2012 development activity report

7/27/2019 2012 Development Activity Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2012-development-activity-report 1/17



On the Cover

D

epicted on the cover is the rst phase of theSpeedwell Avenue redevelopment proj-ect. The rst phase of this project includesthe construction of a 268 unit four story

apartment building (Latitude) above a 357 spaceparking garage. The parking garage consists oftwo levels below grade. The unit compositionof Latitude will consist of 36 studio, 121 one-bedroom, 57 one-bedroom with a den, 50 two-bedroom and 4 duplex units. Of the 268 units,26 apartments will be affordable rental units.

Phase I of the Speedwell Avenue redevelopmentproject is being constructed on an assemblage oflots that formerly contained multi-family homes,a municipal parking lot, and the Morristown DPW

garage. Phase II and III of the project propose toredevelop the remainder of the block (east of therealigned Prospect Street to Speedwell Avenue)with three additional apartment buildings. Thecurrent plans proposed mixed use with retail orcommercial uses on the rst oor for the build-ings with frontage on Speedwell Avenue. The Lati-tude building is the largest building proposed forPhases I, II and III of the redevelopment project.

Latitude reects the current trend for luxury rentalswith amenities in redevelopment projects for mul-

tifamily housing. The Latitude building offers suchamenities as a rooftop resort style deck, tness cen-ter, game room, lounge with replace, business cen-ter with computer stations, garage parking and up-scale interior treatments, and is pet friendly. Masstransportation options are also within walking dis-tance from Latitude as well as shopping, dining andnightlife opportunities. The rental housing marketis driven by young professionals and empty nesterswho prefer these amenities and proximity of tran-sit, restaurants, entertainment, services and stores.

The multifamily housing market is increasing. In aninformal survey, the Morris County Planning Boardidentied 23 multi-family rental projects in variousdevelopment stages throughout the county. A to-tal of 6,434 residential units would be generated bythe build-out of these projects. With the soft ofceand industrial real estate market and limited avail-ability of vacant developable land, most of theseprojects are proposed on sites that were zoned for,and/or developed as, commercial or industrial use.

While demand for multi-family rental housing iscurrently high, municipalities and the develop-ment community should monitor supply and de-mand so that the market in Morris County is not

oversaturated. While upscale multi-family rentalhousing is viewed as a “clean ratable” by most mu-nicipalities, the density and design of this type ofresidential housing is best suited for locations inclose proximity to transit, services and shopping



2013

Board of Chosen FreeholdersThomas J. Mastrangelo, Director

David Scapicchio, Deputy Director

Douglas R. Cabana

John Cesaro Ann F. Grossi

John Krickus

Hank Lyon

Administration John Bonanni, County Administrator

Mary Jo Buchanan, Assistant County Administrator

Department of Planning & Development

Deena Leary, P.P., A.I.C.P., Director

Planning Board Joseph Falkoski, Chairman

Steve Rattner, Vice-Chairman

Isobell W. Olcott, Secretary

Ted Eppel

Ann. F. Grossi, Freeholder

Stephen Hammond, P.E., County Engineer

Thomas J. Mastrangelo, Freeholder Director

Edward McCarthy

Everton Scott John Cesaro, Freeholder Alternate

Stephen Jones, Alternate No.1

Nita Galate, Alternate No.2

Christine Marion, P.P., A.I.C.P., Planning Director

W. Randall Bush, Esq., Attorney, First Assistant Morris County Counsel

Land Development Review StaffGregory Perry, P.P., Supervising Planner

Joseph Barilla, P.P., A.I.C.P., Principal Planner

Rene Axelrod, Data Control Clerk

Graphics and LayoutGene Cass, Supervising Cartographer

Carol Morgan, Principal Drafting Technician



Table of Contents

Page

Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1

Development Data........................................................................................................................... 2

Development Trends ...................................................................................................................... 2

Single Family Housing Subdivisions ....................................................................................2

Attached and Multi-Family Housing Site Plans ..................................................................3

Commercial, Industrial and Ofce Site Plans ......................................................................4

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................ 5

Charts

Chart A: Number of New Residential Building Lots from

New Preliminary Major Subdivision Plats, 2003-2012...............................................3

