United States of America to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Good evening. Call to order the burrow savville planning board on August 20
19th. uh 2025. Beth, has this meeting been advertised in accordance with the open public meetings act? Yes, chairman, it has. I have a roll call, please. Mr. Kandell here, Miss Lman here, Mr. Muller, Mr. Shaw here, Mr. Sataka, Mr. Velo, Mr. Williams, Councilman
Zabrowski, Chairman Tai here. We have a quorum. Moralizations of res resolutions. Um, we have one this evening, but we'll come back to that after the uh preliminary investigation study. Okay,
we need an acceptance of last month's meeting minutes. Do I have a make a motion? Motion and a second. All in favor? I opposed. Beth, um, communication agenda.
Um, none this evening. Site plan subdivision. We have one this evening. Application number PB24-01. Chickle LLC, Freddy Gimenez, and Lucila Perez. 00 and60 Cleveland Avenue, block
360, lots 191 through 194. Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. You ready? Okay, great. Uh, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, and your professionals. Uh, David Himlman. I'm the attorney for the applicant. And Mr. Chairman, I have a
brief opening remarks and then we can proceed with our professional witnesses if that's good with you. That's perfect. Great. Okay. Um, so as you know, the applicant has applied to the board for subdivision and bulk variance approval.
And for the record, the properties identified as block 360 lots 191, 192, 193, and 194. Of course, on the current tax map in Saraveville. And for the for the record, uh the properties are identified as 00 and 60 Cleveland
Avenue. Uh the parcels in question contain a total track area of 10,000 square ft. And as you know, the applicant proposes to subdivide the property where lots 193 and 192 above one another. And we want to construct a
twostory family dwelling within the lots identified as 193 and 194. As you know, the property is entirely within the R5 single family residence uh district zone. Uh the proposed use of the proposed dwelling is permitted use in
the zone. And I wanted to give the board a little background as to sort of why we're here on this. Um in doing my research on this, there apparently was never a subdivision of the subject property lots. Uh even though there were several conveyances
that occurred, the recorded deeds reflect that uh the LLC was the grantee from the estate and in 2003 the LLC conveyed title to 60 Cleveland Avenue uh to uh the Jimnz is the co-licant. Uh
that would be blocks 191 and 192. Unfortunately, when the transfer of title occurred uh from the lots from the bey estate in 2021 and 2022 from the applicant, it appears that they were
improper conveyances as the lots were have deemed merged at that point. So, under New Jersey law, um they should have been uh should not have been conveyed as though the properties were subdivided. Uh so, that's why we're
really here. Uh when the applicant took title to 00 Cleveland, which is lots 193 and 194, they essentially acquired a non-conforming lot, which you couldn't construct a dwelling without a variance.
And quite frankly, this was identified by your zoning officer, Mr. Mashansky. And when uh the applicant had first come in, he he and I spoke about this. When the applicant first applied, he and I spoke about this and he informed me that
technically the lots had merged and therefore a subdivision was required. So that's really why we're here. Um, as you know from the uh application materials, the uh proposed lot that we are looking
to subdivide that we're putting the proposed dwelling on. We need a variance for minimum lot area um which is the corner lot where 6,000 ft is required and 5,000 ft is proposed. We also have minimum lot width and front yard minimum
variance which which are pre-existing existing nonconformities. And Mr. Chairman, we also identified uh another variance which was not originally um identified previously and that's for um the maximum building coverage which
we're going to have to also include as our relief and we will have the architect go through that. Um so uh I have two witnesses, Mr. Chairman. One is our architect Steve uh Condens and then we have Colleen Mcgherk who's our
planner and obviously we will go through your board per your board planner and engineering memorandums as required and address their comments. Who do you want to start with? So I think we'll start with our architect. So you've come up and we will have to have him sworn in
and qualified. Yes. Raise your right hand. We swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. to help you God. I do. You're sworn Steven Considine S what? Go ahead.
