AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT INVESTIGATION FOR THE CHENEY/HAGERTY/KUSHNER SITE CRANBURY, NJ

Transcription

1 AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT INVESTIGATION FOR THE CHENEY/HAGERTY/KUSHNER SITE CRANBURY, NJ Prepared by PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC Planning & Real Estate Consultants in conjunction with Hoder Associates, Consulting Engineers February 20, 2015

2 Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Site, New Jersey February 20, 2015 Prepared on behalf of: The Planning Board Prepared by: Phillips Preiss Grygiel LLC Planning and Real Estate Consultants Newark Street Third Floor, Suite D Hoboken, NJ In conjunction with: Hoder Associates Consulting Engineers 548 Ridge Road Fair Haven, New Jersey The original of this report was signed and sealed in accordance with N.J.S.A. 13: Richard Preiss, PP New Jersey Professional Planner License # 3461

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 1 II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND LOCATIONAL CONTEXT... 2 III. EXISTING ZONING AND MASTER PLAN DESIGNATIONS FOR THE STUDY AREA... 9 A. Master Plan... 9 B. Zoning IV. STATUTORY CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION TO THE STUDY AREA V. STUDY AREA EVALUATION A. Property Overview B. Individual Property Evaluations C. Consideration of a Redevelopment Area Designation for the Study Area VI. CONCLUSION LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Study Area Properties... 2 Table 2: C-M Community Mixed-Use District Requirements LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Area Location... 5 Figure 2: Tax Maps of the Study Area... 6 Figure 3: Study Area Context Aerial... 7 Figure 4: Study Area Context Oblique... 8 Figure 5: 2010 Master Plan Recommended Zoning Revisions Figure 6: Conceptual Plan for the M-C Community Mixed-Use Zone Figure 7: Study Area and Surrounding Zoning Figure 8: Application of Area in Need of Redevelopment Criteria APPENDIX A Letter Report Cranbury Township Engineers Evaluation for the Area in Need of Redevelopment Investigation for the Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Site Prepared by Hoder Associates, Consulting Engineers, dated February 20, ii

4 I. INTRODUCTION The following study has been prepared at the direction and on behalf of the Cranbury Township Planning Board to determine whether certain property located west of South Main Street and south of Old Trenton Road within the ( Township ), commonly known as the Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Tract, qualifies as an area in need of redevelopment as defined under the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law ( LRHL ) at N.J.S.A. 40A:12A. The area to be considered is identified on the Township s official tax maps as Block 19, Lots 2, 3 and 4 and Block 20.16, Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 20 (the study area ). The Township Committee of the Township Cranbury authorized and directed the Planning Board to conduct this study in a resolution adopted on December 22, 2014 (see Resolution # ). In preparation of the study, Phillips Preiss Grygiel LLC, (PPG) with the assistance of David Hoder, PE, of Hoder Associates, the Planning Board s engineering consultant, reviewed the following records and documents: 2010 Master Plan of the 2013 Amendment to the Land Use Element of the Master Plan for Cranbury Township, Route 130 Corridor * Zoning map and ordinances of the Official tax maps of the Tax records Ownership and property sales information Aerial photos of the study area Recent development applications and approvals Environmental documentation from the New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection In addition to the above, PPG physically inspected and conducted a land use analysis of the study area and surrounding land uses, including the various buildings/structures and grounds that were still in existence as of January 26, This analysis included both exterior and interior inspections of buildings. Further, PPG had conversations with representatives of the property owners to obtain additional information on the historical and existing uses of the properties in the study area. The remainder of this report is divided into six chapters. Chapter II provides a description of the study area and its locational context. Chapter III provides an analysis of the applicable zoning and master plan designations within the study area. Chapter IV discusses the qualifying criteria set forth at N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5 for an area in need of redevelopment determination. Chapter V * Note that the Cranbury Township Planning Board adopted the 2013 amendment to the Master Plan on February 21, However, no changes to the 2010 Master Plan as it relates to the study area were made in this amendment. 1

5 applies these criteria to the study area to determine whether or not an area in need of redevelopment determination is warranted. Chapter VI summarizes the overall conclusions of the report. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND LOCATIONAL CONTEXT The area under consideration for redevelopment area designation consists of eight parcels that are designated on the Township s tax maps as follows: Block 19, Lots 2, 3 and 4, and Block 20.16, Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 20. According to the Township s official tax records, the study area encompasses ± acres. The lots range in size from ±0.230 acres to ±3.889 acres. The location of the study area is shown on Figure 1. Table 1: Study Area Properties Block Lot Owner Street Address Area (Acres) 19 2, 3, 4 Hagerty, J C; Hoffer, S R; Gordon, D D 79 South Main Street PGSGIL LLC 37 Old Trenton Road Hagerty, Judson C 1 Old Hightstown Road Hagerty, Judson L & Margaret K 3 Old Hightstown Road Cranbury Building Associates, LLC 5 Old Hightstown Road Cranbury Building Associates, LLC Old Trenton Road The study area is bounded generally by South Main Street to the east; Block 19, Lot 5 and Old Hightstown Road to the south; Old Cranbury Road to the west; and Old Trenton Road to the north. The Old Hightstown Road right-of-way traverses the study area, generally from its southwestern corner to its northeastern corner, and terminates in a cul-de-sac just before the intersection of Old Trenton Road and South Main Street. More specifically, the study area boundaries are formed by the following: Within Block 19, the easterly property line of Lots 2, 3, and 4 along South Main Street; the southerly property line of Lot 4; the westerly property line of Lots 2, 3 and 4 along Old Hightstown Road; and the northerly property line of Lot 2. Within Block 20.16, the easterly property line of Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 20 along Old Hightstown Road; the southerly property line of Lot 10 along Old Hightstown Road; the westerly property line of Lots 10 and 20 along Old Cranbury Road; and the northerly property line of Lot 7 along Old Trenton Road. The study area s tax lots and area boundaries are identified on Figure 2. The study area is located in a portion of the Township characterized mostly by single-family residential development, with some townhouse and office development present in the vicinity. The Four Seasons at Cranbury, a ± 110-unit age-restricted single-family residential community, is located to the west and south of the study area. There is a 20-unit affordable townhouse development 2

