Middletown Introduces Circus Liquors Redevelopment Ordinance

The Middletown Township Committee introduced an ordinance Monday that would permit up to 450 homes on the Circus Liquors property along Route 35, taking a legislative step required by the court-approved settlement of a three-year affordable-housing lawsuit.

The October 19, 2026, vote advanced Ordinance 2026-3544 to a November 9 public hearing. It did not approve construction or a final site plan. If the committee adopts the ordinance, a designated redeveloper would still have to submit engineered plans to the Middletown Planning Board for review.

The ordinance and attached redevelopment plan detail the housing types, building heights, affordable-housing requirements and infrastructure standards that would apply to the approximately 52-acre property. The 450-home figure is a permitted maximum, not a guaranteed buildout.

---

The vote establishes proposed zoning, not site approval

The committee introduced the ordinance with four affirmative votes. Before the motion, Mayor Anthony S. Perry emphasized what the vote would not do.

“This is not an approval of any site plans on this property,” Perry said. He added that the property would still need to undergo a Planning Board application and site-plan review.

The ordinance would replace the existing redevelopment plan and underlying zoning for Block 825, Lot 55.01, permitting the uses and density negotiated in the settlement. It would not approve the location of individual buildings, final traffic design, grading, drainage or other engineered details.

The redevelopment plan requires the applicant to be designated as the redeveloper and submit a site plan under New Jersey’s Municipal Land Use Law and Middletown’s development regulations. The Planning Board would review the application for compliance with the redevelopment plan. Applications could cover the entire property or proceed in phases.

The ordinance follows a builder’s-remedy lawsuit involving AAMHMT Property LLC, the property’s contract purchaser. Public Record NJ previously detailed the ordinance, litigation and settlement ahead of Monday’s meeting.

What the redevelopment plan permits

The plan covers property on the east side of Route 35, south of Kings Highway East and north of Kanes Lane. Township records describe approximately 52 acres of commercial, residential, industrial, vacant and undeveloped land, including wetlands identified through state mapping.

Permitted residential uses include market-rate townhomes, stacked townhomes and multifamily affordable housing. Uses not expressly authorized would be prohibited.

Key standards include:

• A maximum of 450 homes, with a 15% affordable-housing set-aside and a listed maximum of 68 affordable apartments.
• Townhomes and stacked townhomes up to three stories or 45 feet; affordable-housing buildings up to four stories or 60 feet.
• At least 67,500 square feet of combined indoor and outdoor amenity space.
• Maximum lot coverage of 65% and building coverage of 25%.
• Minimum setbacks including 135 feet from the Route 35 mainline and 75 feet from Kings Highway East.

The materials include proposed elevations for townhomes, stacked townhomes and an affordable apartment building, building on previously released concept renderings. The written redevelopment standards would govern if a concept drawing conflicts with the text.

The settlement acknowledges that engineering, environmental requirements and other constraints could make a full 450-home buildout infeasible. It nevertheless says the zoning creates what the parties call a realistic opportunity for 68 affordable units.

If all 68 affordable units are built, the settlement calls for 34 moderate-income, 25 low-income and nine very-low-income units, along with bedroom-distribution requirements. If fewer units are constructed, those requirements would be adjusted proportionally while the 15% set-aside remains in effect.

Infrastructure and environmental provisions

The plan makes AAMHMT, its successors or a homeowners association responsible for infrastructure serving only the development, including private roads, stormwater basins, retaining walls, recreational areas, common space, pump stations and utilities.

That responsibility excludes existing public, regional or third-party facilities, including a sanitary sewer trunk line, Carton Way and an existing stormwater basin near Kanes Lane and Carton Way.

Tree clearing and steep-slope disturbance would be allowed within the concept plan’s limits of disturbance, except in designated preservation areas near Kings Highway East and part of the freshwater wetlands area. The settlement requires conservation easements over confirmed wetlands and buffer areas, subject to activities authorized by required state Department of Environmental Protection permits. The records do not establish that those permits have been issued.

The plan also calls for landscape buffers to reduce views from Route 35, including at least two rows of evergreen trees, along with dark-sky-compliant lighting, electric-vehicle charging infrastructure and shade trees along the main internal road.

The ordinance implements a court-approved settlement

AAMHMT filed its builder’s-remedy lawsuit on August 17, 2023, asserting claims under the Mount Laurel doctrine, which requires municipalities to provide a realistic opportunity for their fair share of affordable housing. The litigation later included challenges to several township actions.

