Prepared for The Council of the Borough of Fanwood
Prepared by Abeles Phillips Preiss & Shapiro
Planning and Real Estate Consultants

434 Sixth Avenue, Fifth Floor
New York, New York 10011

120 Albany Street, Eighth Floor
New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901

March 2001

The following study was prepared on behalf of the Council of the Borough of Fanwood to determine whether a full block in downtown Fanwood qualifies as "an area in need of redevelopment" as provided under New Jersey's Local Redevelopment and Housing Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:12A). The block in question, designated as Block 64 on the tax maps, is bounded by South Avenue, Martine Avenue, LaGrande Avenue, and Second Street. Through the detailed analysis documented in this report, the block in question was determined to have met the statutory criteria for designation as a redevelopment area, based on the following findings:

• The bulk if the properties and the large majority of the acreage within the study area meet one or more of the statutory criteria for redevelopment area designation. The prevailing condition within the subject block is one of an "area in need of redevelopment."
   
  
• There has been no new development activity in the study area for more than 20 years. To a large extent, the subject block has not benefited from the wave of revitalization that has occurred in the communities along New Jersey Transit's Raritan Valley line.
   
  
• The Dean Oil site - the largest vacant parcel in study area, has not been in use for nearly fifteen years. The last building on the site was demolished in the early 1990s. Despite ongoing remediation efforts, the site still has soil and groundwater contamination problems, which have deterred investment.
   
  
• Properties near the intersection of South Avenue and Second Street suffer from dilapidation, obsolete layout, and diverse ownership, which limits the opportunity for reinvestment and redevelopment.
   
  
• The parking lots in the center of the block - the municipal parking lot and the bank site have a faulty design. The paved area is excessive for the number of parking spaces; landscaping is minimal; traffic patterns are circuitous and cumbersome; sidewalks for pedestrian circulation are lacking and, where provided, they are poorly maintained; curb cuts for disabled access are not provided.
   
  
• The study found that some of the properties along the pedestrian-oriented frontage of Martine Avenue do not meet any of the statutory criteria. However, they are included in the redevelopment area, in order to ensure that these properties are integrated into the overall redevelopment plan and are not treated as isolated islands. Moreover, leaving only a few properties out of the redevelopment area could frustrate the potential for redeveloping other parts of the block.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a one-block area in downtown Fanwood meets the requirements for designation as "an area in need of redevelopment" as established under N.J.S.A. 40A: l 2A, New Jersey's Local Redevelopment and Housing Law. The study, which was prepared on behalf of the Borough Council of Fanwood, considered the entire block that is bounded by South Avenue to the north, Martine Avenue to the east, LaGrande Avenue to the south, and Second Street to the west (Block 64 on the Borough tax maps).

Prior to undertaking this redevelopment study, the Borough Council considered several different strategies for downtown revitalization. The Council engaged Abeles Phillips Preiss and Shapiro, Inc. (APPS, Inc.) to conduct an analysis of various development options, which were documented in the August 2000 report entitled Fanwood Downtown Redevelopment Plan: Alternative Development Options. During that investigation, it became clear that conditions on many properties within the block exhibited characteristics of "an area in need of redevelopment" warranting a more complete and thorough investigation of the area. The Council, based on the recommendation of APPS, Inc., requested the study which is the subject of this report to be undertaken.

The scope of work for the study encompassed the following:

• Surveys of land use, property conditions, and occupancy/vacancy within the study area;
   
  
• Review of municipal tax maps and aerial photographs;
   
  
• Review of the existing Master Plan and Land Use Ordinance of the Borough of Fanwood;
   
  
• Review of soil and groundwater contamination progress reports on the Dean Oil site from the New Jersey
   
  
• Department of Environmental Protection, AccuTech (environmental consultants), and Complete Remedial Services, Inc. (environmental consultants).
   
