The Lakewood Planning Board approved four development applications at its March 10, 2026 meeting and declined to advance a concept plan for a proposed daycare facility, citing insufficient detail on parking and traffic.

Four approvals

The board voted unanimously on four resolutions, all passing with no recorded discussion:

  • SD 2645, Miz Construction: A minor subdivision to create eight lots at 15, 17, 23, and 25 Edgewood Court (Block 414). A minor subdivision splits an existing parcel into a small number of new lots.

  • SP 2619, DeAnna Pistola: A minor site plan for a parking lot addition at 745 Airport Road (Block 1160.01). A site plan approval covers changes to how a property is used or built upon, short of splitting the land itself.

  • SD 2642, Prospect Development Group LLC: A preliminary and final major subdivision to create eight lots at 320 8th Street (Block 96).

  • SD 2615, Shaul Halpern: A subdivision at 489 Manetta Avenue (Block 189.01).

Daycare concept plan not advanced

The board held a public hearing on a concept plan from Hamilton of Lakewood LLC (SP 2630) for a daycare at 600 and 680 New Hampshire Avenue and 1518 Bellinger Street (Block 855.05). A concept plan is an early-stage presentation that asks the board for feedback before the applicant submits full engineering and architectural drawings. It does not result in a formal approval.

Attorney Bob Shea, representing the applicant, argued the daycare is a permitted use requiring no variances or waivers.

Board members raised several concerns. Chairman Neiman recommended closing the South Street and Bellinger Street access points and limiting entry to New Hampshire Avenue only. “I’m going to listen to the concerns of the neighbors, especially since there are access options on New Hampshire,” he said.

Board member B. Stern pointed to peak-hour traffic: “What we have learned about daycares is it is a peak load. Everyone comes and goes at the same time.” He said backup onto New Hampshire Avenue would be a problem and urged as much loading area as possible.

Board member Y. Stern questioned an existing commercial use on the property that he said is operating out of compliance in a residential area, stating it “undermines our trust in the applicant.” Board attorney Jackson said the issue “impacts the applicant’s credibility.”

Board engineer Dave Magno noted that without architectural plans, the board could not determine whether setback variances or design waivers would be needed. He recommended the applicant meet with Ocean County before returning.

When Shea asked the board for a determination, Chairman Neiman responded: “We can’t do that with the information provided.”

What happens next

The four approved applications move forward. The Hamilton of Lakewood daycare applicant must submit full architectural plans and coordinate with the County before the board will consider the proposal again.