Chart B: Number of Single Family Building Lots from Final Subdivision Plats

Recorded at the Morris County Clerk’s Ofce, 2003-2012 ........................................3

Chart C: Townhouses & Multi-Family Units from New Site

Plans Reviewed, 2003-2012 ............................................................................................3

Chart D: New Site Plans Reviewed, 2003-2012 ...........................................................................4

Chart E: Amount of New Floor Area from New Non-Residential

Site Plans Reviewed, 2003-2012 .....................................................................................4



Page

Tables

Table I: 2012 Number of Plats Reviewed .....................................................................................6

Table II: 2012 New Submissions....................................................................................................7

Table III: 2012 Revised Submissions.............................................................................................8

Table IV: 2008-2012 Number of Single Family House Lots from Final Subdivision Plats ....9

Table V: 2012 Preliminary Major Single Family Residential Subdivisions Plats .................10

Table VI: 2012 Proposed Townhouse & Multi-Family Site Plans of 20 Units or More .......11

Table VII: 2012 Commercial, Industrial and Ofce Site Plans with50,000 Square Feet or More of New Floor Area .....................................................12



1

T

he New Jersey County Planning Act providesfor the review and approval of many typesof development applications by the CountyPlanning Board. Most development applica-

tions that come before municipal planning boardsand boards of adjustment in Morris County areforwarded to the County for review. All subdivi-sion applications must be submitted to the Countyfor review and approval. In Morris County, minorsubdivisions, which do not front on County roads,are deemed exempt from formal review if it is de-termined they will not adversely affect Countydrainage structures. In addition, all site plans whichfront on County roads and/or have impervious ar-eas of one acre or more must be submitted to the

County for review and approval. Site plans of lessthan one acre of impervious area are deemed ex-empt from formal review if they do not front on aCounty road or affect County drainage structures.

The Land Development Review Section of theMorris County Department of Planning & De-velopment is responsible for reviewing all devel-opment applications, which consist of subdivi-sion plans and site plans submitted to the MorrisCounty Planning Board for approval. The LandDevelopment Review Committee meets monthly

to review the development applications processedby the staff. At each regularly scheduled monthlyCounty Planning Board meeting, the full CountyPlanning Board votes on the “Report of ActionsTaken on Development Plans”, which containsthe recommendations of the Committee, as wellas a complete summary of all development ac-tivity processed through the ofce each month.

Sketch

A sketch represents a conceptual layout of a sub-

division or site plan. Submission of sketcheswhile not required by all municipalities, are help-ful to the County review process by providing apreview of formal plans that are likely to be sub -mitted in the future. They also provide an op-portunity for possible design changes to be sug-gested before detailed engineering is undertaken

Site Plan

A site plan is the construction drawing for thedevelopment and improvement of one lot or

parcel, usually for single uses as ofce, retailstore or higher intensity residential. Most rede-velopment projects are reviewed as site plans

Minor Subdivision Plat

A minor subdivision plat is generally denedas having no more than three lots which doesnot require an extension of municipal facilitiessuch as roads, public water or sewer services

Preliminary Major Subdivision Plat

A preliminary plat is a set of detailed drawingsshowing lot lines, road alignments, dimensionscontours, drainage systems, water lines, sanitarysewers and other details as applicable. Approvalof the preliminary plat is a prelude to construction

Final Subdivision Plat

A nal plat follows the preliminary plat approval

and becomes a legal record of the major subdivi-sion. It is a map of the subdivision which showsthe exact dimension and direction of each lot lineThe approved nal plat is led at the Ofce ofthe County Clerk where it remains a permanentlegal record. The lots can be sold after recording

Introduction



2

A

A combined total of 233 subdivision platsand site plans (including revisions) weresubmitted to the Morris County Planning

Board for review in 2012. Section II of thisreport contains Tables I through VII, which pres-ent specic development information for Mor-ris County’s 39 municipalities. The observationsand comments offered in Section I make frequentreference to the tables of Section II. Of those ap-plications submitted, the Morris County Plan-ning Board reviewed and issued reports on 152applications. Another 81 applications were ex-empt from formal County review and approval.Table I (Section II) provides a breakdown by mu-nicipality of the subdivision and site plans re-

viewed by the Morris County Planning Board.