63 Prospect Street, Bernardsville, New Jersey. I'm been a licensed architect in New Jersey since 1989. have a master's degree in urban planning from Pratt Institute and I have testified as an expert witness before
hundreds of municipal boards in the state of New Jersey. I got a motion to accept his credentials. Second. All in favor? Yeah, I have it. Can continue. Thank you very much. All right, Steve, I just want to ask you
a preliminary question. So tonight, I know you're going to testify on the proposed plan that you signed and sealed. And just for the record, I think that was last revised, was that April 10th? Is that correct? Okay, great. All right. So, would you give the board an
overview of the proposed project? Yes. And we'll work through the professional review memorandums as well. Thank you. So, the client would like to construct a single family 2 and 1/2tory house on the lot. If it was an interior lot, there
wouldn't be a variance, but because it's on the corner, there's an extra 10,000 square feet which is required um for a corner lot. So, the client um we designed the house based off of the
complying with all the setbacks, which would be 20 ft in the front yard. And because it's a corner lot, you'd have two front yards. So it's 20 and 20 and a side yard of eight and then a rear yard of 25. Now the client we now
discovered that our original assumption of the building coverage at 20% was based on the 6,000 ft lot. That's was an error on our part. It's actually the 5,000 ft lot which would bring us to a
maximum building coverage of,210 square ft. uh 1,000 square ft and our building is 1,210 square ft. And I'll explain why the building is this size. So if you add up all the setbacks, the building width would be 22 ft wide, which is what we
are. Um if you add up all the set front to rear setbacks, the building would be 55 ft, which is what we are. So we are in compliance with all the setback but that yields us a result of a building with a footprint of,210 square ft. So we would need a variance
for that extra 210 square ft. And the reason why the the client wanted to maximize the building footprint was because on the ground floor we have a uh built-in garage which takes up at least 20 ft. So, on the first floor, the
client has a built-in garage, a kitchen, a dining room, and a living room, and a half a bath. There's no other type of um there's not a bedroom there or anything. So, these are all pretty much standard. And in in
today's uh living, these are all rooms that we normally would uh would give into a house. On the second floor, we have a four four bedrooms, two and a half baths, and I think it's a laundry room. So,
overall, the house is just a standard single family house, four bedrooms, two and a half baths with a garage. The height of the building is conforming. It's only 28 ft. The style of the building, I would say, is sort of like a modern
um contemporary with a pitched roof in the back and a gable roof in the front. There's not a lot of conformity on the street to copy a style because there's there's just no conformity whatsoever.
So, this was a normal style house that we would build in any neighborhood in New Jersey. Okay. Um, Steve, if I could just um ask you a couple questions and and referring to uh first the memorandum of from Morgan,
a municipal engineer who's the board engineer of course and uh they wanted us to address a couple things in testimony. Let's just go through that. Okay. Okay. So turning to um I guess it's page three of six of the memorandum
um Mr. Chairman August 11th from Morgan. Um so with regard to I'm referring to Dengineering comments uh with regard to prior approvals, you're not aware of any. Correct. Okay. Neither am I.
Um existing easements or proposed easements? I don't believe there are any. Correct. Not that I'm I am aware of. Okay. and the any outside agency approvals that will be re that will be needed for this I'm assuming there I don't believe so well
except for soil erosion sediment and control and and I'm assuming water and sewer department and fire and of course the construction official okay um and we will and also we would need a soil removal permit
great um turning further into uh Right. Um, so there was an issue with regard to the I'm referring now on also on page three of six architectural plan comments. There was an issue about the discrepancy on the height. Right.
And I think we corrected that and we submitted uh a revised uh schematic to that. Correct. Right. So the height of the building from the gray to the ridge is 28.67 ft. Very good. Yeah. in compliance with the height
ordinance. All right. Um and I know I know the plans reflect there's a basement. Uh just need you to confirm that there'll be no bedrooms will be placed. No bedrooms in the basement. Okay. Um also with regard to the proposed fireplace
um which protrudes from the western wall um can you just describe that and whether or not because it's apparently the engineer indicated that it's not depicted in plain view. in plan view. No, in in in plain view. No, plan view. Plan view. I'm sorry.
Okay. So, I don't know what he means by that, but it's clearly shown on the on the floor plans that we have a a bumpout for. The the flu is not so much a working fireplace. It's more a decorative item. So, you're going to have a an electric fireplace on the
inside, which really doesn't require a flu, but as part of the style of the house, we decided to add this element to it, but it's not functional. Okay. Um, turning now further into It's only one foot deep.
It's only one foot deep. Okay. Okay. Very good. Okay. Turning now to page four of the Morgan memorandum. Um, so there are several comments under subdivision plan comments. Um, I don't
believe that under that's 8 A through H, A through G, I think we're in agreement to reflect all that. Correct. Yes. Okay. Turning to the grading and drainage comment. Right. Um and I know that um the you had
a discussion with the board engineer about the issue of the drainage and maybe you could briefly discuss that and what what our issue is there. Well, the lot itself is relatively flat except that on this as it as it as it goes down towards I think it's what's
the name of the street? The side street. It tends to go on a slope. Otherwise, it's a pretty flat lot. The issue with the uh degrading and the drainage was there's a current condition at the corner where water pools after heavy
rain and um it but it's not as a result of the lot itself. It's a result of the topography of the streets and the since there's no storm water management system, the water just pools there. So he wanted us to address that in the
development of the property. Right. And specifically, so he his opinion would be to a way to address that pooling of water would be to install a catch basin in the street. The one problem which I expressed to the
engineer that I have with that is that my client would be a private client working in a public street. Number two, because it's there is no storm water system and it's just a basically uh a a a tank in the ground. It won't not be
maintained because who's going to maintain it? And if it's not maintained, it's going to get clogged with debris and it's going to end up flooding anyway. So, that was my concern which I would ask the board to alleviate us of that, but that's up to you.
Okay. We can, Mr. Chairman, we can come back to that, right? I'm assuming. But okay, turning now to um the other comments under also on page five um under nine. I think you and I reviewed these with the with the with the applicant and other than the issue just described
on the on the drainage base and I think for the most part we are in agreement with that. I think that yeah I think that we would provide all the additional sidewalk handicap ramp and upgrade fix the curbing as required. Right. So, I don't I don't think that's a problem.
