all right everybody it's 730 would you like to start on time it's March 6 2025 this is the Highland Park planning board this meeting is called to order in accordance with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting was provided to the home News Tribune The
Star Ledger and the Highland Park planet on February 3rd 2025 and was posted on the burough website at www . hpb.com and on the bulletin board at Burrow Hall 221 South fth Avenue Highland Park New Jersey and has remain continuously posted as
required by law fire exits are to the left and right of the chambers and as a reminder please do speak into your microphones when it's your turn I know it's very easy to forget that but do try to remember to speak into your microphones all right you do uh actually we're going to do the Pledge of
Allegiance first which is a new addition to our agenda and a odd over side of ours Al to United States ofer stands na indivisible
andice thank you everyone and we'll take miss here Mr BR here Mr Chen here M here Mr h here Mr Lis Mr Malay here Mr Pearlman here Mr Stern Cardel here Mr wi
here Mr Thomas here Mr Kenza here Mr K here all right first up is a riew of our draft November 7 2024 minutes do any members of the board have any comments on the proposed minutes changes comments modifications
anything all right it's acceptable to the board I'll solicit a motion to approve the November 7 2024 minutes motion to approve motion any second second seconded by Alan Williams on this uh you don't have to
but if you'd like you can we'll take a roll call please Mr brusher yes Mr Chin stain Missi OB Mr ha yes Mr Malay Mr fman
yes Mr Stern Cel yes Mr Williams yes M yes thank you next up we have a resolution p2025 D1 for the syc realy LLC minor site plan and C variance waivers
memorializing the actions the board took at our last meeting are there any comments from the board on the language for the resolution this morning on page two um in the first paragraph from page
two the restaurant is at 231 Avenue was is still there thank you for that tense change thank you okay and I'm pay seven under requirements number
six yes and it says in the comments of its planner I don't believe they had a planner it was the lawyer and the engineer I believe you are correct so we'll take out the words and it's planner the revised or or r resolution
indicates that the applicant and the appli plan engineer yeah plan you got anyone else seeing no other other amendments I'll solicit a motion to approve the resolution subject to the two
modifications we just discussed motion to adop motion second seconded by Mr roll call please Mr Brer yes Mr Chen yes M Mr M yes
mrman Mr yes Mr LS yes Miss H yes all right very good so that takes us to our next item on the agenda a public hearing for a preliminary investigation of a condemnation area in need of
Redevelopment regarding Classic Cleaners block 1704 Lots 43 46 and 49 here's how this matter is going to be handled this evening we're going to have our planner make his presentation to the board the board will have the opportunity to make
preliminary questions or observations after that we'll open this up to any attorneys that have are in attendance this evening who wish to be heard and from there members of the public who are physically present followed by members of the public who are attending virtually so please be mindful that we
will do our best to give everybody an opportunity to be heard uh we are going to ask that you limit comments to three minutes so everyone has that opportunity because I see lots of participants here this evening that said we will work very hard to make sure everyone gets their
turn so please be patient with us so with that I will turn this over to our board planner Mr cenza for his presentation on his preliminary investigation thank you Mr cenza just so that purpose of the record you swear for Testimony that you're about to give you the truth so help yes and then just for
the record also state your name St and your location of your offic please Chris Caz c n CA office lrk Incorporated build out the 1218 just Street and and obviously you
are the planer for the bur is that correct yes one second pleas investigation of clean property I just want to start off with by saying just so generally speaking over the past 20 years B has undertaken uh several planning activities to really
try make the community a place to live and really has recognized over the years that there's a need for sustaining potion for our downtown area also aing that reation efforts had not really had a great impact downtown
until recently uh and for variety reasons get into about the overview [Music] A3 process process to really Envision what it could be includes the subject
project the classic property I'll refer to presentation just as La 1704 L 4346 and 49 this constitutes the study area ter the agenda I'm go over a few items
as you're famar my tou presentation try to detail break down and structure to understand bites and this process in terms of the I'll give you overview basically the history of where we were and how we got to where
we are today just a brief overview on statute to the park and some contacts about the stud area as well as the that's the of the presentation and then we'll conclude with the summary and
recomendations for closer so generally speaking the study area is located in the central portion central western portion of the downtown area with fronted on bar Avenue State through 27 is consisting of three lots
about half acre at total in size colly um generally speaking I say odd shap parcel with three odd shaps and I will say that beginning in 2003 um the Burl took a look at the
downtown areas and really wanted to understand what it can use for really improving the environment so it started with going through a 2003 really identifying issu downtown including need for redevelopment uh in
200 starting in 2004 including in 2005 the bur uh adopted an area need of Redevelopment designation for all the properties highlight including area uh and so inly in September 2005 they
adopted the D reel plan which provided basically new Z unision and trfic regulations for all the properties highlighted in Orange the screen as I indicated the outset of the presentation not much has happen through
that re plan other than a small site by the International Food Market uh and over the years the burrow understood the need to make amendments toar and promote some development downtown believe there seven amendments and really came to a
conclusion back in 2016 almost 10 years ago the burrow took the St and determined that the best way forward was really take advantage of statue by uh name the entire Community as abilitation
applies to the entire community and 2019 the bur adopted it most recent master plan with a focus on Downtown Development in it's land use plan had a lot lot of focus on what
could we do to promote liability and wanted to actually want to comment the public was I love the field downtown but the area between first and second major tension and that these are the properties that were uh studying tonight
in 2020 the burrow in its effort to of promote the Downtown Development they to start to utilize a development statue Again by studying the properties
adjacent to the classic the gun Bo property and bacon properties to re so the burrow did area needel with combination and that designation was adopted and after that the bur adopted a re plan
for the property that we commonly call as tracks a through D is actually in track a track B is across the street between South First and South Second track C is basically the farmers want property and track D was a
uh primarily parking area on adopted the went through RFP proc to identify and really to promote opportunities with downtown and invited ERS and Community to respond with their concept plans for
several coner plans were submitted and reviewed and selected two redevelopers one for track a that will be and LLC group they s g homes with track
C in between the RFP process back in 2022 and most recently Amed Redevelopment plan the bur authorized Area Redevelopment study for properties on TR basically expand the redevelop designation for track SE and upon
designation of those properties of non- comination aded amendment to and that Amendment still kept in place the Z standards for track a for class property but primarily focus on enhanced vision for the tra C parel our
homes um so I would say over the years the burrow has as in relat to trap a has bought purchase several properties within trap a almost all the properties except property classer the bur has s to purchase the
property and actually went through the effort to assist the C efforts back in 2017 and at this point even that the burrow now has own properties including taking title to the ug property UB
opening on ja the bur Council termed that it was necessary for the planning board to conduct a PR investigation for for classic clean sleep um consistent with the statute since 201 13
the bur required in his resolution to the planning board to indicate whether it be um non comination or comination non comination mean that the bur will not use uh the power in domain combination means that they will they
could use domain but they have to put in the resolution essentially to declare that their int they may or may not use but the power is available to and S Point clarification as onset this is a
combination does not mean the B will use it it just means that they can I think from prior experience B has used a combination designation for the adjacent properties to guner they did not use they did not
proceive comination procedures event to purchase a property arm L agreement for mayor and Council preference obviously is not to use combination um but is strategy to get
the people to the table and consider Val options so in terms of soci study really evaluation so really detailed effort detail site inspection but found out there several times review all
available records in this case there were not very many records property there some zoning permits and a bunch of construction permits but very little records in how health department as well as from police supp otherwise there Z
master plan and anal phal conditions based off the site inspections uh and also as a conclusion indicate by and [Music] recommendations so generally speaking so gener speaking the local
rment housing law really largely based on the 1949 are designed to guide municipalities through the process of Rehabilitation and before the
using Rehabilitation an area must first beated through Rehabilitation and then at that point they can other programs for rehabilitation and has largely been successful with utilizing the
development statute through findings and fores the community and one of them is on 31 River Road revelop ofel to 40 Apartments
housing and also the restaurant on former helling Market on and Avenue was actually on the same block couple about 100 ft away subject property that was converted to a two
withing in terms of the procedure as I indicated the b in order for to utilize all powers of plan must be first designated area of Rehabilitation or Redevelopment and in this process we're going through the comination area
development in that process requires that the vir Council direct the planning board to do the study and either the planning board or the government body will designate a planner usually it's the mpal planner who do that work onf of the planning board and what we're here
tonight is the public hearing on study that was um authored by my office and on record so in terms of the statutory criteria there is eight criteria as and according to the statute of
property needs to meet only one of those standards uh and I will say that over the years in various case laws to indicate that the study must carefully consider all really utilize the plain meeting meaning of the stat for for
example there's been case law about that opinion meaning you should not rely on my testimony say oh yeah it needs criteria just trust me that's my opinion it must be based on actual factual uh findings that's called net opinions
basically can't do a wi stud and with regards to certain criteria for example criteria e uh this is case law about how defining that the property was underutilized by relying on uh certain parts of the statute but not really
focusing on the first part which was the title issues that make it a um not introductive use so there's been some guard rails set up over the years by caseb to make sure that the study uh is based on factual
findings uh there's also if you review the actual definition of the Redevelopment area it does include properties buildings improvements uh which of themselves are not detrimental to public health safety and Welfare but the inclusion of which is found necessary with or without change
condition for the effective Redevelopment of the are they part and in the read handbook most recent Edition Third Edition came out suggest that these properties are can be included because they are essential for designation of effectively to revelop
question now in most cases you recall sometimes you have an area land we do a investigation for a property that there's no re plan so you're sort of jumping the gun about what could it be there a little bit of a disjoined
effort some of the problems that you have to trust that yes you could use properties were Redevelopment for a clim that doesn't exist in this case we have a rment clim for tra a parcel and Burl has been engaged with various property including the property own for class to
try to purchase and properties and at this point property is the only property that has been um purchased and assembled into the overall be here so effectively the proverbial of the
effort so so in terms of the stary contest indicated that the half anre in in size shaped has some Frontage on Avenue but the majority of lives actually in re more than 57% of the
property is actually made of the landlock lot on lot 43 the existing land use back the slide B on the lot in the rear with a parking lot on the west side the two-story building on the right side the two-story building uh consists of the plastic
cleaners dry plane establishment on the first floor and two apartments on the second floor the parking lot includes 10 parking spaces and obviously vacon lot and the vacon lot overgrowth and now I'm get into some of the details
of the actual evaluation in terms of the exterior building when I did my inspection the building was actually in fair to good condition minor deteriation parts of the facade uh and Improvement located what I did observe that there
were um at least two of the windows were broken and since they were fully exposed to pass by walking apartment that can be constituted safety after re building there's a wooden uh stairway that provides access to the roof however um
the stairway itself exhibits wood Rock and there's no guard rails neither at the base of the on uh guard rails on the roof so anyone the public can walk up and possibly fall again that's a con safety
hazard and minor point of uh intergation that that's really exhibited because of a lack of maintenance on the down spell elbow which pushes water away from into the par in this case water draining to the base of building and causing
deterioration on the inside building um particularly the first flooor did not get access to the second floor Apartments but the first floor actually was in a pretty fair condition what we did observe that there was some water deterioration staining CH Fe mainly in
the back of area and potential for [Music] mold uh at the bathroom itself appears to be substandard by most most uh conditions the bathroom itself black interior wall and floor finishes which
is really Expos the uh underlying floor and a unfinished black wall addition there's some signs of of water staining on the concrete floor Le to the threshold door you see that there's someing and um really the she really
enter into State repair exhib W as well the B the basement actually was very clean it's one of the first times I come across a uh business where the basement was completely clear of de uh
when I went to the stairwell by underneath the sidewalk you did notice that there was some cracking peret so there was some water infiltration that leaves at base for the a well and unfortunately we this find El in the basement that the unused air compressor
was boil into Bas Florida on to the exterior property we focus on the parking area uh the layout and design what we found here is that the the parking lot really do not comply
with most zoning sard DS regulations as well as site plan best practices easy to say for existing condition if you had a a blank slate for sandbox you do it this way um but just want to note that the park um does not
have good well designed ER and accommodation for Access parking and it's just generally inefficient in design way up so on the west side of the property there are nine parking spes um but only that half
of them are useful what we found is that the the parking spaces located the rear of the lot are essentially inaccessible because there are no paid areas for a car to maneuver out back towards the street and furthermore that portion of