Regarding subdivision applications submitted in2012, the County Planning Board reviewed 15 pre-liminary plats and 12 nal plats (including revi-sions) in 2012. The number of minor subdivisions(including revisions) totaled 15 for 2012. Theseminor subdivisions included residential, institu-tional, commercial and industrial uses, lot linechanges and open space preservation parcels. Six-teen (16) minor subdivisions not affecting Countyroads or County drainage facilities were deemed

exempt from formal review. By contrast in 2011, 20minor subdivisions were reviewed and 30 minorsubdivisions were exempted from formal review.

In 2012, the County Planning Board reviewed110 site plans (including revisions). These proj-ects either front along County roads or consistof at least one acre of new impervious surface.Site plans for projects not fronting along Countyroads that do not meet the one acre of new im-pervious surface criteria or affect County bridgesor drainage structures are deemed exempt from

formal review. The County Planning Board re-ceived 51 site plans that were exempt from review.

A signicant portion of the development appli-cations submitted to the Morris County PlanningBoard consists of submissions of revised drawingsin response to municipal and county reviews. Of-ten, development applications continue into thefollowing year. Table III (Section II) provides infor-mation on those development applications contin-ued from prior calendar years. Those development

applications are only counted as new subdivisionplats and site plans in the year they were rstsubmitted to the Morris County Planning Board.

By counting both new and revised developmentapplications, trends in development activity can bebetter determined. The strength of the economy canbe directly correlated to the number of submissions.Generally, when the economy is in an upswing, thereis an increase in submissions. In addition, as a pre-cursor to an upswing in the economy, there is alsoan increase in the number of revised submissions.

Table III (Section II) shows nine (9) revised prelim-inary subdivision plats (residential and non-resi-dential) totaling 56 building lots were resubmitted

from previous calendar years. Seven (7) revisedresidential site plans totaling 1,988 units were re-submitted in 2012. In addition, 37 revised site plansfor non-residential development totaling 1,149,309square feet of oor area were resubmitted in 2012.The number of revised submissions was slightlylower in each category in 2012 as compared to 2011.

DEVELOPMENT TRENDS

Single Family Housing Subdivisions

Residential activity remained stagnant for 2012.New development activity for the year is pre-sented in Table II (Section II). The County Plan-ning Board received three new preliminary sub-division plats for twelve (12) lots compared tove (5) new preliminary plats for 27 lots submit-ted in 2011. This low number of new preliminarysubdivision plats is primarily due to the ongo-

ing recession along with the scarcity of develop-able property and is clearly depicted in Chart A.

Development Data



3

Chart A

Table IV (Section II) provides a ve-year recordof nal plats recorded for each municipality. Dur-ing 2012, 336 lots were led at the Ofce of theCounty Clerk, a 473% increase from the number oflots recorded in 2011. This is depicted in Chart B.

Chart B

The increase in recordings is an anomaly due toa 276 lot subdivision (Morris Chase) in Mt. Ol-ive. Without the Mt. Olive project, there wouldhave been only sixty (60) lots recorded from major subdivisions. These other projects were smallresidential subdivisions consisting of three to25 lots that occurred as inll development in es-tablished neighborhoods in ve municipalities.

Table V (Section II) lists the preliminary residen-tial subdivisions reviewed in 2012. The “Fox Run”subdivision in Parsippany contributed the largestnumber of lots (11). Boonton Township, ChathamTownship, and Florham Park Borough each con-tributed a seven lot subdivision. Due to the scarcityof land large enough to support tract development,it is anticipated that the number of lots created byminor subdivisions will surpass the number gen-erated by major subdivisions in the near future.

Attached and Multi-Family Housing Site Plans

Eleven site plans for apartments, townhouses, andage-restricted adult housing were submitted to theCounty Planning Board for review in 2012. Table II(Section II) shows that six new residential site plansfor 277 dwelling units were submitted during 2012compared to six new residential site plans for 895

dwelling units submitted in 2011. While the numberof units decreased from 2011 to 2012, the number ofunits will be substantially larger in 2013 based on thesubmittals received to date. Chart C depicts the tenyears of historical data on the amount of units con-tained in the new multi-family site plan submittals

1,121

755

934

1,345

388 427

243 298

895

274

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Townhouses & Multi-Famil y Units from New Site