  
• Review of the Borough Building Department's files (for construction permits, zoning permits, certificates of occupancy, and building code violations);
   
  
• Review of the Borough Tax Assessor's files (for ownership, property sales and selling prices, building area, building age, and land value);
   
  
• Discussions with Clayton Pierce, the Borough's Downtown Revitalization Coordinator; and
   
  
• Discussions with Borough officials.

Block 64, as shown on Figure 1, became the focus of the redevelopment study due to its location at tile heart of the downtown. The block includes the downtown's core retail area along Martine Avenue, several vacant and underutilized lots, and a large municipal parking lot. The study was not expanded to include other blocks in the downtown area, because the same apparent conditions were not exhibited and because their location and status have less potential for having a blighting influence on the downtown.

The study area is approximately 6.5 acres in size, and in contrast to the hilly areas to the west, it is has a relatively flat topography. It is situated at the intersection of two heavily traveled arterial roads: Route 28 (South Avenue) and Martine Avenue (which leads north to downtown Scotch Plains, State Route 22, and Interstate 78). The study area is located directly across South Avenue from the Fanwood train station, which provides direct train service to Newark and New York City via New Jersey Transit's Raritan Valley line. The study area has a mix of various different commercial uses, including retail, office, warehouse, and light industry.

There are a series of small retail establishments providing goods for sale and personal and professional services along the west side of Martine Avenue, which generally exhibit characteristics of a traditional "Main Street." The narrow stores have entrances and display windows at the street-front property line, right off the sidewalk. With a consistent retail frontage and a pedestrian-friendly environment, the west side of Martine Avenue functions as a traditional downtown pedestrian shopping street. People park on the street or in the municipal lot behind the stores and then walk along street and can shop in a number of stores in a single visit.

There are some additional sidewalk-oriented stores along South Avenue, but these properties do not have a continuous frontage of shopping. Gaps in the retail frontage include the municipal parking lot (Lot 6); the drive-thru bank (Lot 5); the Livingston Wilbor machine shop (Lot 4); and the private parking lot at the corner of Second Street (Lot 1.01).

The southwestern corner of the study area has been underutilized for many years. Known collectively as the Dean Oil site, Lots 17, 18, 19, and 20 have been beset by soil and groundwater contamination (which is described in greater detail in Chapter 4); the last remaining building on the site was demolished in the early 1990s. Since then, it has been fenced off and has remained inactive, except for ongoing environmental cleanup efforts. Immediately north of the Dean Oil Site is the rear entryway into the Livingston Wilbor property (Lot 21 ) and the former Ponzio Oil site (Lot 22), which contains a deteriorated building and may also contain contaminated soils, according to a 1997 analysis and report by Complete Remedial Services, Inc. (letter from CRS to NJDEP, dated February 18, 1997).

The central portion of the block is almost entirely devoted to outdoor parking, which is utilized by both shoppers and commuters. Both the municipal parking lot on Lots 5A and 6 and the bank parking lot on Lot 5 are inefficiently laid out. and their design creates circuitous traffic patterns. T here is an excessive amount of paved area per parking space. inadequate landscaping and no dr ivewav or pedestrian connections between the municipal parking and ad jacent private lots. The

Despite its poor design, the downtown would not have sufficient parking without the municipal parking lot. Of the small shops along Martine Avenue, only the sites at the corner lots have their own on-site parking. All the other lots along Martine have close to 100 percent lot coverage and rely on the municipal lot and on-street parallel spaces for parking. The commercial uses near the intersection of South Avenue and Second Street rely on the privately-owned corner lot for parking, their nearest location which can accommodate parking. Both the Livingston Wilbor site and the bank site have their own private on-site parking in the rear of their properties.

LAND USE IMMEDIATELY OUTSIDE THE STUDY AREA

Land uses in the surrounding areas form an important land use context for the study area. Moving in a clockwise direction from the corner of South Avenue and Second Street, the following land uses are found in the vicinity of Block 64:

• There is a small automobile-oriented retail center with small shops and a sit-down restaurant. Next door is the former Scotchwood Automotive shop, which is to be demolished and redeveloped for additional parking for the adjacent train station.
   