6 to the south of the study area along Old Cranbury Road, as well as single-family residences with frontage along Old Cranbury Road and/or South Main Street. To the east of the study area, there are single-family homes with frontage along South Main Street. There is an office development located at the northwestern corner of the intersection of Old Trenton Road and South Main Street to the north of the study area, which is occupied by several small businesses, including a bank branch (New Jersey Community Bank) with an exterior ATM. Heritage Park is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Old Trenton Road and South Main Street. These properties are situated at a gateway into the historic village of Cranbury, which is located just north of the study area along South Main Street, and there is a significant amount of pass-by traffic from motorists traveling into and out of Cranbury along both Old Trenton Road and South Main Street. The study area s setting within the immediate surrounding area is shown on Figures 3 and 4. In terms of land use, the parcels comprising the study area have been either vacant and/or marginally used for many years. The Cheney property Block 20.16, Lot 7 (± 2.8 acres), which fronts on Old Trenton Road and Old Hightstown Road, contains an industrial/agricultural building that is in a state of disrepair and appears to be functionally and physically obsolescent, plus a small, occupied single-family home located in northeast corner of the property that appears to be in fair to poor condition. The Hagerty property, which consists of five separate parcels identified below, was formerly used as farmland and as a greenhouse/floral business and has a number of structures on it, including three single-family homes (two occupied, one vacant) that appear to be in a state of disrepair. Block 19, Lot 2 (± 0.34 acres): This parcel is vacant and is considered a remainder parcel after land was taken for roadway widening(s); it is very narrow. Block 19, Lot 3 (± 2.05 acres): This parcel contains three older connected industrial buildings in very poor condition, and an unusable in-ground swimming pool. Block 19, Lot 4 (± 1.48 acres): This parcel contains an occupied single-family home in fair condition. Block 20.16, Lot 8 (± acres): This parcel contains an unoccupied single-family home in poor condition. Block 20.16, Lot 9 (± 0.23 acres): This parcel contains an unoccupied single-family home in poor condition. The Kushner property (Block 20.16, Lots 10 and 20) is ± 4.8 acres in area and is predominantly vacant; the remnants of a single family home that is hidden by vegetation is located on Lot 10, at its southeastern end. Essentially, the parcel has remained vacant for more than ten years. Vegetation 3

7 on the parcel is comprised of scrub brush and grasses, with second-stage growth forest at the northern end of the property. 4

8 Study Area 0 FIGURE 1: STUDY AREA LOCATION CRANBURY NJ 2,000 4,000 PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

9 ' LIEDTKE DR. RAINAGE EASEMENT STAHL LN LABAW LN. SEE SHEET '(S) SEE SHEET 3.05 INSET A SEE SHEET 3.05 INSET A (CTY. ROUTE 535) 400'(S) AC. N 120'(S) 380'(S) ' '(S) CRANBURY HOUSING ASSOC (EXEMPT - N.P.O.) LOTS 11, 12 & '(S) SEE INSET C ' ' 50' HAGERTY LN ' TOWNSHIP OF CRANBURY ormerly Old York Road) ' CRANBURY ROAD ' 420' 10' UTILITY EASEMENT 100' Ac ' AC ' (S) OLD SEE SHEET ' OLD HIGHTSTOWN RD (S) 2.06 AC AC (S) AC AC. 8.27' ' (CTY. ROUTE 685) 150' ' (BRODENTOWN - AMBOY TURNPIKE) " SEE INSET B ' 200'(D) 230'(S) 17 60' '(D) 230'(S) '(D) 230'(S) TOWNSHIP OF CRANBURY (EXEMPT) TREET ' 170 C H A M B E R L A I N DRIVE 51 60' W DANSER 100' 52 DRAINAGE AC ' ' ' COURT AC SEE SHEET 3.03 ST. DAVID'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH (EXEMPT) H 18.0 D.V. (EXEMPT) A FIGURE 2: TAX MAP OF THE STUDY AREA CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

10 OLD TRENTON ROAD SOUTH MAIN STREET OLD CRANBURY ROAD OLD HIGHTSTOWN ROAD FIGURE 3: STUDY AREA CONTEXT - AERIAL CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

11 SOUTH MAIN STREET OLD HIGHTSTOWN ROAD OLD CRANBURY ROAD OLD TRENTON ROAD FIGURE 4: STUDY AREA CONTEXT - OBLIQUE AERIAL CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

12 III. EXISTING ZONING AND MASTER PLAN DESIGNATIONS FOR THE STUDY AREA A. Master Plan The most recent comprehensive Master Plan for the was adopted in December The Land Use Element of the Master Plan notes that, despite large areas of open space and farm fields in the Township to the east and west of Cranbury Village, there are very few vacant parcels that are not either developed, deed-restricted against future development, approved for development, or in the approval or conceptual development pipeline. According to the Master Plan the parcels that comprise the study area are one of only a few substantial sites remaining in the Township that is suitable for development. At the time of the writing of the Master Plan, the study area (referred to in the Master Plan as the Kushner/Hagerty/Cheney parcel ) was located within the Professional Office/Residential (PO/R) zone. Based on the PO/R zoning, it was estimated that the study area could accommodate ±5 singlefamily homes or a few thousand square feet of professional office space. However, due to the study area s collective accessibility, visibility on busy roadways just south of Cranbury Village, and proximity to existing residential development, the Master Plan found that the property had the potential to be utilized at higher development densities, and to provide for a greater range of residential and/or commercial development than the present zoning permits. The PO/R zoning provisions were deemed too restrictive with respect to the use and bulk standards, contributing to the fact that the study area had already been in a vacant and marginally-used condition for many years. As such, the Economic Development Plan of the Master Plan recommends the following with regard to the study area: Expand retail opportunities outside of the Village Commercial area primarily in two zones the Highway Commercial and General Commercial zones, but also as part of a mixeduse development (retail and lower-density multi-family development), in the present Professional Office/Residential zones. Also allow additional lower-density and empty-nester multi-family housing in the present PO/R zone located at South Main Street/Old Trenton Road (to be re-designated the M- C Community Mixed-Use Zone), which would produce significant real estate taxes, but which would not generate significant numbers of school-age children. The Economic Development Plan goes on to state with regard to type of development envisioned for the study area: a more mixed-use type of development small-footprint, local service-oriented retail uses combined with lower-density, empty-nester oriented multi-family development, designed in a more traditional and sustainable form, with design requirements that mirror those of Cranbury s more traditional mixed-use (retail/residential) uses, could be attractive in the 9

