Everyone, welcome. We were in close session for a couple of hours tonight and we are now back in public session. So, begin the meeting as we always do with standing for the pledge of allegiance and then you could please
stand for a moment of silence to honor our troops here. To the flag of it stands one nation indivisible liberty and justice
for all. Thank you. Please be seated. Uh we'll start with the uh with approval of minutes. I'm going to ask that we um uh not vote on the not vote on the May 1st meeting uh minutes. I need to take a
look at those. Um and uh are there any questions about the two April 17th meeting information? I speak up a little. I'm sorry. Sure. Of course. Uh uh so I'm looking for a motion to approve the following minutes. April 17th close session minutes and the April
17th meeting minutes. Second. Um all those in favor please say I I actually I'm going to have a chance to review those administrative reports. Does everybody have a chance to look at the administrative reports? Uh there wasn't
one with storm water management coordinator this this month. Yeah. I don't know why. I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh she's been very busy. But I don't know why there was a report. We've also been busy. Cindy is joining
us online tonight. She's been out uh this week and so Lindsay and I have been a little bit more usual. Um, any other questions or comments about the administrative reports? Okay. May I have a motion to accept them,
please? Second. All in favor, please say I. I. Thank you. Now, we'll move to uh public participation and constituent concerns. Uh, we ask that if you would like to speak that you step up to the podium, uh, state your name and address for the record. We have three minutes of
uninterrupted time for your questions or comments that council may or may not respond. Chap 33 Wilson Street. I just wanted to start off and say that I thought that last week was a momentous event in town last Thursday when so much
of the community showed up. I think it was the biggest crowd I've seen at a council meeting since or at a meeting in town since we had our first pen east meeting 10 years ago and I just think that it was important that came and asked good questions and and spoke out. Um, however, I came out of that meeting
with some serious concerns after listening to the presentation. And when you think about the size of this project and part of the problems that we have in this town, it is so overwhelming both the project and the problems. I mean, tonight you're taking a first good step
with passing historic preservation order, new ordinance. I think that's important, but it also shows why we need to change our parking ordinance. That was changed three, four years ago. because they came forward and said that they only need 93 sponsors and given the
fact that you have a wedding mill with 175 people have a hotel with 49, you have a seven cave spa, whatever that means, you've got a coffee shop, you've got, you know, you've also already got a restaurant and and a bar there. It just seems way way too small that I could
between the staff and everything else, you could have at least 300 cars coming just to that one to that one place because it's really a luxury mega hotel complex is what you have to look at because it's so many different buildings. Other thing is that they said they're exempted from storm water and
because it's a redevelopment site, yeah, they're not going to fit in under the DRBC and the D rules, but our rules need to catch that. And we have some language in there, but I don't think we're strong enough. And this is a massive development. There's already problems there. There's flood lighting and water quality issues. That that canal is a
drinking water supply of a million and a half people. And it just drives me nuts why D doesn't have a better program on uh redevelopment for storm water. U the next is we found out and you know, I know you mentioned the last meeting, it's not we're not going to put any
affordable housing here, but we don't charge for commercial development fee. We need to fix that because it's going to add jobs. It's going to increase our not this round you not round four but round five it will increase the numbers and we also need the housing and to have some kind of fee. I mean you don't want to put it everywhere but just on large
scale projects are you know I think it's important and then finally everything they said could be approved under a current zoning and part of the problem is that zoning goes back to 1993 when this town was suffering and struggling and trying to find its way forward. We're now a
very vibrant community where now we have big u corporations that are even national in scope coming into town to build and and and big hospitality companies and everything else do huge projects. So the world has changed and the town has changed and we really need
to update our zoning to make it more appropriate to what we want the vision of the town to be versus a casual zoning that where we just were hoping people would come and do things in town. And then finally, um, today there was a very important article in Bucks County Herald
that I think you know, one picture is worth a thousand words showing the map of where the contaminated wells are and to what levels they're contaminated. And and the highest level of contamination is in the area next to the garbage dump. Doesn't mean it's necessarily from
the garbage dump. It could also get in there from the former high school site, but it also shows blinking red. and that's a warning or maybe a stop sign to say that's completely not an appropriate site for affordable housing or for any
housing and given all the other constraints. So I think that was an important lesson today to hopefully we will act on it going forward. Thank you. Thank you. Um last meeting when I spoke I did want to clarify this development fee is applicable to all new
construction. Oh, it is I I'm not sure how I worded that, but I went back and checked instruction. Yeah, because I Yeah, I appreciate that. Yeah, not at all. I would just add one thing, Jeff, too. The meeting also showed we really need
new sound systems, but everything else. Right. Right. But I I do want to just just guess it's my pet peeve. So, thanks for sharing it is that I uh you know we
do need to do a re-examination the master plan and update the zoning because there are just so many different changes. You know there's a lot of generational change and and ownership and and just the way you know things are done that um we do have to plan for our
community. You know, it's a different world than it was in the 90s and we have to be, you know, looking forward. You know, the future is, you know, the future is upon us. I welcome the future, but we do have to, you know, be good stewards of our community.