  
• The parking lot for the Fanwood train station is accessed off of South Avenue opposite Independence Community Bank. The Victorian train station building on the other side of the railroad tracks is an historical landmark building that reflects the history and character of the borough. The station parking lot on the north side of the building is also undergoing improvements.
   
  
• Diagonally opposite the study area across the South Avenue/Martine Avenue intersection are several automobile- oriented commercial uses, including a Dunkin Donuts on the corner parcel.
   
  
• There are a series of automobile-oriented stores across tile street on the north side of Martine Avenue. These sites have their own on-site parking spaces and serve predominantly single-destination shoppers, since it is possible to drive to and from the store without walking in the downtown and visiting other stores. They are different from the pedestrian-oriented stores on the south side of Martine Avenue in the study area, which create more of a "Main Street" environment.
   
  
• Diagonally opposite the study area across the Martine Avenue/LaGrande Avenue intersection is a single-family residential structure that has been converted into a dentist's office. Land uses beyond the dentist's office are predominantly single-family residences.
   
  
• Opposite LaGrande Avenue is the First Presbyterian Church and the church parking lot, followed by four detached single-family residences.
   
  
• Diagonally opposite the study area from LaGrande Avenue/Second Street intersection is LaGrande Park, which provides playground equipment and playing fields for recreational activities in the borough; it also contains attractive open space and greenery.
   
  
• Opposite the study area on the south side of Second Street is a row of older attached row houses or "townhouses." followed by a drive-thru bank (another automobile-oriented commercial use) fronting on South Avenue.

Under N.J.S.A. 40A: 12A-5, 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 (C40A: I 2A-6:the governing body of the municipality by resolution concludes that within the delineated area any of the following conditions are found:

1. 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.
    
   
2. 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.
    
   
3. 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 portions of the municipality, or topography, or nature of the soil, is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital.
    
   
4. Areas with building or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, over-crowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout, or any combination of there or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.
    
   
5. A growing lack or a total lack of proper utilization of areas caused by the condition of the title, diverse ownership of the real property therein or other conditions, resulting in a stagnant or not fully productive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to and serving the public health, safety, and welfare.
    
   
6. 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, cyclone, tornado, earthquake, or other casualty in such a way that tile aggregate assessed value of the areas has been materially depreciated.
    
   
7. 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. 992 e. 72 (C.40A: l 2A-5 and 40A: I 2A-6) for the purpose of granting tax exemptions within the enterprise zone district pursuant to the provisions of P.L. 1991, c. 4,1 (C.4OA: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:2 1-1 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: I 2A- 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.

APPLICATION OF THE STATUTORY CRITERIA TO STUDY AREA PROPERTIES

As a basis for the investigation, on-foot surveys of the study area were conducted noting land uses, property conditions, and occupancy. Particular attention was paid to parking, loading, use of yard space, landscaping, coverage, streetscapes, and general maintenance. The inventory of property conditions focused principally 0?1 exterior conditions; however, the condition of interior space, to the extent that public access was available, was included. Research on the history of variances, permits, certificates of occupancy, site plan approvals, and violations in the records of the Borough's Tax Assessor and Building Department was also conducted.

One of the issues that was considered as part of the overall redevelopment study was whether existing uses and buildings were consistent with the Borough's zoning and master plan policies. This analysis was conducted for the purpose of ascertaining whether study area properties were being used to their realistic development potential based on the underlying zoning and whether they were serving the intended function as set forth in the Master Plan.

The following section describes the existing conditions for each of the study area properties and considers whether any of the statutory criteria for "an area in need of redevelopment" are met for each property. Based upon this property-by-property analysis, a determination was made as to whether the study area as a whole or in part met the designation. Photographs of each property are provided in the appendix.

