Larison's Owner, Residents Differ on Site Future

The debate has raged on for over a decade, and after a slew of meetings and visioning presentations Banisch Associates  identified a set of planning alternatives for the tract of land known as Larison's Corner.

David Banisch said at Tuesday's meeting of the Chester Borough Mayor and Council that divergent views have emerged regarding property owner Harold Wachtel's development proposals and public preference. Wachtel's desire to utilize three acres of land on the corner to establish two new uses, a bank in the vacant restaurant and a retail pharmacy adjacent to the vacant restaurant on West Main Street, have been panned by the public.

"Where I think we are right now is a place where there are [different] views that have emerged between the developer's proposals for the site and the public's preferences," Banisch said.

Banisch gave an overview of two possible development plans. The first plan in accordance with the New Jersey Local Redevelopment and Housing Law, had the borough set a redevelopment area and adopt a redevelopment plan to clearly state the development standards for permissable uses on the site. This plan allows the developer to get his project up and running by taking advantage of five-year taxabatement agreement.

The second was a more conventional zoning approach 

"Conventional zoning offers no alternative for conventional property tax collection, with the possible exception of affordable housing development," Banisch said.

Preferred Option

Trying to balance the divergent views, Banisch Associates came up with a plan for the land.

On the corner of Route 206 and Main Street would be a 10-acre bed and breakfast/catering/restaurant, just southwest of that will be a pharmacy/bank on three acres, at the northern tip of the property will be an organic farm/marketplace/agritourism on 10 acres and the western-most five acres of land will be housing.

"What we heard from the public was that this town doesn't need another bank or pharmacy," Banisch said. "They didn't want to see the corner consumed with a bank and the pharmacy. We heard a lot of comments that we want to see a restaurant and we want to retain a local identity. We did hear that there was an appetite for a variety of different types of uses including agritourism, specific types of restaurants, a marketplace. We heard that the public is not interested in any substantial big-box retail, or for that matter conventional-type grocery stores."

Elephant in the Room

While Mayor Bob Davis said he understood the public wasn't interested in some of the options favored by the land owner, it wasn't likely they could be ignored.  "I do agree with the other comments that the public never wanted a pharmacy or a bank nor do they want affordable housing necessarily," Davis said. "But I think the reason you put them on is because they're probably necessities for the site."

Davis said the next step would be taken by a subcommittee that would have  two members from the council in addition to the mayor, three people from the planning board and two people from the public to get the project moving forward.

But Davis also said they needed to address the elephant in the room.

"We've heard from our developer-owner-builder-taxpayer that the corner is where he makes some money on the property and justify why he bought it 13 years ago," Davis said. "We heard what the public has said, but on the other hand economics don't bear it out."