Middletown planning board carries hearing on neuro‑inclusive neighborhood at 911 Middletown‑Lincroft Road

A proposal to build a neuro‑inclusive residential community at 911 Middletown‑Lincroft Road drew detailed questions from the Middletown Planning Board on March 4, 2026 and was carried to the board's May 6 meeting for additional review.

The applicant, represented by attorney Rick Brodsky, described application #2025‑401 as a project involving Neuro‑Inclusive Neighborhoods of NJ 1, LLC with partners 3 Oaks Communities and IStrive Community Inc.; Brodsky confirmed the contract purchaser has a contract of sale that is contingent on board approval. The plan calls for single‑family homes in an R‑30 zone at Block 990, Lot 57 and includes deed restrictions tied to the special‑needs units.

Why it matters: The proposal would create housing intended for adults with developmental disabilities and could affect local housing inventories, homeowner‑association rules and stormwater infrastructure in a residential neighborhood. Neighbors sought clarity about ownership, long‑term restrictions and public‑funding streams that could affect operations.

Parent and nonprofit testimony, plus operational model

Kim Jarck, a parent of a child with developmental disabilities who said she is connected to the applicant, told the board caregivers would work in shifts and would not live on site. Bill Godfrey, a partner with 3 Oaks Communities, described the developer's experience with similar Michigan communities and said, "25% to 30% of the homes in these neighborhoods are designated to be units 'special needs' adults," adding that early integration of a community builder and customization for residents were lessons learned.

Ownership, deed restrictions and funding

Board members pressed for clarity on whether units would be owned by individuals, by a condominium association, or held under a different title. Brodsky testified the applicant is the contract purchaser and that the owner consented to the application; he also confirmed deed restrictions tied to the special‑needs units would run in perpetuity. Neighbors including Jason Franzblau and Kelly Wilder Willis asked where state funds or other public money would be allocated; the transcript records questions about funding sources but no firm commitments or detailed funding breakdowns were provided at this hearing.

Engineering, access and environmental issues

Engineer Jaclyn Flor described the proposed site work, including demolition of existing structures, layout of homes, utilities and stormwater controls. She said "there would be fencing installed around the entire transitional area buffer. This was required by the NJDEP." Flor testified the design includes drywells and retention basins sized for future storm intensity and that the proposed 28‑foot cartway meets RSIS standards; the applicant requested a waiver for the two feet difference from the township ordinance. The board and staff raised concerns about the cartway width, a culvert that may need replacing, drainage easements, driveway dimensions, tree replacement and outstanding items identified in the T&M review letter. Flor said she has been coordinating with T&M and the fire advisory board (TOMSA) on turning templates and other technical matters.

Procedural outcome and next steps

No vote was taken on the application. The board carried application #2025‑401 to the May 6, 2026 meeting for further review and additional testimony on outstanding engineering and planning review items.

What remains unresolved: The board asked for more detailed responses to T&M's review items, confirmation from structural engineers regarding the culvert, a clearer homeowner association framework, and information about funding and ownership structure. The next public session on this application will be May 6, 2026.