the um lot that's unimproved is burrow on property so car vehicles would have to trespass onto adjacent property Le if there was a fence put up by the bur the bur owns the property several people would not be able at those parking
spaces and that does not that's not liing to the extreme the parking spaces northly Li of the parking lot it also includes the two additional spaces to the South a total four parce space
because even on those areas that are paved where a vehicle could be maneuvered out to the par space for street that pain area is actually on F property again the p goes up the spes can't be used so only about half the
yes so want to show di shows illustrates that at the extreme northern part of the parking lot there's really no space for vehicles to get out pass the parking lot which makes for
anicient design if it were be paid and reconstruct with regards to the front of the property there's some issues there where the parking spaces are located directly against the sidewalk um these
two also separate from quy arangement design partly because the ER driveway and Associated Drive aisle is not in alignment with the actual Drive mile parking lot as you can see here in this photo if you were to drive your vehicle
straight towards the street as as you should be doing uh you will be encroaching onto several parking spaces and if there's a vehicle for more than one veh park in those parking spaces that there essentially be no space for you exit the property unless you angle
which gives you less opportunity to serve death traffic to come on to the side looking at this at the reverse Direction uh you can see that the parking spaces are directly line the drive U with the driveway not direct
alignment with the actual parking lot driveway Drive additionally there's a 10 part space that was according to research on partel line data as well as this appears
added without getting approval this parking space is difficult to Mo because where I'm the viewer of this Photograph we see is standing in the sidewalk so the vehicle park there the only way out that parking space if you back up into
the sidewalk which creates a safety haard [Music] or and here's another view at this Direction imagine vehicle parked there has very limited visibility see Ving on sidewalk and there's really a lack of
vetan amenities throughout the parking lot help guide users from the parking space to the building uh it appears that the only walkway that is provided is being used for exposed trash and recycling and finally because the parking lot was recently repaid it
required by Ada guidelines accessible parking space however we observe there's no parking spaces go for the mobility disabled and there's no a so of the 10 parking spaces that are provided it's estimated in my
professional opinion from the S plan design that two or three spes in terms of the perimeters a lot there are um generally speaking curves and wheel stops by multiple purposes Motors pulling through parking space and
they organize parking in a manner that makes it efficient use without Cs and wheel stops Vehicles tend to park away from the uh end of the property which results in a condition where Vehicles will encroach into drive AES and that condition will result in driver
confusion ability and may contribute to a recirculation pattern that is unsafe for both visit motorist additionally landscape buers are often used to help um when paired with curbs they form
landscape and given the lack of s along the street that means that the parking area is directly jent to the public parking lot sorry Jing to the public side but that means that as cars are Ming through the parking lot uh they may
be facing a condition where they may conflict with your pedestrians typically you landscape Island to upright Cur which will help manage the traffic and provide protection to pedestrians in the walkway so this is counter to our principles of our master plan these
streets as well as Z terms of the driveway itself typically these are two oneway driveways and typically when you design a park L oneway driveways are on average at 9 or 12 to
15 and two-way driveways in the middle of the parking lot typically are 24 ft wide accomodating 9 or per parking in this case you have a situation where you have two driveways about 20 ft each in Combined about 40 feet and given the
lack of separation between the two driveways um it gives the appearance of a 50 foot wide driveway in middle of downtown and again these are conditions that on Drive Fusion encourages
between and motorists and represents an unsafe condition detrimental to the public uh there's some other conditions just only one couple spots on the public sidewalk where there's an uplifting faulty patching this will obviously
result in a tripping Hazard which is D to public and may be inacessible May force people to go into the uh parking lot toe around these conditions and in terms of the waste and soft waste
in recycling areas again these areas are typically enclosed in a three wall structure or fence area away from you in this case it's directly on the sidewalk uh fully exposed to view and blocks the accessibility uh for those walking or
using a wheelchair to get to the store terms of the VAC lot just based on our observations with these photographs you see the proper does not be to be aely maintained I do want to knowe that in the 2005 area need
study for the downtown are included the subject property um 49 was identified as an unimproved vacant land that has remained so for a period of over 10 years and based on review of historical uh photography aerial photography
and other Maps dating back to 2014 and Beyond it's confirmed once again at late lot 49 as you see in the photos remains vacant uh in this case it appears to have been vacant for at least 30 years which well more than complies reports to
the re statute criter C which is res prior to the resolu be uh sent to the planning board it must be remain so vacant for a period of 10 years case 30 years additionally there appears to be some challenges with uh being able to
redevelop that lot in particular uh as you can see the property is landlocked so it's not a matter of Simply subdividing it and allowing a redevelop build on it sub require variant or planning variant because it lacks PL on the street if it were to be developed
with the other Parcels there's extremely limited plan available to put even on oneway driveway but need two-way driveway and buffers to connect from the parcels that front marue to get to the rear 49 that means that it is not possible to
provide for a driveway or parking for development on 49 without being other properties and there's also a substantial great change iner for departments uh what this means is that
even if it were to be subdivided and on its own uh it being 50 ft wide means there's only about 304 available for development and that makes it highly impractical to be developed for a downtown setting let alone a sing Family House on a typical
50 so given the reason of its location and lack of meic access areas in topography uh it isely unlikely that will be developed through the distality of private Capital ultimately as indicated report the land assembl and
effective R of blot 49 as part of a larger comprehensive plan as contemplated through to track a development plan U and for really overall health of the study area would be more valuable contributing to area if it were merg or consolidate into a larger Redevelopment area and better
serve public health safety well of the down area as well as overall so is with that finding that um block 49 particular was OCC again occupies more than half of the overall parel half acre
uh criteria the statute in terms of ground water and soil contamination the property is listed on the known contaminated sites list since 2013 according to the njtp records uh
based on the records I reviewed and very little remedial investigation activities appears as Property Owners obtained several extensions and has changed it lsrp on multiple occasions uh based on fire activities that was identified between
2013 and February 2016 uh the buau engaged a lsrp upsell byal resources simply refer to excel they were charged to do environmental investigation of the study are that is
the class cleance property in 2018 a site investigation report or sir was published and was found that the study area had multiple areas of soil and groundwater contamination the groundwater B investigations entailed
installation of three Wells and they all yielded a combination of various contaminant including tce uh the report recommended that further investigation to Det of the extent of the contamination including a vaker intrusion study um as part of the development of that
investigative report 2018 background research showed that the lsrp for the adjacent Ru property has environmental Alliance Incorporated EI eai they identify PC and T tce which but the
consultant to believe that the contaminants were migrating from thejason property because of a downhill condition and the 2013 study showed that the PCC and TC concentrations both exceeded the njp
standards in stud not not just the U property it wasn't until 2024 last year um that an updated s report was prepared by the property owners new lsrp uh it did show that
there was a reduction of contamination however um compared to the sampling event back in 2018 there were still contaminations above the limits in 2024 last year report so it's want to note that even though the business has
stopped using even 20 years of cleanup shows that the property is still there still residual contamination from decades ago in conclusion in summary there's a three
different criteria I believe the [Music] property hit on that is a Bacon Land Le specifically 49 at least 10 years in this case we found to be at least 30 years so therefore that particular
parcel see due to a combination of various factors including faulty range of design De Land Use OB design or other factors including contamination is my opinion that the stud here mentions of the safety Health morals and Welfare
community in accordance with criter the reason I make that connection is to Simply state that the property is inefficient in design also have to make a finding according to case law that it is detrimental safety Health more Ware
community and finally because of the whole F that found is that because the property is in the middle of the tra a development this property fits with the really tend purpose of the definition of section three criteria which even if the
board were to make the finding that the property did not findings as outline criteria C and D it could rely on the section three criteria which includes properties that that themselves do not the criteria so with that said um the VAR
indications of the 7 are design PL other factors related to um safy issues was my opinion that the proper criteria foration Redevelopment my recommendation would be that the bur
Council the resolution sorry plan res back to plan Council and at that point they could formally declare all right discussion coms or questions to
presentation yes I have a question about the long vacant lot especially for those of us who might not have visited that site or aren't familiar with that site um from some of the photos it appears that it's directly adjacent to a uh a
East West trending um right of way or roadway so could you explain what's going on at the north end of that uh that lot so the on the North Lot line of lot 49 that is adjacent to the H Highland Montgomery property so even though it appears as a driveway leading
into the garden department complex that is not the Denon Street public rway line public RightWay line ends at the basic at corner of block 49 interseting block 46 public RightWay South St so this block 49 on its own does not have any fronti from
public thanks can you clarify which Lots burrow currently owns next to uh Lots 43 46 and 49 does the burrow also have possession of lots 48 and
47 so the burrow own slots 48 47 45 44 42 and 41 everything that's shown on the map down on the screen except for the
[Music] 7369 okay and with the burrow owning 48 and 47 which are right in front of 49 is the idea that those lots will be combined and made part of the tra a
development plans uh yes and is already part of the track a limits uh so the classic cleaner study area is part of the track a as right now but the goal would be to assemble all the properties into a cohesive single re
project okay um the other question that I have is regarding the contamination so just so I'm clear was the source of this contamination identified Source I get to that my
understanding that the site exhibit and are there any efforts being made to remediate that the efforts from I can explain is that back in 2018 the burrow initi
proactive assist the funding from a grant to at least an investigation prelimary report um that was back in 2017 report 201 I believe the property owner has since engaged its own L to an
updated report uh from just last couple months ago and that report shows still contamination mod terms actual remediation efforts has do you mind elaborating a bit on which of the Redevelopment stat criteria
you are saying applies to plot 43 specifically the Classic Cleaners building specifically so lot 43 which be the part the lot including building I would say includes would satisfy criteria b as well as section three
criteria any other members of the board have questions for Chris before we open this up to the public all right seeing none we'll open up the presentation to members of the public we'll start with attorneys who are physically present with here here
with us this evening how many attorneys are here in the in the public right now just raise your hands right now just one all right right attorne fair enough well if you you can take the mic from Chris
is there is another M prob I'll St over there can I address the identify yourself for the hold on one second we seem to be having a technical back and forth let's just make sure we're on the same page all
right gonna get one okay all right thank you very much sir please go ahead and introduce yourself okay my name is Thomas Olen I'm with the law firm of mcer risken olssen and Del Lael do selling your last sure o LS o n
thank please receive okay and I am here representing Beth buing the owner of the property as well as plastic cleaners which is actually Mr I'm probably not pronouncing his name correctly I apologize de but they are
both here and present tonight um and uh we have previously submitted a letter objecting to the designation um as Mr Mr K indicated um this is an area in
need Redevelopment with eminent domain and um that is a very severe um impact on obvious Mr these properties this proper they do not wish to have their property in them that they do not feel
we do not feel that it meets the criteria we had our planner here expert planner to present the testimony and we have a report from him as well which will indicate that the property and the criteria will not me and we' like the
opportunity to present that to the board all right well do you want to elaborate on those points yourself or do you want to well I think probably should cross examine Mr C first you're free and then I guess we'll Mr Cassens is behind you
why you you by your laptop it's okay I'm just going to leave I don't have a Podium I'm Mo my stuff here that's fine thank you it's a public T that's very good stay comfortable there okay good
evening Mr good right so Mr Kenza um you did the report that we are um that you testified to just a few minutes ago yourself correct did anyone else help you with it I had staff in my office take points
that I was explaining basically dictating right on occasion almost all the words are yours okay I'm not sure your we know and you got to keep it up yeah if you can repeat your answer couldn't really hear again with the the
noise above here so yeah who helped you I'm sorry who helped you with the uh I had a staff in my office uh help me with writing as I gave Direction Bas main on background information records okay look the
reference are youare Mr are you aware Mr consenter that there's been a cleaner on this property for the last 75 years yes and Mr Ali has operated a cleaner on the property since 1984 yes and and that currently there's a
tenant operating a cleaner yes and I believe you indicated that uh with respect to this particular study area the only the study area are only these particular three lots correct and that these three lots are all owned by be royalty yes matter fact haven't
the three lots actually been merged by the B into one from understand your question correctly it appears on one tax record card probably with lot 43 being a primary lot and lot 46 secondary yeah um
as a matter of fact here's I'm G to show you just a copy of the uh tax assessment record yes and it indicates that lot 43 is the um is actually the lot they've all been merged by the operational block correct yes and as a matter of fact the
property's been being assessed by the borrow at $28,800 yes I believe you indicated in your report that Mr Lee or realy they're current on their taxes they pay their taxes correctly you know currently now there