BLOCK64, LOT1: SOUTH AVENUE DEVELOPERS

This property is located in the northwestern portion of Block 64, near the intersection of South Avenue and Second Street. The L-shaped lot fronts onto South Avenue, with a rear entry off Second Street. The building is the oldest on the block (built i?? 1875) and is approximately 6,200 square feet it? size. Three stores (Florida Fruit Shoppe, Enchantments, and Enchantments Too) occupy the front of the building and at the street line and a large attached warehouse is located to their rear

This property meets redevelopment criteria d and e.

Another problem with the premises is size. Lot I is one of many, small, diversely owned sites in the northwestern corner of the study area. The building and lot are small by modern retail standards, which prevents it from being refurbished and utilized by a more successful tenant. Both the size and the diverse ownership prevent full utilization of the site.

Moreover, the stores are located along a predominantly auto-oriented strip with fast-moving traffic and is not inviting to pedestrians. The physical environment discourages pedestrians and commuters from exploring that part of downtown, despite the recent sidewalk improvements. The stores are disconnected from Martine Avenue by the municipal parking lot (Lot 6), the Independence Community Bank site (Lot 5), and the Livingston Wilbor site (Lot 4). They are also separated from the train station by the large station parking lot and fast-movhlg traffic.

The fact that there are only five stores near the South Avenue/Second Avenue intersection also limits pedestrian interest. Pedestrians are more likely to be attracted to streets with a larger selection of stores.

While the backyard parking lot has been generally well-maintained, it has a faulty design. The gravel surface does not allow demarcation of parking spaces and travel lanes, and is also discouraging to customers in inclement weather.

BLOCK 64, LOT 1.01: WALTER & GLADYS ESSEX

Lot 1.01 at the corner of South Avenue and Second Street serves as tile parking lot for Lot 1, as well as Lots 2 and 3. The gravel-covered lot is accessed off of Second Street. The gravel has an uneven grade that is slightly depressed below the level of the adjacent sidewalks. Weeds have grown through the gravel around the edges of the parking lot near the sidewalk. Wooden wheel stops line the blank wall of the adjacent building on Lot 2 and concrete wheel stops are arranged along the rear property line. Many of the wheel stops are cracked and broken.

This property meets redevelopment criteria d and e.

Because of the lot's small size (about 8,000 square feet) and its odd L-shape it would be very unlikely, by itself, to attract new development, despite its attractive corner location. Separate and diverse ownership of the adjacent lots discourages consolidation into single ownership and redevelopment by the private market. As a result, as a commercial parking lot it is not in fully productive condition, as stated under criteria e.

The site is also poorly designed and shows signs of dilapidation. Although most customers come from the direction of South Avenue, drivers cannot enter the parking lot from South Avenue, and are forced to turn onto the side street. Despite the presence of wheel stops, the gravel surface does not allow parking spaces or circulation lanes to be clearly demarcated. creating haphazard circulation and parking patterns. Moreover the gravel surface and uneven grade create difficulties in inclement weather and do not provide adequate access for disabled persons. The broken wheel

BLOCK 64, LOT 2: LISA ASH & WENDY EVANS

The one-story masonry building on this property houses a printing/copying business. The lot is almost entirely covered by the building, and the storefront opens up directly onto the sidewalk. The large front display window allows an unobscured view of the products and services offered inside the store. According to the records in the Borough Tax Assessor's office, the 2,000 square foot building was built m 1920 and underwent a significant rehabilitation in 1974.

The property meets the redevelopment criteria d and e.

Despite the fact that the building itself is in good condition, the building on Lot 2 has become functionally obsolescent over time. Like the building on Lot 1, the building on Lot 2 is a pedestrian-oriented building on an auto- oriented commercial strip. It does not have the on-site parking, free-standing sign, or other features that would help attract drive-by customers. Moreover, the parking lot on the adjacent lot is substandard (see Block 64, Lot 1.01 above), and the site is not conveniently located in relation to the municipal parking lot. This makes customer parking less convenient, a major impediment for attracting customers along an automobile oriented retail corridor.

