retail plan on hold BY JANE MEGGITT Staff Writer MILLSTONE - The Zoning Board unanimously agreed to dismisswithout prejudice two related applications that had been languishing on its agenda for months. At the April 23 meeting, Zoning Board Attorney Gregory Vella said that the applications presented by 353 Sweetmans Lane LLC and D.Morgan Tracey are still facing a deed-restriction issue with the township. Vella said he had spoken to the applicants' attorney, Kenneth Pape, who said he had no objection to the dismissal. Vella said that dismissing the applications without prejudice due to lack of prosecution had no negative connotation. He said that keeping the applications on the agenda would be unfair to the board andmembers of the public interested in the applications. "It's probably prudent for the Zoning Board to dismiss [the applications]," he said. "They're just sitting here, and we have no idea when they will proceed." According to Vella, the applicants could file the applications again if the deed-restriction issue is resolvedwith the township. The application feeswould bewaived at that time because they were already paid, he said. "[The applications] may come back to us," he said. "They may go to the Planning Board or they may never come back." The 353 Sweetmans Lane LLC application concerns 1.88 acres located in the neighborhood commercial zone at 353 Sweetmans Lane onBlock 39.01,Lot 2.01.The application also concerns Lot 7, which is designated for stormwater management, located in a rural preservation (RUP) zone. The applicant wanted preliminary site plan approval to build a two-story, 3,818-square-foot retail buildingwithanexisting 6,750-square-foot retail building.The existing building is a former schoolhouse that currently houses Roy's Deli, a child-care facility and a real estate agency. The D. Morgan Tracey application was for 4.33 acres on Sweetmans Lane, Block 39.01 Lot 2.20 and Lot 7. The applicant wanted preliminary site plan approval to construct a 9,600-square-foot retail building with 1,098 square feet of office space, and a 2,056-square-foot retail buildingwith an adjoining 2,016-square-foot bank. These buildings would also use Lot 7 for stormwater management. In October 2007, Pape came before the board and said that the applicant needed a variance because Lot 7 exists in another zone. Pape provided the history of the lot and said the Vrabel family, which had once owned the lot, appeared before the board in 1987 to ask if the lot could have agricultural use. The attorney said that ultimatelywhen a larger piece of property was subdivided to create the lot, a resolution stated that the lot's deed should have a restrictive covenant not to allowanything but agricultural use of the site. However, Pape said the deed filed with the county does not have the restrictive covenant. Pape said he is unclear as to whether there is a restrictive covenant thatwould preclude his client from creating a basin on the lot. The current owners of the property only learned about the problemin 2007, he said. Pape represented the Vrabel family for a 2004 lot-line change and prepared the appropriate deeds, according to Vella. Vella said the Zoning Board's 2004 approval of the lot-line change did not reference the agricultural deed restriction, but that does not mean it does not exist.Vella said Papewould have to work with the township regarding the deed restriction.