Colts Neck Master Plan
adopted June, 1996

The Township of Colts Neck has several natural and man-made features which will influence the future of the Township regardless of the detailed land use regulations. One is the existing major highways of Routes 18, 34, 520, 537 and the Federal Highway (Normandy Road) into N.W.S. Earle. Others include the Swimming River Reservoir, the N.W.S. Earle complex, major drainage corridors, environmentally critical conditions, existing development patterns, including farms, and the lack of water and sewer infrastructure.

The Master Plan establishes written and mapped goals for the future. These goals are based on an analysis of past and present conditions viewed in the context of the Township's regional setting. The Master Plan is adopted by the Planning Board. It is used in their review of matters referred to them. As such, it is a guide for the future. Its flexibility is obtained by being able to implement many of the firm goals and objectives in more than one way.

A general re-examination of the Master Plan must be done at least every six years in accordance with the Municipal Land Use Law. This re-examination exercise aides in maintaining the Plan's effectiveness. As new forces emerge, or changes in state and regional plans occur, or new construction techniques emerge, or different zoning and planning concepts get developed, and as alternatives in transportation, housing, agriculture, and public services emerge, modifications to the original plan may be a logical result.

When the Township first undertook its Master Plan in the 1960s, the effort was to direct single family development on lots of about 1 acre. On-site septic concerns emerged and the 2-acre lot was introduced in the late 1960s. The acquisition and development of the reservoir, the completion of Route 18, new environmental and planning statutes, the emergence of county, state and other regional planning agencies, and changes due to Court decisions have all played a part in changing the Township's planning and zoning program over time. During the late 1960s, cluster zoning emerged as a planning tool. The Mt. Laurel I and II Supreme Court decisions of 1975 and 1983, respectively, required a Township response. Regulatory agencies concerned withing protection of wetlands, floodplains, and other environmental concerns emerged as have the State Highway Access Management Code and other state regulations. The Department of Environmental Protection did not exist until the 1970s and the old Highway Department was expanded to the Department of Transportation. The New Jersey Council on Affordable Housing and the New Jersey State Planning Commission were both created in the 1980s. The Municipal Land Use Law was re-written in 1975 and has had numerous revisions since. Each change resulted in some modification to the Master Plan, or the Development Regulations, or both.

Because of events such as these, a Master Plan cannot be static, but must change with the times. The Planning Board becomes the most appropriate agency to take a broad view of these events and distinguish between long-term advantages and short-term expediencies. The Planning Board should be devoted to the soundest community needs and insist upon policies that will not be readily judged inadequate in the years ahead. These policies should be established in conjunction with other municipal agencies, the county, adjoining communities, and appropriate regional groups, including the State of New Jersey. The final effectiveness of the Master Plan and the implementing ordinances will depend in part upon the relationship between the Planning Board and these other agencies.

In creating the Master Plan it was intended that new residential development be designed to be coordinated with such existing features as neighboring street systems, drainage patterns, slopes, and wooded areas. In agriculturale areasdistricts, new housing should be placed to minimize the impact on the farming activities, be located away from the existing streets to preserve the agricultural view, and to maximize the best soils for continued farming. The larger neighborhood boundaries should use flood plains, wetlands and wetland buffer areas, areas of erodable soils, good water re-charge areas, steep slopes, and similar features as neighborhood boundaries.

As part of designing future developments, drainage corridors should be preserved. Environmentally critical areas should be preserved and protected by alternative means such as in dedicated ÒgreenwaysÓ or conservation easements. Homes and other uses should back up to the flood plains and wetlands, not encroach upon them. A minimum number of roads should cross flood plains, wetlands, and other wet areas to result in fewer, costly bridge construction projects and less costly maintenance. The preservation of flood plains, wetlands, and groundwater re-charge areas also offers the opportunity to generate recreation and passive, aesthetic areas convenient to homes while providing open space buffers between neighborhoods or between homes and "working" agricultural areas. Where these spaces can be generated between residential neighborhoods and the agricultural areasdistricts, they will serve to separate the two uses and reduce the nuisances which each can impose upon the other. Their preservation also provides opportunities to re-charge underground aquifers in areas dependent upon ground water supplies. Preservation of these areas also provides opportunities to assist in stormwater management programs. By avoiding the environmentally critical areas, homeowners and the Township will minimize maintenance resulting from wet basements, erosion, and frost action on foundations and paving, while at the same time retaining areas useful to agriculture and wildlife and providing aesthetic benefits as a result of preserving major tracts of open space, wooded areas, and topographic relief.