Okay. Very good. Okay, Steve. Thank you. Is there anything else you want to add? I think we've covered it. Okay, great. Any questions, Mr. Chairman? We'll open it up to your board and your professionals. A couple of quick questions. Um the comment uh that pertain to the
fireplace, um when I look at the site plan, it just doesn't show that one foot bumpout. It's showing the floor plan. So, I was just looking to have that added. Yeah, sure. Um, and then as it relates to the uh the drainage issue, um, so what our recommendation is is a sumped inlet is an inlet that doesn't have a
bottom and it sits on stone. During really big rain events, the area is going to flood. I'm not asking the applicant to put it in an inlet and tie it into nearby storm sewer, but it will help after a rain event, the flooding dissipate in a relatively quick manner. I certainly understand the concern about
the maintenance, but what I will note is that 100 ft away down Garfield Place, so you can see it from this site, there is a bank of 10 storm water inlets in Garfield Place. The reason being for those in that I'm not sure, but there's
already municipal storm sewer that the burrow is maintaining. I don't see any issue with an inlet in this location that the burrow would maintain. Um, regarding working within the right ofway, obviously the applicant would have to get a road opening permit, the same type of work that would be for the
installation of sidewalk. The issue is, and if you look at um, if you're familiar with the area, the reason the sidewalk has been failing is because water is ponding there. And if they upgrade the handicap ramp, you're still going to have water ponding there and the concrete's going to fail again. So,
I think it is important to address an issue. Is it a a perfect fit? It's not, but I think it's a reasonable fix that will help the area. And like I said, the water would drain in relatively quick fashion compared to what it does today, which is it it bleeds through the broken
up concrete. That that was my recommendation for that. Mr. Chairman, I understand where your engineer your board of engineers coming. Our concern was doing work within the rightway in the public area, but obviously we'd get a road opening permit. our concern was not so much the
the uh construction or install of this um you know what you're recommending. I think the problem is it's not it wasn't connect it's not connected to the storm sewer. So we were concerned that it's going to fill up and then since it's not connected to anything it's it may not
act as a water retention the way you're suggesting but we're we're open to that. I just we were concerned about from an engineering perspective if this was going to be effective. Says you you you wanted to install a tank and this is an open end. Correct. This has no bottom.
It's going to per perate. No, I get that. And we'll we can work with again we're not opposed to the condition. We're just suggesting that we were concerned about the effectiveness and the the design. But we can work with your board engineer on that. I know you sort of glossed over section
8A through G. Yes. Um when you were discussing uh my section D1 about existing and proposed easements, you said there were none. Um but I am asking for a site triangle easement in accordance with the burough standard. So that will be provided. Yes. Great. I nothing further, Mr. Chairman.
Anybody else have any questions? Go ahead. Um just uh yeah, real quickly, would you mind commenting on whether any uh fencing or landscaping is proposed on the corner lot? Just to kind of confirm for the record, uh we're just going to seed and grass
the lawn for the moment and then if the client wanted to do landscaping, I'm sure he would at some point, but there was nothing not not intended at the moment. Okay, that's fine. just asking because corner lots sometimes, you know,
for privacy and and other reasons. Um just to make it presume that um a basic landscaping plan would would want to be installed because for obvious reasons, it's attractive. So, but we didn't put it on the plan per se, but I
think that's ultimately what the applicant will do. Thank you. Seeing no more questions, we want to bring up your We are going to bring up our our planner, Colleen Mcgherk, who will testify on the justification for the um
the variances. And we uh Beth, I know we have um we've got the the slide presentation, right? And I think the board members have that, right? Okay, great. All right. Uh good evening, Colleen. Good evening. Um good evening, board
members. So, we'd have to have her sworn in and qualified. Thank you. Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, all God. I do. Sworn. Okay. Um, would you just give a brief background of your CV and your professional qualifications so we can
have you qualified as an expert in planning? Certainly. Uh, I received my masters in urban planning from Boston University. I have worked as a professional planner for over 25 years. Uh most of my experience was at the municipal level as
serving as a township planner but I started my business swick stall and mgherp planning associates uh in 2019. Um I've testified before multiple boards including uh South Brunswick uh Oldbridge Edison Matachin etc.
to accept their credential AICP. My license is current. Second. All in favor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Gerkiff, I know that you have looked at the um the variances that we are seeking particularly on the
the lot size. So, if you would uh go through your planning justification and the research that you did and uh obviously in support of the relief and then we can of course refer to the board and the professionals with any questions. So, I'll turn it over to you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, yes.
