Investigation Of Vacant Lord Stirling Property Moves Forward In Bernards Township

BASKING RIDGE, NJ — The Planning Board got the green light from the Bernards Township Committee to study and analyze whether the long-abandoned, vacant, and vandalized Lord Stirling School property is in need of redevelopment.

Current zoning on the property at 99 Lord Stirling Road only allows for four to five residential homes to be built on the property. Jon Rocker, the new property owner, is looking to have the property rezoned to allow the possibility of building age-restricted housing, along with housing for those with special needs.

"The residences and associated improvements would be designed to blend seamlessly and gracefully with the scale and density of the surrounding neighborhoods and landscapes. The property would generate significant new ratables to help ease the overall tax burden on our residents while doing so with no impact on the school system and extremely minimal impact on existing traffic conditions," said Rocker, a 25-year Bernards Township resident. "Additionally, over 100 future affordable housing units would be credited and prevented during any future rounds of Fair Share mandates.”

The controversial resolution authorizes the Township Planning Board to undertake a preliminary investigation for the redevelopment of the property. It was passed with a three-to-two vote by the Township Committee at the Nov. 11 meeting.

Rocker told Patch that he deeply appreciates the Township Committee’s vote to refer the property to the Planning Board for further review.

"This begins what I hope will be a thoughtful and transparent process about how best to restore a neglected property that has stood in decline for a very long time. My goal is to work collaboratively with the Township, residents and professionals alike, to transform it into something we can all be proud of," stated Rocker.

Committeewomen Ana Duarte McCarthy and Jennifer Asay voted against the resolution while Mayor Janice Fields, Deputy Mayor Andrew McNally and Committeeman David Tancredi voted in favor of it.

"Each member of this committee has toured the site, spoken with the property owner, and seen firsthand the poor conditions of the property. There are a lot of rumors and misinformation circulating about this vote. What this vote means. So I want to be very clear. This resolution is not an endorsement of any project," said Fields. "It is simply the first step in gathering facts and allowing our planning board to make an informed recommendation about the property’s conditions and potential future use. Make no mistake, the property owner has shared some ideas for what he would like to do on the site, but the Township Committee has not committed to anything."

McNally said he had mixed feelings about the resolution, but felt compelled to vote in favor of the investigation due to the special needs housing aspect.

"The owner contemplates a special needs housing component that’s part of any would-be development, which is something I know is very important to many of our residents," said McNally. "This final element, the special needs housing, is what tips the scales for me in favor of sending it over to the planning board to study."

Tancredi agreed that the property "is in disrepair and in need of repurposing. The proposal has interesting aspects, such as it will provide housing for adults with disabilities and would be age-restricted."

McCarthy asked that the Committee take a step back and take more time to look at the property to make sure it would be in alignment with the Master Plan.

"This approach would give us more data on whether classifying any of these lots, including, among others, those in this resolution which are currently zoned as R2 or two-acre housing, as areas in need of redevelopment," said McCarthy.

She added that, unlike "meeting our affordable housing obligation, we are not time-bound. For this reason, I am going to vote no on this resolution."

Asay made allegations at the meeting that there was no communication to her about this resolution. Fields countered Asay by claiming she called her while she was on vacation and left a voicemail. Asay denied Fields claims, while Fields offered to share her call log.

Asay ultimately voted no on the resolution.

"I've shared with Mr. Rocker that his concept would have merit, particularly in the areas of age-restricted housing and housing for adults with IDD," said Asay. "But it's important that we first take the necessary planning and engagement steps. And regarding this specific parcel, I’m not even certain that a formal area in need of redevelopment designation is the most appropriate tool."

Rocker said he recognized that members of the community may have differing views on his project and welcomes residents to communicate with him on the project.

"My approach has always been rooted in transparency and collaboration and I truly believe that the best ideas come from listening to one another. I want this effort to be shaped not only by myself and my team but also by anyone who calls Bernards home," stated Rocker. "My hope is to restore and embellish this property in a way that benefits not only future residents but also our entire community, creating a space that reflects our shared values, compassion, and pride in Bernards Township."

• Previous Reporting: Abandoned, Vacant 'Eye Sore' Lord Stirling Property Seeks Bernards Township Help

Have a news tip? Email alexis.tarrazi@patch.com.