Middletown and AAMHMT entered into the settlement on August 6, 2026. According to the ordinance, the Superior Court in Monmouth County approved it on October 7 after a fairness hearing.

The agreement requires Middletown to amend the redevelopment plan to allow no more than 450 homes with a 15% affordable-housing set-aside. The township agreed to complete final adoption by November 10, one day after the scheduled public hearing.

The redevelopment plan acknowledges that the residential proposal is inconsistent with Middletown’s 2025 master plan, which called for affordable housing on an adjacent site but not on the commercial portion covered by the new plan. It attributes the change to an Appellate Division ruling and the builder’s-remedy settlement.

The court approved the settlement, not a final engineered site plan. The agreement also states that it represents a compromise of disputed issues, not an admission of liability or wrongdoing by any party.

Upon adoption of the amendment, AAMHMT is to release its litigation claims. The settlement separately preserves two crossclaims filed by the Fair Share Housing Center until they are adjudicated, withdrawn, dismissed or otherwise resolved.

A resident asks when the public can weigh in

During general public comment, Mark Patton, a Middletown resident, asked when residents could address the proposed density and other details. There was no public hearing specifically on the ordinance Monday because the committee was introducing it, not considering final adoption.

Township representatives said the November 9 hearing would address the ordinance and its zoning standards. A later Planning Board proceeding would address an engineered application, including traffic, architecture, environmental issues and other site-specific concerns.

“The settlement is for the zoning — zoning of the property, not for the plan of the property,” Perry said. He described the drawings as concepts rather than the engineered site plan the Planning Board would review.

The settlement requires a special Planning Board meeting at which AAMHMT’s proposal would be the only development application, unless AAMHMT agrees to another item. Any additional hearings would continue at consecutive regular or special meetings.

A drainage easement follows years of resident complaints

The committee also introduced Ordinance 2026-3546 to accept a permanent drainage easement on Edgemoor Road in Belford. The proposed easement is 10 feet wide and covers approximately 1,673.8 square feet of property owned by Joseph and Kristen Scibetta.

During public comment, Joseph Scibetta thanked the township engineer for helping advance the easement but described years of difficulty establishing responsibility for a drainage pipe and basin on his property.

Scibetta said he bought the home in 2018 and noticed a sinkhole forming in 2021. He said the township initially disputed responsibility because a cap was marked “SHD,” which he traced to Sunrise Hill Development. After consulting an attorney and researching the infrastructure, he said he found records that he believed established township ownership.

He also said he paid $3,800 to repair a deteriorating basin after unsuccessfully trying to reach the township. Those statements were part of Scibetta’s account, not findings in the easement ordinance.

“It was like pulling teeth. But I don’t quit. And I have the paper trail,” Scibetta said. “I sent the Township of Middletown between 2021 and 2026 177 emails. And here I am today. I finally got the easement.”

Scibetta said he wanted responsibility to be clear if the pipe failed again. The committee did not address the substance of his remarks during the meeting, although Perry asked him to clarify the developer’s name marked on the cap.

In a statement to Public Record NJ after the meeting, Perry said older infrastructure is sometimes inadequately identified in property records and deeds.

“The Township is pleased that this matter has been positively resolved,” Perry said. “In this case, there was confusion over the ownership of a drainage pipe. Through Mr. Scibetta’s research it was determined, and the Township agreed, that this pipe should be the responsibility of the municipality.”

Perry said the municipal engineer’s work with Scibetta led to the proposed easement. “Although these projects take time, there will be no dispute going forward as to responsibility for this infrastructure,” he said.

The easement ordinance has also only been introduced. If adopted, it would authorize township officials to accept and record the easement following final review by the municipal attorney and engineer.

What happens next

Public hearings and final consideration of both ordinances are scheduled for 7 p.m. November 9, 2026. Residents can address the Township Committee on each ordinance before a final vote.

For Circus Liquors, adoption would establish the zoning required by the settlement. AAMHMT or a successor would still need redeveloper designation, staff review, Planning Board site-plan approval and other required governmental or utility permits before construction.

Other land-use matters could also come before the committee that evening. Earlier township notices identified potential November 9 hearings on the West Nut Swamp development and a proposed data-center ban. As Public Record NJ previously reported, the November 9 agenda had not yet been published, so it remained unclear whether those matters would be heard alongside the Circus Liquors and drainage easement ordinances.

The November 9 hearing will determine whether the township adopts the Circus Liquors zoning changes. Any subsequent Planning Board review would address the project’s proposed engineering and design, giving residents a separate opportunity to comment on those details.