I've reviewed the application, the site plan, the ordinance, the 2013 master plan, staff memos, and visited the site. So, tonight we're asking the board to approve a minor subdivision with bulk variances. The property in question, lot
360, lots 191 through 194, contains 10,000 square ft and is located at the intersection of Cleveland Avenue and Garfield Place at 00 and 60 Cleveland Avenue. The property is within the R5 zoning district which requires a minimum
of 5,000 square ft. So this is an oversized lot for this zone with twice as much of the amount of required square footage. We are proposing to subdivide the property into two lots with 5,000 square ft each and 50 ft of the amount of required square um and 50 ft lot
width. Sorry. Lots 193 and 194 would contain the new single family dwelling. But since this is a corner lot, a minimum of 6,000 square feet is required and 60 feet of lot width instead of the 5,50
lot width. That's for all interior lots. So we are requesting three bulk variances for the corner lot. Lot area, lot width, and um the max building coverage 20% is allowed whereas we are proposing 24%. And I guess also we're
adding in the uh electric fireplace. 20 ft of front yard setback is required whereas we're proposing 19. So we meet the lot depth of 100 ft and we meet all of the setbacks required front side and rear except for the front setback on Garfield Place and the
building height. We're also proposing 38.90% for the total impervious coverage which is well below the max permitted of 45%. There is also an existing variance condition on lots 191 and 192 due to the
existing single family dwelling location which will remain on the property. The existing front yard setback is 12.68 which does not meet the current ordinance requirement of 20 ft. The dwelling was built in 1927. So prior to zoning standards,
the proposed two-story dwelling would consist of four bedrooms. We are providing two off- streetet parking spaces, one space in the driveway and one in the garage. The surrounding uses consist of single family dwellings and the appearance of the proposed dwelling will fit in with the neighborhood. Uh if
we could take a look at the exhibit. The first slide is uh just a photo of 60 Cleveland Avenue and it also shows the vacant uh area on the corner 00 Cleveland. Next slide. That's the corner. Uh it
shows the intersection of the property. Next slide. And that's looking southward towards Washington. Uh just showing down the street and the different types of houses that are located on that street. That again is the inter intersection of
Garfield and Cleveland. So you get an idea of what the property looks like. Next slide. And this is the tax map. So the tax map shows a historic development pattern was which was created from the formation of 25 foot wide lots and the various
combinations that occurred from this mainly 5,000 square feet. If we look at the surrounding area out of the six corner lots, four are 5,000 square ft. Our lot is 10,000 and the adjacent lot is also 10,000.
And if we look at block 360, the entire block, 71% of the lots are 5,000 ft. Only 29% are larger than 5,000 ft. None of the corner lots are 6,000 square ft. Again, this is due to the original lot
pattern of 25 ft wide lots, which would have created mainly 5,7500 or 10,000 square ft. The burough's 2013 master plan states, quote, primary uses facing the single family residential districts include
preserving the integrity of the existing family neighborhoods. This proposed development will accomplish this goal by constructing a permitted use at a scale that is in keeping with the neighborhood which is preferable to a much larger dwelling on the existing 10,000t lot. With regards
to special reasons, the project meets several goals of the MLU well, including goal A to encourage municipal action to guide the appropriate use of development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. The
proposed development will be attractive with a modern design. It is a permitted use and the proposed lot sizes would fit in with the neighborhood and would be a good use of the property which is an oversized lot for the R5 zone. The setbacks are being met and the site triangle as shown on the site plan will
be clear of any obstructions and there will be more than adequate visibility. Goal E to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons, neighborhoods, communities, and regions
and preservation of the environment. The proposed single family dwelling would be built at the appropriate density. Goal G to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of agriculture, residential, recreational, commercial, and industrial uses and open
space, both public and private, according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens. The property is oversized for the zone, and the proposed dwelling would be would provide a benefit to the community by creating new housing stock for the residents of Seville that would
fit in with the existing neighborhood. and the proposed dwelling is fully conforming with all aspects of the ordinance requirements. The proposed development also meets the C2 hardship balancing analysis. Do the benefits of the proposed use outweigh any detriments associated with the
requested bulk variances for undersized lot and width and building coverage? Yes, the lot area and width and building coverage are similar to the surrounding lots. This development is more in keeping with the surrounding lot sizes and will fit in with the character of the neighborhood. The proposed first
floor would consist of 1,210 ft, 10 square feet, which is consistent with the type of single family dwellings that are built in today's market. Creating new housing stock would be a benefit to the community. The development, the dwelling, and proposed layout would create a desirable visual environment
and would be consistent with land use patterns. As far as the front yard setback, the proposed electric fireplace does create the additional variance, but it measures 1 ft by 6 feet. So this would be dimminimous and I don't see any negative impacts that this would create
and it is my professional opinion that this application can be granted without substantial detriment and the benefits of the proposed use substantially outweigh any potential negative impacts to the zone. The adjacent properties are not being impacted since the majority of the required setbacks are being met.