Yeah. Councilwoman and I spoke about this at a meeting yesterday. I think it is time to to look at our zoning. Uh, last time I asked Crystal about this, I think she said it's been more than 10 or 15 years since we've really done any kind of wholesale examination of zoning. So, it's something that's talking about.
I would just also add to the one thing that I just find incredible is that the fact they're not going to be doing any storm water management and you look at a development that size and you look at the city of Lambertville and obviously we all know about storm water management for them not to want to do that I think is a big mistake. Right. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. And and you know one last point not to labor but labor in in discussions with the that I have recently with the canal commission um there is a lot of input that they are going to be providing we to be uh careful because it
is a drinking water source and if the the inte they feel the integrity of the canal is affected you know they can even refer this to the New Jersey water supply authority. So, you know, there is some, you know, hopefully they'll be able to um have a further look at it
from that from that perspective because it comes like right up to, you know, the canal and if the the banks of the canal are are threatened even, you know, that they Yeah. with Yes. with digging. Yes. And with the foundations, you know, so there are a lot of considerations in
that regard that should come up as they take a look at that. Um, oh, okay. Uh, I I also support taking a look at the master plan and kind of bringing it into the 21st century. Um, you know, so
much has changed and we're tw, you know, we're a quarter into this century and we really there's so much that has accelerated change um on so many levels that it's it's an appropriate uh and beneficial activity.
I'm this is very good sound the uh um several years ago at a conversation and it was about a project that was going on. I won't call it out. And at
that point, I had a conversation. I said, "We got to look at all the zoning laws that that we are that we're living by that some of them were started in [Music] 1978 about certain developments in certain zones. And when you look back at
it, it's like when that was done, the activities in the neighborhoods were already established. So when they wrote the zoning, they wrote it to include pre-existing non-conforming use is what what what it was called. So, a
lot of a lot of uh uh time has been spent on dealing with that from from project to project, but I think it's and I agree it's long overdue to to uh just review our our
ordinances and our zoning and make sure it's in compliance to how are actually living now and uh bring it up to date. So I look forward to that. Next, please 255 Avenue last Thursday was
certainly enlightening. Uh, one thing that immediately jumped on my mind in addition to the zoning and planning and all of those things because they're long-term, if I remember correctly, they're long real long-term issu items.
All right? And the developer may be, you know, working off of that and maybe pushing through to make it happen under the existing ordinances or regulations. Uh, one thing that really uh caught my
attention along with many others I own, we own 120 uh, you know, uh, PE of frontage and so we'll be able to have lots of parking to drop off people, etc., etc. All right. I I think that and
I believe all right, that may be in the city ordinance. All right. That needs to be really clarified that that's, you know, that that frontage does not give you parking because I mean even you don't have a free parking lot in front.
Nobody in this town and none of the business never had parking in front of their stores and it's something that I think you can look at very quickly. All right. And make a change and that any developer will know what it is going
forward. That's a suggestion. Thank you. May I first I don't know if you know the answer to this question, but I don't believe that front edge entitles anybody to public parking or any parking whatsoever on the right of way. Everything is everything is dictated by
ordinance um and arranged by ordinance. So I I would characterize that as someone speaking about uh something. So did you hear I'm sorry? I I can if you Yeah, of course. I'm sorry. Um, yeah, just because you have
frontage on a on a public street doesn't entitle you to any any parking whatsoever in the right of way. That's all established by ordinance. So, I would just characterize his remarks as a a mischaracterization or a mis so but but mayor if I may. So it is absolutely
in the ordinance today that that is not a tr that that that is not a given right. Thank you. And I have brought up a a question about because of the setup that I saw about possibly them doing valet parking
which if they did that they would have to come to the city to get permission to to do that in parking spaces. But as far as street parking on the street, this just doesn't happen. Yeah, sure.