13 marketplace, help to serve the convenience needs of Cranbury residents, and generate additional ratables. The Community Design Element of the Master Plan provides more specific details regarding the density and design considerations for development within the study area. The Community Design Element reinforces once again the need to re-designate the study area from PO/R to M-C and indicates that the existing zoning controls (both use and bulk) to some extent contribute to the stagnant conditions within the study area (i.e., vacant, marginally developed, or undeveloped). With regard to design standards for the proposed M-C district, the Community Design Element recommends site plan standards be adopted that are sensitive to the study area s proximity to Cranbury Village and that reinforce the existing character of nearby established residential areas. Recommended design standards specific to the M-C district outlined in the Community Design Element include the following: Ground floor retail should be provided along the south side of Old Trenton Road with housing above and to the rear, and parking at the interior of the lot. The entire parcel should be developed comprehensively as a single, integrated development. Therefore, as-of-right development for parcels of less than 10 acres would be residential development of four units per acre. To develop the retail portion, and to obtain additional residential units on the second floor over the retail portion, a minimum tract size of 10 acres would be required. Permitted uses should include single-family attached (e.g., townhouses, duplexes, stacked flats), multifamily residential on the second story fronting Old Trenton Road (subject to meeting the minimum tract size of 10 acres), and retail and service establishments (e.g., banks, nail salons, delis, banks, bakeries, etc.). Prohibited uses include single-family detached dwellings, garden centers and nurseries. Recommended bulk and area provisions include the following: Minimum tract size of two acres for residential only, at four units per acre. Minimum tract size to permit retail with second floor residential would be 10 acres. Minimum frontage of 100 feet for residential only; 400 feet of frontage along Old Trenton Road for mixed-use. No Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for attached residential only developments, but maximum total FAR of 0.35 for a mixed-use development (where this higher FAR provides an incentive to provide two-story buildings). Maximum residential density of four units per acre. However, as an incentive to provide housing over retail along the south side of Old Trenton Road, 20 units of upper-story residential in this location would be excepted from the density requirements, but only if a unified development is created which combines all parcels south of Old Trenton Road in the district with a minimum tract size of 10 acres. 10

14 Maximum impervious coverage of 40 percent of the lot. Maximum height of two stores/28 feet for mixed-use retail/residential buildings, and a maximum of two stories/25 feet for all-residential buildings. It was thought that these proposed changes in zoning regulations, as outlined in the Master Plan, would create incentives for new development within the study area and help to diversify the array of retail and residential choices in Cranbury in a manner that would complement the surrounding residential neighborhood. The zoning revisions recommended for the study area in the Master Plan are shown on Figure 5, and the conceptual plan for the M-C zone which is actually included in the Cranbury Township LDO is shown in Figure 6. 11

15 Present HC District to be newly designated C-C Community Commercial District Present P/OR District to be newly designated M-C - Commercial Mixed Use District Portion of present P/OR District to be newly designated M-R Regional Mixed Use District Portion of current P/OR District to be added to new C-R District Figure 4-1: Cranbury Township, NJ Phillips Preiss Grygiel 2010 Source: Hatch Mott MacDonald 2009 Present GC District to be newly designated C-R Regional Commercial District FIGURE 5: 2010 MASTER PLAN CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

16 FIGURE 6: CONCEPTUAL PLAN CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

17 B. Zoning The study area was previously zoned PO/R, which permitted single-family dwellings, offices for professional services, commercial, business and government, garden centers and nurseries, and banks and financial institutions. As described in the preceding section, only ±5 single-family homes or a few thousand square feet of professional office could be developed under the prior PO/R zoning. The 2010 Master Plan recommended that the area be rezoned from PO/R to M-C. The parcels were subsequently rezoned as recommended in (Note that the proposed M-C zone was instead designated as the C-M Community Mixed-Use Zone on the Township s zoning map). The C-M zone permits mixed-use, limited retail and low-density multi-family uses. The C-M zone includes bulk and design standards intended to foster a comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment project, consisting of a row of convenience-oriented retail stores with residential apartments on the second floor along Old Trenton Road and lower-density attached single-family residences or apartments (or professional office development) on the remainder, all of which is to be of a traditional scale and design so as to blend in with the predominantly residential neighborhood of which this district is an integral part. In order to achieve the comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment, the C-M zoning provides incentives to develop the three parcels in their entirety. For example, the minimum lot size for low density retail and professional offices is two acres. However, on tracts equal to or greater than 10 acres with at least 400 feet of frontage on Old Trenton Road, retail and service establishments are also permitted, as well as residential uses including apartments above the retail on Old Trenton Road. The relevant zoning is described in Table 2 and the study area and surrounding zoning is shown on Figure 7. Table 2: C-M Community Mixed-Use District Requirements Permitted Uses For tract sizes equal to or greater than two acres but less than 10 aces, the following uses are permitted: Single-family attached dwellings, including townhouses and duplexes, but restricted to oneand two-bedroom units only Apartments, restricted to one- and two-bedroom units only Professional offices For tract sizes equal to or greater than 10 acres, and having at least 400 feet of frontage on Old Trenton Road, the following additional land uses are also permitted: Retail and service establishments, including personal service businesses and specialized convenience retail, including but not limited to drugstores, banks and financial services, bakeries, delis, beauty shops, nail salons, tanning salons, laundries, drop off-only dry 14