This proposal is appropriate given that it is a better zoning alternative than the current underutilized property and the additional housing will benefit the community. There is no substantial detriment to the public good and the variances can be reconciled with and will not substantially impair the intent
and purpose of the zone plan and the zoning ordinance because the development is consistent with recommendations in the state development redevelopment plan for metropolitan planning areas one which is this is located in and the MLU all would be advanced by the proposed
deviation from the zoning ordinance requirements. That is all I have. Thank you uh Mgherk for that well thought out and reasoned uh planning justification. Mr. Chairman, I don't have any further uh questions of Merk, but you guys the
planner. I have one question. Did you do an analysis similar to the lot size for building coverage on undersized lot undersized lots? Well, I found out tonight that we had a building coverage variance, but I did look I I have a list of all the uh
square footage of the homes in the block. um the max though. So there were there were quite a few that were 1,700 square feet. Okay. But that's the total square footage. Anybody else? Okay, Joe,
I'm good. I was wondering the same thing actually and um No, I'm I'm good. I think they touched on all the variances and all the proofs. So, thank you. Thank you very much. Good. Uh Mr. Chairman. Yep. Um so just to conclude uh we obviously would request
that the board act favorably upon the subdivision and obviously incorporating the bulk variances uh and we think we've uh provided the uh sufficient justification from a planning standpoint. I anticipate that we've addressed your professional uh your
planner and engineers comments and uh we hope that the board would act favorably upon the application and thank you. All right. At this point, I'll need a motion to open up to the public. Second. All in favor? The eyes have it.
Anybody from the public like to speak? State your name and your address. Good evening. My name is Margaret Heeken. I live at 50 Driftwood Drive in Parland. Okay. And you'll forgive me my ignorance. Uh, I understand that there's some work
that's about to be begin or there's been some talk about the mini mall that that it's sinking. That's different. That's a different I think you're here on the Are you here on the investigation study?
No, I I I'm I'm wfully behind the curve and I'm wondering this isn't this is only to speak of the two houses that they want to put over. All right. I just have some questions about what's going on. Well, we'll get to that. Okay.
All right. Thank you. I'm sorry. No, no worries. Does anybody have any questions on this matter? Anybody want to speak on this matter? Anybody from the public like to speak on this matter? If not, I'll take a motion to close the public.
Motion. All in favor? The eyes have it. We're back in session. Gentlemen, ladies, what's your pleasure? involve variances. I guess our planner in their comments,
right? everything that they asked be incorporated that they said we've agreed to. Anybody else have any questions on them? Second. All in favor? We'll take a roll call. Mr. Kandal, yes. Miss Lman, yes. Mr. Shaw,
yes. Mr. Sataka, yes. Mr. Williams, yes. Chairman Tai, yes. Application approved. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members and your board professionals. Thank you very much and always a pleasure seeing you. better than being viewed.
I'll take that. Thank you so much. Okay. Next on our agenda is the preliminary investigation study for the need area in need of redevelopment or andor rehabilitation. Mini Mall Drive intersection of Ernston Road. Um, the report is dated August
20th, 2025. prepared by Vina Sawad from VMS Planning LLC. Just uh before we start on this, I know there's um some questions about um eminent domain and uh the proposed area
needed redevelopment would be uh would prohibit uh the use of eminent domain, it would actually prohibit it uh as compared to uh allowing it.
Hi, you raise your right hand. Swear I tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. So, I'll help you God. Yes, I do. I'll just wait for Beth to load it. ready. Thank you.
Good evening. Good evening board members. Um I've been in front of you before, so I I hope you accept uh my credentials and I can just directly proceed with the uh presentation. um under the statutory powers instituted
by the state of uh New Jersey and the Seville Burough Council resolution um dated 2024-289 adopted on November 25th, 2024. The Burough Council authorized the planning board to undertake this area
investigation study. It comprises of uh 17 parcels and these parcels are located on either side of Ernston Road. And um before I even start um for those who are
watching uh I just want to let uh the residents know as well as business owners that should the planning board approve this study and the council designates the area as an area need of redevelopment and rehabilitation
uh this uh the subsequent redevelopment plan that would be written uh would be a non-condemnation plan um which means that the burrow will not exercise its power of eminent domain. And what that
simply means for businesses is they can still continue with the uses they have. It does not change or it does not force uh a existing business out of that area. All it does it it gives the owners an
opportunity to redevelop their sites um uh under the statutory requirements of the redevelopment law. So any business that is in there can continue to do so if they wish to redevelop their site
they would have that opportunity uh to move ahead and redevelop. And while I've spent hours on this site, some of the challenges of this site as I see um I'm sorry as a planner is this area entire
area it's at the U municipal boundary between Oldbridge and Sville. So if you look at it if you're moving if you're traversing northbound on Route 9, it is a gateway entrance on one side. If you're exiting and you're moving southwards, then you're leaving several.
But it's an important area. Uh what I also notice is the area is zoned for highway commercial B3 zone. However, majority of these parcels within the study area actually don't abut route 9.
