As a permissive license, the Apache 2.0 license does not prevent extra restrictions. The code may be used in any project as long as the attribution requirements are met. But such projects would not be licensed under the Apache license! And it would arguably be a misuse of the Apache trademark to call such a project Apache-licensed…
That particular licensing is quite unclear. It is not possible to say whether the author intended to publish an open source project with a public license under the Apache 2 terms, or whether they intended to publish a commercial shared source project that is only free for non-commercial users. There is usually no malice involved in such unclear terms, but frequently a misunderstanding of the open-source license they chose.
To avoid later problems, projects with an unclear license should not be used by other open source projects. Here, personal use might be OK. If you are interested in using the project, you should ask the authors for clarification. In particular:
- whether the royalty-free license in the Apache license or the “paid-for” license in the quoted license take precedence
- whether this applies both to commercial use and to other open source projects (which may also be used commercially)
- whether this applies to both use of the software and to derivative works
Ideally the copyright holders remove this restriction so that the project is licensed under a pure Apache 2 license. The second-best outcome is that they bring clarity by removing the Apache 2 license.