18 cleaners, gift stores, florists, takeout food, and clothing and shoe repair; but only on the ground floor of buildings located on that portion of the parcel within 200 feet of the right-ofway of Old Trenton Road Residential apartments restricted to one- and two-bedroom units only, located on the second floor over the retail and service uses as set forth in Section B(2)(a) above Bulk Standards For single-family attached dwellings, apartments and professional offices: Minimum lot area: two acres Minimum street frontage: 200 feet Minimum lot depth: 250 feet Minimum setback from a public street: 25 feet Minimum setback from other buildings on the same lot: o Front-to-front: 75 feet o Front-to-side, front-to-rear: 40 feet o Side-to-side: 20 feet o Rear-to-rear, rear-to-side: 20 feet Minimum setback from internal driveways: 15 feet Minimum setback to parking: 10 feet Maximum building coverage: 10% Maximum impervious coverage: 50% Maximum building height: two stories and 25 feet for residential buildings; 28 feet for offices Maximum residential density: four dwelling units per acre Maximum floor area ratio (FAR): 0.15 Maximum number of residential units per structure: four for single-family attached units, eight for apartments Accessory buildings shall have the same setbacks as principal buildings but shall not exceed one story or 15 feet in height, whichever is the lesser For mixed-use, retail, ground floor and second floor apartments as permitted in Section B(2)(b): Minimum lot area: 10 acres for entire tract Maximum lot area devoted to mixed-use (retail ground floor, apartment above): three acres Minimum street frontage for mixed-use: 400 feet along Old Trenton Road Minimum lot depth for mixed-use: 250 feet Minimum setback from Old Trenton Road for mixed-use: 15 feet Maximum setback from Old Trenton Road for mixed-use: 30 feet Minimum side yard setback for mixed-use: 25 feet Minimum setback from internal streets for mixed-use: 15 feet Maximum building coverage for mixed-use: 25% Maximum impervious coverage for mixed-use: 65% 15

19 Maximum building height for mixed-use: two stories, 28 feet Maximum density, for residential portion of the mixed-use only: seven units per acre, but not more than 20 units Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for retail portion of the mixed-use only: 0.25, but not more than 30,000 square feet of retail floor area in total For the remaining part of the site not utilized for mixed-use, development per Section D(1) shall apply 16

20 FIGURE 7: STUDY AREA ZONING CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

21 IV. STATUTORY CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION TO THE STUDY AREA The LRHL at N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5 provides that [a] delineated area may be determined to be in need of redevelopment if, after investigation, notice and hearing as provided in Section 6 of P.L.1992, c.79 (C.40A:12A-6), the governing body of the municipality by resolution concludes that within the delineated area any of the following conditions is found: a. The generality of buildings are substandard, unsafe, unsanitary, dilapidated, or obsolescent, or possess any of such characteristics, or are so lacking in light, air, or space, as to be conducive to unwholesome living or working conditions. b. The discontinuance of the use of buildings previously used for commercial, manufacturing, or industrial purposes; the abandonment of such buildings; or the same being allowed to fall into so great a state of disrepair as to be untenantable. c. Land that is owned by the municipality, the county, a local housing authority, redevelopment agency or redevelopment entity, or unimproved vacant land that has remained so for a period of ten years prior to adoption of the resolution, and that by reason of its location, remoteness, lack of means of access to developed sections or portions of the municipality, or topography, or nature of the soil, is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital. d. Areas with buildings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community. e. A growing lack or total lack of proper utilization of areas caused by the condition of the title, diverse ownership of the real properties therein or other similar conditions which impede land assemblage or discourage the undertaking of improvements, resulting in a stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to and serving the public health, safety and welfare, which condition is presumed to be having a negative social or economic impact or otherwise being 18

22 detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the surrounding area or the community in general. f. Areas, in excess of five contiguous acres, whereon buildings or improvements have been destroyed, consumed by fire, demolished or altered by the action of storm, fire, cyclone, tornado, earthquake or other casualty in such a way that the aggregate assessed value of the areas has been materially depreciated. g. In any municipality in which an enterprise zone has been designated pursuant to the New Jersey Urban Enterprise Zones Act, P.L. 1983, c. 303 (C.52:27H-60 et seq.) the execution of the actions prescribed in that act for the adoption by the municipality and approval by the New Jersey Urban Enterprise Zone Authority of the zone development plan for the area of the enterprise zone shall be considered sufficient for the determination that the area is in need of redevelopment pursuant to sections 5 and 6 of P.L. 1992, c. 79 (C.40A:12A-5 and 40A:12A-6) for the purpose of granting tax exemptions within the enterprise zone district pursuant to the provisions of P.L. 1991, c. 431 (C.40A:20-1 et seq.) or the adoption of a tax abatement and exemption ordinance pursuant to the provisions of P.L. 1991, c. 441 (C.40A:21-1 et seq.). The municipality shall not utilize any other redevelopment powers within the urban enterprise zone unless the municipal governing body and planning board have also taken the actions and fulfilled the requirements prescribed in P.L. 1992, c. 79 (C.40A:12A-1 et al.) for determining that the area is in need of redevelopment or an area in need of rehabilitation and the municipal governing body has adopted a redevelopment plan ordinance including the area of the enterprise zone. h. The designation of the delineated area is consistent with smart growth planning principles adopted pursuant to law or regulation. In addition, individual properties that do not meet any of the statutory conditions may still be included within an area in need of redevelopment provided that within the area as a whole, one or more of the expressed conditions are prevalent. This provision is referred to as Section 3 and is set forth under N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-3, which states in part that "a redevelopment area may include lands, buildings, or improvements which of themselves are not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, but the inclusion of which is found necessary, with or without change in this condition, for the effective redevelopment of the area of which they are a part." 19

