Addressing Redevelopment and Transparency in Teaneck

At this last week’s Council meeting, the Council introduced Ordinance 25-2018: An ordinance designating the Township Council of the Township of Teaneck to act as a Redevelopment Entity.  The full text of the Ordinance appears at the end of this post.

What does a redevelopment agency do?

In order to determine different areas of the Township that can benefit from changes in use, the redevelopment agency and Planning Board would review areas in the Township that would qualify for redevelopment.

Typically, without a redevelopment agency, if an owner wanted to change the use for their particular property (e.g. from light industrial at Alfred Avenue to Multi-Family housing), they would either seek a variance (under certain criteria) or seek a change in zoning.  This could be done on an as-needed basis, depending on the desires of various property owners.

With a redevelopment agency, the Planning Board would perform an investigation and in conjunction with a planner, create a redevelopment plan to achieve a cohesive goal for future development.

What powers does the ordinance confer on the Council / Redevelopment Agency?

The Township Council has certain powers granted by the State.  This doesn’t change the powers retained by the Council.  In previous years, issues regarding development (including eminent domain and zoning changes) have come up before councils and all the powers available under a redevelopment agency were available to be used (or not used) by those previous Councils.

If that’s the case, then why is this action being taken?

This agency would coordinate redevelopment plans throughout the Township in an open and transparent manner.

In the last several years, there have been many public conversations (at council meetings, before boards and during elections) revolving around development.

When projects, such as 1500 Teaneck Road or Avalon Apartments were contemplated, they involved open and public meetings, such as:

• • discussions before the planning board with the Town Planner regarding changes to the Master Plan
• • updates to the Master Plan based on deficiencies found in the old plan, as well as new uses for certain areas based on demographic changes or changes in needs of the community
• • zoning changes before the council
• • consistency review of any zoning changes before the planning board
• • site plan reviews of contemplated development

The problem, some argued, was that the process was piecemeal.  Additionally, the members of boards couldn’t be held responsible by voters.

In short, some felt that the way development was handled could have been more transparent and clear.  When you add to that, the historical difficulties of getting some areas developed, a coordinated means of redevelopment was sought.

That was one of the primary motivators of the Redevelopment Agency.

Now, the public will be able to know which areas are being considered for redevelopment, why, and most importantly, if the public is dissatisfied – they can remove the agency members themselves.

What are the benefits of having the Council, as opposed to another board, become the agency?

The most tangible benefit for the public is that it promotes transparency and accountability.  If the Agency wishes to act, and all actions taken by the Council must (by law) be taken in public, the Township Council must have public meetings and discussions about what we are contemplating.

An appointed redevelopment agency can meet behind closed doors, but the Council, as a public body, must hold all hearings in public pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA).

It also enables the public to directly have a say in who sits on the Redevelopment Agency through a vote every two years.  The redevelopment agency will not be an appointed board, immune from removal by the residents, appointed by political actors to do their bidding.

If you do not like the job we do, you should be able to choose someone else to do it.

Finally, an important aspect of a Redevelopment Plan project is that it must go through a public proposal process.

Will the Council designate which areas it will consider for redevelopment prior to creating the agency?

The purpose of the agency is to determine, through a public process, which areas of the township will be designated as in need of redevelopment.  As such, choosing a particular area prior to the creation of the agency would be putting the cart before the horse.

The Planning Board will still be involved in the investigation and planning stages of the redevelopment plan as outlined more fully below.

Can the Council designate “every inch of the Township” as a place in need of redevelopment?
No.  It’s unfortunate that some members of the public have stated this before they had a chance to see the relevant rules that guide the process.

The criteria for areas which can be determined to be in need for redevelopment can be found in the State statutes: NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-5 (2013).

What are the procedures for declaring an area in need of redevelopment?

These are the steps for declaring an area in need of redevelopment:

1. Council adopts resolution authorizing planning board to undertake a preliminary investigation.
2. Planning board undertakes a preliminary investigation and prepares a map (they may enlist a planner to help them at this stage).
3. Planning board provides notice and publication of public hearing.
4. Planning Board holds public hearing.
5. Planning board adopts a resolution recommending a redevelopment area.
6. Council adopts a resolution determining that the area is a redevelopment area.
7. Copy of the resolution provided to the Commissioner of the N.J. Department of Community Affairs
8. Notice of determination provided to all record owners of property located within the delineated area and upon each person who filed a written objection.
9. Notice to advise whether eminent domain is authorized and that any legal challenge thereto must be commenced within 45 days of receipt of the notice.
10. 45 day time limit to challenge determination.
11. The plan goes back to the Planning Board for a Consistency Review with the Master Plan.