are no leans correct pres yeah now when you did you get inside the building yes okay it's a functioning dry cleaner correct yes did you get upstairs too I requested access to the second floor and the property own Le did not ACC okay because
tenants up there right there people residing in upstairs this departments that's what was explained to me two right two apartments up there yes and in addition up on theof roof Verizon I think has a couple cell cells up there
right two cell that's the wooden stairs you mentioned before that's those stairs are just for that correct I don't know is other way to get up to the roof besides that I don't know now you mentioned that you did do a
uh request with a record correct we to this property yes and U no indicated no leans on the property correct uh I believe I put in my report let me J my memory [Music]
section there are no open Le or any Le that were redeemed for the past five years any violations right none of record um no police report uh regarding any crime or other incidents at the
property not have record no accident reports no and then you said there really was no records at all right without any of difficulties there was very liit information yes I indicated the property itself the building itself is in faired a good condition right there are parts of
building exterior and some interior appear to be in fair condition but but otherwise see the fair good building is is operating a functioning building functions yes indicate you like the basement right basement was I like that it did not have
storage or food as I often see with other hopefully not so um all right so so you indicated you're familiar with the case law that as it relates to uh Redevelopment correct it's are you aware there's a
recent opinion by the New Jersey Supreme Court which is very which kind of helped to clarify uh this area of the law and Redevelopment called Manga versus West Orange you familiar with that one yes I believe that's at 253 NJ 291
2023 now that case indicates that when you're doing a an analysis like this and a study like this in determining whe whether or not the criteria and whether or not it actually comprises an area in Redevelopment you need two things one is sufficient proof
that areas with buildings or improvements suffer from one or more specified conditions correct and then sufficient proof that as a result of the particular condition or conditions the areas are detrimental to the sa safety Health morals and Welfare of the community correct yeah so you need two
things you have to look at the criteria and see if they're met and then those that's not enough they also then have to be detrimental to the safety Health morals of welfare of the community right y I believe I mentioned that in testim and you you agree with that
yes with respect back to um uh the what we're talking about tonight we are only talking about these three lots that's the study area correct correct there are no other properties in the study area and with respect to the vacant
lot that you're using criteria C for that correct yes they get unapprove the parking lot and the uh building owned by Betha cleaner would not fit into that criteria believe you one of the criteria
you've come up with is D correct yes now I think you indicated um with respect to the parking lot you would U mention some in your opinion you mentioned uh people coming in and out and whether or
not uh there were issues there how many people do you know have been injured as a result of um that given the lack of documentation of any accident reports I can't say there is zero or a lot but there no accient reports indicating there have been
anyone injured or were there any condition that suggest well if there were there would be a police report probably how about um car accidents any police reports regarding cars uh having accidents in the parking lot never
recorded I think you indicated that the there's an obsolete uh design uh here is that is that one of the criteria that You' come up with I was Ring specifically on fa Arrangement design or other factors and how is that other than the fact that
that you youve indicated this you have no other U evidence with respect to how that's detrimental to the safety moral safety or welfare of the of the community there are no other reports there's no other evidence that you can point to other than your opinion uh no
other evidence other than using the actual conditions [Music] and also with respect to the building which indicates is in a functioning building in FA good condition some of the items that you've mentioned can be
um corrected correct in other words the broken windows they've actually covered them over now correct I mean it's not they're not they put they put something across the the breakage so that it's covered I'm not aware of that with
respect to the stairs that they can be Ted off they can be repaired correct it have been completely DED well what are you basing that on they're there and they're being used well given the wood Rock condition and
lack of the guard rails on at the base of the stair I saw the roof there be more significant work need be done I did also know that I believe in the report may not put in testimony that the first couple steps did not meet code terms of that consistent
rise yeah those those STS can be that's an item or something that could be corrected correct fa easily and the cost yeah the cost to the own and uh with respect to um those stairs are only used by Verizon
anyway right they're not I don't know you mentioned the uh contamination at the site the owner is in fact Mr Lee is actually um working with the D on this cor that's my understanding now he has RP yes SC monitoring Wells on the
property yes are you aware of any violations from the D that he has not been complying with the their plan I don't recall specifically other than that deadline's been extended and I think there being extended further it's my understanding that DP is assign as
respons party yes and he's been working with that correct they they haven't accorded off the site right they haven't indicated to anyone that this is a danger to the public correct other than the contaminant levels I hav any conditions about
closing off okay the property continues to function with the monitoring Wells there with the wells yes just getting back to meanger real quick um you um aware of the the section that indicates the municipality's discretion
is not unfettered the governing body must rigorously comply with the statutory criteria determine to determine whether property is in need of Redevelopment correct yes and it says more than a bland recitation of applicable statutory criteria and a declaration that they have been met is
required it must contain sufficient the record must contain sufficient credible evidence that the designation sta satisfies the requirements of the lrhl which is the uh the statutes that we have been discussing tonight
so Mr um the um s the uh so this has been property has been functioning as a uh dry cleaner for I think we said for 75 years correct when I still say the property that's my understanding
yes now when we look at these the uh the Redevelopment um statue and we look at the conditions if you were if you had a blank slate I think you indicated this earlier if you had a blank slate you might develop it differently correct perhaps yes but we don't have a blank
slate we have a property that exists and in order for that property to be found in the development must satisfy the criteria yes then current conditions and this is a I think as you indicated a functioning dve
yes also by the way when we were talking about the there the area open to the public at the front of the building is just it's a it's a small vestibule area where people can come and bring their clothes correct yeah a little bit step up so it's not accessible they actually clean the property CLE I'm sorry clean
the clothes at this site so they clean when people bring their their dry cleaning it's actually done on the premises yes and a lot of the dry cleaners today send them out but this one is it's actually done on the premises right the equipment's on site and they have equipment on site in some
of the areas that you indicated in the back that had maybe you know the restroom the toilet back there and the walls the walls that were blocked and so on that's not the part that the public traverses correct no but us by the the workers work the public that the area is finished
off in in a manner that you would see for most for most dve there's a desk there's a tile on the floor and drop ceiling so on yes I have nothing I don't thank you
Mr Mr R before you call your planner I just want to clarify something from your questioning here is it your client's position that the three lots we've been discussing tonight should be evaluated by this board as a single lot or each lot evaluated based on its individual
merits as I I would um ask the board to EV Val as a single property because that it's all owned by one the burrow has combined a lot so um I think if you wanted to you could you could find a um a portion of the property meets the
criteria um but um I think you can look at it either way ultim be up to the board I would up I would say it's up to the board thank you yeah I thank you and um if you want to bring your planner yeah I would like to bring Mr St that's
Mr who Mr Peter G second you know so you sarir testimony that you're about to give will be the truth so help you out I do kind enough to state your name your last name and give us the location of your Offices please uh my name is Peter
St s c k 80 Maplewood Avenue Maplewood New Jersey thank you Mr SEC begins his testimony I do have some extra copies of his report if I can pass it it would have been nice as you know Mr olon to have had that material in
advance so that number one the board could end up being in position to Rie that as well as mred myself so I I I really do have a problem but yes you can present it there may be some issues later on that I have to discuss with more the members well just to explain well I
don't need an explanation all I know hold on all I know is that the material is being submitted as of this moment which is now 8:33 on the day of the hearing and it has not been presented presed in advance and it the material that you have had has been presented to
the public for a considerable period of time so that's a problem from that having been said why don't you proceed okay let let me let me just indicate again Mr I'm not so sure there's a need for indication these are facts that I think okay but I want to these are facts that are on the
record and whatever your excuse may be is your excuse excuses well that's your opinion uh the fact of the matter is that Mr St is a very is a planner yeah there we go is is a planner that's been in in the business for a long time uh he understands the rules and he understands
the fact that this this was scheduled for today and you and him decided that it was appropriate to end up having this report submitted to this board this evening at 8:33 can can can I again this is this may on the record before court sometimes Thomas I'm not going to allow
you to get into the discussion as to what the the excuses are why don't you proceed with your planner so that we can have testimony and you might want but my client only just got notice of this hearing it's 10 the statute says 10 days Mr 's had a long time to prepare his
report Mr St worked diligently and he completed today the fact of the matter is that nonetheless why don't you submit the report okay thank you a few other CS that would be nice uh
if you don't I do have one more copy uh I well let's see if if we need another right Mr Olson why don't you proceed with qualifying your pleas Mr St are you are you a licensed uh planner in the state of New Jersey yes and why
don't you detail for the board your uh credentials uh by way of Education if we can shorten this uh I am familiar with Mr st's background Mr St you are a professional planning state of New Jersey that correct yes and in fact your license remains assume it remains in
full force of effect in the state of New Jersey that's correct and you have testified before planning uh planning zoning and Landing SPS on many occasions have you not yes and um are you a licensed in any other state no okay I have no additional questions which you
go his background okay thank you Mr St um you had you before we start I have a memory stick and I don't know someone has a which is better than my memory and I don't know if someone
has the capability of putting it on the ask well qualified IT professional I don't have that capability but maybe he does I didn't ask you and then when you are prepared to start giving your testimony please do remember to use the
microphone that you have transition pardon this is It's a PDF document on this it's a power right no it's just it's a word PDF document all right so otherwise you have to let me
know when to turn it off because I don't have access to it when you're the microphone this this is this with all du respect this is technical I don't know that that needs to be on when they get back to when they get on you're absolutely right Mr St will get his get
the microphone up and there'll be no problem um I Mr St get the microphone if you don't want uh I'm happy to go through my report there's some graphics in it that I'll describe perod yeah can can we can
we get it up no try to get it up yeah okay Mr sh let me just say preliminarily while they're working through the IT issues when you do go to give your testimony on your report I would ask that we don't need to hear about every
statutory criteria please Focus your testimony on as you're cross to the factors that have been presented by the bur's planner we don't need to go more beyond that which is my very respectful way of saying let's try to keep everything focused because I still have
many members of the public who wish to be heard we being very consider it with the time here because you do represent the owners so please proceed according if I there are two items on the stick one is a report and one is a
singular p not work okay okay all right Mr St well um he's working on that um you've had an opportunity to look at the subject property correct yes you already did I already did you
already did thank you for that reminder yes on several occasions I've looked at the property uh so before you is a report that I prepared it's dated March 6th of 2025 and it's entitled planning
evaluation of area in need of Redevelopment investigation Classic Cleaners and then identifies uh the property by lot and block and street address uh the first page has a
reproduction of the property as it is included um in your planner's report uh it appears to be three tax map Lots uh I talk about the statute and the
only thing I want to emphasize is the purpose of the Redevelopment law is to address situations where the private Marketplace is not
operational and that's in the uh purpose statement uh in 40 njsa 40 colon 12 a-2 and uh this as you know is a condemnation area so it's it's serious
that that while if you declare this in need of Redevelopment which is the the same as declaring it blighted uh the governing body at will can decide to condemn the property or not condemn the property but in it from
the point of view of the owner the game's over the the governing body has absolute power to condemn the property and the only argument is what the amount of just compensation I apologize for interrupting your testimony in the PO spee I you've made some declarations on
the state of the law I just need to ask this Thomas is is that your understanding of the law as well well in terms of U the fact that uh there is a provision under section two that deals with the issue of Market but that's a
broad statement and I'm sure that we will get some clarification either uh by way of Mr St clar Mr st's clarification by cross examination or by clarification from our plan thank please thank
you um again the uh the report as I read it um separated the parcel into three tax map lots and in a sense analyze them
independent of one another and particularly um the rear lot uh lot 49 uh was uh separated from the other properties in terms of its
analysis um the applicant excuse me the your planner uh has invoked Criterion C for that rear lot uh D for the whole area but really it's the parking area and the
building and then uh invoked section three uh that says if property isn't doesn't meet the other criteria C or D uh you can still include it if it's
necessary for Effective Redevelopment of the area an important consideration in your planner's report is that it specifically States we're not commenting on the plans
that surround this property the report says you know they they're different plans different developers interested uh those specifics are not involved with this investigation and the report says that so there's no specific
plan at least in this report behind the scenes that says how this property would be integrated into a larger area the the report specifically discloses is we're not endorsing any other plan in in the
