Articles Land use and development
131 Morristown Road, Explained: From 119 to 125 Townhouses and a 4-3 Vote
How the proposal to replace an office complex on Route 202 with age-restricted townhouses changed over five Zoning Board hearings, what relief it needed, who spoke, and why a 4-3 vote did not approve it.
The short version
- Who and where: 131 Morristown Rd LLC (Sonny Adoni, Adoni Property Group) owns 131 Morristown Road (Route 202), Block 801, Lot 2, an office complex in the E-5 office zone.
- What it asked for: a use variance and a floor-area variance (both “d” variances), bulk variances and site plan approval to replace the offices with two-story townhouses for active adults.
- How it changed: 119 units at the first hearing, 131 (26 affordable) in July, and 125 after September.
- The outcome: on Oct. 28, 2026 the motion to approve drew four votes to three, one short of the five a “d” variance requires.
The relief sought
The Zoning Board of Adjustment hears applications for uses a zone does not allow. A use variance (“d(1)”) and a floor-area-ratio variance (“d(4)”) can be granted only by the affirmative vote of at least five Board members, under the Municipal Land Use Law. The application (ZB25-040) also sought bulk variances and preliminary and final site plan approval. Its attorney was Donna M. Jennings of Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer.
How the proposal changed
| Date | Hearing | What the record shows |
|---|---|---|
| Feb. 4, 2026 | Completeness | Deemed incomplete; two items to be addressed |
| Mar. 4, 2026 | Completeness | Deemed complete, 7-0; hearing set for Apr. 16 |
| Apr. 16, 2026 | Hearing 1 | Remove the office buildings; 119 two-story active-adult townhouses in 43 buildings; clubhouse, pickleball court, pool, spa and dog park; 479 parking spaces; more than 700 trees and 1,700 shrubs; impervious coverage cut by about 128,000 sq ft; wooded areas and wetlands not disturbed |
| May 14, 2026 | Hearing 2 | Built in phases, clubhouse first; all units for sale; 20% set aside as affordable |
| July 16, 2026 | Hearing 3 | 131 units, 105 market-rate and 26 affordable; one building and the dog park removed; the applicant offered a five-year bond in lieu of sidewalks on Route 202 |
| Sept. 17, 2026 | Hearing 4 | Straw poll: most members wanted garages for the affordable units and no more units per building; applicant to revise to 125 units |
| Oct. 28, 2026 | Hearing 5 (special meeting) | Revised plans; vote |
Affordable housing. At the first hearing Ms. Jennings said the township could accept a development fee instead of affordable units on site, and that the applicant would build the set-aside on site if the Board or the township required it. Board Attorney Steven K. Warner said the affordable-housing requirements would be reviewed before a decision. From May on, the plans included affordable units. NJ Hills reported that the 125-unit plan had 100 market-rate townhouses and 25 income-restricted units.
Why the owner wants to change the use. On July 16 the applicant’s broker, Jordan Sobel of Cushman & Wakefield, testified that the building’s shape makes it hard to lease to many small tenants. Mr. Adoni testified that he bought the building about four years ago and had tried for two years to lease it after a large tenant moved out.
Who spoke
The minutes name 10 different residents who questioned the applicant’s witnesses over the four hearings from April to September, among them residents of Morristown Road, Franklin Drive, Van Dorn Road and Dexter Drive North, and an attorney, Robert Wianecki, for the owner of 164 Morristown Road. On Apr. 16 seven residents asked about stormwater, wetlands permits, a traffic light, buffers, lighting, utilities, noise, parking, water and sewer, and the affordable-housing payment. In September, questions covered the site’s suitability, I-287 noise, the affordable share, density and whether offices or single-family homes would suit the site.
The vote
At the Oct. 28, 2026 special meeting, the township’s recording shows that the motion to grant all the relief received four votes for and three against. With fewer than five affirmative votes, the “d” variances were not granted; the applicant’s time for a decision had been extended to Oct. 31, 2026.
NJ Hills reported on Oct. 29, 2026:
| Vote | Members (as reported) |
|---|---|
| Yes | Vice Chair Beth Pochtar, Benjamin Lindeman, Susan Trapp, first alternate John Ladyzinski |
| No | Chair Lisamarie Baumann, Karl Kraus, Elizabeth Silver |
| Absent | Nancy D’Andrea |
The same report said the three members voting no were concerned that approving a large housing development on an office-zoned tract would amount to a rezoning, a decision they said was better left to the Planning Board and the Township Committee.
The township had not posted minutes of the Oct. 28 meeting as of Nov. 1, 2026. The outcome above is from the township’s recording and the roll call from NJ Hills; both will be checked against the minutes and the Board’s memorializing resolution once posted.
What is not known
- The Board’s written reasons, which will be in its memorializing resolution.
- Whether the applicant will appeal to the Superior Court or ask the Township Committee to rezone the site.
What residents can do
- The resolution. The Board adopts its memorializing resolution at a public meeting; agendas are posted on the township’s site.
- Any rezoning would come before the Township Committee as an ordinance, with Planning Board review and public hearings.
- The record. Plans, reports and hearing transcripts are in the township’s ZB25-040 application folder.