23 V. STUDY AREA EVALUATION A. Property Overview The study area encompasses ± acres and is improved with industrial and single-family residential buildings on either side of Old Hightstown Road. The study area also contains undeveloped lands that have been vacant for well over 10 years. Located at a key gateway into Cranbury Village, the study area is exposed to a tremendous amount of pass-by traffic from motorists traveling into and out of Cranbury along Old Trenton Road and South Main Street. Despite its rezoning to Community Mixed-Use (C-M) in 2011, the study area has not experienced any type of development, let alone that envisioned in the Township s 2010 Master Plan. A significant portion of the study area includes vacant land that is overgrown with brush and secondstage growth forest; of the remaining improvements in the study area, many are older structures that are vacant, dilapidated and in poor condition. This mix of uses and varied property conditions contributes to the study area s poor image and has hampered the Township s efforts to foster comprehensive redevelopment of the area. Likewise, the presence of certain deleterious land uses and obsolete and inefficient site improvements, as described in greater detail later in this chapter, impact the ability of the vacant parcels within the study area to be developed in an appropriate manner. In short, while the study area benefits from a prime location proximate to Cranbury Village, it is as a whole hampered by the presence of poorly maintained properties and structures generally existing within it as well as certain incompatible land uses that prevent it from being redeveloped. The following sub-chapter evaluates the specific parcels within the study area and considers whether they meet any of the statutory criteria for an area in need of redevelopment designation consistent with the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law. For the purposes of evaluation, several of the individual properties were aggregated into logical assemblages based on common use and/or common ownership. The evaluation was based on surveys of land usage, property conditions, occupancy and ownership status, the Master Plan, and review of other relevant data. All of the information was collected on either a property-by-property or assemblage-by assemblage basis, as appropriate. The analysis was then aggregated to reflect the entire study area. It should be noted that the property owners identified below are taken from the tax block and lot ownership records available by way of the New Jersey Association of County Tax Boards ( B. Individual Property Evaluations 1. Cheney Property Block 20.16, Lot 7 Location: 37 Old Trenton Road Owner of record: PGSGIL LLC Total Acreage: ±2.8 Current Use: Industrial building and single-family residence 20

24 Assessed Value: Land $500,000 Improvements $270,000 Total $770,000 This ±2.8 acre parcel is roughly rectangular in shape and has ± feet of frontage along Old Trenton Road and ± feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road. It is developed with an industrial/agricultural building and a single-family residence. The industrial building consists of several individual buildings dating back to the 1940s that are physically connected to one another, which gives the appearance of a single large structure. According to the owner, the building was originally used as poultry processing facility, and more recently has been used for storage purposes. Most of these buildings appear to have been built between 1930 and 1960 and are constructed of cinderblock walls and a light steel truss roof. There are several concrete and stone pads/parking areas surrounding the building. The single-family residence is located at the northeastern corner of the parcel and has access from Old Hightstown Road; the residence is currently occupied and is in fair to poor condition. In its current state, the industrial building on the property is in a substandard, dilapidated and untenantable condition. Most notably, it is no longer usable for the primary function for which it was originally designed and used storage and manufacturing or processing purposes. Significant investments would be required to return the building to a productive use. Moreover, the design of the building its disparate parts, the lack of functional electrical, water and sewerage services would not make such an investment worthwhile. Even if such processing activities would be desirable and they would not, given the current zoning it would be far better to demolish the buildings and replace them altogether. There are also a number of health and safety issues that would have to be addressed before the building could be restored to productive use. Considering the building was constructed between 1930 and 1960 and has not been occupied in recent years, this increases the likelihood of outdated building systems, such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning, plumbing, and telecommunications. The lack of modern wiring to accommodate telephones, computers, internet access, and other necessary business infrastructure make it highly unlikely that the building could easily be tenanted with a modern industrial use. In a report dated February 20, 2015 (attached hereto as Appendix A and made a part hereof)(the Planning Board Engineer s report ), Planning Board engineering consultant David Hoder notes that the cinderblock construction of the industrial building is not in compliance with New Jersey building codes and cannot be used as is today. Further, the building s mechanical systems have either been stripped or have fallen into such disrepair as not to be salvageable. This building has been allowed to fall into so great a state of disrepair as to be untenantable. Further, any major construction or improvements necessary for the reoccupation of the buildings by any industrial or commercial enterprise in the future would not conform to the use, bulk or design requirements of the existing C-M zoning district, or be consistent with the intent and purpose of the master plan of zone plan. As such, the industrial building on this property is likely to remain in its current dilapidated and nonconforming condition well into the future. The existing single family 21

25 residence on the property is in fair to poor condition, and is located close to both Old Trenton Road and Old Hightstown Road Based on the above, the property meets criteria a, b, and d. It is in a substandard, dilapidated and untenantable condition. It has not been viable for any productive use in recent years. The fact that the site has remained fallow despite its generally desirable location at the intersection of Old Trenton Road and South Main Street, a location appropriate for mixed-use development as evidenced by its rezoning to C-M in 2011, indicates the property s suitability for designation as an area in need of redevelopment. Further, the current vacant state of this property contributes a detrimental impact to the streetscape of this section of Cranbury and is visible to the high volume of traffic passing the study area. 2. Hagerty Property Block 19, Lots 2, 3, 4 Location: 79 South Main Street Owner of record: Hagerty, J C; Hoffer, S R; Gordon, D D Total Acreage: ±3.87 Current Use: Lot 2 Vacant Lot 3 Three industrial buildings, swimming pool Lot 4 Single-family residence Assessed Value: Land $764,000 Improvements $309,500 Total $1,073,500 This property consists of three tax lots under common ownership; according to the Township tax maps, they are assessed as a single unit. Lot 2 Lot 2 is ±0.34 acres in size and is irregular in shape. It has ±180 feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road and ±175 feet of frontage along South Main Street. It is a remainder parcel after portions of the property were taken to accommodate roadway widening(s), and, as such, it is narrow, ranging in width from ±80.65 feet to ±90 feet. This property meets criterion c. The property contains unimproved and underutilized vacant land that has remained so for more than ten years. The property is wedged between South Main Street and Old Hightstown Road. Its narrow configuration, resulting from roadway widening(s), has rendered it effectively undevelopable without assemblage with another property. At ±0.34 acres, the property is well below the minimum lot area requirement of two acres as set forth for the C-M district. As such, by reason of its configuration and location within the Township, this property is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital. 22

