Resident files lawsuit against Planning Board
Claims recent decision on Ambten application was unreasonable
BY REBECCA MORTON Staff Writer

MARLBORO- The Planning Board is facing litigation that stems from its recent approval of the Ambten Road Associates warehouse-office project at Tennent and Amboy roads.

Resident Alexander Ingham filed a civil action in state Superior Court following the board's approval of theAmbten application. Ingham lives across the street from the site where a two-story, 22,430- square-foot building is to be built.

Ingham will be representing himself in the legal proceedings, according to a copy of the lawsuit.

The lawsuit lists the Marlboro Planning Board and Ambten Road Associates as defendants.Ambten's owner is listed as Sheldon Rodgers, according to planning documents. He also owns Garden Irrigation, Route 9, Marlboro.

The Planning Board gave its approval to Ambten's warehouse-office project on Feb. 20 in a 7-1 vote. Board memberMark Barenburg cast the dissenting vote. Vice Chairman Gerald Bergh abstained from voting.

The applicant sought 12 variances and waivers to township codes, including a parking area or driveway setback of 150 feet from any front, side or rear lot line that abuts or is near the street line of a residential zone. Approximately 10 feet was proposed. The property in question lies in Marlboro's IOR (industrial office research) zone, which requires a 5-acre lot size.Ambten's property is 3.8 acres.Across the street where Ingham resides is zoning as residential.

After speaking out against these types of variances, Ingham "maintains the board's decision was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable," according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit claims that during testimony before the board, representatives of Ambten were not truthful about attempting to acquire neighboring property to meet the 5-acre lot size requirement. The lawsuit notes the applicant responded by saying no adjacent land was for sale (in order to create a 5-acre parcel), but Ingham states he has proof that two residentially used lots, totaling 2.5 acres just north of Ambten's property, have been listed for sale during long periods between 2005 and the present time.

The current lawsuit refers to previous litigation Ingham brought against the Planning Board in the early 1990s concerning another industrial park just north of Ambten's property.

Ingham states that the board's recent Ambten decision contravenes the ruling made by the late Judge John P. Arnone in which he upheld a variance awarded at the time because the developer had promised to upgrade the buffer between the office park and Ingham's home. A 150-foot setback is required, in the former situation a 50-foot setback was awarded, while Ambten received at 10-foot setback.

Ingham states in the lawsuit that he is aware of the need to grant variances when a building plan deviates in minor ways from the township's master plan and zoning ordinances, but said the variances granted to Ambten disregard the safeguards that are "to protect and preserve existing viable residential neighborhoods."

"Whether such total indifference to these safeguards is warranted in order to fulfill a new administration's stated goal of increasing business in the township is a question better left to an impartial court than to the mayor's appointed Planning Board," Ingham said in the lawsuit.

Mayor Jonathan Hornik said he does not comment on pending litigation. Hornik did say that the Planning Board is extremely thorough in its questioning of applicants during hearings.

Ingham has lived across the street from theAmbten site on Tennent Road for 36 years. He and his wife spoke out against the structure when it came before the Planning Board this year, and also when it appeared before the Zoning Board of Adjustment in 2005.

During its time before the zoning board, the application included a request for a variance because the applicant sought to use more than 15 percent of the gross floor area for retail use, according to previous articles in the News Transcript.

The plan at that time called for a 23,400-square-foot building, but as zoning board members questioned the size of the facility, the building was decreased in size.

It was noted in the zoning board minutes that board member Robert Knight stated that if the size of the building was reduced it would eliminate a few of the variances requested, including the setbacks. The building continued to be decreased in size, but even when it was down to 20,450 square feet, Michael Fishman, who was the zoning board chairman at the time, called the application "overwhelmingly overbuilt."

In early 2007, the Ambten Road Associates application was withdrawn from the zoning board. It reappeared in a public notice for the Planning Board in August 2007 without the requested variance for retail space. Marlboro's zoning office confirmed that without that particular variance being sought the application was eligible to be heard before the Planning Board.

The plan was eventually heard and approved, leading to Ingham's present legal action against the board.