Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Use Interpretation Clergy Residence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board finds multi‑clergy residence at White Neck Road is accessory use to house of worship
Summary
The board issued an interpretation that housing multiple clergy on the same premises as a house of worship can be an accessory use, limited to the facts and concept plans presented for 40 White Neck Road (New Testament Ministries). The board tied its opinion to the small portion of building converted and to long‑term, church‑service residents.
The Bernards Township Zoning Board of Adjustment issued an opinion on Jan. 7 that the proposed residential use of multiple clergy on the premises of New Testament Ministries at 40 White Neck Road is a permitted accessory use to a house of worship, limited to the facts and concept plans presented at the hearing.
Applicant counsel asked the board to interpret the municipal code regarding a “clergyman’s residence,” noting examples such as rectories, convents and monasteries. The applicant’s pastor, who asked to be called Brother Samuel, explained the congregation’s operation and said roughly eight ministers would live on site to provide full‑time ministry and on‑site pastoral presence. The applicant emphasized the residential component would be incidental and subordinate to the primary house‑of‑worship use and would not change building footprint.
Board members examined zoning language, considered whether the residential component would be principal or accessory, and discussed routes to control intensity: limiting the percentage of building used for residences, tying expectations to the submitted concept plan and noting that more intense residential use would require a separate use variance. Several members said the proposal appears accessory because only a relatively small portion of the building would be converted and the occupants are long‑term ministers serving the church.
The board adopted an interpretation by resolution concluding, for this property and based on the testimony and concept plans presented, that the residential component is incidental, subordinate and customary to the house of worship and therefore a permitted accessory use. The board’s opinion emphasized it is based on the specific facts and plan before it; substantial changes (for example, converting most of the building to residential occupancy or increasing the number of residents far beyond the number presented) would require further review.
The board noted that normal permitting requirements — building permits, health department review for septic and any necessary site work — still apply and that the applicant may need additional approvals if the scope of residential use changes.
