Borough would subdivide Fieldstone Ct. parcel Resident wants 2.5 acres to be used for a park BY LAYLI WHYTE Correspondent EATONTOWN - Months after the controversial topic of selling 2 acres of borough-owned property at the end of Fieldstone Court was first discussed by the Borough Council, Borough Engineer Robert Stetz presented four ways in which the property could be subdivided to get it ready for sale. Stetz's presentation took place at last week's Borough Council workshop meeting. According to Stetz, the goal of the proposed subdivision was to create lots of at least 20,000 square feet, the minimum buildable size in the R-20 zone where the property is located, and to minimize the number of variances that would be needed, while restricting the space in which a home could be built. In three of the possible layouts, the cul-de-sac at the end of Fieldstone Court would be extended in order to provide frontage on an improved street to each of the newly created smaller lots. The fourth option simply splits the property in half, with no improvements made to the property or the street. The first layout option Stetz presented to the council extended the cul-de-sac and split the property into two parcels. "There would be no variances with this option," he said, "but the building envelopes would be very, very large." Mayor Gerald Tarantolo said previously that he would like to see restrictions placed on the property that would limit the size of the building, including subdividing the land to provide small, but allowable, building envelopes. Stetz said that with the second layout, he attempted to create four lots on the triangular-shaped 2.5-acre property, but one of the four lots proved very difficult. "The areas in these four lots are between 24,000 square feet and 20,100 square feet, which is a permissible size on which to build a single-family home in this zone," he said, "but in this layout, three out of the four lots require variances." The third layout has the property divided into three lots and includes an extended cul-de-sac, as well as vacating a portion of the property to one of the adjacent property owners. "One lot would need a depth variance," Stetz said, "but otherwise all the lots are conforming and leave good-size building envelopes." Stetz said that there were several other ways the property could be divided, but that only these four made sense. "We want to discourage mega-mansions," said Mayor Gerald Tarantolo at the workshop meeting. "The three-lot layout probably achieves that, and we could create a right-of-way access to the trails behind the property." Although Tarantolo and some members of the council were satisfied with the options, mostly preferring the three-lot layout, some residents of Fieldstone Court were on hand to continue to voice their opposition to any plan for the property that would result in the borough selling the land. Jackie Arnone, a resident of Fieldstone Court, has been very vocal about opposing this proposal by Tarantolo, first suggested as an option by the mayor in April as a form of property tax relief. "I'd like to see a park back there," Arnone said at the meeting. "I don't want to see anything done there. It's not a flat parcel of land, and it's going to disturb a lot of trees, a lot of dirt, a lot of everything." Arnone was skeptical that any amount of preparation by the borough will stop the developer or developers who buy the property from building whatever they want. "You can parcel it off however you want," she said, "but somebody's going to come along and bring their case before the Planning Board, get whatever variances from them, and build huge houses that don't fit in with the neighborhood." As for Arnone's suggestion that the property be used as a public park, Tarantolo said that would bring about another set of problems. "Let's assume that we made this property a park," he said, "and that we took down some trees and put up a tot lot. Let's say we really advertise the park, and it becomes popular. I'd bet if the popularity of this property was such that it brought a lot of traffic down Fieldstone Court, the next comment I'd hear would be, 'Why'd you do this?' " Arnone disagreed with Tarantolo's assumptions, and said she believes the additional development of even three houses on the now-vacant property would be "an absolute nightmare." Councilwoman Joyce Englehart said that she continues to be fundamentally opposed to the project, saying that she did not believe that the one-time sale of the property would lead to any significant property tax relief for residents of the borough, but she asked Arnone to pick the layout to which she was least opposed. "It doesn't matter what I pick," Arnone replied. "Whatever developer gets the land will get variances, and I'll be back in front of the Zoning Board fighting for my neighborhood." Councilman Theodore Lewis said that he would want to see strict limitations in the deeds of the properties upon their sale, which would lay out size limitations for the footprints of the homes, and limit them to single-family homes. Once the borough has subdivided it and has completed the deed restrictions, the property will be put out for public auction, and Tarantolo said that last year, at the height of the real estate market, that property, as one undeveloped piece, was worth $250,000. Lewis said later during the regular council meeting that the entire argument may be moot, since a recent ban on new sewer connections by the Two Rivers Water Reclamation Authority may last for at least two years, prohibiting any new connection to the sewer line. "I suppose we could just get prepared to sell it," he said, "and wait until the sewer ban is lifted."