They do not have direct access. The only parcel that has access is the White Castle parcel. And that is why to some extent it's disadvantaged. uh the underutilization, the vacancy or the vacant lots lots that you see are
mostly because they don't have direct access on a public street and um most of them most of the parcels are landlocked. Um some of them probably have um shared access easements but not all of them and
that puts a lot of constraints on the site circulation and um the extensive report that was uh circulated to the board members actually evaluates each of those 17 parcels and explains the challenges. It has a photo survey. It
has an aerial to describe each parcel and what criterias it can meet. So at this presentation you already have a comprehensive report that was uh provided. I'll just go over I'll just give you an overview of the area and
some of the highlights. So what you see on the screen is the uh is study area map. Um it shows the 17 parcels. The entire study area comprises of roughly 12 acres of land. And I said before the
area is um located on either sides of Ernston Road. It is next to the municipal boundary. And what is what is interesting about this area is uh I'm sure you most of you have heard but Oldbridge Township the neighboring
municipality is seeking a transit village designation from NJ do for the area on the other side of the municipal boundary. What you have in front of you is a study area map. The one in orange
shows the transit village um that Oldbridge is pursuing. Their council has also directed the uh planner to undertake an area investigation study. This study area within several directly
abuts the transit village. And when you apply for a transit village designation is typically between uh half a mile radius or 10 minutes of walking distance from the commuter bus terminus. In this case because uh the study area that
we're talking about today is right next to that um uh half a mile radius. The area is actually at walking distance 12 minutes to 13 minutes to the old bridge bus commuter parking lot and that bus
service has one of the highest riderships in the state of New Jersey and that connects you directly that's the last stop that connects you to New York City. So there is a lot of advantage that even serill could take by
redevelopment of the this site and that is why this area is being uh reviewed for its development potential. So um next slide out of the 17 parcels 13 of them are uh developed. Uh there
are four parcels that are vacant. The parcels that are developed contain the mini mall which is uh quite a prominent building and people know about it. There have been issues with that site as well. There are restaurants, there are uh food
stores, there are some utilities like the cell tower, the water tower, there are utility uh lots there and then again there are four vacant parcels. Each of these parcel has no direct access. Actually very few
like maybe one or two have even direct access on Ernston Road. They are interconnected and some of them are actually by definition landlocked. Uh they have driveways around it but they don't have direct access on a public street. Next slide.
So uh some of the objectives uh I've already talked about we're trying to take advantage uh of the area being ripe for development. It being right next to uh a potential transit village designation on the other side of the municipal boundary. The area is
challenged because it does not have direct access to Route 9 although it is uh although it is zoned for highway commercial. So redeveloping the site, creating a redevelopment uh plan would allow it more flexibility and also would
allow it to have other retail commercial users as well as residential uses that opens up the for a sound planning because some of these lots could be merged and you could create a comprehensive plan for the area. So um
it will again enhance economic growth and create new employment opportunities at as it will open up to new retail commercial uses within this area. Next slide. Uh on the screen you have the eight
criterias that are defined by the local redevelopment uh law as well as section 3 which allows you to include any parcel that does not meet one of the eight criterias of redevelopment law. So if your land is vacant for more than 10
years, you could include it in criteria C. You have criteria A which is about sub substandard buildings. There is criteria B and so on and so forth. But there are eight criterias that are defined in redevelopment law and have been enumerated in detail in the report
as well as it's on the screen. This area is also being evaluated for rehabilitation criteria which means that um if there is a uh if the building is older and um you know you could assign a
criteria or needs some sort of rehabilitation you could include that property within the uh and based on the redevelopment law. You have underutilization. You have tax delinquencies based on which you could include a property for
rehabilitation. And what that means when I say redevelopment, when I say rehabilitation, what that means is under the redevelopment law, it allows a mun municipality to come up with a pilot should the council want to exercise that power. And that allows the council to
give when it's a redevelopment site, it allows a council to give up to 30 years of tax abatements. When it comes to rehab, it allows the council to give 5 years of rehabilitatements so that the property owner has the advantage of fixing the property,
improving it or revitalizing it. Next slide. Uh this is rehabilitation which I already spoke about. Next slide. So within the study area there are five
lots that meet criteria C which talks about vacancy. These pro parcels have been vacant for more than 10 years. Uh there are 13 parcels that meet criteria D and criteria D is critical especially
for this area because majority of the parcels are landlocked. Um I had gone through the engineering, the tax department, the building department and uh according to the engineers report most of the parking lots within these
areas uh need to be can you please sorry uh need to be fixed. Um the uh Ernston Road was recently paved but the Minim Mall Drive which is a private road as
well as Westminster Boulevard uh need is in bad shape. There are cracks in the pavements. The sidewalks are cracked. It really needs some um care. So paving and milling of those roadways are recommended. There are sites with huge
parking lots which are um not properly maintained and when I was walking through the sites the site circulation is actually so challenged because the driveways there's no direct access on a public street. So these driveways are
the ones that provide access to the interior lots and many of the places it causes vehicular and pedestrian conflicts while uh maneuvering in and out of the site. Um many of these uh parcels have issues with visibility