rest of this area that surrounds and Mr that's because the stud area is just three lot yes right but but also the plan indeed even if you if you want to look beyond the three lots and as indicated this is the one property that is not owned apparently by the
municipality but the answer is it is an important consideration that this document uh that your planner produced says we not endorsing any plan for the remainder of
the area the larger area right and if the study area is just these three lots then with respect to section three they can't be the hole in the donut because there's no donut and in this case there's no donut because the study area is just this
property but if you want to go Global donnut there is no endorsement of a plan which in my opinion is important uh this as a conforming use as this is controlled by a older
Redevelopment plan uh permits personal services it permits residentials so these are conforming uses um that are on the Classic Cleaners uh property just one moment Chris this area
is part of the tra a Redevelopment plan correct yes since 2020 including the of study and the surrounding properties yes all right there not to interrupt your attorney's questioning but how do you respond to the idea that there's no Redevelopment plan they're all part of tra a of the Burrow's Redevelopment
plan there is no there are guidelines but there's no specific site plan approved for the entire area it's flexible so is it your testimony that there would have to be a site plan actually developed and in place in order to find a hole in the
donut for redevelopment planning in my opinion and we're jumping the gun I know I wanted to go through this in a logical fashion but to invoke Criterion three you have to say that this property this
study area of Classic Cleaners is necessary for Effective Redevelopment of the area and if you had a plan then said uh you know there's going to be a 20 story highrise here etc
etc uh and there's 100% lot coverage one might argue that it is necessary for Effective Redevelopment but this study says ignore the plan it says we're not voting on the
plan we're not picking one plan over another so that flexibility is important in my opinion um I read the report
and there are uh a number of items which are and I'll I'll talk about the phrasing later that were with speculation um there are
phrases I'll just give you samples of them uh it talks about uh the roof is entering a state of disrepair I don't know what Mr you you're referring someplace in your report I'm jumping to page
14 and uh rather than uh part of my report recasts or emphasizes certain uh portions let me back up this business has been here for a long
time it's a very active business on it tends to people drop stuff off on Monday they pick up their clothes on Friday uh on a typical busy day you
have 50 to 100 transactions so if you're interested in having activity your downtown boy this is it you get a lot of activity here from this
facility what has happened over time and I'm sure some of you may be aware of it is that other dry cleaners have disappeared um over the past 10 years they disappeared from New Brunswick uh
the number that were in uh Highland Park have disappeared so uh people like convenience they like a dry cleaner that's in town and uh this is one of the few that's
left want to emphasize that while you need a parking area because people don't walk that far with clothes hangers you need to deliver your clothes this is a very active use and uh well used by both
people in Highland Park in piscato in New Brunswick it's a very active use and if one of your goals is to keep activity in your downtown this is a pretty decent use in my opinion if that is the goal Mr is it
also your opinion that the current parking setup isn't effective effectively services such a busy business and residential unit as it is right now yes in its current condition despite the testimony heard Mr consa
that there there's no Ada accessibility and there's only three to four usable parking spots you feel that it is sufficiently serviceable for two apartments and a very busy active business yes and I'll go into the details I would like to hear how three
to four parking spots sufficiently servic that it's because it's not just three to four parking spots okay so if you'll wait I'll I'll get there uh on page 14 so my first
conclusion is that these three tax map lots are one lot because they're substandard by themselves okay we're gonna pause again
for a moment I'm gonna ask your attorney does the applicant want us to consider all three lots as one lot or is it up to the discretion of the board if we treat them as three separate if I can he's already indicated the it's the board's discretion to be able to do that
and I understand that Mr st's opinion is that it's one but it's up to the board to make that determination and I think the board should retain that that flexibility so why don't you proceed so your tax
assessor thinks that this is one property and uh he gets one tax bill the three lots all have the same ownership on your records it is one lot and in fact this lot is a um
assessed in a uh a 4A criteria it's commercial and in fact if you read the definition of commercial it excludes vacant land if you have vacant land that's not commercial that's specifically part of the statutory definition so the burrow considers this
one lot in commercial use in my opinion those three tax map lots have merged because by them they're in common ownership and each by itself uh is substandard one lot has just the
building with zero parking and you require some parking one lot has just the parking lot as a PR then it it would be a principal use rather than accessory use which doesn't make sense and the vacant lot that called
vacant lot that's part of the whole parcel in the rear this is all one property so because the burrow looks at it as one property because the case of lochner versus campoli suggests that it's one
property because it's used as functionally as one property it is one property and consequently you can't say the rear yard is vacant and you can't get there it's not vacant your assessor says
it isn't vacant um it's part and parcel of the open space of this property and so in my opinion you can't apply Criterion EC to this because it it
applies to uh vacant land that is like remote from the developed portions of the municipality you can't get there what you can do is just walk there it's in the back of this property the second point I want to focus on is the
application of Criterion D and uh as indicated that was recently clarified uh in the Kevin Manga versus West Orange
case uh where the as I understand it the Supreme Court said you have to first of all identify what criteria is it deteriorated um is it obsolescence it
well it's not obsolescent because it's used you have to first identify the criteria that are present and then as as an important feature how is that detrimental to the Community what's the
harm to the surrounding Properties or the community in general and first of all there were observations made and and I I put these in the middle of page 14 uh and I would call these speculative
observations it says the roof is entering a state of disrepair I I don't know what entering is I was up on the roof it looked great to me it said a Down SP spout May potentially be contributing to water
damage uh well if you can take someone's property because the bend at the bottom of the down spout isn't there I don't think that was the intent of the legislation in terms of being able to condemn someone's property the answer is
the water splashes down on the ground and it might discolor the building but it's not detrimental and in fact it's easily fixed with probably $150 and an aluminum elbow on a down
spite uh the report says there's potential mold I don't know what potential mold is that's that's not mold that's potential mold there's suspected asbest because of the age of the building but we don't know if there's aestus there or not it's
it's suspected there may be lead based paint well no one's tested for that there's no proof that it's there but it's there it may be it talks about the bathroom appeared
to be substandard now uh this property has had inspections periodically uh the certificates are up in the wall and they're in my report um it's he's got his business license he's got a boiler
license uh there are no violations at all in any of the codes that are outstanding uh your planner says the lot layout may result in driver confusion
and poor visibility it it may result so we don't know if it does or not but it it might and I'll talk about that in a minute and it says broken windows constitute a safety hazard well there are some in the windows some of the
windows and the lower level they're wire glass so it's not like the glass is going to fall out there's one window that has a panel behind it so this is not a broken window where the air is blowing in and out of the building the answer is there is a a cracked window
there so number one those speculative comments in my opinion are not substantial credible evidence uh there's misinformation it talks about the a unused air compressor the air
compressor in the basement is used because that's how you power the the pressing equipment on the second floor uh there was an oil spill and if you look carefully at the picture there are there's uh granular matter put it on
it to soak it up but that's part and parcel of how these things operate uh there was talk about the curb Cuts uh on um riton Avenue and it said oh they're two close and they don't meet
like some 32 foot stand I don't know where the 32 foot standard came from but if you look at the curb Cuts starting from the automotive shop there's a curb cut of about 21 feet in width that I
measured this evening and then there's a middle area of about 21 F feet which is actually a parking stall cars parked there and in my report you'll see that and then the next curb cut is about 19 feet there's nothing wrong with that in
fact it's great that you have separate entrance and exits now the pavement has been recently redone the lines are striped uh there is not a handicap sign
but the parking space next to the building would be logically the handicapped one and in fact there's enough room to have a full handicap place so what's missing is the handicap sign but the dimensions are there I measured this evening the distance from
the guard rail to the closest part of the building now keep in mind there's right angle parking so you have a standard 18t parking space and then a uh a 24t
aisle so you could have this parking arrangement with a 42 foot distance the distance from the guard rail is 50 feet so you got an extra eight feet to turn around in that aisle
these are highly functional parking spaces the parking as I was there doing my inspections there was someone parked in the parking space right next to the building they didn't back out over the sidewalk they backed up five feet went
into the aisle turned around and went out the correct way you don't have to back up over the sidewalk because there's luxurious room here again there's a 50 foot distance between the guard rail and the building that's more than enough to have right
angled single loaded parking now your plan says oh there's no Landscaping there um there should be a buffer I don't know what you're going to buffer the guard rail that's that's that's my client's guard rail that's
there so apparently we're deficient because we don't screen the guard rail or we're supposed to have uh wheel stops in the parking lot why would you have wheel stops if you have a guard rail doesn't make any sense to me so these
criticisms of the parking area in my opinion are unfounded uh I would say that there are functionally eight parking spaces here and there's more than sufficient aisle to get in and
out and there is more than sufficient dimensions for drive a separate driveway entrance and exit and by the way there's no evidence of any accident any pedestrian accident any car accident
on the property it operates in my opinion uh very well the let me getting down to the end here um so just to remind the board under the manga case you have to show actual harm
to the surrounding area so what's the harm no violations no accidents uh nothing's falling down uh the first step to the in the rear of the building to go up to the roof for the cell for the Verizon the
first step doesn't match the other steps I could go there this evening um and and make that the first step but the answer is the only people that use that stairway are associated uh with the Verizon equipment up there in
fact there's a sign as you walk up there that says what you can and can't do because of the Verizon equipment so limited use of that access point I climbed up there uh you're right there there's not a guard rail or a parit all
around the top of the building but the answer is the only people that go up there are Verizon people and there are cautionary notes as you climb the steps and are at the top of the building the final issue is the
application of criteria three and let me emphasize what that says so that's from the that's not the criteria a to H as you know that's in the definition section of the municipal land use law and it says as used in this
act unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context and this is definition why a Redevelopment area shall mean an area of a municipality which the governing body there thereof finds is a blighted area or an area in need of Rehabilitation whose
Redevelopment is necessary for effective for to effectuate the public purpose declared in the act and here's the important sentence a Redevelopment area may include lands buildings or
improvements which of themselves are not detrimental to the public health safety or welfare but whose inclusion is found NE necessary with out without change in their condition for the effective Redevelopment of the area of which they
are a part if your planner says that section three applies that implies that none of this study area meets any of the other criteria that's the purpose of three is
to say when when when you don't meet the other criteria of obsolete and then you know detrimental when you don't meet those you can include a good property in the area so by saying that section three
applies at the same time the applicant is saying well it only applies if none of the other area uh is blighted and it's almost an admission I try to apply that that none of the the
three components here are are BL because the report clearly does not endorse any specific plan for the larger area it is impossible in my opinion to
conclude that in that this property is necessary for Effective development of the study area itself which I think was the intent of the state legis ation but if you want to expand it there is no
evidence that it is necessary for Effective Redevelopment and and again here's here's the the burden of proof is on the M the planning board and its planner and you want to have substantial
credible evidence here's the substantial credible evidence your planner says that section three applies here it is because it fits within the intent in purpose of section three criteria at
njsa 12 a-3 so the substantial credible evidence is that this property is necessary because it meets the intent in my opinion that's a net
opinion there's no basis to say that there are no facts and in fact the report says we're specifically not talking about the rest of the area so in summary I don't think there this board has substantial credible evidence in
front of it that would allow it to conclude that the study area qualifies as an area in need of development thank you Mr did any members of the board have any questions for
the property owners coule questions um just take me some your thinking so um Mr cassan gave his testimony um explain the history of this area and the steps that the B has taken uh to the
area he and it's documented in his report um the first front matter really goes through page 18 and you know I'll say 2020 um you know
andess you need to correct me um we did take uh did make recommendations to condemn or have a Redevelopment area designation that for the for the that that would be gbo stores that would
be um an area in need of of Redevelopment with condemnation in 2020 um then we did uh that was 2020 and then 2021 um we also uh adopted a Redevelopment plan for that entire set
of of the Gateway in area a um and so the the the the planning board has heard testimony and has heard uh a lot of it actually for that whole area right we have looked at that area the whole burrow before that this area was ination
area so um that's context I think that is part of um that all goes into in lead up to tonight's uh you know review of the in plary investigation for these three
problems right um I I'm I'm not sure what position you're taking and sometimes I hear you say well roll looking at these three properties or one property however you want to play or versus um you know versus well the you know the other we didn't look at the
whole area but in fact we have looked at the whole area and I don't think it's uncommon for municipalities when they do Redevelopment to um look at a whole area and take piece by piece by piece while always in context understanding the