Because environmentally critical areas represent over one-third of the Township, road locations, grading, and structural siting must be carefully selected. New development should not be stripped along the frontage of existing roads. In fact, reverse frontage with increased lot depths along arterial and collector roads will place homes further from these busier highways, provide a landscaped buffer for aesthetic treatment, and provide fewer interruptions to traffic flow by controlling road access. Major roads should remain along the periphery of a neighborhood, not go through it.

The Master Plan consists of several basic elements: The Land Use Element; Housing Element; Circulation Plan; Utility Services Plan; Public Facilities and Open Space Plan; Recycling Element; and an Energy Conservation Plan. These elements are related even though shown on individual maps and discussed in separate texts. The specifics of the total plan have some flexibility in order to remain realistic while being applicable to possible alternatives. However, the concepts behind each plan are basic and firm. Flexibility is offered because the plan can be implemented in more than one way without altering the concepts.

LAND USE ELEMENT

The Master Plan includes Plate 27, Land Use Element, and its related text. This is followed by other Plans setting forth other services needed to support the Land Use proposals. The density of development is highest in the southwestern corner where water and sewer services exist to serve the high density housing.

Except in the southwestern corner, the Land Use Element continues to be based on the long-standing, low density development pattern throughout the Township. The 1996 Plan continues five significant policies from both the 1984 Master Plan and the 1988 Master Plan amendments to it, as well as the 1990 Master Plan: (1) the designation of lower residential densities in major areas of undeveloped land, with the lowest density in designated agriculture areas; (2) locating the higher density residential area in the southwestern corner to implement the Township's obligations to comply with the Fair Housing Act and the Court's 1986 Judgment of Compliance and Repose; (3) containing the commercial uses to an area along Route 34 extending a modest distance north and south of Route 537; (4) not planning for any industrial base; and (5) not extending water and sewer utility services into the Township other than to serve the higher density, low/moderate income housing development adjacent to Freehold Township.

It is intended that zoning policies follow the principles of the Master Plan. This will coordinate agricultural uses with low density residential developments as well as the higher density housing in the southwestern corner of the Township. The higher density housing near Freehold Township recognizes the available water and sewer services, major highway access, the convenience to jobs and regional shopping in Freehold and the Route 9 corridor, and the regional efforts to locate urban-type development where sanitary sewers and storm sewer facilities can be located the greatest distance from the Swimming River Reservoir.

In general, this higher density area was located to best reflect the goals of the regional growth corridors. The southwest corner of Colts Neck was determined by the Court to be a "growth area" under the 1980 State Development Guide Plan. The Court disagreed with the County's and Colts Neck's position that the Route 9 growth corridor should not extend as far east as shown on the then, State Plan.

The Township's Plan continues to provide design flexibility by recommending cluster designs, lot size averaging, and related provisions in the zoning regulations. The intent is to direct growth in logical patterns and in ways to preserve major blocks of land for agriculture and open space. The intent is to recognize both regional and local goals for low density development in the Township, including agriculture. The design mechanisms together with the lower density of development are intended to avoid "leap-frogging", regional sprawl development patterns, or the appearance of such development patterns, in large areas of the Township.

The present level of public facilities and services, including schools, roads, recreation, open space, water resources, fire, and police service (together with the on-going costs of maintaining these services), needs to adjust commensurate with development. By identifying the future intensity of development, the areas to be developed, and the conditions under which growth may occur, the Township can more reasonably predict its future needs for public facilities.