because a business would flourish only if it is visible when you are on the main highways. But these buildings are set back. So you wouldn't unless you are on the site, you wouldn't even know that they exist. There there are properties that have food truck on it because the
parking lot is empty. The owner is using it for uh an added business which probably is a violation. The mini mall site in the past few years had almost 21 code violations. Uh as of now there are
three open violations. There are few vacant stores. Um the parking lot I tried to look at the aerial imagery throughout the last five years and the parking lots are pretty empty which is a clear indication of underutilization
and um there are some stores and offices that are empty. Um section H applies to smart growth and the entire area is within the metropolitan planning area PA1. Um it encourages uh sustainable
smart development within those metropolitan areas. It also encourages infill uh redevelopment within those areas. So criteria H can be applied to all 17 parcels as well as section three where all 17 parcels applies and section
three is uh related to inclusion of a parcel if it does not meet any of the criteria. However, that parcel is critical to the development of the entire site, then you could include that parcel. And in this case, because majority of the parcels don't have
frontage, it is um quite uh essential to include those parcels for section 3. Um area need of rehabilitation. There are nine parcels that qualify for criteria three. There is some sort of underutilization and vacancy on those
nine parcels. there is one lot which has um tax delinquency and that's why it meets criteria four for rehabilitation but um I've provided you with an extensive report there is a photo survey
uh some of the pictures have been posted um on the PowerPoint slide you can see the cracked uh paving you can see the empty parking lots you can see some vacant stores within the mini mall building with the water tower, with the
utility buildings, there is no landscaping. There's fencing, but literally the area has 100% impervious coverage uh with the driveways all surrounding it. Um so the photos, the next two slides are just basically photo
surveys um showing vacant stores. There's an entire vacant building and again that is barely visible from the public right of way. It has access through a driveway. So, you wouldn't even know that it it existed. This is the other side. The central photo is of
a restaurant which is on the other side of Ernston Road. But even that area with a strip mall is has it becomes a hangout place because it creates an empty parking lot showing again in underutilization.
There has been police activity noted on these sites. So redeveloping, revitalizing this area seems to be critical. I think with um the area on the other side of the municipal boundary again being considered for uh
redevelopment, I I believe that this is a great opportunity for uh Seville to even reconsider the zoning through creation of a redevelopment plan. I'll take any questions. Anybody have any questions of
Seeing no questions, we'll open to the public. I need a motion. Second. All in favor? I'm a talent of many mall and as saying come up. You have to pronounce your name and follow.
Speak into the mic. Hi, good evening everybody. I'm a tenant of many more for last 35 years and SEO is saying that uh parking lot is crack it's not used is not access to public this is a landlord's responsibility to fix it but if he's don't maintain it
doesn't mean that as a tenant that we get kicked out so I don't know there is no other land in the stable that they can utilize for affordable housing or you can force them to do anything about it. You know, the
landlord should enforce to fix the parking lot if that's the big issue. Go ahead. So, as I said in my presentation, uh we're not trying to kick any tenant out of the building.
If so, nobody's trying to kick out any tenant from the building. This uh area in uh designation actually need and redevelopment designation only allows the owner to take advantage and
redevelop the site, improve it. If he doesn't want to do anything with the site, nobody's going to force him. He it is just an incentive for him to improve the site. It is not forcing any tenants
out. and um the cracked if if he chooses not to do anything then it becomes at some point a code enforcement issue if maintenance and I think many more like I said there have been in the past 5 years like 21 violations that the building
department has issued. So uh the building department is doing their job and enforcing anything that they could in terms of the building code. But in terms of maintenance, it is the tenants who have to talk to the owner. But if your fear is that by saying that the
site is in need of redevelopment, you're going to be displaced. That's not true. Nobody, like I said in the beginning, uh this is a non-condemnation plan. The burrow will not enforce eminent domain. So, nobody's going to be removed from the location.
No, but as far as I understand, the redevelopment and rehabilitation means they're going to knock the building up and they're going to build another houses or something. No, that's not true. So, what is they going to do? So, it only they don't have to do anything. That's what I'm saying. The
owner doesn't have to. So what happens is once the uh the study gets approved by the planning board, they make a recommendation to the council. The council passes a resolution uh deciding
that this area is in need of redevelopment. After that they choose to create a redevelopment plan which is a new zone plan. But a new zone plan doesn't mean that the underlining zoning
goes away. It only opens up other uses to that area and this is a commercial zone. It is in the commercial. The council may choose if they write a redevelopment, if they authorize someone to write a redevelopment plan, it could
be a mixeduse development with some apartments, but apartments doesn't necessarily mean it's affordable. I heard affordable housing that it's not a site that is catered to just affordable housing. We're talking about just redeveloping the site. We haven't talked
about residential. We have not reached a stage where we are uh talking about the users. At some point when a plan is developed, I'm sure the owners will have a say and they will attend the council meeting. They will be notified as well. So nobody's displacing anybody here.
I know. But how can somebody let it go so far that you say that he needs to redevelopment if the parking lot is in such a bad condition? There is no access the mini mall mini mall drive is a private. So these are all the thing that you were saying. So so far nobody
Alex maybe you can chime in if I'm if I'm failing to explain why nobody the landlord to take care of the property that he owns. If I don't cut my grasses let it grow neighbor complain and somebody give me sites. So why can't somebody did that?