Next, please. Sean Ellis, 21 Belvadier Avenue. Um, so just in in light of the Bucks County Herald article uh today about um on Kana Hills, I think that there are two ways
actually a few ways that the the city could really help our cause and help people get um clean water uh faster. And one is to ask the D to um you know uh
file a skill act directive that would allow uh the the D to um work more closely with the city identifying who still hasn't been remedi tested or
remediated and to um either you know if if the D can't test all of those wells uh maybe the city can help test those wells. I think we you know we got a lot of money from um cannabis tax in the
past few years. I think a little bit of it could be put towards maybe getting people clean water um you know helping them get there and so a spill act directive and then uh also if they could if we could convince them to you know move on declaring it an area of
immediate environmental concern that will help them expedite uh the process and um you know that becomes their priority. Uh uh so those are two ways that we could without even putting any
money out help people help residents and um you know certainly helping people test getting that one comprom that one certified test so they can get the spill fund to you know pay for the filtration system is um a big step. And then the
other thing that you know might might cost some some time and labor but not uh necessarily uh big um you know a lot is helping people just file the paperwork for the spill fund. A lot of residents have been picking up the slack and we
all a lot we have full-time jobs. We got lot of stuff going on. I think it's it's time for the city to maybe pick up a little bit of the slack there and um help people get clean water as I said. So, thank you. Thanks. Um, I'm just
going to make a general remark here. Uh, yeah, of course. Um, so, so the council has been considering things in close session, and I think that, uh, our meeting on June 5th, we'll be able to outline some steps that we'd like to
take that will hopefully have a positive and fairly immediate impact on the situation. So, um, let us continue to do our work and, uh, come to the meeting on the 5th. Um we'll have some positive news for the
community. Just a couple of other updates while we're talking about PAS. I did speak with the um uh commissioner DP commissioner's office today. They they're going to be sending a formal letter to the city about some
of the activities. Uh and as I noted in Lamville matters, uh the state has requested access to the uh Lville Leville uh high school site for testing. So we
will see how that goes. Um and we're staying on top of that. Um I did also have an email from I had an email exchange with the DP this week as well. Um and uh I've been asking them about when these additional testing letters
are going to go out. 20 20 additional tests on Cottage Hill and 20 tests on on Confield. Um and I got an email yesterday saying that uh from from someone she she thought that the letters were going out today. Um so uh people
should be looking out for letters uh in the city uh over the next next few days for that additional testing. So, uh, we have more information, we'll certainly share it and, uh, we're going to be able to start
making some progress on this very soon. Is there anyone else in the room? I would just add real quickly, Sean, thank you for all the work that you're doing up there, helping everyone out, too, because I know all the residents and you guys are all helping each other, and that's just one of the great things about So, thanks for all the work.
Hi, John Towns, 14 hand. Um, so I was reviewing the letter from D to Mr. Wilson and second paragraph specifically states documentation shows that municipal
landfill operated on Cogman Hill area of Lambertville, West unit, the 1960 property currently owned by Academy Hill. And it goes through all the other listings. It also is very specific as to the tax map addresses. Is the city going to take ownership of this now or are we
still gonna play around? There's a dump up there, gentlemen, ladies. We've known about it for years. We don't understand why the city won't address it. It's frustrating. Now, I know you
may want the current uh owner of the property to take responsibility for it, but we're the residents being affected by it. Our city council is supposed to be there for us. Again, EP said it here in your
letter. I don't know why we're dragging feet still. Um I'm also hopeful you guys can share information with the court or with information that you received from the court. I don't know if all that is still private or not,
but a lot of us are quite interested to find out if um where we are with this uh builder's remedy uh and the fact that information wasn't readily available for the court regarding the land and water contamination. So, all right, I guess
that's it. Thank you. Sure. Um so, you know, this is this is build away and if he has any additional information, but because we're in potentially ongoing litigation with KF and we have received over 25 notices of torque claim, we're