Agricultural Areas
The Plan proposes the continuation of several major areas for the preservation of agriculture. These areas are presently either undeveloped, or represent concentrations of existing agricultural activities, or have very low densities of development in accordance with the established agriculture zoning based on one dwelling unit per 10 acres. Each "AG" area is a contiguous block of land. About 80 percent of the boundaries of the sevensix "AG" areas are streams, public land, streets and similar buffers. The pattern of these agriculture areas is shown on Plate 28, Agriculturale AreasDistricts. The remaining 20% of the perimeters of these areas are a mixture of development conditions consisting mostly of the rears of a few residential lots. This condition minimizes the intrusion and nuisance of one use upon the other. By maintaining the integrity of these agriculture areasdistricts, the continuation of the agricultural industry in Colts Neck is given a greater opportunity for success. In the development of new housing in the agriculture areasdistrict, it is intended that the new housing be located so the view of farmland and open space is preserved as one travels the existing road system. It is also intended that each new lot that is created have a notice in the deed indicating the existence of the adjacent agriculturale use and that use's "Right to Farm".

Planning and zoning, however, are only part of the effort needed to maintain New Jersey's farmland. A major effort in this regard culminated in the State's Agriculture Retention and Development Act and the formation of Monmouth County's Agriculture Development Board whose May, 1981 report designated Colts Neck as an agriculture areadistrict.

While planning and zoning can provide the opportunity for continued agricultural use and can provide flexible land development techniques to preserve agricultural activities, they have no authority in other important areas such as labor laws, environmental restrictions, property taxation, inheritance tax laws, and farm prices. While an effort to preserve farmland cannot be brought into complete focus by planning and zoning alone, planning and zoning can at least encourage the continuation of agriculture and give direction to the preservation of those areas best suited for farming. If the effort is not made, sites that should be retained for farming will be developed with homes and other suburban uses. Once farms are developed with houses, it is impractical to think that the land would ever be put back to farm use again.

By retaining agricultural uses now, it may not guarantee they will be around forever, but at least the options are retained while other state and federal laws can be explored in the hope that the taxing, environmental, labor, and other laws might be modified to properly serve agricultural interests. Hopefully, in conjunction with planning and zoning efforts, the best agricultural use of prime agricultural soils and the protection of related water resources can ultimately be achieved.

Because continued agricultural uses require extensive land area and continued availability of water for irrigation, any residential subdivisions which might be located in the agricultural zonedistricts should continue to be based on a very low density. It is proposed that alternate design concepts be available in the agricultural areas to offer the most flexibility in order to minimize the impact on agricultural operations. The ordinance should continue to allow lots to be subdivided at 10 acres each. But it is preferable that where there is an overall plan for a tract, that an "average" lot size of 10 acres be encouraged. With an average lot size of 10 acres, a 100 acre tract might result in about 8-9 lots once some land is used for the new streets. The "averaging" concept would allow the new residential lots to be as small as about 2 acres with one lot consisting of the remaining +80 acres, depending on the acreage needed for the new streets. To encourage retaining large parcels under this lot size averaging technique, bonus lots should continue to be offered based on the size of the large parcel remaining. The bigger the size of the dedicated farm tract, the higher the bonus.

It is also recommended that the lot size averaging technique be modified based on some of the experiences over the last few years. For example, additional bonuses are recommended (a) when the new homes are located away from existing roads to "hide" the new development, and (b) for dedicating the farm tract to the Township.

The following bonus schedule is recommended. The intent is to encourage developments in the "AG" ZoneDistrict to preserve large tracts of land, place development where it cannot be seen in order to preserve the rural character of the area, and to dedicate the agriculture or open space tracts to the Township in an effort to better secure the area's rural character over the long run.

Residential Areas
The remaining residential areas are largely a reflection of the existing pattern of development. The intent is to have the zoning regulations in these areas to be sensitive to the pattern that exists. When developing existing farm tracts, cluster designs are encouraged in order to create planted buffer areas between the new houses and such uses as an adjacent farm, an abutting residential neighborhood, or along existing roads. The zoning in areas of existing residential development is intended to reflect lot sizes as large as, and densities similar to, the existing developments. Overall, densities of <0.5 unit/acre with individual lots clustered to 1.25 to 1.5 acre lots are expected, subject to soil conditions for on-lot water and sewage treatment, and subject to the amount of acreage required for the internal street system.