26 Lot 3 Lot 3 is ±2.05 acres in area and is irregular in shape. It has ±665 feet of frontage along both Old Hightstown Road and South Main Street. It is improved with three industrial buildings that appear to have been built between 1930 and 1950, and a swimming pool. The buildings were used for horticultural and floral businesses, along with greenhouses that were formerly on the property but have since been demolished. Offices and space on the second floor that appear to have been used as an apartment are also evident based upon an interior inspection of the buildings. The buildings are constructed with cinderblock walls and light steel truss roofs. The buildings are in poor condition and there are a number of holes in the roofing and walls; only remnants of the heating and electricity systems are in place. The southernmost building appears to have been partially used for the greenhouse or floral business; this building also has a partial second floor and a partial basement. There are a number of boilers/heaters in the southernmost building, but they are not operational. The swimming pool is in disrepair and is not usable. In their current state, the industrial buildings on the property are in a substandard, dilapidated and untenantable condition. There are also a number of health and safety issues that would have to be addressed before the buildings could be restored to productive use. Considering the buildings were constructed between 1930 and 1950 and have not been occupied in recent years, this increases the likelihood of outdated building systems, such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning, plumbing, and telecommunications. The lack of modern wiring to accommodate telephones, computers, internet access, and other necessary business infrastructure make it highly unlikely that any of the buildings could easily be tenanted with a modern industrial use. The Planning Board Engineer s report (Appendix A ) notes that the cinderblock construction of the industrial buildings are not in compliance with New Jersey building codes and cannot be used as is today. Further, the buildings mechanical equipment has either been stripped or fallen into such disrepair as not to be salvageable. Breaches in the roof and walls of the buildings have formed over the years, allowing for continuous exposure of the buildings interior to the outside elements. These buildings have been allowed to fall into so great a state of disrepair as to be untenantable. Most notable, however, is the fact that the buildings are no longer usable for the primary function for which they were originally designed and used industrial and/or commercial purposes. Significant investment would be required to return the buildings to productive use. Further, major construction improvements would be required for the occupation by any industrial or commercial enterprise in the future -- uses that are not permitted under the current zoning, and that would be inconsistent and incompatible with the intent and purpose of the Master Plan. Similarly, the buildings could not be adapted to residential uses consistent with the current zoning and master plan. The industrial buildings on this property have remained vacant, and are likely to remain in that condition well into the future, absent substantial intervention by the Township. Based on the above, the property meets criteria a, b, and d. It is in a substandard, dilapidated and untenantable condition. It has not been viable for any productive use in recent years. The fact that 23

27 the site has remained unused despite its generally desirable location along South Main Street, a location appropriate for mixed-use development as evidenced by its rezoning to C-M in 2011, indicates the property s suitability for designation as an area in need of redevelopment. Further, the current vacant state of this property contributes a detrimental impact to the streetscape of this section of Cranbury and is visible to the high volume of traffic passing the study area. Lot 4 Lot 4 is ±1.48 acres in area and is irregular in shape. It has ±225 feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road and ±215 feet of frontage along South Main Street. It is improved with an occupied single-family residence located in the western portion of the property that has fallen into a state of disrepair. The Planning Board Engineer s report notes that the residence, through occupied, is in poor condition and is not up to current building codes and standards In addition, the continued use of the property for single-family detached residential purposes is inconsistent with the Township s zoning and planning goals for the study area and is incongruous with the proximate industrial uses. In fact, the Community Design Element of the 2010 Master Plan specifically recommended prohibiting single-family detached residences in the M-C district. Based on the above, the property meets criteria: a and d. The overall site conditions of the property, which include a deteriorating and ill-maintained structure in substandard and potentially unsafe condition, is in itself a condition detrimental to the overall public health, safety and general welfare. Further, these conditions are indicative of the property s obsolescence within the context of the area in which the property is located. Block 20.16, Lot 8 Location: 1 Old Hightstown Road Owner of record: Hagerty, Judson C Total Acreage: ±0.311 Current Use: Single-family residence Assessed Value: Land $125,600 Improvements $86,800 Total $212,400 Lot 8 is ±0.311 acres in area and is irregular in shape. It has ±166 feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road. It is improved with an unoccupied single-family residence that has fallen into a state of disrepair. The Planning Board Engineer s report notes that the residence is in poor condition and is not up to current building codes and standards. The residence is in so great a state of disrepair as to be untenantable, and is unlikely to be re-tenanted without significant improvements. In addition, the continued use of the property for single-family detached residential purposes is inconsistent with the Township s zoning and planning goals for the study area and is incongruous with the proximate industrial uses. In fact, the Community Design Element of the 2010 Master Plan specifically recommended prohibiting single-family detached residences in the M-C district. 24

28 Based on the above, the property meets criteria a and d. The overall condition of the property, which includes a deteriorating and ill-maintained structure in substandard and potentially unsafe condition, is in itself detrimental to the overall public health, safety and general welfare. Further, the property s condition is indicative of its obsolescence within the context of the area in which it is located. Block 20.16, Lot 9 Location: 3 Old Hightstown Road Owner of record: Hagerty, Judson L & Margaret K Total Acreage: ±0.230 Current Use: Single-family residence Assessed Value: Land $121,500 Improvements $76,200 Total $197,700 Lot 9 is ±0.230 acres in area and is shaped like a square. It has ±100 feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road. It is improved with a single-family residence that has not been occupied for several years and has fallen into a state of disrepair. The Planning Board Engineer s report notes that the residence, is in poor condition and is not up to current building codes and standards In addition, the continued use of the property for single-family detached residential purposes is inconsistent with the Township s zoning and planning goals for the study area and is incongruous with the proximate industrial uses. In fact, the Community Design Element of the 2010 Master Plan specifically recommended prohibiting single-family detached residences in the M-C district. Based on the above, the property meets criteria a and d. The overall site conditions of the property, which include a deteriorating and ill-maintained structure in substandard and potentially unsafe condition, is in itself a condition detrimental to the overall public health, safety and general welfare. Further, these conditions are indicative of the property s obsolescence within the context of the area in which the property is located. 3. Kushner Property The Kushner property consists of two separate tax lots in common ownership, designated on the Township s tax maps as Block 20.16, Lots 10 and 20. Block 20.16, Lot 10 Location: 5 Old Hightstown Road Owner of record: Cranbury Building Associates, LLC Total Acreage: ± acres Current Use: Vacant land Assessed Value: Land $179,000 25