not going to comment on any matters related to that litigation with city may or may not be a party or is a party. So I don't know if you have anything else to add on that bill. Um and then just in terms you know there's a little bit of
misinformation the if you read the the briefs filed by the city contamination was noted um as as something that was noted by our by our attorney and otherwise comment on the strategy as I've said before um we have excellent
professionals the council has in fact weighed in on has had access to the professionals to offer advice or uh suggestions in terms of legal strategy. So um that that's that's all this is. I think you ask for an update though, right? Yeah, I think I think an update
on June 5th. June 5th we have there. Yeah, but June 5th, explain what oral argument or June 5th, there will be an oral argument just on on the on the matter, you know, on the other questions about the bill's remedies and whether or
not we're allowed to make and again I'm out of by not being up there, but will go residents be able to go to the court and watch anyone can go into the courthouse courthouse. You can go there. I mean, I sat and I watched it. There
were a couple other people there as well. Uh, so it's going to be Judge Ballard this time who's going to be deciding this motion. Uh, the judge before was the former municipal court judge in Lampfield. So, this question, he didn't feel it was appropriate for him to decide on that based upon his prior relationship with L. So, it got
moved to Judge Ballard. I don't believe there's any new briefing or anything like that. Uh, Judge Ballard is going to have argument on the date of this June. So, right. And if I think and you can contact the court and get a link if you if you can't go in person and and and
also to to the mayor's reference that you know just I've not been shy about adding to our professionals where I think that we should be going not to specific but but I think
that I say I hear your point on that and I been you can write a letters. Well, many people have written letters. I checked the court file. They uploaded all of them. So, they are now part of the record that the judge and the judge absolutely is going to review those in connection with us, too. So, uh you
know, feel free if you need any help getting your letter to the courthouse, you know, let me know and I'm happy to walk through the process to Hancock Street. Just to add to this conversation, um the the notices that I've seen on the docket for Judge Ber showed that this meeting will be
held June 5th at 2:15 via Zoom, not in person. Anyone else in the room like to offer public comment? Please step to the podium address. Um, I just wanted to add on to earlier comments about looking at the ordinance and zoning. Is that something
you guys can put a timeline to and do it sooner rather than later? And the only reason why I'm bringing it up is um obviously I will be greatly affected. I live on Corell Street, but um I travel to Hudson, Savannah, New
Orleans. These are towns like ours built around the same time period and they're preserved and the residents all have these beautiful homes and lives and they bust all with tourism. It's not going to stop anything. We are still a popular
town whether we build big or not. I think also to compare things up on the corner where the grade is higher or things on the canal that are not dwarfing other homes is a is unfair comparison. But again, I guess the only thing I want to say is can you look at
it sooner rather than later? Yeah, I might be able to answer that question really. I mean, looking at the zoning ordinance is a very, you know, to look at all of them. Uh, I think that Bill would probably agree that uh looking at specific
ordinances now well the plan has not been submitted but I think it could be problematic to look at ordinances that may be related to the SE business district at this particular moment what we don't want to do is set up the city for any kind of legal action based on
sort of preemptively making something uh preemptively affecting a potential potential do anything to add on that? I mean, zoning ordinances are just going to take a long time. I It's a big it's a I don't know if anybody's ever read any of them, but they're they're a lot. And
you you know, we've had a couple of subcommittees look at certain things over the last couple years, and it's takes a long time to get consensus. You need a really you need a formalized uh effort. I'm not I'm not even sure what that looks like just yet. So, in the short term, I would say no. I mean, not the next few months. That's for sure.
Well, I would say master plan. I mean regardless of this project and we need to look at that no matter what. So regardless of the project that's been proposed we need to be thinking about the next projects that because the yeah the master plan is really the underpinnings of the zoning.