A high density residential area is shown in the southwestern corner of the Township. In recognition of the Township's obligation to provide housing options for low and moderate income households, this area was selected for the following reasons.

In previous years, the size of the residential building was controlled by a FAR (Floor Area Ratio). The FAR is a measure of the total floor area to the area of the lot, e.g. 4,000 sf of floor area on a 40,000 sf lot = 10% or a FAR of 0.10. Because of how the use of a FAR has been interpreted, and how it has been used in conjunction with "Lot Coverage", there has been confusion. In the meantime, the size of residences has been increasing, giving the impression of a greater intensity of development than was anticipated. The character of some neighborhoods has become different and the intent is to provide greater assurances that the views of future larger buildings be diminished by requiring larger lots and/or greater setbacks. To offer a new approach to these issues, it is suggested that the use of the FAR in residential zones be repealed and that the regulations be modified to use a foundation size regulated by "Building Coverage" plus setback criteria for principal buildings based on building height and width. This approach should provide the protection desired by using more traditional measurements.

Commercial
The Plan shows the commercial area along Route 34. Much of this area is already developed commercially, so little choice exists but to recognize it. On the other hand, the total commercial area has different characteristics within it. The eastern side, south of Route 537, is a series of individual lots with scattered uses and some vacant tracts. Where the area is developed, it is a typical rural, strip highway pattern that evolved over the years. Some vacant areas exist along the highway with most of the vacant land being to the rear of the existing uses. The northwest area has, by contrast, emerged as a shopping center with controlled highway access and shared parking facilities. There is modest room for expansion. The northeastern area is largely developed with existing business uses. The southwestern area contains Delicious Orchards plus a bank and has considerable area for new development. In total, the vacant acreage throughout the Business Zonebusiness district offers expansion opportunities. And as such, there is a need to anticipate access, highway safety, and the appearance of that future development.

This total commercial area is a mixture of highway uses and limited retail services. It is disjointed. Access is available only by car. To go from one area to another today, Route 34 must be used rather than having internal streets or driveways paralleling Route 34. It is not a pedestrian-oriented retail area. It is a collection of community uses. Major retail outlets must be sought in adjoining communities.

Throughout the Business Zone, the intent is to encourage older uses to share their access and parking in order to improve highway safety and perhaps reduce the amount of pavement needed for parking. It is also the intent to develop standards that will encourage a greater appearance of landscaping, a consistency of lighting and signage, and related techniques to maximize the rural character which is a visual amenity throughout the Township.

Route 34, South of Route 537. The goals for this portion of the business area are to allow business services to expand as the community requires additional services. As part of that growth, the goal is to make the most efficient use of the available acreage so the business community can be contained within the designated area. By having an overall plan, each site is expected to be designed in a manner consistent with the overall plan. In that way, each piece becomes part of a larger, coordinated whole. The intent is to provide access to the rear acreage where the bulk of future needs can be met, to reduce as many driveways onto Route 34 as possible to improve highway safety and encourage the more efficient movement of traffic, to develop a coordinated circulation system conducive to serving all the business zones and not just individual sites, and to provide the opportunity for existing, older sites to be redeveloped and modernized as part of an overall improvement program. With a coordinated traffic and land use plan, the amount of development can be maximized (a) with respect to what will fit in the entire Business Zonebusiness zone, and (b) with respect to how much traffic NJ DOT will allow to access Route 34 as a result of that development and the approved locations of driveways and street intersections.

The dominant characteristic of the business area south of Route 537 consists of wooded and undeveloped land, some farmed, some not. Because the existing businesses are nearer the highway, the wooded and undeveloped land is not what one sees from the road. The development screens the vacant property from view. But in all, the area south of Route 537 contains a total of 156+ acres consisting of almost 62 acres east of Route 34, another 13 acres in the "island" between Route 34 and Leland Road, and about 82 acres west of Route 34 and Leland Road. In 1994, the zoning consisted of about 105 acres of commercial zoning and 51 acres in residential zoning. There were four residences in the commercial zone and two commercial uses and a billboard in the residential zone.

