Scotch Plains Planning Board Approves Council's Shack. Resolution

The Township of Scotch Plains should declare  and several municipal properties, “areas in need of rehabilitation,” the Planning Board unanimously recommended during a special meeting Monday night.

The Planning Board met to consider the resolution as authorize by the Township Council . The board did not discuss future plans for the sites, but heard a presentation from planning consultant Dave Roberts, who evaluated the properties to see whether they met the conditions to qualify as an area in need of rehabilitation. Roberts elaborated on the difference between an area in need of development and an area in need of rehabilitation – specifically, that the rehabilitation label would not allow the township ti assert eminent domain.

“One of the issues with redevelopment is property control and property acquisition, that’s why eminent domain is part of it,” Roberts said. “It’s all about the public interest. We have to act as a concerned, public body in the public interest, because if we don’t, a situation can arise adverse to the public interest and we have to take action. The redevelopment approach is the most difficult to get through from a procedural stand point, but also gives you the most power…. As you can imagine, it’s a pretty extreme step.”

One of the criteria required for an area to qualify for rehabilitation is that more than half of its housing stock or a majority of its water and sewage infrastructure is at least 50 years old. Roberts explained that Scotch Plains is a “mature suburban township," meaning that it was mostly developed post-WWII, and that most properties meet the requirements for a rehabilitation designation. He also stated that rehabilitation would be a better alternative to re-zoning Shackamaxon, because downzoning might invite a lawsuit if property is devalued.           

“It’s not a negative context in terms of there’s something wrong with this neighborhood and we have to fix it,” he said. “It’s more we’re trying to set up a system where we can do something now so that it can be sustainable.”

Roberts stressed that, “We’re trying to do the minimum necessary to be able to link the municipally controlled blocks with Shackamaxon.”

Planning Board members expressed several concerns regarding devaluation of the property, and how the development plan could affect the area.

“It seems to me, depending on what that plan consists of, has a tremendous impact on the value of that land,” board member Michael Michalisin said. “I don’t know what the value of civic space is, but that’s township-owned. Who’s going to buy that and pay for civic space? Right now, that property owner could do anything he wants with that land. With a development plan, he cannot.”

Board member Jeffrey Strauss said he hoped that the plan would still utilize the area’s space without compromising the old charm of the property through redevelopment. Strauss' assertions were that the statutory language is the guide for what can and cannot be done and what can and cannot be designated as 'an area in need of rehabilitation'. He thought that legal terms and applications must be thoroughly studied to see if such a designation can even be used, but would defer to a studied legal opinion of town professionals.

Roberts responded that the developers’ aim was to prevent the devaluation of the property surrounding the course by creating an alternative that is, “reasonable for the property owner and in the best interest from the fiscal standpoint of the township.” He went on to say that the rehabilitation plan would be the most, “flexible vehicle to give the township council and planning board the most tools to come up with the best situation possible.”

Board members also discussed the economic feasibility of redeveloping, but Mayor Malool clarified that the Council had previously sought help in determining the revenue.

“Early in this process, we did meet with a developer just to get input into whether or not what we were thinking about was even on anybody’s radar,” she said. “We asked the developer to put together an idea of what we could do with this kind of a plan. Based on the plan that he gave us, where Shackamaxon pays $300,000 a year in taxes, this plan would bring in over a million. The feasibility is there, the developers are there, and in fact, if we get to that point, we would put out a request for bid proposals for developing.”

The resolution passed unanimously, provided a memo be given to the council stating they should further investigate the legislative intent of the state statute as well as an analysis of the economic feasibility of the plan.

Corrections: This article has been amended to reflect the following correction made February 22nd:

A previous version of this article misspelled Board Member Jeffrey Strauss' name and misattributed a quote to him. This has been corrected to better reflect his views on the matter.