29 Improvements $9,400 Total $188,400 Lot 10 is ± acres in area and is irregular in shape. It has ± feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road and ± feet of frontage along Old Cranbury Road. This parcel contains the remnants of what appears to have been a small single family home, and is completely overgrown with trees, shrubs and other vegetation. The property meets criteria a, b and d. The home on the property is in a substandard, dilapidated and untenable condition and has been neither viable nor productive in recent years. Block 20.16, Lot 20 Location: Old Trenton Road Owner of record: Cranbury Building Associates, LLC Total Acreage: ± acres Current Use: Vacant land Assessed Value: Land $311,200 Improvements $0 Total $311,200 Lot 20 is ±3.889 acres in area and is irregular in shape. It has ± feet of frontage along Old Hightstown Road and ± feet of frontage along Old Cranbury Road. It contains no improvements and has remained vacant for more than ten years. Vegetation on the parcel consists of scrub brush and grasses, with second-stage growth forest at its northern end. Based on the above, Lot 20 of Block meets criterion c. The property is vacant, and has been for well over 10 years. The property is also unusual in shape, with a long thin strip adjacent to Lot 7 of the Block which is too narrow to be of a functional use. There are two outparcels (Lots 8 and 9 of Block 20.16) which contribute to its unusual shape, and the property narrows at its southern end where Old Cranbury Road and Old Hightstown Road meet. Old Hightstown Road is the remnant of a former road that terminates in a cul-de-sac at its northern end, is in poor condition and serves no purpose beyond providing access to the Cheney and Hagerty properties to the north. The Kushner property is somewhat remote by virtue of its configuration and location, and is dominated by the dilapidated industrial buildings and single family home on the adjacent Cheney (PGSGIL LLC) property. The potential for its redevelopment in a manner envisioned within the 2010 Master Plan and current zoning is negatively impacted by these conditions, and is the likely reason for its undeveloped condition despite the rezoning in These circumstances are indicative however, of the site s qualification as an area in need of redevelopment. The property stands a much better chance of being redeveloped for a productive use, particularly of the type envisioned in the 2010 Master Plan, if it is part of a comprehensive redevelopment of the study area as a whole. 26

30 C. Consideration of a Redevelopment Area Designation for the Study Area The results of the redevelopment area investigation reveal that the properties that comprise the study area meet criteria a, b, c, and/or d for redevelopment designation. Thus, the entire ± acre study area meets the criteria for the statutory conditions for designation as an area in need of redevelopment. The study area s current condition precludes its ability to be developed as outlined in the Township of Cranbury s 2010 Master Plan, particularly that of achieving comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment of the study area in a manner that diversifies the array of retail and residential choices in the Township and complements the surrounding residential neighborhood. The substandard and potentially unsafe conditions within the study area are deleterious to the surrounding area and these conditions are detrimental to the overall public health, safety and general welfare. Significant portions of the study area are in various states of disuse and/or are adversely affected by substandard, dilapidated and untenantable conditions. More specifically, the cinderblock construction of the industrial buildings are not in compliance with New Jersey building codes and cannot be used as is today, and most of the utility and mechanical infrastructure in these buildings are outdated, inefficient and, in many instances, no longer functional. In addition, the residential buildings within the study area are in a state of disrepair and are not up to current building codes and standards. As such, the prospects for re-tenanting these buildings are poor. Further, the current vacant state of certain parcels within the study area exerts a detrimental impact on the portion of the Township in which they are located. Use of the properties that make up the study area, or lack thereof, represents a deleterious activity that contributes little or nothing to the economic well-being of the Township at large, especially as it relates to the provision of ratables and quality housing opportunities on the site. The study area has seen little or no capital investment in recent years, and, as such, it is unlikely that the private sector would develop the area in such a way as to provide meaningful new retail and housing opportunities. Despite the fact that the study area was rezoned to C-M in 2011 per the recommendations of the 2010 Master Plan, there has been little interest in redeveloping the study area in accordance with the vision articulated in the Master Plan. Clearly, it its present condition, the Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner tract is failing to satisfy the Township s land use policy objectives, all of which are intended to advance the public health, safety and welfare of the community. Without public intervention in the form of a unified and cohesive redevelopment strategy, this area is likely to remain stagnant and unproductive. 27

31 OLD TRENTON ROAD HAGGERTY Lot 2 c PGSGIL LLC Lot 7 a, b, d HAGGERTY Lot 8 a, b HAGGERTY Lot 9 a, b OLD HIGHTSTOWN ROAD SOUTH MAIN STREET Block Block 19 OLD CRANBURY ROAD CRANBURY BUILDING ASSOCIATION Lot 20 c HAGGERTY Lot 3 a, b, d CRANBURY BUILDING ASSOCIATION HAGGERTY Lot 10 Lot 4 a, b, d a, d FIGURE 8: CRITERIA APPLIED TO STUDY AREA CRANBURY NJ PHILLIPS PREISS GRYGIEL LLC 2015

32 VI. CONCLUSION The foregoing study was prepared at the direction and on behalf of the Cranbury Township Planning Board to determine whether the area commonly referred to as the Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Tract qualifies as an area in need of redevelopment pursuant to the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law. Based on the foregoing analysis, the referenced area meets the criteria set forth at N.J.S.A. 40A:12A- 5a, b, c, and d, and can therefore be designated as an area in need of redevelopment. 29

