Ridge Oak 4 hearing continued amid debate over lighting, traffic, fire access and construction routing

The Bernards Township Planning Board continued the public hearing on Ridge Oak Management’s proposed Ridge Oak 4 senior affordable housing project (PB26‑001) to May 19, 2026 after nearly four hours of testimony and public questions on May 5.

Project scope and timeline: Attorney Luke Pontier said the proposal covers 95 and 150 Manchester Drive and would create 29 age‑restricted independent living one‑bedroom units with parking, stormwater controls, walking paths and landscaping. The project is in the township’s SH4 senior housing zone (Ordinance 2573). Bonnie Kelly, director of housing and development, described Ridge Oak as a private nonprofit with 362 current residents, lengthy waiting lists (598 entries, 331 unique applicants) and a construction plan that would seek permits this summer and aim for a December 2026 groundbreaking and 12‑month build to reach occupancy in early 2028.

Parking and traffic: Kelly said approximately 49% of Ridge Oak households have at least one car; the project proposes 39 spaces (roughly 1.34 spaces per unit) with 15 forecast as assigned if half of households have cars. Traffic engineer Gary Dean presented counts from 2023 and supplemental counts Dec. 9, 2025, and projected that the 29 units would add roughly two trips in each peak hour (one vehicle every ~15 minutes). Dean concluded nearby intersections would remain at level‑of‑service C or better and that traffic impact is minimal; neighbors questioned peak‑period methodology (resident mid‑day activity vs. commuter peaks) and asked for a construction routing and timing plan to protect school‑hour travel and local sidewalks.

Lighting and site design: Project engineer Rob Michello presented an April 14 existing‑lighting survey (exhibit A10) and a revised proposed lighting design (A1). The revised plan increases fixture count while lowering lamp wattages and adds shielding to reduce spill, but the applicant still requests an exception to the township’s residential average foot‑candle limits for vehicular roadways and sidewalks; Michello said property line illuminance meets 0.0 in most places. Neighbors pressed for additional walkway lighting in a dim corridor and board members asked the applicant to consider one additional fixture or other mitigation.

Fire access and hydrant: An email from the Basking Ridge fire chief raised two items: limited apparatus access (apparatus access only to the front of the building) and the lack of a hydrant on the roadway approach; the chief asked for additional access consideration and a hydrant at the driveway entrance to avoid passing the building to secure water. The applicant agreed to add one hydrant on the property and to provide a hydrant/fire plan and follow up with the fire chief; the board asked that professionals be copied on that communication.

Construction routing and community concerns: Multiple neighbors warned about heavy construction vehicles using residential streets during school drop‑off and pick‑up times and called for restrictions on delivery hours and a dedicated routing plan. The board and applicant agreed to require a construction routing and timing plan (to be coordinated at a preconstruction meeting) as a condition of any approval, with municipal staff and board professionals included in the review.

Public process and next steps: The hearing was continued to May 19, 2026 with no new notice required. The board waived the 21‑day submission rule down to 10 days for the next packet; the applicant was directed to submit the fire hydrant plan and related materials in advance. The board reserved additional engineering and architectural testimony (lighting refinements, construction routing, and the architect/engineer to return).