The main development characteristic of the business area south of Route 537 is the result of development having occurred one lot at a time over many years with each building and parking area fit onto its own site, toward the front of the site near the highway. Until recently, little was done to coordinate commercial development from one site to another except for minor connections between a few parking areas. Most older buildings are located near the highway and many either have several driveways onto Route 34 or have an open curb-cut along the highway. With little curbing along Route 34, frequent entrances to the highway have emerged in an informal manner.

These characteristics are not unusual in a rural area that emerged one lot at a time over many years. Many of the commercial uses were initially small, rural enterprises that continued, albeit many have changed ownership and uses over the years. As the community grew, more businesses emerged and others changed to meet the needs at the time. And as more recent growth took place, more modern and formal design standards were required such as the single access and single egress drives for Delicious Orchards and the abutting bank, and the controlled access/shared parking for the shopping center northwest of the Route 34/537 intersection.

In the area south of Route 537, the Soil Conservation Service maps indicate a seasonal high water table pattern that can be expected to negatively impact development. A variety of Freshwater Wetlands categories also exists where no development can take place. These conditions exist on an estimated 51% of the proposed business area west of Route 34/Leland Road and 16% of the business area east of Route 34. The delineation of these environmental constraints gives a general illustration of where they exist, but is not a substitute for site-specific information. In order to determine the extent to which environmental conditions actually impact a site, site-specific data from soil logs and NJ DEP wetland boundary determinations will be needed.

However, with the general information as a guide, it is clear that environmental conditions will have an impact on future development. Although site-specific data can be expected to modify the boundaries of these environmental conditions, the general pattern is expected to prevail. The plan for this portion of the business area therefore includes several design principles which will allow development to meet site-specific conditions, but still follow the design principles of the plan.

Accordingly, the plan for this portion of the business area includes an internal street system that is discussed under the Circulation Plan. This circulation system is an integral part of the Land Use Element.

The Land Use Element considers the wetland/water table boundaries on the west side of Route 34/Leland Road by running the road parallel to their boundaries in an effort to provide room for new buildings and their associated parking in an area between the road and the wetlands. It is assumed that some of the area with seasonal high water table, but not designated wetlands, will be able to be developed in some manner. The plan has therefore assumed there will be some penetration of those areas having a seasonal high water table. As site-specific data results in different wetland and high water table boundaries, the road system and the placement of buildings can be adjusted accordingly without altering the main design elements of the plan, i.e. interior roads parallel to Route 34 in order to access rear lands and one new street intersection in order to control access to Route 34.

Because of the commercial character along this stretch of Route 34, the plan proposes to revise the zoning on the west side of the highway to permit professional office development in an area of approximately 20-25 acres south of Delicious Orchards. Approximately 6 acres of this new zone lies in the triangular area between Leland Road and Route 34 and is already in the Business Zzone. The wet conditions in the entire area west of Leland Road and Route 34, but particularly the area approximately opposite the rear driveway into the Green Meadows Restaurant, appears not to be developable or, if developable, only in very selective areas. This area therefore offers the opportunity to create a large separation between the new office zone north of this area and the existing and future residential uses on Leland Road south of this area. It is recommended that this new Ooffice Zone zone not be extended farther south, such as to be opposite the rear of the motel, in order to discourage non-residential traffic from traveling the residential portion of Leland Road.

The plan proposes to reduce the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from the current 0.30 to about 0.15. Although this appears to reduce the amount of potential development from what is permitted in the existing ordinance, that is not really the case. The fact is that the existing 0.30 FAR would not be able to be achieved throughout the zonedistrict considering lot coverage limitations, reasonable setbacks, septic field requirements, and the limited amount of land outside of wetlands, areas with seasonal high water table, and other environmental conditions.