Plans Reviewed b y the MCPB, 2003 through

2012

Chart C

Of the six new residential site plans reviewed

by the Morris County Planning Board, only one(Speedwell Avenue Redevelopment, Phase II))was a sizeable project containing 100 or more unitsHowever, there were three resubmitted projectswith a combined total of 1,466 units. Two projectsare located in the Township of Rockaway (MorrisCommons, Pondview Estates) and one is located inthe Borough of Florham Park (Sun Valley Plaza)

The Speedwell Avenue Phase One redevelopmentproject will contain 268 apartment units. The proj-ect, marketed as “Latitude”, is being constructed

on an assemblage of lots that formerly containedmulti-family homes, a municipal parking lot, andthe Morristown Department of Public Works ga-rage. At full build-out, the Speedwell Avenue re-development project would include 650 residen-tial units and 85,000 square feet of retail space

The number of applications proposing age-restrict-ed adult (55 and older) housing has declined sig-nicantly from previous years. The Morris County



4

Planning Board received one assisted living andskilled nursing facility project in 2012. The MerryHeart project in Rockaway Twp proposes 102 as-sisted living residences and a 125 bed skilled nurs-ing facility. The previous plan for this site pro-posed 81 age-restricted units in three buildings.

As stated in the description of the Latitude de-velopment in Morristown, current consumer

trends favor rental units more than condo/own-ership units in multi-family buildings. The Coun-ty Planning Board expects continued growth inthis market due to the continued fallout from thehousing mortgage crisis and scarcity of develop-able land for major single-family subdivisions.Redevelopment of vacant and underutilized non-residential properties and older housing stockinto multifamily housing is a trend that willcontinue to increase as the economy recovers.

Commercial, Industrial, and Office Site Plans

Non-residential site plans submitted to the Mor-ris County Planning Board can range from smallbuilding additions with a minimal amount ofnew oor area to new ofce buildings, regionalretail facilities, and industrial warehouses withseveral hundred thousand square feet or more ofoor area. Industrial site plans, as a rule, providelarger buildings than do commercial or ofce, es-pecially those that include warehouse facilities.

Chart D

As is shown in Chart D and Table II Section II, theMorris County Planning Board received 60 new non-residential site plans in 2012. This level remainedvirtually unchanged from 2011 (59 new non-residen-tial site plans were submitted in 2011). The amountof oor area from new non-residential site plans

(Table II Section II) in 2012 is 1,233,413 square feet.The amount of new oor area from non-residentialsite plans increased by approximately 350% fromthe level recorded in 2011 as depicted in Chart E .

3.14 2.92

2.24

1.761.54

1.371.20

1.63

0.38

1.20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Amount of New Floor Area from New

Non-Residential Site Plans Reviewed,

MCPB, 2003 through 2012

Chart E

Table VII (Section II) provides a list of the moresignicant site plans of non-residential develop-ment with new oor area. Only site plans of 50,000square feet and greater are included in Table VII.The 67 Whippany Investors project (a.k.a. Bayer)contributed the largest amount of square foot-age, 883,130 square feet. The current economy andrelatively high vacancy rate has continued to limitthe number of projects greater than 50,000 sq. ft.

Notably, all of the projects listed in Table VII areredevelopment sites or an expansion of existingfacilities. Due to the scarcity of developable landit is anticipated that redevelopment of existingcommercial/industrial sites will far outnumbernew non-residential development on green elds.Future growth in this sector will depend on -nancial markets recovering to fund new projects;the availability of developable and redevelopableproperty; and, more importantly, a reduction inthe supply of vacant ofce and industrial space.

Morris County leads the northern New Jersey of-ce market with 29,180,112 square feet of ofcespace (Cushman & Wakeeld, Marketbeat Of-

ce Snapshot, Northern New Jersey, Q4 2012).For 2012, the overall vacancy rate for ofce spaceuctuated between 22.7% and approximately23.8%. Between 2011 and 2012 the vacancy ratefor all classes of ofce space decreased by .8%.

Morris County ranks sixth in total square feet ofindustrial space in the northern and central New Jersey industrial markets with 42,889,321 squarefeet of industrial space (Cushman & Wakeeld,Marketbeat Industrial Snapshot, Northern New



5

Jersey, Q4 2012). The overall vacancy rate for in-dustrial space was 13.4%. Out of the 10 countiesin the market area, Morris County continues tohave the highest vacancy rate of industrial space.