So when you start to take a look at the master plan that's that's like not to get technical but I will it's the avenue to to get to the zoning. But in ter if you're going to mention the Z word, I think what is very important is I can't touch that is that
um you know as we go down the road our interpretation of what meets our zoning code and what is it you know um when folks come in and they make an application they say oh we're doing this and we meet all your requirements of your zoning. It's up to us to make that
determination. They don't make that determination. So, you know, there's a couple of things I think that was the were discussed the other evening, you know, that touched on that topic, but that's something to be vigilant on and we as a community want to make sure that
our zoning is being interpreted correctly. Definitely agree with us. Thank you. Michelle Harris, 26 Church Street. Um following up on the question about zoning, um mayor, your comments
just now about um taking care to not set the city up for uh you know problems or perception of an issue that we're preemptively um getting in the way of development. I guess that was my question coming up here and I just want
to be very clear. So the the zoning and plan documents that will prevail in considering the current this development that we're considering at Corel as they're written today, that's what will apply even if we started to consider
anything. My point being that if we want to push back on development, right, if we want to use the tools that we have to um kind of make shape development in a way that we
want our town to to be, we're not going to be able to rely on a change of ordinance. Those rules are in play. So to to to any point that they are going to leave the gates open further than we'd like them to be for
this development, that train has left the station. Correct. We're kind of stuck with that for now. Right. If that's Are you at the end of your comment? Yeah, that's my question because I just want to make sure that people understand that if we're going to that that if we have to use the zoning
and master plan documents as they are today um to apply to that development proposal, for example, um then we have to figure out other strategies. That's not a tool that we're going to effectively be able to use to kind of pen this. And I want to be clear on that
to make sure I understand. Well, so, uh, I'm gonna have Bill kind of shadow me on this answer because I want to make sure that that I'm not missing anything, but first thing to notice that there's no application, nothing's been submitted to the city yet, right? So, um, that's an
important note. So, we don't know what what's being submitted and we don't know how that will align or not align with existing ordinances and code. So that's I think um I'll let Bill speak to
maybe a little bit more in depth. So we do have a master plan and you know it's four years away from its typical uh re-examination. So the master plan re-examination uh last one was done
in 2019. So typically the re-examination master plan is done every 10 years. We can certainly do it sooner and it sounds like there's a lot of interest in doing it sooner. I'm happy to do it sooner. I think it's a fairly large undertaking. I have not done it so I don't know what what specifically is involved in that
planners and you know professionals and public comment and all of that. So you know we do have we do have master plan in place and a reexamination plan in place that defines our goals currently. Um so and you know the idea of um
amending zoning ordinances kind of proactively or even maybe reactively on on a particular project I think is could have problematic legal and this is where I want to kind of
speak a little bit to this because there's a number of cases that deal with municipal zone changes in response to projects. Um there's different [Music]
there's a lot of cases that deal with municipalities changes ordinances in response to specific projects. Um there's a lot of nuances each of those cases. So it's it's a matter that courts have
addressed previously and um it'll So the point is we'll just have to be creative beyond leveraging those creative word you know well no if I may so in my
time on the blackboard three years that I've started on the plat board there are you you know, when when the can my first baptism by fire right on the can on the planning board for the for the the cannabis businesses and while you can't force uh a particular applicant to do
something that's not in the code, you have a room full of people, you have participants, you have I suppose you could say leverage. You have and you maybe not even call it leverage if you're a cynic, but maybe it's more about cooperation, right? This is a concern for our residents. You're hearing it now. This is a concern for
our board. let's think about a way that we can uh adapt, you know, and for you to kind of come to some solution here uh for something that is a concern to the community. And those things happen in real time at boards with public participation and the expertise of the
board members uh and the attorney and whoever else plan whoever else may be in the room. So I don't want to say that you know things things will happen right. So, you know, at the planning board applications for the cannabises, we did not in the ordinance require
traffic studies, but in those meetings which went till 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning on the, you know, it was decided in the meeting that um planning board was going to make uh as a condition of approval traffic studies and not just any traffic studies, but traffic studies that the city got to choose, right? We
got to choose the professionals, not the not the applicant. So there's a lot that happens kind of in these meetings uh as you probably know. So you know it's not just about kind of what what they come with. It's about how you know it's about how how responsive they are kind of
things that come up in the community. And I would say in some highprofile applications or future applications, you know, there's already going to be, I would hope, a sensitivity on on behalf of the applicant coming in knowing that, you know, the community's already
expressed very very publicly to X, Y, and Z are issues and the planning board, you know, in its mission to both uh work within the confines of of the zoning of the ordinances, but also be mindful of the impact, you know, that may not have been
considered. considered by an ordinance that that additional conditions can be. So, it's a a long answer, but uh yeah, there's lots there's lots to talk about. Thank you. I have one brief comment. Um if I may on a different topic on the PAS topic um I
think a lot of people come to this podium and speak in the community and wonder if your voice matters and as the the PAS situation on Comet Hill is sad and frustrating and unacceptable. But I will say that it's
given us an amazing example of what it means to use your voice for good. So Sean and everyone who has stood up here when it was not a popular topic and it was not addressed by this council for months is now on the table and I'm very
proud of the community and I think it's time beyond time for the council and mayor and everyone else involved to get behind this. Thank you. Next, please. Yes, please. um after leaving the meeting
um I just thought that that someone comes into the city and I'm not not specific to what we heard you know other than but comes into the city with a dream I don't want it to
be Lambertville's nightmare and that's kind of how I'm approaching this whole So, um, you know, we'll do what we can do and we'll be proactive where we can
be proactive. Um, but, um, that's that's kind of my mindset going forward. Yes, we have uh 11 people online and two people with their hands raised. Mr. Thurber, will you please state your name and address for the
record and then state your question or comment? Yes, thank you very much. Uh, good evening. It, uh, I'm Bart Thurber living at 53 Lambert Lane, and some of my comments may be redundant, but I think worth uh, adding to the record.