The FAR is a measure of how much floor area may be constructed on a lot. For example, with an FAR of 0.15, a 100,000 square foot lot would be permitted a building with a gross floor area of 15,000 square feet (100,000 x 0.15). This 15,000 sf limit would apply whether the building is 1-, or 2-, or 3-stories high. The taller the building, the smaller the foundation footprint. Because so much of the business area is impacted by environmental conditions, a lower FAR is also more realistic because the FAR, as defined in the Municipal Land Use Law, allows the FAR to be applied to the entire site, including the wetlands and areas of high water table, even though the buildings and pavement would not be expected to be constructed on these environmentally constrained portions of the site. With these environmental areas generating floor area, but since no construction is permitted in these areas, the effect is that the remaining, developable portion of the site gets more intensely developed.

The new Office Zone on the west side of Route 34 plus the existing Business Zone on the west side of Route 34 (including the 6 acres in the island between Route 34 and Leland Road) have a new combined total of about 80 acres. Therefore with the 62 acres currently zoned business on the east side of Route 34, the total zoning for various business and office uses would be about 143 acres in the area south of Route 537. To the extent large sites, rather than small sites, are proposed for development, it can be expected thate buildings will be able to approach the permitted floor area ratio. This is expected to be the case as a result of each larger site having more design flexibility in locating the septic system, parking area, and the building itself. Certain smaller lots can be expected to achieve the 0.15 where there is also some flexibility in locating the septic systems and where there are either no wetlands or the size of the wetlands is less than required for the setbacks.

In examining the rate of commercial development since 1960, commercial development has generally followed phases of housing development with the new housing generating an increase in population which created more purchasing power. The peak commercial development period was 1966-1975 when new commercial development averaged 15,000 square feet a year. The 1976-1985 period averaged 7,500 square feet per year. These periods of commercial development followed peak periods of housing development: 1960s @ 963 new homes; 1970s @ 723; and 1980s @ 675. The housing development of the 1980s would appear to be a logical explanation for the 1994/95 inquiries and applications for additional commercial and office development. The amount of new business development has been dropping in recent periods consistent with the reduced number of homes being constructed and the fact that the number of people per home has also been declining: 1970 @ 3.8 people per home; 1980 @ 3.47; and 1990 @ 3.2. With the homes built in the 1980s plus those to be built in the future, it is estimated that 150,000 to 200,000 square feet of additional commercial and/or office development will be built over the next 20 years, or between 7,500 and 10,000 square feet per year, on average, to the year 2015.

As a reflection of the different patterns of land uses along Route 34, the Business Zone is viewed in the following areas:.

Public and Quasi-Public
Major areas for public and quasi-public purposes are shown. The most dominant are the N.W.S. Earle facility, Swimming River Reservoir, and various dedicated parks and open space areas. Other sites include the county's Hominy Hill Golf Course, school sites, the municipal complex, fire houses, rescue squad, and churches.

The N.W.S. Earle property is shown for its continued use. This places the types of uses on that site outside the Township's planning and zoning authority. Because of this, it was considered more appropriate to recognize the facility in general rather than identifying specific areas for specific uses. On the other hand, the federal ownership does not permit environmental degradation in violation of federal regulations. Protection of wetlands, water quality and clean air are an obligation of all property owners, federal, state and local. In the event the federal government were to close this facility, it is the intent of this Master Plan to have the future use of the site be a determination of the Township of Colts Neck under it Master Plan and zoning authorities. It is anticipated that any decision to close the base would be several years in the making so that the Township would have ample time to evaluate its options, including a dedication of the facility to a public use, in whole or in part. But whatever the ultimate outcome of ownership, it is assumed that the cleaning of any environmental contamination that might have occurred due to handling chemicals and explosive materials on-site for many years will be the responsibility of the federal government. It is also a policy of this Master Plan that all environmentally sensitive areas will be avoided by any future uses of the site, e.g. wetlands, wetland buffers, flood plains, and slopes in excess of 15%, and that all future uses will maintain stream and air quality.

Summary
It is expected that as conditions change, the Plan and related ordinances would be subject to review. However, several overview goals remain constant: