The meeting’s primary focus was the Orchard Plaza Shopping Center, a property that has remained largely unchanged since its construction in 1980. Phil Abramson of Topology, a consulting firm, presented a detailed report assessing the site for potential redevelopment, highlighting its 85% vacancy rate and various maintenance issues. The board’s role was to evaluate whether the property satisfies New Jersey’s criteria for redevelopment, specifically criteria B, D, and H, which address underutilization, dilapidation, and alignment with smart growth principles, respectively.

The presentation by Abramson outlined the methodology used in the study, which included site visits, historical data analysis, and the use of drone technology to capture aerial images. Additionally, safety concerns were raised, citing instances of children being picked up in fire lanes and overgrown vegetation obstructing visibility, which had previously led to accidents.

During the discussion, the board members and Abramson delved into the legislative updates that allow properties with significant vacancies to be classified for redevelopment. The recent update specifies that properties with significant vacancies for at least two consecutive years can be considered, a criterion the Orchard Plaza meets with its 85% vacancy rate. The presentation stressed the need for substantial evidence to substantiate these claims, as the integrity of the investigation forms the foundation for any redevelopment initiatives.

Further discussions touched on the smart growth potential of the site, considering its proximity to a bus stop that enhances its accessibility despite the absence of a rail line in Ocean Township. This detail was deemed critical in evaluating the site’s suitability for mixed-use development, which aligns with broader goals of revitalizing older suburbs.

Concerns were raised about discrepancies in the report, particularly regarding impervious coverage calculations and lot size inconsistencies. These details were noted for correction to ensure the accuracy of the final report. The board also addressed existing code violations at the site, acknowledging several documented complaints related to code enforcement.

A notable moment in the meeting occurred when a representative of the property owner, Anthony Saro, requested a postponement of the board’s decision. Saro sought additional time to review the report with the property owner and participate meaningfully in the process. The board accommodated this request, agreeing to carry the matter over to the next meeting scheduled for June 23rd. They also discussed the necessity of providing the property owner’s team with advance access to any counter reports to avoid unforeseen issues during the review process.

Public comments were invited, with a realtor from the audience expressing hope that the discussions would motivate the property owner to revitalize Orchard Plaza. The realtor highlighted difficulties in contacting the owner of a vacant store at the site and expressed interest in assisting with filling the vacant units.