There's nothing when it run down so much that everybody see as a redevelopment area. That happens. It happens. But you know, as a tenant, Well, as a tenant, you you have a right to speak to the landlord and say, "Hey, look at I'm paying your rent.
Everybody's paying your rent. Why don't you maintain your property so I can afford to pay you the rent?" Yeah, but then then he won't renew the lease that he's paying. Said, "You you're not getting the lease again."
I mean nothing from what I hear it's an issue between the tenants and the landlord. The burrow actually doesn't have say in it. If there were uh issues related to actual physical building and something the building code could do or
code violation could do then there was I could see a way that the the burrow intervenes but this purely is an issue between the tenant and landlord which should be sorted between us. Okay. So, what is the plan? What do you
There is no plan yet. So, they nobody All we're all we're asking for tonight is that they do a study. When they do the study, they come back here. We decide if the study is worthy to go to the go to the council.
Okay. So, if we recommend that the study is A, B, C, and D of of what she explained, we'll we'll tell the council we think it's a good idea or bad idea. Well, the council can either vote yes with us or no against us or they if we
say no, they could still say yes. They have the final say. So, this is just the beginning of a preliminary study. Nothing's getting built, nothing's getting knocked down. We're going to see if we can come up with a a better plan. Now, if the owners say, "Boy, this fits
Mike," you know, he can get involved in it. If he doesn't, he doesn't have to. So, that's where we stand tonight. All we're doing is looking to make sure that everybody has a say at this and that along the process, you're you're kept in
the loop. Okay. Okay. Thank you. But you know the 449 across the street from the minimal they CME I read the email that they're going to build 60 units affordable housing. So this might be the same way
that's that they they're going to knock down the buildings and the affordable housing because it's all close to the Route 9 and all that. So the the purpose of this is not to say what to do with it.
Purpose of this uh meeting is to say does this meet certain criteria and in fact this board really has no idea what the council wants to do with it because that's my likelihood. No, I understand. We understand that we
want you to understand to get out. Well, the these things don't take six months. I'm saying, you know, you know, we're going to be here for a while on this one. There's there's certain procedures that has to get done before they even come back to us. Then we have to sit down and
decipher it and then we have to send it to the council and then they can decide what they want to do with it. Okay. And you will not be displeased just because of this area designation. No, I just want to make sure. Thank you. No. Does anybody else have any questions?
Come on up, ma'am. Hi, Makin. 50 Driftwood Drive. There's no doubt that that parking lot needs help. I had my first auto accident exiting the mini mall.
So, as far as that goes, um, we're all for that. We're all for not having We're not promising that. Well, we're trying. Well, we're all trying and and I understand.
Our concern was the stores, the vacancies that blight. If something could be done about that, that's what that's what this is intended to do, to take a good look at this and and and to see if we can do away with
that. And as far as come up with a better plan to make it more economical, feasible, and tax ratable for us. I mean, actually, you may or may not be aware of this, but there's a very large dumpster that's in the parking lot. You've seen
that full of grease. It's a mess. People dump all kinds of stuff over there. It's as if we're directly behind the mini mall. It's as if people don't even realize that people live there. This is
an This attracts brats, mice, whatever. So, if something could be done about that or somebody could start a code enforcement, we could have that look bad. Somebody could start thinking about that and the the I've almost fallen several times in the cracked. We We use the mini
mall all the time because we in fact this gentleman the liquor store uh we use all this all the time. Centinos. So, if something could be done about improving that, we're I mean, we're all for it. If it means if it means affordable
housing at some point or it means housing, so be it. As long as it's not encroaching on the property owners, you know, that are there. Yeah, we we care about you start talking about affordable housing up near the water tower, you're
going to see more than one people here. Yeah. No. Ma'am, for the record, I didn't catch your address. What was the address? 50 Driftwood Drive. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Appreciate it. Welcome. Anybody else have any questions on this redevelopment study? Anybody else have any questions on this
redevelopment study? Would you like to sum up? I just would request the board uh to vote for it favorably uh and make a recommendation to the council to uh designate this area as an area in need
of redevelopment and rehabilitation. Thank you so much. I So chairman, we have a um a resolution already written recommending to the burough council that the property known block 446 lots 2.01 and 2.02, 2 block
445 lots 1.01 1.02 1.03 2.03 2.04 3.01 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06
5.03 and 5.04 as well as block 449.07. Lots 1.01 2.01 and 3.01 01 should be designated as an area of need of redevelopment. Can we have a motion? Second. Second.
All in favor? Let's do a roll call vote. Mr. Kandell, yes. Miss Lman, yes. Mr. Shaw, yes. Miss Sataka. Mr. Williams. Chairman Tai. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, next on the agenda, old
business, new business, and administrative matters. Our next meeting is September 3rd. Uh we currently have two informal applications um that possibly might be coming forward for there. You want to open up to the public? Make a motion to open to the public.
Motion. Second. All in favor? I Anybody from the public would like to speak on any matter? Anybody from the public like to speak? Hearing none, I'll make motion that we close public portion. Motion to close.
Second. Second. All in favor? I make a motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor. Thank you very much. Thank you everybody. Have a good night.