As stated in the 2011 Development Activity Re-port, given the highly educated workforce resid-ing in Morris County and global competition,the likelihood of traditional manufacturing and

industrial uses reoccupying all the vacant in-dustrial space is unlikely. The current trend toconvert former industrial properties into a non-industrial use (retail, commercial, multi-familyhousing etc.) will most likely continue. The lossof industrial properties is not unique to Mor-ris County, which reects the national loss of themanufacturing sector. The location and desirabil-ity of Morris County have enabled the success-ful redevelopment of these sites into other uses.

The redevelopment of the East Hanover Avenuecorridor continues to progress. Construction has

begun on both the Blanchard Securities site andthe Hanover and Horsehill site. During this reportpreparation, the County Planning Board receivedredevelopment plans for the Berlex site, whichincludes a 130,000 square foot Lowes home im-provement store, Quick Chek convenience storewith vehicle fueling and an 11,000 square footretail building. Reporting early 2013, the CountyPlanning Board also received two site plan ap-plications for redeveloping commercial proper-ties on the Morris Township side of East HanoverAvenue. Details on these plans will be provid-

ed in the 2013 Development Activity Report.

Construction has also begun on the former Alca-tel/Lucent site (now Bayer). As was stated in the2011 report, phase one and two will redevelop 94acres of the site with 845,000 square feet of ofcespace, parking areas and related site improve-ments for Bayer Healthcare, which is consolidat-ing its East Coast operations. At this time, thereare no plans for the remaining 100 acres of the site.

The Honeywell campus redevelopment in theTownship of Morris has been mentioned in theannual report since 2010. The Township of Mor-ris amended its master plan and zoning ordinancein 2012 as requested by Honeywell. In Decem-ber of 2012, the County Planning Board receivedthe rst phase of the project for the demolition ofbuildings and consolidation of Honeywell opera-tions within the remaining refurbished buildingson site. Honeywell has abandoned its plans fordeveloping its headquarters at the Morris Town-ship campus and is moving to the former Pzer/

Johnson & Johnson facilities that were constructedbut never completed and occupied in the Boroughof Morris Plains. The rezoning of the Honeywelsite in Morris Township is currently in litigation

CONCLUSION

Due to the slow economic recovery, developmentlevels remained low in 2012. The development lev-els shown in the tables in Section II were similarto those recorded in 2011 with the exception of theBayer project and the Morris Chase subdivisionThe new submittals of larger projects in 2012 indi-cate that the lending markets are starting to open upto provide the needed capital to spur development

Although it will take a few years for the con-struction industry to recover from the Great Re-cession, there are signs that the recovery processhas begun. During the preparation of this report,

County Planning Board staff began to notice anincrease in the number of submissions. Duringthe rst ve months of 2013, submissions haveincreased by 56% as compared to the amount re-ceived during the same time in 2012. Severalarge scale projects were submitted (multi-familyhousing, big box retail, auto dealership, commer-cial, light industrial, etc), and several more are onthe horizon and expected to be submitted by thefall of 2013. These projects will create both shortterm and long term jobs and help expand the rat-able bases for the municipalities and the County

As stated in the cover story, there are approximately6,500 multifamily units either proposed, approvedand/or under construction. County PlanningBoard staff believes that the proposed multifamilydevelopment will further spur development andredevelopment of both residential and nonresiden-tial sites throughout the county. Redevelopment ofvacant and underutilized nonresidential propertiesand older housing stock into multifamily housingis a trend that will continue as the economy contin-ues to strengthen and the market demand increases



