Applicant Asks for More Time on Plan to Subdivide Wawa Property
The Zoning Board will wait to consider a request for a variance to build duplexes at the vacant property at the corner of Fourth Street and West Avenue.
Photos
Midway through a Wednesday zoning hearing on a plan to subdivide a long-vacant Wawa Food Market property at Fourth Street and West Avenue into six lots for new duplexes, the applicant called for a time-out.
Representatives of Wawa and a potential buyer asked to table their application for required use and density variances, and the board consented.
Lack of revenue forced that Wawa location to close about four years ago, and Wawa has been unable to sell the property to another business. The 300 block of West Avenue is a neighborhood-business zone that calls for businesses on the first-floor with residential units permitted above. The applicant sought variances to allow purely residential units.
In failed attempts to sell the property to another business, Wawa had asked that any potential buyer consent to a deed restriction that would prohibit them from operating a competing convenience food store, a coffee store, a doughnut store, sandwich store or fuel-dispensing store at the location. The restriction would also apply to any of a potential buyer's successors.
But at Wednesday's zoning hearing, the applicant revealed that they had decided to abandon that deed-restriction requirement a year ago.
That announcement surprised Zoning Board members, and direct and persistent questions about what efforts Wawa had made to let potential buyers know about that change appeared to give the applicants second thoughts.
But after the meeting, the attorney representing the applicants, Avery S. Teitler, said he wanted to check with his clients before discussing the reasons for requesting to table the application.
The hearing is the latest chapter in the saga of the vacant Wawa. Passions on both sides of the issue have run high because it revolves around a central question: Can Ocean City retain small business owners on an island where their land is far more valuable than their enterprises?
One side asks what business can succeed where Wawa failed? Can a small business owner afford to buy a piece of Ocean City's pricey real estate, equip a new business and make a go of it on an island where the year-round population has fallen by 24 percent in the last decade? They ask if it wouldn't be better to allow new homes to fill out an already residential block than to look at a vacant lot (and all the attendant problems) for another four years.
The other side asks if Ocean City will ultimately cease to be a year-round community with the selling off of the island to duplex developers. They see a self-defeating cycle of fewer year-round businesses, fewer jobs, fewer residents and ultimately then few customers for year-round businesses. They believe the city should abide by a Master Plan that designates areas for businesses and residences. And they believe the city should have the patience to outlast a bad economy in the interest of maintaining a rational balance for the future.
In public comment, speakers touched on those themes.
On March 24, 2011, a bid to change the zoning designation on the 300 block of West Avenue by ordinance failed in a rare tie vote of City Council.
Council was considering the second reading of an ordinance that would change the west side of it to a residential zone.
Councilman Keith Hartzell had proposed the ordinance change in February to recognize the reality of what exists on the block: residential duplexes and one vacant business, the former Wawa property.
Because the city’s Planning Board had determined that the change was “not substantially consistent” with the city’s Master Plan, the vote required a two-thirds majority of council. And because Council President Michael Allegretto recused himself from the vote (to avoid a perceived conflict related to a real estate colleague), the ordinance change needed four votes to pass.
Council members Scott Ping, Karen Bergman and Hartzell voted in favor. Council members Roy Wagner, John Flood and John Kemenosh voted against. The motion failed with the 3-3 vote.
The ongoing debate over the issue has been fueled by the fact that the Wawa property went under contract soon after the first reading of the ordinance change in February. But a property transaction has not been completed, and the potential buyer was not named at Wednesday's hearing.
The applicant is listed as "352 West Avenue, LLC." The LLC was formed on March 4, 2011, and the sole registered agent is Avery S. Teitler at 109 34th Street in Ocean City, according to state Division of Revenue records.
NJ dreamin'
7:51 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
I was pleased to read the following comment in the above article: "They believe the city should abide by a Master Plan that designates areas for businesses and residences. And they believe the city should have the patience to outlast a bad economy in the interest of maintaining a rational balance for the future." To which I add a hearty "amen!"
Although our current primary residence is out of state, my husband and I plan to live full time in our OC home after retirement. While we welcome the quiet winter months, we also appreciate the continuing benefits of a year-round community: the library, fitness center, churches, stores, and eating establishments.
Let's not turn our wonderful community into a ghost town during the winter months.
