Raising lot size may not be the answer

Mark Covitz, in his letter (Feb. 17 Examiner) regarding development in Upper Freehold, appears to take issue with and disparage everything being done to find a balance between the large farmer landowners and the small residential landowners.

Mr. Covitz contends that “small landowners have been supporting the large landowner/developers’ way of life via farmland assessment taxes. Proportionately, these large landowner/developers pay a much lower tax rate on their farmland than the small landowner does.”

And then he poses the question, “Why should the small landowner get stuck with all of the problems created by an overabundance of major subdivisions?”

Wow. Where did that come from?

According to the Monmouth County 2003 Development Activity Summary, which delineates residential growth rates, Upper Freehold is far behind other municipalities in Monmouth County when it comes to the rate of residential development.

Much of the credit for this belongs to our town fathers, who, over the years, maintained the delicate balance between zoning and growth and large landowners who dedicated their lands to open space and farm preservation..

Sure, it’s easy today to support larger and larger minimum acreage sites. It seems like a no-brainer to assume that the larger the acreage requirement the lower the rate of growth. What is not obvious is that farmland is an investment little different from the IRAs and 401(k)s that many of us have. When the farmer feels threatened that the value of his land will decrease, he is more inclined to sell to a developer who will gladly give him his price. The key, therefore, is to allow the farmer to feel comfortable while modifying the township master plan to account for new and changing pressures that the need for more housing brings.

Much is made of the previous planner’s recommendation that the entire township be immediately rezoned to 6-acre minimum for residential lots. Mr. Covitz suggests that this would be a way for the large landowners to say “thanks, small landowner, for supporting me all these years.”

What Mr. Covitz does not say to the large landowner is, “Too bad, large landowner, that this may strip you of a good chunk of your equity and cast doubt on any retirement plans you may have had.”

I am a retired professional, and partially out of self-interest, I am moved to be sensitive to the position of the farmer in Upper Freehold. If a farmer keeps his land in farming, that acreage is not available for development. It is good policy, therefore, to seriously consider the effect zoning changes will have on increasing the amount of land available for residential development. Our neighbor, Millstone Township, upped its zoning to 10 acres per residential lot. According to the Monmouth County Development Summary, Millstone is experiencing more residential development than any other town in the county. Mindlessly raising lot size throughout our township is not the answer.

The answer lies in working with all affected landowners in the township to develop a comprehensive plan to determine what lot sizes are appropriate where. We know that residential growth cannot be legislated out of existence, so it is in our best interest to move quickly to set a course for the future that will control this growth.

A new planner has just been brought on board who has vast experience in dealing with townships like Upper Freehold, having worked with similar municipalities in Burlington County.

It is a difficult task trying to accommodate all competing interests, but the township has a good record of success and will continue to do so under the leadership of the Township Committee and Planning Board.

Meanwhile, Mr. Covitz would do well to join those who are working so diligently to find an effective solution to our zoning dilemma instead of spending valuable time carping at, and denigrating, those whose efforts attempt to bring stability and control to the growth that we may experience in years to come.

Gerald Nathanson

Upper Freehold Township