By ROBERT LINNEHAN | The Haddonfield Sun
Heyer, Gruel and Associates presented the first draft of a redevelopment plan that would create four distinct districts at the 19-acre Bancroft site. Borrowing heavily from public comments gathered from a 2006 meeting about the site, the community planning consultant group shared the plan at the first of many public meetings this summer.
The plan was presented in front of an audience of about 50 community members, many of whom expressed their displeasure that the borough did not address purchasing the 19-acre site.
Borough representatives also stressed that Haddonfield had not spoken with developers in regard to the land.
Commissioner Ed Borden explained that the Heyer, Gruel and Associates was retained by the borough in 2005 to complete a study to determine if the Bancroft site was eligible as an area of redevelopment. At the time, it seemed as if Bancroft was going to sell the property as soon as possible, he said, so the borough had to move fairly quickly. The results of the study determined that the site was feasible for redevelopment, but Bancroft ended up not selling the property.
This is the first draft of a redevelopment plan that will be reviewed, examined and tested by the commissioners and Planning Board over the summer, he said. The borough will also allow for additional alternative ideas to come forward during the next few months, he said, and an emphasis will be placed on community feedback as well.
As soon as September, Borden said formal hearings with the planning and zoning boards, and finally the commissioners, will take place. Hopefully at that time there will be a recommendation to adopt or not adopt the final draft of the redevelopment plan, Borden said.
There are several zones in the redevelopment plan, explained Susan Gruel, of Heyer, Gruel and Associates. The first being a Continuing Care and Retirement Community, the second being an affordable housing district, the third being open space, and the fourth being a Lullworth Hall professional office district.
Each district would allow for its own original redevelopment, Gruel said. The CCRC district would create additional and specialized housing opportunities for the elderly, she said, between 160 and 190 units. A health-care center with a maximum of 75 assisted living units and beds would also be constructed in the district.
Finally, a community center/club house with a minimum floor area of 20,000 square feet would be built for the residents of the CCRC.
The CCRC cannot be over 3.5 stories, Gruel said.
As for the minimum off-street parking, one spot would be required for each independent living unit. For the health-care center, one spot would be required for five beds.
Finally, one spot per employee would be required for the largest shift at the center.
The affordable housing district would allow for a 100 percent affordable housing development with a maximum of 19 apartments. Adjacent to Lullworth Hall, the existing carriage house will become part of the development. The development would share a parking lot with the athletic field.
The third district would be devoted to open space, with a regulation soccer field constructed. It would be flanked by a parking lot with 80 spaces. Pedestrian walkways would connect the athletic field to the high school.
Finally, Lullworth Hall would be preserved and restored as the fourth district. It would be converted into office space to generate additional economic investment in the area, Gruel said.
Gruel stressed that this was only a first draft of the plan and that every aspect of the redevelopment plan would be reviewed. Fred Heyer, also of Heyer, Gruel and Associates, said the level of redevelopment in the plan is on par with the development currently at the Bancroft site.
Several members of the audience weren’t happy with the plan, citing that not enough effort was made to find a solution that would allow the borough to purchase the 19-acre property and preserve it as open space.
Resident Peter Fontaine urged the commissioners to fund a study that would look into options to bring in open space grants and utilize the open space trust fund that residents approved.
“There are many ways to leverage funding from various sources to create more than just one ball field for the town on this site,” he said.
He stressed that, since 2006, a number of other open space and green grant funding streams have been created that would give the borough some financial flexibility to purchase the site. This is a one-time shot, he said, and he said the commissioners would look back and regret not using the one chance to purchase the land for the borough.
Joseph Haro, a member of the Historic Preservation Commission, also expressed his dismay that the firm did not sit down or speak with the HPC when developing the plan.
Gruel said the firm closely based its plan on the HPC’s ordinances and guidelines. She also stressed that this was only the first draft of the plan and it was open to any suggestions or criticism at this time.
To view the complete report, please visit Haddonfield’s Web site at haddonfieldnj.org. Residents will also find a link at the site to submit their own ideas, suggestions and criticisms for the redevelopment plan.
A video of the June 23 meeting has also been posted on the Haddonfield Civic Association’s Web site, www.haddonfieldcivic.com.