Although the site is nearly 100 percent covered by the building, the store is still very small by contemporary standards. The smallness of the site would be likely to limit future commercial opportunities.

BLOCK 64, LOT 3: BARBARA HORVEZ

This lot has a two-story wood-frame building built in 1925. The building covers virtually the entire lot, and the ground floor has a shop that opens up onto the sidewalk. Neither the site visit nor the Borough Hall research revealed what use occupies the top floor. The ground floor is approximately 1,100 square feet in size, and the upper floor is approximately the same size.

The property meets the redevelopment criteria d and e.

The outdoor appearance of the structure suggests that the building is structurally dilapidated. The Front and rear facades are freshly painted and seem to be in good repair, but the side view of the building's second floor from Second Street reveals a sagging roof, a boarded up window, and deteriorated wood siding. The structure is dilapidated.

Like the other adjacent properties (Lots I and 2), Lot 3 has become functionally obsolete. It has no on-site parking and relies primarily on poorly designed and dilapidated parking lot on Lot 1.0 ] . The municipal parking lot is too far away to be convenient for most shoppers. Moreover, unlike most other commercial uses along South Avenue, the site has no sign to attract customers.

Like the adjacent lots. the small size of Lot 3 is also an issue. The lot is one of several small, diversely owned parcels in the northwestern corner of the study area. The diverse ownership prevents a developer from consolidating a number of these lots into a single parcel and creating a more functionally up-to-date building for the site.

Originally built in 1930, the Livingston Wilbor Corp building is a light industrial and warehouse use that is unlike all other land uses in the study area. Light industrial and warehouses are prohibited under the current zoning; the Livingston Wilbor site presumably is a pre-existing nonconforrning use.

Each property meets the redevelopment criteria d and e.

Light industry and warehouses are deleterious uses in the midst of a downtown environment and are inconsistent with the policies of the Master Plan and the regulations in the Land Use Ordinance. Truck traffic is associated with warehouses, and noise, vibration and dust are associated with the workshop. The site's backyard storage shed and outdoor storage materials are visible from the adjacent municipal parking lot and create an unattractive visual impression for the rest of downtown. Because of all these characteristics, light industrial and warehouse uses are not consistent with the predominant pattern of retail uses and threaten the vitality of the downtown commercial environment.

The arrangement of the site is also faulty. The site does not have automobile access from South Avenue, but the owner purchased Lot 21, a vacant lot which connect Lot 4 to Second Street. As a result, the site attracts commercial traffic down Second Street past an existing townhouse development. Site access and building arrangement are poorly design to accommodate the loading activities associated with a light industrial and warehouse use.

Finally, the smallness and odd L-shape of the site would tend to make the site difficult to convert the site into one of the conforming uses currently allowed in the code. Any new use in the building would be hampered by the cramped configuration of the lot and building. Consolidation of sites in the northwest corner of the study area would help create a fully productive use.

BLOCK 64, LOT 5: STATEWIDE SAVINGS BANK

The one-story Independence Community Bank building on Lot 5 was originally built in 1973 as the Arch Federal bank. The building has a modern, automobile-oriented design with colonial accents and a mansard parapet, and a free-standing sign is situated in the landscaped front yard. The large parking lot, the sign, and drive-through window are provided for the convenience of the driving public. The design of the building and the property would be better suited for the automobile-oriented commercial character of Route 22.

The property meets the redevelopment criteria d.

The building and the site are inefficiently utilized and the backyard parking lot has a faulty design. The parking lot is inefficiently designed, in that there are relatively few parking spaces for the large amount of pavement. Landscaping is limited to the fringes to the parking lot, resulting in a large expanse of asphalt behind the building. Moreover, despite the fact that the bank parking lot abuts the municipal parking lot, no effort has been made to link the two, whether with a driveway or a sidewalk. This makes it more difficult for downtown shoppers to walk between stores and service establishments. an express goal of the Master Plan.

Together, Lots 5A and 6 form the municipal parking lot that provides parking spaces for downtown merchants.

