Planning board finds A&P site, adjacent lots meet criteria for condemnation redevelopment; resolution sent to council

The Clark Township Planning Board voted May 1 to adopt a preliminary investigation report recommending that a three‑parcel study area — including the former A&P supermarket site at 52 Westfield Avenue (Block 105, Lot 2.01), an adjacent parking/loading parcel (Lot 26.01) and the former Investors Savings Bank parcel (Lot 1.01) — be designated an area in need of redevelopment under the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law.

Planner Paul Rickey, who prepared the condemnation study at the board’s direction, told the board the A&P supermarket building is gutted, boarded and vacant and that police reports show repeated break‑ins and vandalism. Rickey cited the law’s vacancy and obsolescence criteria and said the supermarket parcel has been vacant for approximately 18 years. He also said the Investors Savings Bank parcel is vacant and that a posted closing date of Feb. 17, 2023 establishes a vacancy period exceeding two years, which meets the statutory vacancy criterion added to the redevelopment law in recent years.

Why it matters: designation as an area in need of redevelopment starts a separate municipal process. If the council accepts the board’s recommendation and later adopts a redevelopment plan, the governing body gains statutory redevelopment powers that can include negotiating redevelopment agreements and, in condemnation redevelopment cases, exercising eminent domain subject to state law.

What the board considered - Evidence of vacancy and building condition: Rickey presented site photos showing boarded windows, missing interior finishes and an overgrown, unstriped parking area. He said the supermarket building lacks mechanical systems and is not in a condition that could be reactivated without demolition and reconstruction. - Statutory criteria applied: the board reviewed criteria in the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law including obsolescence/dilapidation (criteria a and d), abandonment/significant vacancy (criteria b) and the inclusion of adjoining parcels necessary for effective redevelopment (criteria allowing non‑blighted parcels to be included when needed for a coherent redevelopment plan). - Public comment and notice: the board confirmed legal notice of the study was published twice in the Union County Hawk and that the planning board had jurisdiction to hear the matter. Two members of the public asked procedural questions about ownership records and how to review the report; the planner noted the report is available at town hall and that the board’s action is a recommendation to council.

Vote and next steps - The board adopted the preliminary investigation report and a draft resolution recommending designation; the motion passed on roll call and the board voted to forward the recommendation to the township council for its separate action. - If the council accepts the recommendation, the governing body would then adopt a redevelopment plan by ordinance. Council approval is required for any condemnation redevelopment path; the planning board’s role in this proceeding was limited to the statutory preliminary investigation and recommendation.

Community questions and procedural notes Residents at the meeting asked how to review reports and where notices are posted; the board clarified that documents are available in the municipal clerk’s office and that legal notices were published in the county paper. Members of the public were given an opportunity to comment before the board adopted the resolution.