33 APPENDIX A Letter Report of Hoder Associates, February 20,

34 Hoder Associates 548 Ridge Road Consulting Engineers Fair Haven, NJ February 20, 2014 Allan Kehrt, Chairman Planning Board 23-A North Main Street Cranbury, NJ Re: Engineering Evaluation for the Area in need of Redevelopment Investigation for the Cheney/Hagerty/Kushner Site HACE # CBT-004 Dear Mr. Kehrt and Members of the Planning Board: We have prepared this letter report to aid the Township Planning Board with assessing the properties below for their designation as a Redevelopment Area per the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law in New Jersey. The parcels in question (Study Area), as identified on the Cranbury Township Tax Maps, and their current uses, are as follows: Block 19 Lot 2 Vacant Lot 3 Industrial (unoccupied) Lot 4 Residential (occupied) Block Lot 7 Storage(partially occupied) / Residential (occupied) Lot 8 Residential (unoccupied) Lot 9 Residential (unoccupied) Lot 10 Vacant Lot 20 Vacant All of the parcels in the study area are located within in the CM- Community Mixed Use Zone of the Cranbury Land Development Ordinance. Description of Parcels Block 19 Lot 2 This parcel is at the North East end of the site and is vacant. It is the remainder parcel after roadways were taken and widened. This parcel is very narrow which essentially precludes its development as a stand-alone parcel. Its only use would be in combining it with other lots to form a larger parcel that could be developed Hoderassociates.com

35 Allan Kehrt, Chairman HACE No. CBT-004 February 20, 2015 Page 2 of 10 Lot 3 Lot 3 is a parcel containing three buildings and a swimming pool. See Photo 1. The pool is unusable and in decay. The buildings are industrial buildings with cinder block walls and light steel truss roof structures. See Photos 8, 9 and 10. There is a partial second floor and a partial basement in the southernmost building. There are numerous holes in the roof and walls and only a remnant of the original electric service and heat are still in place. The southernmost building appeared to be partially used as a greenhouse or florist business and there are a number of boilers/heaters that are in place that are not operational. Lot 4 Lot 4 contains a single family home which is occupied. The house is in poor condition due to deferred maintenance. The parcel fronts on South Main Street and Old Hightstown Road and the single family home is located very close to the street. Block Lot 7 Lot 7 contains an industrial building and a single family home. See Photo 2. The home is occupied but in fair to poor condition. The industrial building(s) appear to be a combination of buildings (approximately five) that were originally used as poultry processing facility, but later used as for storage purposes. Most of the structures seem to be built in an era from 1930 to 1960 and are constructed of cinder block walls and a light steel truss roof. The interior of the buildings are in very poor condition. See photos 5 and 6. There is no basement and there is no second floor. Some concrete and stone pads/parking areas surround the building. Lot 8 Lot 8 contains a single family dwelling. See Photo 4. The dwelling appears to be unused, has not been kept up and is in a state of disrepair. Lot 9 Lot 9 is a parcel that contains a single family dwelling that is in a state of disrepair. See photo 3 It is no longer inhabited Lot 10 Lots 10 contains a dilapidated home which is overgrown with vegetation. Lot 20 Lot 20 is vacant land. Combined with lot 10 they are the largest of the parcels within the study area. They front on both Old Cranbury Road and on Old Hightstown Road. Generally the land is scrub brush and grasses with a second stage growth forest at the North end of the parcel. Within the Study Area, the industrial buildings have either been stripped of most of the mechanical equipment needed for their industrial use or the equipment has fallen into such disrepair that it will not be salvageable. The elements (rain, snow) have been allowed to enter or seep into the building causing damage. The discontinuance of the use of these buildings previously used for industrial or commercial purposes (their partial abandonment) have allowed them to fall into so great a state

36 Allan Kehrt, Chairman HACE No. CBT-004 February 20, 2015 Page 3 of 10 of disrepair as to be un-tenantable. The industrial buildings are built mostly with cinder block which by New Jersey building codes cannot be used today. The single family homes within the Study Area have fallen into a state of disrepair. They are all conducive to unwholesome living conditions. The amount of time and the funds necessary to bring the residential buildings up to today s codes and standards are more than the structures are worth. All of the buildings on the properties within the Study Area by reason of dilapidation and obsolescence as well as lack of ventilation and light and obsolete layout, are detrimental to the safety, health, and welfare of the community. If you have any questions regarding the matter please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, HODER ASSOCIATES DJH \Projects\Cranbury\CBT-004\0204redev.docx David J. Hoder, P.E., P.P., C.M.E.

37 Page 4 of 10 Property in Question February 20, 2015 Aerial Map Cranbury Township Study Area Block 19, Lot 2, 3, 4; Block 20.16, Lot 7, 8, 9, 10, 20 Hoder Associates

38 Page 5 of 10 Tax Map Cranbury Township Study Area Block 19, Lot 2, 3, 4; Block 20.16, Lot 7, 8, 9, 10, 20 Property in Question February 20, 2015 Hoder Associates

39 Page 6 of 10 Photo 1 - Buildings on Lot 3 of Block 19 Photo 2 - Buildings on Lot 7, Block February 20, 2015 Hoder Associates

40 Page 7 of 10 Photo 3 - Building on Lot 9, Block Photo 4 Building on Lot 8, Block February 20, 2015 Hoder Associates

41 Page 8 of 10 Photo 5 - Interior of building on Lot 7, Block Photo 6 - Interior of building on Lot 7, Block February 20, 2015 Hoder Associates

42 Page 9 of 10 Photo 7 - Interior of building on Lot 3, Block Photo 8 - Second floor of building on Lot 3, Block 19 February 20, 2014 Hoder Associates

43 Page 10 of 10 Photo 9 - Interior of building on Lot 3, Block 19 February 20, 2015 Hoder Associates