Each property meets the redevelopment criteria d.

While the municipal parking lot serves a critical function in downtown, it has a faulty design. Like the bank parking lot, Lot 6 has a large amount of pavement for a relatively small number of parking spaces and has virtually no landscaping. The travel lane that connects LaGrande Avenue to South Avenue and provides a one-way access drive to the parking spaces is approximately 25 feet wide. This is much wider than necessary for one-way traffic. The wide lane also creates occasional traffic and parking problems, because trucks use the slightly wider lane to make deliveries.

Lot 5 is better designed than Lot 6, in that it has narrower travel lanes, attractive granite curbs, and landscaping along the LaGrande frontage. However, the design of the parking lot is still faulty. There are no curb-cut pedestrian connections to Lot 6 (which would be necessary to reach the stores along Martine Avenue), and there is only one driveway connection to between lots 5A and 6. While the properties are both municipal lots, their design is not integrated in the least. Their separate design treatment creates wasted pavement space and creates circuitous and inconvenient circulation.

BLOCK 64, LOT 6: BOROUGH OF FANWOOD

See Block 64, Lots 5A & 6 above.

BLOCK 64, LOT 7: CHARLES & MARGARET COBB

The one-story, wood-frame building on Lot 7 has been occupied by the same three stores for more than twenty years. The building appears to be in good structural condition, but does show some minor signs of deferred maintenance. There is some cracking and chipping paint on the side of the building, and some roof shingles and the barber shop pole attached to the front facade are broken. The rear-yard is used as a parking lot in conjunction with Lot 8 adjacent.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

The building fits nicely into the pedestrian-oriented context of the other shops along Martine Avenue, and the good building maintenance suggests that the businesses are doing well. Although the building and the lot are small, they are in scale with the other small lots and buildings in the "Main Street" area.

Like the other downtown properties, the property relies on the adjacent municipal parking lot as well as its own rear lot for parking. Although the on-site parking lot is oddly configured (no auto access from the front of the property and no connection to the municipal lot), this is not a major constraint on business.

While the property does not achieve anywhere close to the site's full development potential as permitted in the Land Use Ordinance (nearly 100 percent coverage and, stories in height), it is

BLOCK 64, LOT 8: BURGDORFF ERA

The building on Lot 8 creates a very attractive first impression of the downtown area. It has an ornate cornice and decorative masonry, which is articulated at the corner. The large display windows create a welcoming and visually stimulating environment along the street.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

The building on Lot 8 fits in well with the pedestrian-oriented shopping environment along the street, both in terms of size and design. The building is very well maintained, with enclosed trash receptacles, lighting for the rear entrance, screening for the roof air conditioning unit, and overall cleanliness. The site has limited on-site parking, but this is not a constraint on business because patrons can just as easily use the municipal parking lot, which has a large number of spaces and is just steps away. The property is not blighted.

BLOCK 64, LOT 9: MARTINE AVENUE ASSOCIATES

This one-story building is occupied by Fanwood Bagels & Deli and is generally in good repair. According to Borough Building Department files, the building on this property has undergone substantial improvements over the course of the 1 990s, including roof and siding repairs, installation of new windows, and a sign replacement. Brick pavers, landscaping, and an awning have been added to the rear facade, improving the look of the store from the direction of the municipal parking lot.

The exterior of the building does show some signs of deferred maintenance (the front awning is slightly tattered and frayed, and in the rear yard, some of the brick pavers in the rear yard have started to buckle), but these are not beyond repair. Despite the fact that the property has no on-site parking, the adjacent municipal parking lot and the on-street parallel parking spaces provides ample places to pull over. Moreover, the building fits in well with the pedestrian-oriented environmental along Martine Avenue, with large display windows facing the street.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

Nothing about the property would suggest that it is blighted. Aside from some minor improvements that may be warranted, the building is in excellent condition.