larger a larger area of which we're working so it seems to me um and I you know I don't I I think you want it both ways I think you on the one hand are saying well you know only tonight you look these three properties so the Plenty board cannot consider
anything we've talked about or voted on for three or four years prior or five years prior 10 years prior um and then the other hand I don't know what you mean actually but you know I I I what I'm I'm sort of feeling a shell game going on you know
here so why don't you explain uh here's why it's not a shellgate when the state statute was amended to have condemnation and non-c condemnation areas that was a big change and when you're changing an area
from a non- condemnation to a condemnation area the I think the legislature recognized that's serious stuff because we can take your property despite whether you want to sell it or not and so my understanding
of the intent of the legislation is you start over again when you're turning this into a condemnation area now what's weird is the criteria just the same so I think people have told me that there was
a concern that you declare an area in need of Redevelopment without condemnation and of course the property owner com down because you're not going to take his property and then he come in next year with the exact same testimony
and said look you just concluded it now we're going to turn it into a condemnation area it's a whole different number one it's a whole different ball game when it's a condemnation area number two is the focus is on the
word um necessary you have to have this you can't do it without it and one of the I'm glad that your planner hasn't invoked Criterion H because that's first of all there's no law or
regulation that says what smart growth principles are but what what that is it's future oriented it's what you would like to see this property uh your planner would like to see paring islands and you know uh uh curb concrete curve
bars and Landscaping I would too but that's not the criteria for a blight in fact there there's a a case called uh Spruce Manor versus Belmar that says the very fact that you don't comply with zoning standards is not dispositive of
whether something is in need of Redevelopment of blighted so my point is that the burden of saying it's necessary first of all I think the intent of the
legislation is just look at the study area section three now section three most you know most Redevelopment areas are not single properties some are uh but if you had 10 properties and
again eight were clearly you know met Criterion a through AB whatever they were and you had one property that did not meet it then there's a judgment you know is it at the edge of the area that can be
extracted um there's a phrase you know is it the hole in the doughnut if you go to Montclair on upper Bloomfield Avenue you see a building that was built around a uh a Japanese
restaurant because it while it was there it's like the hole in the doughnut the answer is it wasn't necessary so my focus is what what you would like to see in the area is does not necessarily answer the
question of it's whether it's necessary or not if there was a Redevelopment plan that said you know you got to build 100% lot coverage and and potentially you look beyond the
study area I suppose you could I'll call it fabricate an argument that it's necessary for the larger area but I think the standard is stricter than that number one I think it was intended just for the study area and and unfortunately you have a one property study
area and that's why I say it's inconsistent to invoke section three because section three implies that it's not blighted to start with so you can't go to an area and say it's necessary if none of the properties are one of one of
the things and I I guess maybe you know our Council can councel but um I don't think it's uncommon for municipalities to look at a larger at an area and break it break it up into
smaller pieces and Tackle smaller pieces one at a time and I don't think that that prudes planning board or burrow to uh say well you know you started with a larger area and the minute that you mooved away from taking it all of one bite you've now prevented yourself from
looking at the area and taking into larger considerations the planning board has looked at this area for years right we've taken we took one bite out of it in 2020 and that was the gun and boat store now we're moved out you know now we're moving to this area and for some
reason because we didn't take it all in one in one full swoop we are now unable to use section three I I I don't I don't I don't buy that argument I don't I don't that makesense yeah let me ask a couple of questions are you finished oh then you tell me I
finished and Peter let me ask a couple of questions you don't dispute the fact that there is a Redevelopment area that incorporates this problem your microphone oh sorry I keep on I was
talking to Peter directly I didn't mean to anyway the bottom line is that you don't dispute that this is a Redevelopment area that has been designated by the town correct correct it's okay it's track day what yes track day that's exactly right and in fact as
Jeff has made reference to there have been any number of discussions over the years with regard to this track in terms of the development potential correct yeah are you aware that I've seen a diagram that keeps this property and then surrounds it with a with two
buildings on either side that's evidence that you don't need this well that's interesting I haven't seen that but the bottom line is that you would agree based upon I'm now talking about your report page one which ends up having uh the area and and you don't disagree that
in fact at least as part of track a that includes uh lot 41 correct yes and includes lot 42 correct yes 40 uh 44 yes 45 yes 47 yes and 48 yes okay
and you would also agree that they and I will represent it in my understanding based upon discussions with uh Mr cenza that all of those properties are now municipally owned you understand that as well yes okay so when we look at and then you made reference to the Montclair
area where there is the Chinese restaurant that is on the it was Japanese but anyway sorry either way I don't go there but the bottom line is that um that was a as your example pointed out that was an edge property
and they then found apparently that in fact it was not the hole in the donut no that that was it was an edge property that's what you you I gave that what you testified no I no I didn't say that was an edge property I said that that's the it was on the edge of the the
Redevelopment area the ele the Redevelopment area as you face that property is to the right to the left and behind Okay exactly to the same as this one so so but the point is that well is it really because the fact of the matter
is that that you have this property effectively surrounded by Municipal property do you not no well do you not have uh uh 48 47 45 44 42 and
41 that all of that property is surrounding your client's property and whether you call it three individual Lots what you call it one lot it is still surrounding your client's property is it not it's not technically surrounded because there's nothing
behind lot 49 well but in terms of its its development potential it's spack dab in the middle of that Redevelopment area is it not if you is it not if you concentrate on the road Frontage it is
in the middle of from the left to the right thank you so therefore um if you assume that it is in the middle of the property and therefore you end up having development it is not unreasonable although you may disagree it is not unreasonable to conclude that
section three does in fact apply because in order to develop the property you need to have the entirety of the property as was concluded by Mr cend that's not an unreasonable position to take is it not I think that it does not arise to the meaning of the word
necessary you can have a project to the left and you can have a project to the right and they both could be successful without taking at least the building and the parking lot well you know so so now you're saying that that you're conceding that at least lot 49 whether it's
singular or multiple uh is something that can be taken I think that's what I'm not conceding that because I you seem to just conceded well if you'll let me finish I thought I did I did not
because it has to meet the statutory criteria now after tonight there might be negotiations that's not my business my business is to listen to the testimony and to see if it meets the statutory criteria I do not think it does because
that's not an isolated lot that's vacant well it is still a lot that is vacant and and your suggestion as and your Council has already indicated it's really up to the board to make that determination as to whether or not it's an isolated lot and and you've already
conceded that it is a vacant lot and it has been in a vacant lot for a considerable period of time I have not ConEd that it's a vacant I said that this whole property is assessed for a commercial and you can't assess it for a
commercial if it's vacant well you you have not you're not saying that in fact there are situations in the state of New Jersey where tax assessors make determinations they are not binding upon land use uh decisions are they no you're
not you're not aware of any case law that would say that are you I am not okay so the mere fact that that happens to be assessed as such does not then bind this board to say oh well we're stuck we can't really do anything correct the answer is this is all one
lot whether the tax assessor treats it that way or not because of lochner versus Camp hole in your opinion in my opinion and and now you're suggesting that um there is no possibility that an alternative argument
can be made to say that when you have a section three argument saying that it's the hole in the donor that's an additional argument over and above arguments that may suggest that the criteria a through H are also present on
a lot are you suggesting that that is impossible to do I there are many opinions from different points of view all I'm saying is based on the testimony I've heard this evening and the report I don't think section three can be applied
here well that doesn't answer the question that wasn't your test the testimony I've heard so far is that in your opinion if one of the a through AG factors applies you can't use section three no I I didn't say that okay well you certainly implied that so now you're
saying that in fact it is possible as I suspect the law in includes concludes that in fact you can end up having uh alternative arguments which include the fact that uh a piece of property is both in subject to the criteria and meets the
criteria of a through H whatever they may be let's forget about each because we know that that's kind of useless uh but the fact of the matter is that it can meet those one or more of those criteria and it can also meet the criteria of section three and now you're agreeing with that I'm saying the
argument can be made I don't think it applies in the facts of this situation that's okay that's on my understanding is that's your opinion I get that but at least you you agree with me that we can have alternative arguments about that and I think that's you've already answered that question so and M Thomas
just and again I think what our position um is I think this St testimony is that with respect to uh section three and the whole in the donut there really is no um evidence are you testifying as a planer or as an as legal oh as a legal we'll
get to you in a minute let's finish up with Mr Ste um all right well is there any other members of the board who have questions for Mr Ste I would just like to to make a point that this board is made up of people that live in town and we should
be the ones that have the most interaction with the witnesses and things and it just it gets frustrating sometimes so let me just a very simple if you're saying that I should ask you many questions I'll stop now yeah no and Roger you know we go way back but it
happens a lot I mean armies go back and forth and I think the public suffers because of that there's a lot of wisdom on this board and everybody on this board lives here and has a vested interest of doing the best for Highland Park so just a quick question I come
from a builder background uh what you what labeled here for is lot 43 that's where the building is that's where most of the tax revenue is assessed for the town and that's where most of the revenue is generated by the with the
adjacent parking lot 43 and 46 are basically where most of the taxes are levied where the revenue for the property generated so to me I don't understand the value of 49 only as a hindrance to Redevelopment and that to
me is not do fly so that's just a very simple statement on my part and I think it makes things clear and I think the market condition I think this property has more value as a hindrance to Redevelopment rather than in its own
operating business and that's something you know that obviously you know you have to balance out the rights of the individual with the the you know the town and everything but it just seems to me that it it this is all about money go ahead
uh I got just a couple questions here um so as we kind of mentioned earlier we didn't see this report ahead of time so I've just been kind of flipping through it here as we've been talking so I haven't had time to like read every word um but I didn't see as I was going through it any mention of the
contamination on site uh that's mentioned in the other report was there any mentioned that in here at all um I summarized your planner's report and there's a lot of stuff about
contamination but at the end of the day it's in the process of being cleaned up and it's continues to be cleaned up in fact the well the test well that's on lot 49 which I think is I forget the
number of the lot 499 portion uh I believe that's clean the others they're not clean yet but they're in the process and it takes time it's not like there's a big you know something pumping groundwater out of here it has to biologically work the
answer is the D is monitoring this um it's getting cleaned up it will be cleaned up so the remediation currently is in process right now that's correct process and and in my opinion it is not a factor to determine whether this
property is it or not because the the owner is responsible and it's being cleaned up and if hang I'm sorry you don't think it's a back so the chemicals that have been documented on site are mutogenic and carcinogenic yes are any
of those chemicals still currently in use on the side I know there was one I for for more than a decade the my client was one of the early ones that abandoned those chemicals so it hasn't been used for years and years he's very
knowledgeable about that and just to be clear it's your position that you just said that the presence of the chemicals on site shouldn't be taken into consideration when the standards that we're considering are uh detrimental effects for the safety Health and Welfare of the community there is
nothing detrimental about the use of the site today it is being cleaned up and it will be finished and cleaned up but it's not like someone dropping off their dry cleaning get exposed to this this is all groundwater right what's the timeline on
the remediation well actually let me ask how many times has the deadline been extended I I know that the applicant switched lsrps it was my understanding it was a question of cost because someone had a
much more reasonable figure than another contractor so uh not being crazy my client picked a more reasonable cost so do we have a I don't know I don't know what it is I don't know what because it's been 12 years since the chemicals
were first identified we've all I can tell you is one of one of my understanding is one of the wells is now clean the others are not clean yet but they're in process they're in process okay and again I want to emphasize it's been 12 years since the chemicals were first identified uh there's been
multiple extensions of the deadline and a switch of the I don't know the correct term the lsrp the contractor the doing radiation and that was specifically because of the cost of the original one was too much and now we're using a lessens and Co had to do with it also in
terms of people coming out and monitoring Etc that had a that was a factor in the delay frankly and these are chemicals that again in the groundwater right they're not above ground it's not like right on in basement it's in the groundwater which is not then limited to the site so do we
know the degree to which these chemicals have leeched into the surrounding areas including the Hill residential areas I I do not know that do we think that could have an effect on the I get the phrase right the safety health or welfare all I can tell you is that it's being cleaned
up and D is monitoring it and we're not in violation of any standard any other members of the board what are the remediations that are being done how is it being remediated how is it what are the actions that are
being taken to remediate I I'm not the the expert on that uh but the answer is there's a licensed professional that is hired and is Monitor it and D is completely aware of what's going on but as far as you know there's no actual
