Page 6 THE VILLADOM TIMES IV • August 31, 2011 Mahwah Officials set special session to rescind rezoning plans by Frank J. McMahon At a special meeting on Sept. 1, the Mahwah Council is expected to adopt Ordinance 1698, which would rescind the three ordinances that rezoned the International Crossroads property from office park use to a retail mall use. Last week, the township’s planning board reviewed Ordinance 1698, which was introduced by the council on Aug. 11, and found it consistent with the township’s master plan. Council President John Roth advised that all the other statutory timelines for publication of notices and for notifying the adjacent property owners and municipalities about the ordinance had been completed on time to permit the council to consider adopting the ordinance at the special meeting. At the planning board meeting, board member/Mayor John DaPuzzo moved to send a letter to the township council indicating the board’s findings. DaPuzzo’s motion was passed by a unanimous vote of the board. Joseph Layton of Mazer Consulting, the township’s professional planner, pointed out that the planning board previously found that the rezoning ordinance adopted on March 31 was inconsistent with the township’s master plan. “Since the prior ordinance was inconsistent with the master plan, Ordinance 1698 is now consistent with the master plan,” Layton said. Layton also explained that, in the 1989 mater plan, the Crossroads property was zoned for office park use. That master plan recommended that there be no deviation from that zoning. More than 75 people attended the planning board’s meeting to urge the board to recommend that the ordi- nance to rescind the ordinances that rezoned the Crossroads property be adopted. Peter Scandariato, the planning board’s attorney, explained that the planning board does not have the authority to recommend the adoption of the ordinance to the council because only the council can enact or rescind an ordinance. He explained that, according to the state’s municipal land use law, the planning board’s responsibility is to look at the ordinance and the township’s master plan and make a determination as to whether the ordinance is consistent with that master plan for the development of the township. If the planning board finds an ordinance consistent with the master plan, the ordinance can be adopted by a simple majority of the council, Scandariato said. If an ordinance is found to be inconsistent with the master plan, a majority of the full council, or four affirmative votes, would be required to adopt the ordinance. Assuming that Crossroads Developers LLC, the owner and potential developer of the Crossroads property, does not submit a site plan that is deemed complete prior to the adoption of this ordinance, and if the council ultimately adopts Ordinance 1698, the zoning of the property would revert to its previous zoning designation. The previous designation was for office buildings and uses such as research laboratories, medical arts buildings, banks, non-fast food restaurants, and hotels, with retail permitted only as an accessory use. However, if plans are submitted prior to the adoption of this ordinance, and those plans are considered to be complete and in compliance with the township’s requirements for a site plan application, the mixed retail, office space, hotel, theater, and recreational use zoning that was approved by the adoption of the rezoning ordinances on March 31 will be the zoning against which the planning board would have to review the site plan. Regardless of the actions by the council or the developer, a referendum will be on the November election ballot. The township’s registered voters will have an opportunity to voice their opinion on the zoning of the Crossroads property, and the council will then be able to consider whether to reintroduce the rezoning ordinances. Ordinance 1698 could also result in litigation inasmuch as Andrew Kohut, an attorney for Wells, Jaworski & Liebman LLP, the law firm representing Crossroads Developers LLC, has notified Township Attorney John Conte that he believes the ordinance is in violation of numerous state statutes including one concerning the procedure for the passage of an ordinance, and the state’s open public meetings act. Kohut has retained his client’s right to contest the proposed ordinance or the manner in which it was adopted. The issue of the rezoning of the Crossroads property has been controversial. More than 400 residents attended the council’s March 31 meeting, and most of those in attendance voiced their opposition to the adoption of the three ordinances intended to rezone the Crossroads property for retail. The council, however, voted 4-2 to adopt the ordinances, and Mayor DaPuzzo signed the ordinances into law. At the March meeting, the council also voted not to hold a referendum on the rezoning issue. That vote was recorded in the minutes as a 3-3 tie, which defeated the motion to hold a referendum on the question. The minutes of that meeting were subsequently amended, however, to show that Councilman Samuel Alderisio voted against the referendum and not for it as originally recorded, and, therefore, the vote against a referendum was 4-2. A group of residents then formed the Committee to Stop the Mahwah Mall and collected 2,220 signatures on a petition calling for a non-binding referendum on the November ballot. That action motivated all the council members except Alderisio to subsequently vote to hold the referendum and to introduce the ordinance to rescind the three ordinances to rezone the subject property.