Following last Thursday's presentation by the developers of the hotel corel project, I went back to look at the relevant municipal zoning ordinances, specifically those in the section related to design standards for the central business district. While I'm
sure that the city's planning experts will thoroughly review any plans and proposals submitted for approval to make sure they adhere to these guidelines, I'm equally certain that the developers architects have already done the same. Given that to given that to be the case,
I'm trying to figure out how Lambertville's ordinances could possibly allow at least a twostory parking garage to be consistent with the quote physical, visual, and spatial characteristics of immediate and nearby buildings," unquote, on Lambert Lane and
Corell Street. How is it that a plan with as many as, per the developer's own words, as many as 50 cars per hour entering and exiting the parking deck, some of which via Lambert Lane, which at its narrowest section has a right of way as wide as
oneway George Street, and that's not counting additional two-way traffic heading back and forth to the old Riverhorse Brewery site could be proposed. It will be especially interesting to see, according to the section related to structured parking, how the required
traffic impact study will not indicate there will be quote no unreasonably adverse impact on public streets in the same or adjacent zone unquote. Unfortunately, since I'm seriously concerned like others about the effectiveness of Lambertville's zoning
ordinances and though although although it may be too late to mitigate the effects of the massive hotel coral project, I along with others hope that consideration will be given to updating regulations in the future to limit proposals that are completely out of
line with the scale, mass, proportion, and architectural character of our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you. Second person. Hello. Yes. Good
evening. John Henek, 99 Quarry Street. Guess where? Lambertville. Back from the dead. I want to bring up a few points, but if I can do so right now that may address a
current issue here. As the um past chair of the Lamville Historic Preservation Commission at the time, we were a strong board. The difference between a strong board and a weak board is that a strong
board is regulatory and therefore you seek out if you need a relief you have to take us to court whereas a weak board you go to the zoning board of adjustment. the current
um certified local I guess it's called 082025 dealing with the certified local government that takes you to the zoning board of adjustment we have been in the past and I don't know how it was
migrated from a strong board to a weak board but the historic preservation commission as a strong board which they were until this change took place have all of the power to stop whatever needs to be
stopped because we have design standards. Now I'm John Henek. I am a certified according to the Department of Interior standards 36 CFR part 61. I meet all the
requirements of a historic preservation specialist. I've operated in that capacity for 50 years and so is my wife. I came here in 1969 to do good and I think I did. What has to move on is to make sure that our
protections that we have here are the same ones that others have have enjoyed and that we can continue to enjoy the lifestyle that we deserve because that's why we came to Lambertville. So I leave that with you. I can tell you right now
the um I ask you to please table 08 2025 and take a look at the uh certified local government 22page PDF first before any action is taken that's put out by the state and at this particular time I
think a strong board would go a long way but I really came here for another purpose and that is to like congrat congratulate us some discovery. The Hokum farm, it's not Hok
Park. The Hokum farm is not only on a state and national register. It was considered to be historic by the federal government as of March the 2nd, [Music] 1934 when it was put on the historic
American building survey. the entire property was put on and the building itself was uh recognized. How it happened, I can't tell you. But all of the properties that were
in the historic American building survey are national historic landmarks. And the Hulcom farm is a national historic landmark. And I believe that our state senators, either Booker or Andy Kim, would be very happy
to carry this one across the wire because it's a slam dunk. It requires none of the other requirements. In addition to that, the Hulcom form is on the uh battlefield protection act, which I helped Senator Lenberg
um get through an ominous bill and get that passed. I've also been involved with the uh crossroads of the American Revolution legislation and it was my customer as a favorite to me, George W. Bush when he was governor of
Texas, he said to Jane Keratton, "Tell John I signed it today." So, we have got a lot of protection here and a lot of um good visibility. And lastly, I do believe it's very important
that we understand as we move into the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution. I say this because I have the proof. What occurred here in Lambertville is the most significant