Eric Sauder
10:24 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
You know maybe Wawa doesn't think anything like a convenience store can make a go of it there (although at the same time it did everything is its power to prevent anything even remotely like it thru deed restrictions) but there are many potential uses for that lot other than a convenience store (and duplexes). Building residential there is simply the most profitable (and easiest) way out. As far as the costs associated with starting a commercial venture there, the current zoning does allow for residences above the store which could help offset those costs. This really isn't about what can or cannot make a go of it there, but about what is most profitable for Wawa, the developers, and realtors.
Will that lot still be sitting vacant in another 5 years? Possibly. If so it will be because no one here has any intention of doing anything else with a vacant commercial lot than building duplexes there.
Kevin Redmond
3:41 pm on Thursday, January 19, 2012
How can you say "it really isn't about what can and cannot make a go of it there"? That is exactly what it is all about! If there is no viable business option, then it sits abandoned for eternity because it's zoned commercial? I'm confident that is not part of any community's Master Plan.
Eric Sauder
8:39 pm on Thursday, January 19, 2012
Kevin the deed restriction (or at least the threat of them) eliminated many possible commercial uses for that property and significantly reduced it's marketability for almost anything BUT residential development. I would like to know who is responsible for promoting commercial investment in Ocean CIty? What attempt was made to market that property for potential commercial use? I'm sure no one wants to see that lot remain vacant. I'm just not willing to condede that the only possible use for it is high density residential. Not until some effort is made to find a commercial application for it (sans deed restrictions).
No commercial piece of land anywhere on this island can't be more readily utilized as residential. There were going commercial concerns in this town that were bulldozed for duplexes. I think given a change in the present economic reality there will be more demand for commercial here, especially if we can also find a way to attract more year around residents. Who is responsible for promoting Ocean CIty as a place to live?
To some extent the realities you sight to justify what it is the builders want to do are of our own making. Anwser those few questions and we'll talk some more.
Eric Sauder
10:02 am on Friday, January 20, 2012
I butchered my comment so badly I'm restating it. ...
How do we know that there is no viable commercial option for that property? For the majority of the time it was on the market it was adverstised as deed restricted. Apart from that the economy has been in a recession (at best) during that period. Those are the only realities (in terms of sellng the property as commercial) that that property has known.
JB
10:52 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
This end of the island is not serviced year round, the old supermarket is for sale also, there is one deli with limited bread and milk. Having a convienence store with apartments above seems like a good idea. WAWA is doing the right thing lifitng the restrictions. The master plan should be abided by, we continue to build build build but to what end....
BLDShamrock
12:34 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
There is an even bigger property located a block over on Asbury....the old Palermo's. How about we entertain the idea of a small grocery store or deli there where there is a larger parking lot and already apartments above. All of this is likely in need of updating/repair but the general building is already in place. If the store were closed at night it might pose less of an inconvenience to the neighbors as the previous site did....not like a 24/7 establishment such as Wawa. I don't want to sound as though what we don't want on the Wawa site is ok for somewhere else, because it isn't but if that is what was there, with apartments as well, then perhaps we should be entertaining the options at that location as well.
Coral
11:07 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
extend to section 8 dwelling
BLDShamrock
12:23 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
How about section 8 housing somewhere else on the island as this area is already saturated with "affordable housing" between the Pecks Beach Village, The Senior Housing and the Senior/Handicapped (not sure of the appropriate name) High Rise all within 3 blocks of each other not to mention the numerous privately owned and section 8 rented properties.
Pete
8:30 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
No
Duffer
6:42 am on Friday, January 20, 2012
There should not be another lot on this island converted to use for building duplexes. There should also be absolutely no subdividing of existing lots. I have no problem with a home being built on the Wawa site. A HOME!!!! A Single Family Home!!! Just ONE!!!! Make it a nice big one with a yard. That's what our town needs.
BLDShamrock
12:25 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
On a 100 x 190 lot that would be a mighty big home. It would be nice I suppose but I don't foresee that happening. The cost to tear down and build would not likely be recovered in the sale of the new property so it would not be cost effective for a builder/developer, unfortunately.
Pete
8:30 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
This sounds like a good idea.!!
anonymous
6:52 am on Friday, January 20, 2012
I agree with duffer...but the guy who is in the process of buying this property has friends in high places and it's pretty much already a done deal..it's going to be condos..
But any thing is better than a closed down wawa in my opinion.