6

Table I2012 Number of Plats Reviewed, Morris County Planning Board

New/Revised/Total

MunicipalityPreliminary

Major SubdivisionFinal Subdivision

MinorSubdivision

Site Plan

Boonton - - - 1/2/3

Boonton Twp. 0/1/1 0/1/1 - -

Butler - - - 0/1/1

Chatham - - - 0/1/1

Chatham Twp. 0/1/1 0/1/1 2/1/3 2/0/2

Chester - - - 3/2/5

Chester Twp. - - - -

Denville 0/1/1 - - -

Dover - - - 4/0/4

East Hanover - - - 1/1/2Florham Park 1/1/2 - 1/0/1 4/4/8

Hanover - - 1/1/2 5/4/9

Harding 1/1/2 1/0/1 - 1/0/1

Jefferson - - - -

Kinnelon - - - 2/2/4

Lincoln Park - - - 1/0/1Long Hill - - 1/0/1 5/1/6

Madison - - - -

Mendham - - - 1/2/3

Mendham Twp. 0/1/1 0/1/1 - -

Mine Hill 0/1/1 1/0/1 - 1/0/1

Montville - - - 5/6/11

Morris Twp. - - 1/1/2 2/0/2

Morris Plains - - - -

Morristown 1/1/2 1/1/2 - 1/1/2

Mountain Lakes - - - -

Mt. Arlington - - - -

Mt. Olive - 0/1/1 - 1/0/1

Netcong 1/1/2 1/0/1 - -

Par-Troy 0/1/1 1/0/1 1/0/1 6/4/10

Pequannock - - 1/1/2 1/0/1

Randolph - - - 7/3/10

Riverdale - - - 1/0/1

Rockaway - - - -

Rockaway Twp. 1/0/1 1/0/1 - 6/6/12Roxbury - 0/1/1 2/1/3 3/2/5

Victory Gardens - - - -Washington - - - 1/0/1

Wharton - - - 1/2/3

Total 5/10/15 6/6/12 10/5/15 66/44/110

New Submissions = 87Revised Submissions = 65 Total Submissions = 152

In addition, 81 minor subdivision plats and site plans not fronting on County Roads were reviewed and exempted.



7

MunicipalitySubdivisions (1)

Residential

(Plats/Lots)

Subdivisions (1)Non-Residential

(Plats/Lots)

Site PlansResidential

(Plans/Units)

Site Plans (2)Non Residential

(Plans/Sq.Ft.)

Boonton - - - 1/1,058

Boonton Twp. - - - -

Butler - - - -

Chatham - - - -

Chatham Twp. - - - 2/0

Chester - - - 3/7,136


Denville - - - -

Dover - - 2/6 2/0

East Hanover - - - 1/3,272

Florham Park 1/7 - - 4/30,044Hanover - - - 5/905,932

Harding - 1/4 - 1/320

Jefferson - - - -

Kinnelon - - - 2/10,000

Lincoln Park - - - -

Long Hill - - - 5/13,016

Madison - - - 1/0

Mendham - - 1/0 -

Mendham Twp. - - - -

Mine Hill - - 1/3 -

Montville - - - 5/12,000Morris Twp. - - - 2/21,396

Morris Plains - - - -

Morristown 1/3 - 1/268 -



Mt. Olive - - - 1/0

Netcong - 1/3 - -

Par-Troy - - - 6/8,531

Pequannock - - - 1/123,882

Randolph - - - 7/66,587

Riverdale- - -

1/7,168Rockaway - - - -

Rockaway Twp. 1/2 - 1/0 5/17,786

Roxbury - - - 3/5,285

Victory Gardens - - - -

Washington - - - 1/0

Wharton - - - 1/0

Total 3/12 2/7 6/277 60/1,233,413

Table II2012 New Submissions, Morris County Planning Board

(1) Major subdivisions (Preliminary Plats) (2) Includes some site plans for building additions or renovations where no new oor area is being added.



8

MunicipalitySubdivisions (2)

Residential(Plats/Lots)

Subdivisions (2)Non-Residential

(Plats/Lots)

Site PlansResidential

(Plans/Units)

Site Plans (3)Non Residential

(Plans/Sq.Ft.)