military defeat of the British Army till Yorktown. And I do so because I it's one way for me to launch my next book. It I have all the proof I need and uh it's just a matter of
getting it together. I'll only leave you with a quote that supports what I have to say and uh let me get it out so I don't mess it up. This was stated by Charles Ward of
Cornwallis after the battle of Yorktown. uh Cornwallis did show up at a customary dinner that they had and he uh made this statement at the end. He
said to George Washington, "Fame will gather your brightest laurels from the banks of the Delaware rather than those of the Chesapeake." because he knew that when he was stopped here on December the 9th,
1776 between Lamersville and New Hope, it took the to Yorktown for them to accomplish what they attempted to accomplish. And I thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. uh for those who don't know I I had been seriously injured which is under
investigation and um almost killed me and uh suffocation on your own blood is something gets kind of scary particularly when you're turning blue from your feet up in your hands and the kid who was in the hospital tells you we didn't make your bed because we didn't think you were going to make it. Well, I
got news for him. I got everybody. I had not only am I making it, I'm coming back as strong as I can. And I would like very much for the governing body to take a look at one other thing. Mr. Roy Meyers has three and a
half acres and he's been trying also hard to get it looked at for someone for affordable housing. He's located between 518 and Quarry Street. His wife has got
a great idea and that is the tiny house u type of project uh which would be something that could be looked into and I know Roy will be more than happy to introduce folks to him and by the way his mother
is a hul and in the D with Barbara. So thank you very much have a good evening folks. Thank you, John. It's uh good to hear your voice and to know that uh that you're still with us. We're glad about that and uh we're always delighted to
hear uh hear your stories and hear a little bit be reminded of uh the history of Lambertville and uh our great nation. So, uh thanks for being here very much. I appreciate your comments. Anyone else? Okay. How many people do we have online? 12. 12. All right. Well, uh
good evening everyone online. Thank you for for attending. Um, let's see. Anyone else on the room side? I will ask for a motion to close the public comment period. Please move. Second. All those in favor, please say I. I. Thank you. All right. We're going
to move on to a proclamation for the monarch butterfly pledge. Um, this is something that we are doing. We're undertaking a bit of a program to uh protect and encourage these incredible species here in Lambertville. Working with Lambert goes wild. uh planting lots
and lots of milkweed. We planted a bunch of it at the city hall a lot and I saw like five monarch butterflies this week as I was walking my dog along my toe path. So, good stuff. And uh unless anybody has any questions about that proclamation, I would ask for a motion
to I'm going to make a motion to adopt second. All in favor, please say I. I. Thank you. resolutions on the consent agenda. These are considered routine and they're typically active at one motion. If any member of the city council seeks
separate discussion of any item, that item will be removed and discussed separately. Does anyone have any questions on the consent agenda this evening? Okay. I have a motion to approve the consent agenda. Let me just read the numbers. Number uh resolution numbers 88
uh 2025 through 93. All in favor, please say I. I. Resolution 94-2025. This is a resolution supporting an application for funds to the New Jersey Department of Consumer Community
Affairs, New Jersey affordable housing trust fund program and authorizing the execution of a memorandum of understanding between the city of Lambertville and Raritin Valley Habitat for Humanity Incorporated and furtherance of the potential construction of six semi- detached
houses to be located on a portion of the city owned Hulcom farm property. Um theou uh council's been talking about this. Uh we are I think united in our enthusiasm for getting something done,
getting six houses built, affordable houses built on city- owned property. Um we've had some a number of discussions uh in close session uh and met with uh Habitat for Humanity. I think that we're uh ready to uh to consider this uh
resolution which will authorize uh me and the city clerk to sign a memorandum understanding with Habitat for Humanity. Uh this is really the beginning of a of a process which will probably take several years. The funding is uh it's a complicated funding structure that go
out for funding from the DCA and often from other sources. Um so this is really just the the first step. This will also as noted in the um in the resolution. You know, this will be something that we can write to fair share housing housing
about um assuming it will be uh adopted and uh and hopefully this will be uh we'll be able to amend our um settlement agreement which will um then transfer the police station to this project. So,