proactive steps to do I think it's being done the way it should be done and and that but it it takes it's part of the process is it simply takes time well H hang on a second if we could just go back to that then is it a passive process or like is
it we stopped using the chemicals and eventually they'll all just Le away I'm not aware of this I'm not an expert on that treatment can anybody can anybody testify as to whether there are active remediation things going on or is the remediation basically we stop using the
chemicals and over time it will dilute because it washes off the groundwater into the surrounding Community I don't think that's a question for Mr Question Mr ol he's got anyone here fair enough yeah I just yeah somebody can answer that that to know I don't know that I want just
anybody to answer that question someone who knows corre I just want just on this point a little a little more um and and and you know Chris thanks for your your report here on docent page 46 uh Under Fire
activities for the groundwater so contamination um you knowe that since from 2013 February 2016 there was no there was no significant remed remedial on that then you talk about how the buau
took initiative to start the process and that was uh part of the the Redevelopment agency when when it was independent and I was a member of the Redevelopment agency when we we did reach out and got help in the burrow to get Excel
environmental resources so truth is is that that if for the Burrow's initiative I'm not sure any this would have any rediation would have taken place it took it took it took development agency the time with borrow funds to go in and get
a and get a grant from the county I believe to get money to actually do the the the remed the site uh the records review and the site BL short of that I don't think anything would happen can I can I say something about
not right now you can your that's my point the answer is no sir you cannot say anything just sir you cannot right now all right any other members of the board have questions for the
planner yes oh yes thank you um um Mr SE uh thanks for coming to property and having a look around I'm glad you weren't hurt on these stairs that may might be dangerous might what I'm curious about is how many
visits you've made to the site it's only two visits okay now what times of day were those uh one was before I came to this hearing I was there and then Friday the 28th I was there for maybe two hours
okay were you there during a time when people were walking on the sidewalks yes okay um can you tell can you be more specific about the times um it was it was Midday uh when I got there the parking lot was full um
and then some people left uh but I was I was there um on the site uh I uh toured inside of the building I talked with the owner uh
I walked the neighborhood I walked to the back street down the slope so I would say I was probably there for a total of two hours okay midday on that on that Friday okay and then you were here today in the evening uh before this meeting yeah I came I went to the site
to measure uh dimensions of the parking lot and the uh driveway aisles all that was during the daytime daylight no it was getting dark okay so you weren't there to say when uh when like maybe 20 minutes after the high school was getting out of SCH I was not okay or
like you weren't there in the morning when people were walking their kids to school no I wasn't okay you haven't seen seen anyone have a near Miss from a car next that uh no there's there's clear visibility uh your planner's report says
that it looks like a 50 foot wide curb cut but actually there's a tree in the middle so so if you're if you're turning right um from the parking lot and I think when I was looking at the parking lot diagram there's an arrow on the east
side for in and an arrow on the west side for out of lot right correct um so if you're turn if you're turning right you have to place your car before entering the roadway in a certain spot to not anywhere anywhere but a certain spot
to not have your vision be impeded when you're looking let's say left to make sure that you're not going to cut someone off and you pull into the road right well when the enter driveway is at an angle and uh you have clear visibility
into the parking lot when you exit you're furthest away from the building so you have a great view up and down the street to see where the pedestrians are well I'm not I'm not sure about a great view but I will say that because it's
a yes sorry about that like everyone's forgetting say um so because of the angle let's say I'm let's say this is the road right here and I'm in my car um I would be looking
my car would be pointing that way not just so that so the record's clear you're saying that you would be pointing in a in the right direction yes angle to the right so that people would have to essentially look over their shoulder a little bit to make sure they're not um
cutting someone El when they're mering to tra I don't understand what you said I'm sorry it's at like a 40 is the driveway the exit driveway it's at like a 45 degree angle um it it's not it's not a right angle it
is an angle that's point and there's also a tree in the middle of that of that view yes with BR branches 15 ft high you're right yes look over your shoulder and try not to like have a three block of view when I entered and exit the site
and walked around it I didn't see any I mean there there are issues if someone parks on the roadway you know but that's true with any driveway along raron Avenue when because you have on street parking that does some blockage but it
the the configuration of the parking lot with respect to the building makes sense because when you enter you can concentrate on pedestrian traffic and when you exit you're further away from the building so that you have the best site distance up and down um uh
riton Avenue when you're exiting the property which I think is is the correct configuration okay do you uh do you regularly approve driveways of that width that's a standard width uh I don't
know but the in the planning report there was something like the drive has got to be 32 feet apart there's no Source I I don't know about that I I haven't seen that the answer is this this property could probably operate with a combined driveway of you know 20
feet wide this has a luxurious width it's about the the Eastern driveway is about 9 fet in the on the curve cut and the other one and then you got to go 21 feet to get to the other driveway I think it's safe that you have that separation and
you have that wide driveway thank you for your Tes sign all right any final comments for members of the board um oh sure I actually have a couple questions for power planner yes well let me let's finish with this
planner then we can call Chris back um but what I'd like to do I believe the board members are done with your planner sir so I thank you for your testimony apprciate did you want to give the public an opportunity that's that's what's next yes what I wanted to do was
just ask Mr ol if you wanted your client to provide testimony I don't want to open this up members you had a chance to put on your full presentation give me just give me one second thank you my plan is once Mr Olson's done we can hear from Chris the
M sir you swear affirm testimony that you're about to give the truth so help you go yes would you be kind have a seat okay would you be kind enough to state your name your last name and give us your address ra please yes and U Mr Lee let me ask
you a few questions so Mr Lee you are the principal of Beth real yes okay and you um only these the three lots that weth really own three lots we've been talking about there is a some been some questioning and you've been here about
the environmental remediation that's going on with the property why don't you explain to the board Mr ol I'm going to have a problem with this U the fact of the matter is that with all due respect Mr Lee has not been qualified to testify with regard to anything involving
remediation so if he wants to testify testify to the facts see he's now showing us some papers which are not going to be terribly helpful if he wants to indicate that what he has observed that is going on that's one
thing but as soon as he starts getting into any kind of technical uh comments then I'm going to have to say that he is not qualified to be commenting on that I'm going to cut off I just want you to be aware of that hold on Mr Lee yes you have an lsrp who's
working at the property yes he is working with the Department of Environmental Protection yes and he is in compliance and you are in compliance bethl with the environmental Department ofal protection yes and there are monitoring Wells on the property correct
and those monitoring Wells are uh monitored both by your lsrp and the department Environmental Protection okay and um what does the your lsrp do with respect to to the Wells at the property yeah well I'm going to when you say what
does he do what that becomes a question of sort of technicality what if you want if you want to ask him what he observes what do You observe the lsrp doing when he's uh so so the previous
nsrp had a vapor test 3 years ago for the public cares but and I apologize it's my fault not yours I didn't understand what you said could you repeat it please paper paper yeah yeah so everything was
negative okay we're getting into the technical things which I have problem hold on he's just turn let me let me let I think he can testify to as to what his understanding was as to what happened well he's the owner the fact that he's the owner doesn't make him qualified to
be able to testify that everything was clear I don't know what that means okay I don't know if he's testified that but he just did and that's what concern does the does your lsrp generate uh and the reports that he gives to the DP and gives to you yes and do you have a copy
there yes this is a copy I got from the mylp last year and I gave it to the uh Chris about this but he didn't mention about the uh you know the data of the uh
the water level you get this because Mr St like to know what the status of the water but this is the data so that's why I like to tell you with
all du respect uh Mr Lee uh the report if your council is going to submit that report that's one thing the data will then speak to itself I'm concerned about you interpreting and reading that report I I would I would submit this for
let it speak for itself I guess we'll call that 01 do we want to Mark Mr st's report too and give that a number uh we can Mr St report as 01 in this report
what's the date of that report the date of this report is October 31 2024 at 3:22 p.m. Chris sorry to put you on the spot I just I just want to confir you received this lsrp report you reviewed it in the preparation of your
presentation for the board this evening and your investigation let me just I copy that yeah yes and I believe there's a follow email I Mr Mr is not an expert this is something that they consider I wasn't saying that he
was same report that your client said that our on yeah that is it that I need you need well that's the only copy um well if you would like
ctif if you would like I don't want to steal a only copy so why don't we end up having a situation where I don't know that we can do it now but uh what I would like is that you will represent to us as an officer of the court that you will take this in your custody and
reproduce it and submit it to our board secretary I AB absolutely I'm gonna make a copy give oh okay this number I have to car no they won't let you it'll speak for itself they can read it oh okay they can okay okay
thank Mr do you have any further presentation yes who the ref Robbie oh no no name Mich Dy oh okay to m m
d but R is engineer all right for what it's worth so you'll you'll pH get all right Mr Wilson I thank you for your presentation and if you're finished I'll ask step back and I'm going to give the
members of our board the opportunity to speak to our planner regarding the presentation that would beine I think there are number of make can I make two minute oh
yes we take a five minute break here to let everyone Breathe Stretch your legs and then we'll come back at at thank you be prepared [Music]
get [Music] oh that's nice my office doing signal stud we're try inventory in our region try to get their each yes I know that's come up that's
come up that's a little yeah yeah some are private there's a couple City bless so many of them are not justy
to app you don't do we do know do no one ever Zo would no one yeah we we deced see how it goes with this hybrid situation you said
so one of the be with somebody here you thank you now I can wait for the start writing by the way I tell youest microphone I have been sitting here since 8 o00 no 7:30 and I only catch
half of what are to hear everything that is being said that's the problem hold on I want to get the meeting reopened hold on fair enough I appreciate the feedback
thank you very much all right it is 951 we're going to call the meeting back in session I think everybody's present and in their seats thank you very much at the advice of our board attorney and CRA we will definitely still let you have time to talk to Chris and everyone else afterwards you know because it's getting
late we're gonna open up the meeting to members of the public wishing to be heard on this application we're going to start with members of the public who are pres and everyone's going to have an opportunity to speak I'm going to ask that you keep any comments directly to this application and please keep
comments two three minutes when you come up you'll be sworn in you'll state your name and your address for the record please spell your last name and speak into the microphone sir I saw your hand up why don't you come up there's a microphone right here on the table I have a I have a bad angle oh someone can
thank you so much IED it in so sir do you swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth so help you got as aough iirm yes sir uh would you be kind enough to state your name spell your last name and give us your address Robert pret p r i t c h t
t I live in Somerset New Jersey thank you sir first of all it's been a very eye openening experience for the last two hours and a half um I'm a customer over at least 25 years of Mr
Lee uh he's got he's not just the only dry cleaner in town at least but he's the best dry cleaner in town I started going there he put a sign and said organic cleaning and I went in he gave me a tour of his facilities he showed me his
machines and everything else I've never had a problem with the parking lot I understand well I know that he repaid it at his own expense uh I've had more problems with people and kids on skateboards and bicycles riding on sidewalk than I have with
cars um I come in to get my dry cleaning and I often stop and at uh Raceway to get gas I stop at Basin Robins or uh dunin D dunin Donuts to get something to eat and I often go to um but us to the
St shop so if if you take this over and this place no longer exists I'm not going to come in and patronize businesses and um that's pretty much it and by the way they just don't do dry cleaning they can do they do it
the same day if you need it and the best in town and uh and one of the thing I'll be real quick is that this is a private business which has people on payable who
get paid they pay taxes and one of the questions is all along um bar Avenue there's all these places that you've taken over you're abandoned I remember some years back there was one of the mech to put up a sign don't take my
don't take my business that seems to be what's going on here um and what what's going to happen to this land are they going to build senior citizens housing here it's going to be low low income housing or you just don't know and you want to take over this this land and
this private business thank you Mr P somebody anybody else thank you yes sir if you don't mind coming up now have our MC of microphone thank you do appreciate itar the testimony that you're about to
give be the truth go I your name address spell your last name I'm sorry your name and spell your last name and your address stepen white I like the color um that good enough that's good enough um I live on norex Avenue in Highland Park thank
you it's about the parking isn't it really now um Mr Cena's discussion of the parking lot was a very very nice academic planner's view of the parking lot and that view has nothing whatsoever
to do with how the parking lot is actually used at least seven or eight of the spaces are viable I'm a 25 year customer too I use it all the time do you um I've never had a problem there's
no problem with ER Ingress any of the above people use it to come in drop their clothes and leave and it functions extremely effectively for that um I won't say further about
the 10 space but you don't back into the department you don't back into the cyle you just don't but really ultimately it's about the parking because as much as Highland Park is a walking Town um this is into walking