BLDShamrock
12:27 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I agree anonymous, it seemed like a done deal right from the start...one good thing is that if it does end up being duplexes without stores that would be potentially 5 less empty stores vs the alternative.
Eric Sauder
10:10 am on Friday, January 20, 2012
Perhaps Anon but the argument will be made again and again that anything is better than a vacant commecial property and if approved will lead to more and more applications for use variances (for multi-family) and establish a precedence.. Incidentally a member of the Zoning Board asked why single family wasn't considered. As you might suspect there was no answer.
Duffer
5:56 pm on Friday, January 20, 2012
There ought to be a law in town that use of a property of any kind or size can only be changed to single family and nothing else whatsoever. This island doesn't need any more duplexes.
If you tear down a duplex you can rebuild the lot with a duplex of the same size or convert it back into one single family lot....those are your options. If you tear down a single it can not be converted to a duplex. If you tear down a commercial you can put up a similar commercial building or convert it into one single family lot. Not one more subdivision or duplex.
BLDShamrock
12:28 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Not necessarily a bad idea but that is a 100 x 190 lot and terribly large for one singe family home.
Duffer
2:43 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
BLD,
Go look at the size of the lots some of the homes in Avalon and Stone Harbor are built on. No lot is ever too large!!!!!
Robert McKenna, MIKE
11:08 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
I am with you 100%. Such a law would certainly slow our beautiful town being inexorably turned into an Ocean City, MD or even a Wildwood or Seaside Heights. Evidently, the city council is under heavy pressure to pay more attention to investments then community.
archie struthers
9:19 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Lots of opportunity for a new direction here! How about some single families, even small ones that might be affordable . The area is too far from the beach for anything but boxy duplex development given our zoning laws. How about some incentives for single family, particularly in light of the drainage issues in the area.
Time to get away from the last twenty years of failed zoning and show some imagination.
NJ dreamin'
9:44 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I appreciate the focus on "community" and "imagination" in the above two postings. My assumption has been that the city council is elected to represent the city and its residents. Ocean City began as a community, and I believe that, despite its growth, it can and should retain its essential nature. And yes, this will require both residents and council to work together on an imaginative solution to preserve the community that has already been established. We need to be creative, courageous and forward-thinking -- welcoming and carefully considering out-of-the-box ideas but keeping the end goal in mind.
Eric Sauder
2:18 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I like your comment Dreamin though I'm not sure about your assumption. It seems to me our elected officials already have a partner and that partner isn't us. I was thinking last night what the CIty has done for the community and apart from the community center I couldn't come up with anything. Everything else seems to be oriented to tourism and real estate development, which is fine for the developers and realtors and those who have a big investment in tourism, but not necessarily for the community. Maybe I'm just drawing a blank. Can anyone else come up with anything?
Robert McKenna, MIKE
4:18 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Spot on Eric! The city council our elected officials had their own agenda and community, residents, neighborhoods, are not in their vocabulary. I like Duffer's idea something comes down then only a single-family unit goes up, but it will never happen. Follow the money! I offer you a million bucks to tear down your shore style cottage and then put up a zero plot-line duplex, and let you live in have the house for the rest of your life for free. Deals like that and better, are made all over the town. The net result, single family units are a slowly disappearing. It is a shame.
archie struthers
5:29 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Why not three or even four small singles? It's going be less bulk coverage, fewer cars, and less intensive.
Eric Sauder
11:07 pm on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Wow you got that offer too?
Robert McKenna, MIKE
8:42 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
Yes. A neighbor one street west (We share the alley) took the deal and once work started the lovely larger cottage-style shore home was literally vaporized within a couple of days, leaving nothing but a bare spot of land, where a large cookie cutter duplex of Picasso Nightmare design will soon reside. It is such a shame.
JB
10:24 am on Monday, January 23, 2012
What is going on with the Palermos site? I kow the structure got hammered by the snow years ago, and there was a nice set of plans in the window... But now its for sale... Anyone?
George
8:46 am on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
The Palermos should try to get a variance to put homes, preferably singles, on their former store location and then put a new store at the Wawa location.
archie struthers
6:28 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
George that's a great idea ! I really missed Palermo's last summer . They are such nice people and their sandwiches and produce we're always first rate. However the wa wa price might be too high to justify the Palermo's going there. Wish it would work.
JB
10:57 am on Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Any updates? Why doesn't the Palermo's rebuild? Expense? It would be nice to see something other than homes become of the two locations....