RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Proposed Residential Development, Long Branch, Monmouth County, NJ.
This approximately 5-acre residential site adjacent to a tidal creek had several issues for which assistance from MEC was needed. Addressing these issues was part of the regulatory process whereby the applicant was seeking authorization to re-develop the property with a new, single-family home community. This property had been considered for re-development several years earlier by a previous owner, but approvals were not obtained, the project went dormant and the property was later sold to MEC’s client.
As a first step, MEC conducted a wetland delineation to determine the extent of wetlands associated with the creek edge and to confirm that no new wetlands had developed within the site since the original investigation. This step was particularly important since the presence of wetlands and wetland buffers has the potential to reduce the developable area within a property. Once the delineation was completed and the wetland buffer width was determined, MEC worked closely with the project engineer and the client to ensure that the proposed development would be in compliance with the applicable state, federal and local rules and regulations while still meeting the client’s project goals.
The project’s original design involved minor impacts to the wetlands and wetland buffers for which MEC submitted an application to the NJDEP for a Statewide General Permit under the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act Rules. However, after the initial review by the City of Long Branch, the project was re-designed to reduce the number of proposed homes. The re-design eliminated all impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers and MEC withdrew the application from the NJDEP.
However, additional approvals from NJDEP were needed due to the:
- property’s location within the Coastal Zone as regulated by the NJDEP’s Coastal Area Facility Review Act (CAFRA);
- presence of a concrete/rock revetment along the shoreline that had been in place at least since 1971 (which is many years prior to the client’s purchase of the property), but was not legally existing with regard to the NJDEP Waterfront Development Law; and
- revetment partially occupying an area below the mean high water line, thus requiring a Tidelands License to authorize use of such areas owned by the State of New Jersey.
In addition to NJDEP approvals, authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) was also needed to legalize the revetment because in most parts of New Jersey, areas below the mean high water line are subject to the jurisdiction of both the NJDEP and the ACOE. MEC prepared a Compliance Statement and other materials for submittal to the NJDEP requesting a CAFRA permit, an In-Water Waterfront Development Permit and a Tidelands License. MEC also prepared an application for an ACOE Nationwide Permit to legalize the revetment. All four of these approvals were obtained.
During the CAFRA permit application review, the NJDEP decided that a cultural resource survey was required. As a result, MEC, on behalf of the client, requested proposals from three cultural resources consultants to conduct a Phase IB archaeological investigation and an intensive-level architectural survey of the six existing residences at the site that would be demolished upon implementation of the proposed project. MEC reviewed all proposals and consulted with the client to choose the best firm to complete the study. MEC also reviewed the cultural resource consultant’s draft report and provided comments. The final conclusion by the consultant and the NJDEP was that no evidence of significant archaeological deposits was found at the site and the structure with the most potential to be of historic significance had been modified to the extent that it is not eligible for listing on the State or National Historic Register due to loss of integrity.
This re-development project also required various approvals from the City of Long Branch. To assist with the local approvals, MEC prepared an Environmental Impact Statement in accordance with the City’s requirements and testified at the Planning Board meetings.