business because people bring their stuff and they bring their stuff in their cars and they leave and some like this gentlemen come from out of town because so many people have closed up um what you're planning to do is take
away a 75 year long viable business that works well that's that some business like it is going to be necessary in town after a Redevelopment anyway but this is already viable why disrupt it and if you
really feel that this property is the one that's necessary for your Redevelopment then give Mr Lee a way to have an equally viable business at the other end of things which means including parking and it means including
what he needs to run a viable business and so far if he's held out from selling it's because nobody's to that thank you thank you Mr White sir do you swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to give will
be the truth so help you go I do yes spell your last name for the record I N G but she knows how to spell well for the record the record doesn't matter okay okay North Second Avenue and I went behind the the cleaners under their
neighbor he's my neighbor and behind the gun shop I'm on the corner of Dennison where the nice blue house used to stand until it got eaten by human terites but that's another story for redevelopment okay I can't imagine when I read the
criteria Redevelopment back in whatever 20 years ago bacon is a Bacon's place there's a factory falling down and undeveloped lot a natural tree SHRM weed Critters deer
Fox it's not make it it's undeveloped and that's what we need I have a photo from 2008 maybe although the bur has repaired some of the drains that is a street was flooding so rapidly right
there behind the BB ugly gun sh that a young man moving had his boogie board out in August and he floated down Dennison to the garages and I got a photo so don't tell us we don't need
trees and grass and green area which is behind UB pronounced UB it was we appreciate that area it's a pit stop for Little Critters it's got trees
to clean the air we have to pay every inch in high but okay so we're own gun shop had to buy it it still has graffiti I asked mayor Dale please can you paint the
graffiti off the back and that expert or another expert said oh it's got broken trees tree ranches and this and it's not cleaned up so don't take a a business a friendly helpful business that that if
we can go to the moon and sometimes come back why can't Deborah a developer for track day why can't she build around the building it's not attached to the gun shell they do it all
the time in New York maybe Atlantic City take down the surrounding buildings leave a nice brick building why can't it just be there her development Deborah's development is the
we looked it up on E Avenue right opposite R prep it's an enormous gorgeous development work our stores I bet it doesn't have cleaners why not have a cleaners on site who else has
that K have it no why wouldn't this be unique why not help why do we have to we that mckin away 80 years here mckin o mov ubri which which I can't understand why you can get a location
and the burrow cannot find a place to put Mr Mrs Lee the family next door to each other he didn't move them and so now he's suffering build around them thanks thank you sir anybody else
yeah yes we need to have you there's a mic right here on the table Yeah right there I mean you can go to the corner if you I just you swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth so help you got I do your name spell your last name and your address
car Montana Montana like the state m n I live on North 10th Avenue I've lived there since 1968 I didn't come here for this I came I have another question later but I've I've shopped at since 68 so I've been going to that cleaners many
years when Cas on and um I've never had a problem going in and that Barking Lot and neither has my wife who was there today and I have to say he's probably the best Cen of around our priest in Brun ask us to bring our priest and asks
us to bring the Linens from the altar to him nobody else and even his first that's how much he's respected so I don't think we want to drive him out of this town uh this town needs him so that's what I have to say for this I I
would like to come up later ask you a question do that later anyone else all right any last call for members of public presid oh I'm sorry please do you swear or affirm the testimony that
about to be the truth the help of God okay you got to get by the mic please thank you very much uh would you spell tell you your name spell your last name and your address yes my name is right by the mic my name is wh and I apologize I don't have a lot of
voice toight oh I'm sorry didn't I didn't hear I apologize and I apologize that I don't my voice tonight I do my best um and I live at North 6 avue and I've been in town over more
than 40 years I'm a walker I walk around town a lot been involved in a variety of organizations in town I've worked in town and a commed in town so I'd like to open thank you about me and your family
for providing a service to this community when I mov to to I used Tri cleaners I used a variety of them and I friends get I Vol his business St with his
business because he been more reliable because business for a whole variety and being with other Tri fers most of who no longer exist I like to say J and I'll be as weird as I can if condation is based on
parking which is where a lot of the conversation is been tonight I think think a lot of other businesses that very quickly chased out of town personally been on the 27 waiting to turn left into clock 27 watched cars
back out I've watched cars parking spes by Donuts at the end of town near and watch Circle and parking fire and block ambulances there are a lot of problems with parking this time it's a familiar
topic and it's not a good enough reation my opinion so a lot of this felt like trying to findes to get some out for the benefit of putting in a development I understand and I understand the need for I
understand for and I've watched a lot of the discussions for many years and come meetings but I think there's a of Law and intent law and park is a time I love and it's a Time
and I would hope that when we go to do things like Economic Development we also do with a sense that when we have a business that's been this long and disrespected and um I know that there
are people from as far away as Pennsylvania there are people from other communities like Ed that use this right specifically also because they the Articles um Thomases and other things
because service and as was they gra way for members Community I think that's kind bus really hard to keep in reques a lot of effort on
the and others of what makes to work bu really like to keep in town from my perspective that as much as I walk I'm not taking my clean dry clean and stiffing in the bag on my shoulder to walk back home again I'm going there
with the card nevered so just y support general concepts of this toing forward
seems way we that out and I have heard it over the various discussions that I've tried to follow over time I'm not on the plan board I find other ways to be actively involved in the community to volunteer and to do service to the community but they do try to follow some
of these discussions service you thank you are there any other members of the public present tonight who wish to be heard uh on this application we'll reopen for public comment afterwards are there any members of the public at home
that wish to be there are no attendees no attendees we're not that interesting fair enough all right then with that we can close the public we can close the public portion of comments for this application
again we'll come back to General comments later and I will ask Chris um to be available to answer any final questions or comments or discussions from board members please you're waiting very patiently please go ahead you am I speaking L enough can
everybody hear me okay um I have a couple of questions and then I have a comment um about all of the testimony that I've heard here tonight from Chris from Mr Lee and his legal and planning team and from the members of our community so my first question for Chris
is I know we heard a lot tonight about the uh contamination that was found on the subject property and the burrow has acquired the adjacent properties lots of
48 the uies and lot 47 the gun shop and um in the report there was a pce that was found tce that was found I will not try to pronounce the use those chemicals I
cannot and vinyl chloride um is it possible uh and I just you know briefly looked up what these chemicals actually are uh pce being a chemical that is specific to dry cleaners but um
tce and Vinyl chloride um could also be byproducts from the auto body shop that was on lot 46 or 47 for a number of years is that possible on lsrp or environmental
scientists don't were there any other uh chemicals that were reported in the report when they did a like sampling of the soil where they were testing the groundwater around that area besides these three that are noted in this uh there may be but I think I'm focus on this
three so I can't really answer that so with the burrow now having possession of those other two lots are they making any efforts to work with um Mr Lee to remediate the area or is this only falling on him it's my understanding
that Mr Lee is a responsible party if the bur were to purchase the property they would s all responsibilities okay but does the bur assume any responsibility for cleanup on an area where there was an auto body shop for over for decades I don't know
the answer to that I'm not sure Mr C H we own it so we have responsibility so we the properties that we own responsibil prob we don't responsibil okay um okay um understood
so is the borrow actively remediating um so none of the properties that the B own have the same sort of designation that this property has had from from Department protection understand I'm not
an lsrp either right what I'm saying is that none of the other properties that are there have ever had a judgment saying that there is contamination on their site responsible party so's never had the Department of Environmental Protection saying that he has the
responsible party the other one down the side or the gun boat or all of the ones required they've never been had those determinations made by the by the state well did they not have those determinations made because they were not investigated I I think to be fair
okay so the I'm not sure if investigation is the right word but for whatever reason that uh Lots 43 and 46 and 49 were investigated but the other two lots that
had auto body shops on them were not that doesn't make sense to me like why why this block and not the adjacent boock I don't know that counil was saying that they weren't I think he was saying that he doesn't know if they were or not okay here oh I I don't think
councilman Hill said that the other Lots owned by the B weren't investigated and think he say he doesn't know but as far as I know I I I don't know the answer okay um okay so based on the testimony that I'm
hearing tonight you have a business that has existed in our community for 75 years and in my opinion has served this community well and is a standup business
that I think as a burrow should be applauded um and not nit um I think that you know what we're seeing here is an opportunity for the borrow to
develop track Aid and the borrow has done a really great job of making very strategic Acquisitions to achieve the goal of enhancing our downtown and bringing more economic growth and development into the
town the Classic Cleaners is in my opinion an exemplary example of a small business in the community that has served the community that has the respect of the community and I would hope that we could find a solution that
does not not only displace a business that appears to be and is apparently an institution in the community but would also displace the uh tenants that live above it I hope that we can find a solution
that does not um displace this business and that allows this business to continue to serve the community and serve as an example of Entrepreneurship and community service
so you know I I hope we can find a solution to this that just does not um that doesn't erode that that doesn't R Us of that as we want to continue growing this downtown and showing new
business owners you know what serving your community for a long time what it looks like and you're not just a shop you you're a part of people's lives you're a part of people's everyday routine and I'd like to continue seeing that I'd like to see
more of that and I'd like for us to find Creative Solutions to that Chris I just want to offer some feedback on how to me 12 I I met Mr Le at the and he assisted me during the investigation you need to bring it back
closer to he gave me access to the building respectively didn't go to the second floor uh attendant with family members up there uh gave me has space property and we had productive conversations um which included the possibility of relooking uh it's my
understanding since 2019 so at least six years that the burrow has tried hard to accomodate um the possibility of relocating business um because I think everyone at least my observation is that everyone recognizes it is a stand up
business they stopped using the chemicals 20 years ago um so this study is a really an analysis of the land in question not business so I just want to make sure that that's clear I enjoyed my time Mr Lee and I I hope there is a
productive solution and my understanding it is happening behind the scenes but I had of fairness to Mr Lee and the bur officials for that matter I I can't comment on what those things are so in in some the bur is actively and has been
for years trying to find a way to relocate the business as it has done for new any members of the board want to make any general comments or questions for I just want to go over which I feel is the Crux of the issue could you
review the I I forget what the nomenclature was but the the hole in the Dona and whether that by itself if it meets that criteria that's enough to show this property in as need
Redevelopment which includes condemnation could you go just review that okay I'll try to terms a high level Bas terms I try to structure my report an easy to understand pits and that's why I separate the condition the analysis on a
Perot basis in this case it fit neatly because there is a building on one lot there's just a parking lot on the other and baking land on the other if you review the statue st's vacant land doesn't really indicate in my opinion the entire property so whether it's one property or three separate Lots it's
your there vacant land of which occupies more than 57% in my opinion criteria C and then I went through the various things and I didn't pick one thing one aspect of the property that means criteria I review many conditions so in
some all those conditions show that there's a faulty agement design and or other factors that make it detrimental which includes contamination if there's if the statute doesn't accommodate or anticipate that contamination somehow not detrimental I don't understand what
this purpose of re is um and in addition to that if the board were to take the decision that it does not meet the criteria C or D I have the just in case statute that or we're not to make that finding you could rely on criteria C because it is a proverbial
proverbial donut because there is a reeling plan that anti anticipates its Collective and um consolidate development by assembling all the properties the plan anticipates that will devel in fact
2001 the plan uh which has providing Zing allow for construction has in contemplated it would be buil two bases when through the RFP process we got a response to said I want to develop it all at once and we're going through
that process potentially plan to amend regulation but there may not any need to do so depends on what the concept plan is forward so there is a plan place by virtue of the plan to
allel continuous development um I think it would be inappropriate to have a site plan filed pause it and then have a rone study no I I don't have any problem with my main question was whether the let's
say that the inability of the bur to come to terms with the property owner constitutes and the fact that it remains you know the hole in the donut does that by Statute constitute a reason that we
can pass this uh whatever the ACT you know that says it can be condemned in just on its own you know I want to separate condemnation proceedings from are stud are need studies that includes
condation condation be a essentially it's a bargaining tool that's like again it's about what will be acceptable and just to make a comment coming from a background of being a builder if I was to look at this and say oh but you have
to leave this section and work around it I'd walk away I mean the people have this inflated idea that people want to build in Highland Park and yet we've had an empty gas station on the corner of South Second for what 25 years if
everybody wanted to come and you know that's why I think we owe it to ourselves to really do due diligence to try to maximize our ability at redel I agree with you about the maximizing all the tools available for