BLOCK 64, LOT 10: FANWOOD EQUITIES

The one-story building on Lot 10 was built in 1970 and is occupied by the Fanwood Corner Store, which is a combined lunch counter and convenience retail establishment. The building generally appears to be in good structural condition, although it is suffers from some deferred maintenance. On the building facade, there is wear and tear on the metal and masonry cladding. In the rear, trash is deposited on the asphalt sidewalk (some of which is broken up), and the fencing around the dumpster is warped and heavily worn.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

BLOCK 64, LOT 13/14: I&R MANDEL These two lots have been combined. There are 5 stores in the two buildings, the largest being the Eckerd drug store. Measuring more than 12,000 square feet, the property is more than twice the size of any other individual property along the downtown stretch of Martine Avenue except for Lot 16. Because the site can rely on off-site parking in the municipal lot, the building has been expanded to almost 100 percent lot coverage. As a result, it can accommodate a relatively large store for a pedestrian-oriented environment and is still able to attract a chain retailer like Eckerd.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

Due to the combination of two key assets (its relatively large lot size and its location in the pedestrian-oriented part of downtown), Lot 13/14 is desirable from a commercial point of view.

BLOCK 64, LOT 14: I&R MANDEL

See Block 64, Lot 13/14 above.

BLOCK 64, LOT 15: ANTHONY GASPARINO

Built in 1975, this one-story building is very well-maintained. It has an attractive front masonry facade, and on the side and rear, it has a stucco facade with tasteful brick accents. The proprietor has made ongoing improvements to the facade and signage of the building. The building fits in very well with the pedestrian-oriented environment along Martine Avenue, with large windows and a double-door facing out onto the sidewalk.

The property meets no redevelopment criteria.

The lack of on-site parking is not an impediment to business, because the adjacent municipal lot provides ample parking for entire area.

BLOCK 64, LOT 16: DOMINICK CONSTANDI

Lot 16, located at the corner of Martine Avenue and LaGrande Avenue, is occupied by Frank's auto repair shop. The site has a small 1,300-square foot building with 2 garage bays facing the street. The building is set back more than 20 feet from both property lines, and a parking lot where cars are parked on an on-going basis lines the edges of the property. There is minimal landscaping on the site.

The property meets redevelopment criteria d.

The auto repair use is not consistent with the pedestrian-oriented uses along the west side of Martine Avenue and detracts from the attractiveness and vitality of the shopping environment. In addition, auto repair facilities often cause soil and groundwater contamination from oil, gas, and

BLOCK 64, LOTS 17,18, 19, & 20: SAVERS SHARES, INC.

These four lots make up the Dean Oil site, which is currently vacant, fenced off, and overgrown with weeds. For many years, the site was the home of a fuel oil company, but the site has not been used for more than 15 years, and the last building on the site was demolished in 1987. The Dean Oil site has had ongoing issues with soil contamination. The former fuel oil company had several underground storage tanks, which leaked contaminants into the soil and ground water. While all the underground tanks were removed between 1985 and 1989, soil and groundwater contamination were left behind. Since then, Savers Shares Inc. (SSI), in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) has taken the following steps toward site remediation:i

• In 1995 and 1996, Savers Shares Inc. completely excavated the soils that were identified as containing polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and replaced them with clean fill. Subsequent soil samples showed that the PAH levels were well below the NJDEP's standards for nonresidential use. However, the site would require additional remediation for residential development.
   
  
• In 1995, at SSI's request, the NJDEP approved a remediation process and ongoing monitoring program for benzene and naphthalene contamination found in the ground water.
   
  
• In 1996 and 1997, an environmental consultant hired by SSI determined PAH constituents found in Monitoring Wells MOO-7 and M-100 were in fact coming from an off-site source. Lot 22 was identified as the potential source.

Each property meets the redevelopment criteria c.

The Dean Oil site's ongoing contamination problems have deterred redevelopment of the site. While the site has been vacant for the last 15 years. soil cleanup did not take place until the mid ! 990s, and to this clay. there are ongoing unresolved contamination problems. It is unclear to what extent natural remediation tor benzene and naphthalene contamination have been effective.

