Sayreville planning board recommends non‑condemnation redevelopment study for Mini Mall/Ernston Road area

The Borough of Sayreville Planning Board on Aug. 20, 2025 voted to recommend that the borough council designate a 17‑parcel area at the Mini Mall Drive/Ernston Road intersection as an area in need of redevelopment and rehabilitation, forwarding the report prepared by VMS Planning LLC for council consideration.

The recommendation is a preliminary step that the board said would allow the borough to prepare a redevelopment plan; the planner who prepared the report emphasized the study proposes a non‑condemnation approach and would not compel business displacement or the use of eminent domain.

Veena Sawad of VMS Planning LLC told the board the study covers roughly 12 acres and evaluates 17 parcels on either side of Ernston Road, noting that most parcels are landlocked or lack direct frontage on Route 9. Sawad said 13 parcels are developed and four are vacant, and that many parking areas and private drives need pavement and sidewalk repair. On the Mini Mall site specifically, she said the borough building department recorded nearly 21 code violations in recent years, with three currently open.

“Should the planning board approve this study and the council designates the area as an area need of redevelopment and rehabilitation, … the subsequent redevelopment plan that would be written, would be a non condemnation plan, which means that the borough will not exercise its power of eminent domain,” Sawad said.

Sawad told the board redevelopment would create flexibility for site consolidation, rehabilitation and possible mixed uses and that the location abuts a transit‑oriented area in Old Bridge Township where a transit village designation is being pursued; she noted the study area is within the metropolitan planning area (PA‑1), which favors infill and smart growth. The report lists eight statutory criteria under the Local Redevelopment Law and identifies parcels that meet vacancy, underutilization and rehabilitation criteria, including some lots that have been vacant more than 10 years.

Board members and members of the public asked about tenant displacement and property‑owner responsibilities for maintenance. Several tenants and nearby residents said they use businesses in the mini mall and expressed concern that redevelopment could lead to displacement. In response, Sawad reiterated the study recommends a non‑condemnation redevelopment plan and said designation does not immediately change existing uses or force tenants to vacate.

The board moved and seconded a resolution recommending council designation of the specified blocks and lots as an area in need of redevelopment/rehabilitation (see actions). The board’s recommendation lists parcel identifiers (see actions) and will be transmitted to the borough council for its final determination. If the council designates the area, the borough can prepare a redevelopment plan and may consider tax incentives under statutory provisions (redevelopment tax abatement up to 30 years; rehabilitation abatement up to five years), though any specific redevelopment proposal would require later public review and approvals.

Members of the public who spoke at the hearing urged code enforcement and maintenance of the existing parking lot, removal of accumulated debris and improved sidewalks; tenants said they were not seeking displacement. The board noted these maintenance and circulation issues are documented in the report and would be addressed in the planning process if the council directs a redevelopment plan.