redevelopment um and since you bring up the gas station that's MD on the corner of South Second opposite fish dry cleaners um you know I would love to see that being brought before us for redevelopment and condemnation because
that's actually something that is blighted and looks awful I'm sorry I got multiple people okay but it is it's coming it's not here yet I mean you know this is this is not a blighted building this is
a functioning building with a functioning thriving business with a taxpaying business owner uh building owner tenants that pay their rent there are no violations I mean this building is in much better shape than a lot of other buildings that we see in this town
and I know that everything's not before us this evening and I and I totally understand the hole in the donut where you know if you see you have this whole big lot that the borrows worked really
hard to acquire and there is this one thought that you know just doesn't fit quite in the puzzle and makes the puzzle incomplete um for me I don't know that that is enough to condemn this property I don't
think that it fits the criteria no I respect your opinion I'm just trying to because it all comes down to the law and we have to follow you know the rule of law and I'm just wondering is the law there and what the you know things are so that's in my head
what I'm going through it's not you know I have no problem with the business in it of itself you know like many of the others in Highland Park it's a bit of a hod podage and that's you know Sense part of our charm but we do have an overwhelming need to bring in development to at least stabilize our
tax Bas and if you look at lot 43 and compared to everything around it it is a small little piece that is holding up a huge potential bonus to the entire community and you know like I said it's all about the law and whether you know
we meet or whether the proposal meets the law but I'm just saying that there's a lot of you know there's two sides to the story to that point I just want to rely on really definition of the section three criteria which
again if the board were to say I don't agree with the report it meets criteria C or D you can use section three criteria because it's and in it of itself does not me to criteria but may be useful for the
effective Development Area sounds like I heard you say already a small piece of a large do that would effectuate a productive reiv plan which already in place thank you everyone for everyone's
comments I'm gonna make one final comment here on this oh I'm sorry did I miss I didn't mean to interrupt you but I didn't want to not have a chance to ask a question um for plan uh can you tell me if um if
there are laws or or policies for uh for ethical relocation of tenants when Redevelopment like such as this one is done can you give more detail yes it's my understanding that if the bur were to pursue if they were to pursue
condemnation they would be required to prepare what's called a r w work relocation ass and it's my understanding that if we need to do so we will do so okay and uh who in that building would be covered by
the would the W apply to it would apply to both residences and businesses okay so if there were condation the business would have to be relocated at the bur's expense is that what of understanding I I'm not sure about the
expense since I have not done a myself my understanding that the Redevelopment attorney would to draft on of maybe would offer just a small bit again I haven't done a wrap either but I'm familiar with that Redevelopment
attorney's discussion of the there is relocation assistance and there's also relocation assistance as part of a um a consensual agreement if that were to come so you can have REM if it's condemned there definitely has to
be relocation assistance if it is part of an agreement you can have relocation assistance along with purchasing the property there's a number of different mechanisms that would help the tenants and the the the the business move um
even if there was a possibility that there was a negotiated settlement towards a purchase so there is that's part of the WRA agreement is is baked into the um to this part of the the statute as so it sounds like there would be a
provision for relocation of commercial and residential tenants in either case that's my yes I feel better the Bro start kicking people to the curve and walking away so I I'm sorry just a follow up on that so would that also involve
compensation to Mr Lee for the cost of his building my understand through em domain I offer a fair market value for that is absolutely correct there AB to be a determination of what fair market value would be and that's just that's a
process separate from this boing okay all right last call I'll say this this is a preliminary investigation of a condemnation in area in need of Redevelopment we were we're being asked
to decide if this area is in need of r velopment to such an extent that we would authorize the burrow to use condemnation Powers if that's what the burrow decides to do in the future it's a very serious step to take I think no one on this board takes it lightly we've
heard a tremendous amount of testimony tonight about it and how great AA cleaners has been as a business and continues to be as a business for this community and how valued it is all members of this board live here I think we're all very familiar with the site
the Loc a and the history of the site and what's been happening or not happening in the surrounding properties along with all the history of the Redevelopment discussions that we've had up till now so with all of that vast weight of history and knowledge and
experience we're going to take a vote on whether this should be considered an area a condemnation area in need of Redevelopment so I think the board is ready to vote and with that alsoit motion that oh if I can well no you're
you're very close what I what I would suggest what I would suggest is that the board's responsibility is that you will be submitting by way of a resolution a recommendation to the government body that the area or part thereof should or
should not be determined to be a Redevelopment area um and that's recommendation is made to the governing body so that's what you're doing you're doing a recommendation predicated upon the report that you've heard together with the testimony that you've heard as
well so it's a recommendation uh you have heard uh I don't to go through all the testimony you've heard it all there's there's the possibility to be under the criteria either as Chris has made reference to either C or D uh the
uh issue that has been raised uh by Mr stack is whether or not the contamination is something that should be part of it uh he saying well it shouldn't because of the fact that it's being remediated uh respectfully I
disagree with that position I think that uh it is a situation uh where there has been at least reference to the fact that this has been going on since 200 12 years whatever it's been and it's an ongoing process and that that process if it is ultimately property is
ultimately acquired by the municipality that process will continue to then be the responsibility of the municipality um there's also the fact that under section three and as you've already heard that section makes it
clear that excuse me that if the property is necessary to effectuate the public purposes of the act and it goes on to indicate that the Redevelopment area which includes lands buildings or improvements uh which of themselves are not detrimental to the public health
safety and Welfare but whose inclusions is found necessary St be with without a change in their condition uh for the effective Redevelopment of an area for which they are a part that in and of itself is a basis for the uh
determination of uh it being a positive recommendation so what you're looking what you're looking before Madam chair is a motion to make a recommendation to determine whether or not you are recommending this uh as has been indicated by Chris that it would be uh
it would give the the burrow enough opportunity to uh determine that this is an area need of Redevelopment either with or without uh condemnation does the council have to hear you sorry by the mic by the
mic does the uh Bal Council have to follow do can they disagree and say it is cond if if the resolution would be that the the board would recommend that this isn't condemnation are in need of
Redevelopment it would be up to the council's discretion whether or not to exercise the powers of condemnation thank you so are we gonna be given the recommendation with cond condemnation and without condemnation that's my
understand that's my understanding direct is with with the possibility of with condemnation and without condemnation it's at the discretion of the governing body this this ordinance will Empower if they passed an ordinance it would Empower them to use common Domin whether
they choose to or not is so the answer is it's with or without but it it empowers them to be able to do that okay to be clear the alternative would be if this was a non-confirmation are development study the recommendation to council to declare as an are development
but there would be no possibility understood of this this just this just includes the possibility that it would occur and and I don't disagree with Mr Olen I don't agree disagree with Mr St or for that matter any members of the
public this is a significant step I agree with you so you need to think about it but that is that is the situation they have the opportunity they are not required to exercise it if we were to declare this a non-
condemnation Redevelopment area would that not be redundant to already existing Declarations of r development for this area I I don't know that you have that option in other words the option here is that it's it's a uh a
request for determination including the uh option for condemnation so that's what you're being it's there as part of this this presentation to you so it's not like you can say well we're going to declare it but we're not going to include condemnation that's not your
option thank you that was my thank you for clarification yes we cannot convict on a lesser included charge not evening I don't know that I using the criminal but essentially
yes so uh would anyone like to make a motion on whether we should make a recommendation to Council on whether this is a condemnation area in need of Redevelopment I'll make that motion I'll second so the motion would be to declare
that this is a condemnation area in need of Redevelopment correct yes and all three lots all three of yes and and just so it's clear because I know that you folks know it but I've had a situation many many years ago if you vote in favor
of this you are voting in favor of the recommendation if you vote no you're voting against it just so it's clear I I know it's fairly simple but I had a situation many years ago where it didn't seem clear to some board members so I like to explain it and I also always ask for the board to the chair to solicit a
motion in deposit so there's no Mis all right we have a motion and a second so we will take a roll call vote Please Mr brusher yes Mr Chin yes Miss
haaz no Mr ha yes Mr Malay yes Mr kman yes Mr Stern Cardel yes Mr Williams yes and miss it is with a lot of
forethought and gravitas associated with this decision I to say yes the motion pass okay thank you very much with that I will open up the meeting to members of
the public on non agenda non-agenda items may wish to be heard and again I don't know what happened to the mic but again sir if you just be kind enough to just restate your name you don't have to spell it we already know that
mon lived here since 1968 almost two years ago two friends of mine are killed at the corner of North T and R there was a large outcry surpris some of your members
don't even know about that accident that where I was talking to yeah I don't know are you all aware of that accident anybody not I'm sorry can you please repeat the accident on the corner of North P and
R a driver was later was determined to be doing over 90 miles an hour I have aware of that all right people that were killed were friends of mine their children their son and their grandchildren live up Street U at the time we were told that
the mayor was talking to the governor it was a big deal I was on TV because I was very upset because I had been talking to your police in person for over a year and a half before that about that corner and I was told I'm not going to mention names he's still on the forone
he's a very good guy nothing he could do I I say you should do something how about putting a flashing sign how about putting those signs up that say your speed and and blink everybody has except do it's a state road well the state can work with us I want to know what's
happened since then because I understand that there was a study that was supposed to be done by the yes you see that's why I'm wondering what's happening there was supposed to be a study by do talking about bike lanes and all kinds of stuff nothing has been told we
don't know what's going on the couple whose parents were killed there don't I I asked them today they don't know any more than I know can you tell me what's going on we can and the reason why we can't is that that unfortunately is not within the jurisdiction of this board if
you want to know information uh uh I'm not the mayor I'm the chair of the planning board however this is only the planning this is not the government so thanks for coming thank you very much but it's the wrong
board I'm a member of the B Council and I'd be happy to discuss this for the after after the meeting I I really just absolutely but as as our attorney said this board this is not the right I thought this was the board I'm GL I came because I had something else Char so I'm happy to talk
to you afterwards and and talk to you about the progress on that I would really appreciate that even though it's almost sorry for your loss well yes and and and the grandchildren and the parents that okay
thank you very much thank you very much just so you know that have a b head plan that we adopt as part of our master plan the end of 2019 and we are implementing it so that is specific crash you're talking about you know that
was an exception I understand I was doing over 90 some miles an hour they triangulated it they figured out a speed and I understand that but there are other accidents on that corner frequently and and I I've been there since 68 and it's a dangerous point and
people do not slow down do not slow down as they should be according to speak now I know the police have been there I'm telling you eyes that but I know the police have been I don't know how many tickets have actually been given sir if you don't mind just put the mic on the table thank
you very much came excuse me I'll start with I have a three Monon old New Jersey Department environmental protection remediation plan site plan program program pending sites confirmed
contamination anyhow under active we find methyl under active we find UB under active we find JSM and Park South six so my question is what is the status of Gabriel Estates has that come before
your this Bo this Bo and in passed at all and what is the status of the cleanup and lo and behold under active I can show councilman Hil 133 R Avo is the
gun and boat vacant space from when I can figure because 13739 I believe is the um restaurant The Busy restaurant so it is on it's a 3 mon list you can pull up your own I didn't
do this sister did and and it's active and it's not been cleaned and the bur has owned it for I don't know how many years and was after it before then so on the Le and you know it's it's not
fair but what is the status of Gabriel States and when are they going to clean up and I know that was litigation and so was south second that developer is f games it has nothing to do with making it pretty is is back for
Holland Parks Buck Woods status of Gabriel stes anybody know uh again U the planning board you're absolutely right the planning board did get involved in that application and did review it extensively and then approved it at that
point unfortunately unfortunately at that point it is no longer within the uh jurisdiction of this board to monitor things such as what's going on thereafter building permits uh things of that Ma and in particular what you're asking for which is the status of a
cleanup that is the subject of the U of uh the developer and the D I would I don't know I I'm not going to speak for Mr hail but I would assume that there would be some information uh at the uh Township sorry at the burrow level that
might be able to be available to you but it would be at this level let me rephrase I think that was made almost two years ago 2023 has Gabriel stays come before you within the last two months yes thank
you any other members of the public wishing to be heard on non-agenda items okay seeing none I'm going to close the public portion of tonight's meeting uh normally we go into reports but frankly unless Scott you're dying to tell us
something at this point I'll close a motion to move second All In faor thank you very much everybody [Music]