BLOCK 64, LOTS 18: SAVERS SHARES, INC.

See Block 64, Lot 17, 18, ]9, &: 20 above.

BLOCK 64, LOTS 19: SAVERS SHARES, INC.

See Block 64, Lot 17, 18, 19, & 20 above.

BLOCK 64, LOTS 20: SAVERS SHARES, INC.

See Block 64, Lot 17, 18, 19,-& 20 above.

BLOCK 64, LOT 21: LIVINGSTON WILBOR CORPORATION

See Block 64, Lot 4 & 21 above.

BLOCK 64, LOT 22: JOBAR REALTY CORPORATION

The masonry building on Lot 22 faces onto Second Street and backs onto the rear of the Livingston Wilbor property (Lot 21). Originally built in 1948, the building was used for auto repair and limited auto sales until the mid-1990s. Today, the building appears to be partially vacant and partially in use as an office. While the building appears to be in good structural repair, the exposed cinder blocks that make up the rear facade are weathered and crumbling around the edges. A gravel parking lot occupies the rear part of the lot, and strewn trash, unkempt shrubbery, and a broken chain link fence indicate an overall lack of maintenance.

The property meets the redevelopment criteria d and e.

Like many of the adjacent properties in the northwestern corner of the study area, the site is too small to attract significant reinvestment. Along with the other small surrounding sites, the diverse ownership impedes reinvestment, redevelopment, and the full productive use of the site for commercial purposes.

The building on the site was originally built as an auto repair facility, but owing to the small size of the site, is no longer feasible for auto repair. Although the building is partially occupied by an of fice, half of the building is made up of a garage bay and would not be useable for retail, of rice, or commercial use without significant rehabilitation. Thus, the design of the building in and of itself is faulty and deters investment. Another issue with Lot 22 is that the site has potential soil and groundwater contamination, which may be the remnants from the older auto repair business. This problem could potentially limit reuse or redevelopment of the site in the future.

As shown in Figure 4, while several properties do not meet any of the statutory criteria, the prevailing condition within Block 64 is that of "an area in need of redevelopment." Out of the 24 individual tax lots in the study area, all but seven meet at least one of the statutory criteria. All properties within the study area should therefore be included within the redevelopment area. The exclusion of only a few parcels could potentially restrict future redevelopment activities. Moreover, these properties can be readily incorporated into a redevelopment plan for the block as a whole.

The fact that some property owners have been considering making Improvements to their sites does not alter the conclusion that the study area qualifies as an area in need of redevelopment. Even with some additional improvements, the diversity of ownership (as specified under criteria e) complicates coordination of capital improvements and makes it more difficult to coordinate marketing for the purpose of drawing more customers. Downtown would still be far from achieving its full potential utilization if these properties were left out of the redevelopment area.

There has been virtually no new development activity in the study area over the last 30 years. During the 1 990s, downtown Fanwood was bypassed by the wave of revitalization that impacted communities along the Raritan line. Nearby Cranford and Westfield, for example, have attracted new downtown investment and redevelopment. In Fanwood, the little new commercial development that has come to Fanwood has continued to spread out along South Avenue to the west of downtown.

Along Martine Avenue, the fact that most properties are small and ownership diverse limits the opportunities for redevelopment. Larger lots would tend to attract more development interest; in the past it has been evident that the private sector has been unwilling to take on the trouble and expense of lot assembly on its own. While improvements have been undertaken on a small scale, areas behind the Martine Avenue shops suffer from faulty arrangement and obsolete layout. The municipal parking lots and the bank parking lot are poorly designed and make vehicle and pedestrian circulation complicated. The commercial buildings near the intersection of South Avenue and Second Street are obsolete in their design and arrangement. The Dean Oil site has been vacant for the last 15 years largely due its contamination problems.

For all of the reasons expressly set forth above, we conclude that the study area qualifies as an "area in need of redevelopment" in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40A: 12A-5