In order to determine that an area is in need of redevelopment, there must be:

1. An investigation by the Planning Board
2. Notice to the public
3. A public hearing
4. A conclusion that one of the following eight conditions¹ was found for a particular area:

• a. buildings are substandard, unsafe, unsanitary, dilapidated, or obsolescent, or are lacking in light, air, or space.
• b. The discontinuance or abandonment of the use of buildings or the disrepair thereof so as to be untenantable.
• c. Publicly owned land or unimproved vacant land for a period of ten years not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital.
• d. Areas containing buildings which are dilapidated, obsolete, overcrowded or having other deleterious conditions, which are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.
• e. A stagnant and unproductive condition of land having a negative social or economic impact or otherwise being detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the surrounding area or the community in general.²f. Areas in excess of 5 acres which have been destroyed by casualty resulting in material depreciation.
• g. Designated urban enterprise zones.
• h. consistency with smart growth planning principles.

If one of these criteria are not met, the area is not eligible for redevelopment under the statute.

 

---

Applicable statutes:

The State Statutes that authorize the creation of such a Redevelopment Agency can be found here:
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-3 (2015): Definitions
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-4 (2014): Powers of municipal governing body, planning board.
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-5 (2013): Determination of need for redevelopment
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-6 (2014): Investigation for determination as redevelopment area, public hearing, notice.
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-8 (2013): Effectuation of development plan.
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-14 (2013): Conditions for determination of need for rehabilitation.a
NJ Rev Stat § 40A:12A-15 (2013): Implementation of redevelopment plan

---

Notes:

1.  These are the complete criteria found in the code, required to proceed with an area in need of redevelopment:

• a. The generality of buildings are substandard, unsafe, unsanitary, dilapidated, or obsolescent, or possess any of such characteristics, or are so lacking in light, air, or space, as to be conducive to unwholesome living or working conditions.
• b. The discontinuance of the use of buildings previously used for commercial, manufacturing, or industrial purposes; the abandonment of such buildings; or the same being allowed to fall into so great a state of disrepair as to be untenantable.
• c. Land that is owned by the municipality, the county, a local housing authority, redevelopment agency or redevelopment entity, or unimproved vacant land that has remained so for a period of ten years prior to adoption of the resolution, and that by reason of its location, remoteness, lack of means of access to developed sections or portions of the municipality, or topography, or nature of the soil, is not likely to be developed through the instrumentality of private capital.
• d. Areas with buildings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.
• e. A growing lack or total lack of proper utilization of areas caused by the condition of the title, diverse ownership of the real 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.
• f. Areas, in excess of five contiguous acres, whereon buildings or improvements have been destroyed, consumed by fire, demolished or altered by the action of storm, fire, cyclone, tornado, earthquake or other casualty in such a way that the aggregate assessed value of the area has been materially depreciated.
• g. In any municipality in which an enterprise zone has been designated pursuant to the “New Jersey Urban Enterprise Zones Act,” P.L.1983, c.303 (C.52:27H-60 et seq.) the execution of the actions prescribed in that act for the adoption by the municipality and approval by the New Jersey Urban Enterprise Zone Authority of the zone development plan for the area of the enterprise zone shall be considered sufficient for the determination that the area is in need of redevelopment pursuant to sections 5 and 6 of P.L.1992, c.79 (C.40A:12A-5 and 40A:12A-6) for the purpose of granting tax exemptions within the enterprise zone district pursuant to the provisions of P.L.1991, c.431 (C.40A:20-1 et seq.) or the adoption of a tax abatement and exemption ordinance pursuant to the provisions of P.L.1991, c.441 (C.40A:21-1 et seq.). The municipality shall not utilize any other redevelopment powers within the urban enterprise zone unless the municipal governing body and planning board have also taken the actions and fulfilled the requirements prescribed in P.L.1992, c.79 (C.40A:12A-1 et al.) for determining that the area is in need of redevelopment or an area in need of rehabilitation and the municipal governing body has adopted a redevelopment plan ordinance including the area of the enterprise zone.
• h. The designation of the delineated area is consistent with smart growth planning principles adopted pursuant to law or regulation.

2. There are two leading New Jersey Supreme Court cases clarifying the foregoing criteria. The first, Gallentin v Paulsboro, 191 N.J. 344 (2007) held that the clause “e” allowing for the redevelopment of “stagnant or not fully productive” property did not allow redevelopment of areas which were merely operated in less than an optimal matter but only applied to property that had become stagnant or unproductive due to issues of title, diversity of ownership, or other similar conditions and which negatively affects surrounding properties. In 62-64 Main Street, LLC v. Mayor and Council of City of Hackensack, 221 N.J. 129 (2015), the Court limited the holding of Gallentin to clause “e” and rejected the contention that a heightened constitutional standard for blight was applicable to the other clauses of the Redevelopment Law.

---

Presentation slides regarding a redevelopment agency:

Local Redevelopment and Housing Law info

---