Boonton - - - 2/1,566

Boonton Twp. 1/7 - - -

Butler - - - 1/5,190

Chatham - - - 1/0

Chatham Twp. 1/7 - - -

Chester - - - 2/7,136


Denville 1/4 - - -

Dover - - - -

East Hanover - - - 1/3,272

Florham Park 1/7 - 1/116 3/23,417

Hanover - - - 4/985,828Harding 1/5 - - -

Jefferson - - - -

Kinnelon - - - 2/14,000

Lincoln Park - - - -

Long Hill - - - 1/12,600

Madison - - - -

Mendham - - 1/0 1/7,916

Mendham Twp. 1/5 - - -

Mine Hill - 1/4 - -

Montville - - 1/6 5/8,050

Morris Twp. - - - -Morris Plains - - - -

Morristown 1/3 - 1/268 -



Mt. Olive - - - -

Netcong 1/7 - - -

Par-Troy 1/11 - - 4/5,742

Pequannock - - - -

Randolph - - - 3/63,300

Riverdale - - - -

Rockaway - - - -Rockaway Twp. - - 2/1,350 4/11,292

Roxbury - - - 2/0

Victory Gardens - - - -

Washington - - - -

Wharton - - 1/248 1/0

Total 9/56 1/4 7/1,988 37/1,149,309

Table III2012, Revised Submissions (1), Morris County Planning Board

(1) Each development continued from prior calendar year(s).(2) Major subdivisions (Preliminary Plats) (3) Includes some site plans for building additions or renovations where no new oor area is being added.



9

Table IV2008-2012 Number of Single Family House Lots from Final Subdivision Plats

Recorded at the Ofce of the Morris County Clerk

Municipality 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 5 Year Total

Boonton - 7 2 - - 9

Boonton Twp. - - 1 2 - 3

Butler 8 3 - - - 11

Chatham - - - - - -

Chatham Twp. - - - - 7 7

Chester - - - - - -

Chester Twp. - - - - - -

Denville 10 3 - 29 - 42

Dover - - - - - -

East Hanover - - - - - -

Florham Park - - - - - -Hanover 1 5 3 23 - 32

Harding 4 - 13 - 9 26

Jefferson - - - - - -

Kinnelon - - - - - -

Lincoln Park - - - - - -

Long Hill - 6 - - - 6

Madison 4 - - - - 4

Mendham - - - - - -

Mendham Twp. 2 - 3 - 3 8

Mine Hill - - - - - -

Montville 2 7 6 - - 15

Morris Twp. 3 - 4 - - 7

Morris Plains - - - - - -

Morristown - - - - - -

Mountain Lakes 4 - - - - 4

Mt. Arlington 11 - - - - 11

Mt. Olive 56 - - - 276 332

Netcong - - - - - -

Par-Troy - 2 7 - 16 25

Pequannock - - 3 - - 3

Randolph - - - 17 25 42Riverdale - - - - - -

Rockaway - - - - - -

Rockaway Twp. - - - - - -

Roxbury - - - - - -

Victory Gardens - - - - - -

Washington - - - - - -

Wharton - - - - - -

Total 105 33 42 71 336 587



10

Table V2012 Preliminary Major Single Family Residential Subdivisions Plats

Reviewed by Morris County Planning Board

Municipality Development Name Location Number of Lots

Boonton Twp. Koehler Pond (2) Split Rock Road 7

Chatham Twp. High Gate at Chatham (2) Long View Avenue 7

Denville Glenmount Commons (2) Casterline Road 4

Florham Park Heights at Florham Park (1)(2) Columbia Turnpike 7

Harding Fawn Hill (2) Spring Valley Road 5

Mendham Twp. Wilmerding Trust (2) Roxiticus Road 5

Netcong Progressive Properties (2) Railroad Avenue 7

Parsippany Fox Run (2) Fox Hill Road 11

Total 53

(1) New Submissions

(2) Revised Submissions



11

Table VI2012 Proposed Townhouse & Multi-Family Site Plans of 20 Units or More


Municipality Development Name LocationNumberof Units

Florham Park Sun Valley Plaza Passaic Avenue 116

Morristown Speedwell Ave. Redevelopment Speedwell Avenue 268

Rockaway Twp. Morris Commons Green Pond Road 300

Rockaway Twp. Pondview Estates Union Turnpike 1050



12

Table VII2012 Commercial, Industrial and Ofce Site Plans

With 50,000 Square Feet or More of New Floor Area


Municipality Development Name Location Land Use New Sq. Ft.

Hanover 67 Whippany Investors Whippany Road Ofce 883,130

Hanover Hanover & Horsehill Development Hanover Avenue Commercial 93,048

Pequannock Chilton Memorial Hospital West Parkway Institutional 123,882

Randolph Mark’s Corner Hanover Avenue Commercial 63,300

2012 development activity report

Documents