uh, which will bring us into plans for the third round, which is something that we've all been wanting to do for a long time. And, uh, this feels, uh, really good to me personally. I don't know if any of the council members wish to speak to this before. Yeah, I'd only be restating the obvious,
but it's great that we are, you know, we're taking a step. You know, we're building some affordable units. So, we're making use of some property that that we have now and um
and it's it it's just a great opportunity. I think it'll be the learning experience and we've got a great relationship with Habitat and I really look forward to uh to this moving forward. I agree. I think it's very exciting. We
obviously we have not done enough in terms of affordable housing here in Lanc. This is a huge step. Uh I think the last time we bought a portfolio that we're getting six units uh and you know I think unfortunately it was a mistake that we're put uh our affordable housing obligation on the
police site big mistake. We realize that this is you know we're trying to make up for that and fix that hole. Uh and you know again I hope fair share will support that with the court. If my memory doesn't fail me, I think
it's ironic that our affordable housing crisis that we're kind of wrapping up with this kind of started with removing an overlay on the ser. So I think it is more than fitting
that we've come full circle and we're able to close the gap on the very property that for I don't know why but it was done and I it just seems fortuitous. So I think it's great and we
need the housing and these people are going to have a great spot. This is a case where the dream does not become a nightmare. There you go. So, thanks for being really patient with uh
with us over these uh several years since uh we did agree to buy the property and an idea that we had four years ago to use the property for housing is a dream
come true. So, I I thank the council and the mayor for encouraging all of us and and be able to supply something that we think is a a great signal to other municipalities
uh that we had a problem and uh we solved it in a way to give people some place to put their head at night. So, and I thank the public for being patient with us as well.
On that note, I would ask someone to make a motion to adopt resolution number 94-2025 authorizing. All in favor? I I um resolution number 95-2025. This is a resolution to authorize the donation of $500 to the
Delaware Valley senior citizens for recreational and social activities for senior citizens in and around Lambertville. So the last meeting um this came up and uh said actually before it came up that uh one of the things that we do here in Lambertville is
basically everybody gets to look at the budget. Everybody gets a say. Everybody makes a decision before we adopt it. This came after adoption and so I thought it was appropriate that we uh we consider it as a as a resolution. Does anybody have any
questions about this? Have a motion, please. Second. Okay. All those in favor? I I Okay. I'm actually opposed to this one. Uh, I'm just going to note that uh I think the
that that the payment of $500 to a social and recreational group um is not a good use of of city funds. So, I'm going to know on this one. That's it. Uh motion has been adopted. Approval of the bills list.
Everybody got a chance to look at bills? Yes. Okay. Have a motion to approve the bills list, please. Second. Okay. All in favor of paying the bills, please say I. I. Thank you. Ordinance is first reading. Uh,
ordinance 11-2025. This ordinance would amend the Lambertville city code chapter 7 traffic section 77-7.2 stop intersection to add a four-way stop at Rosemont Avenue, Delaware Road intersection.
As many residents know, uh um uh used mountain is a cut through kind of an unofficial shortcut from uh from 29 to avoid the lights uh for those people who may be going to routes at 179 north. Uh
and uh sometimes in the morning it has a fairly high level of traffic. Um we've had some conversations with neighbors up there lately. Uh we've done a speed study. speed study indicated that there wasn't really a significant speeding problem, but uh in consultation with some of the neighbors, it was felt that a four-way stop at that intersection
would just uh you know have the effect of slowing everything down a little bit further, making people a little bit more conscious of the neighborhood in which they're driving. So that's the that's the point of uh this ordinance. And uh anybody have any questions for that?
Okay. I have a motion to introduce ordinance number 11-2025 with a public hearing schedule for June 26, 2025. Second. All in favor, please say I. I. Next would be uh ordinance number
12-2025. This ordinance of the city of Lambertville would amend the Lambertville city code 2014 article 7 department of administration 2-7.2 division of municipal operations letter E purchasing number two purchase
by quotation. So um this just really brings us into uh into line with what the state does. So for example I wrote last week about having to go on three different roofs. uh we have repairs uh and in order to do that our city code
requires even for small jobs that we get three different appraisals uh and that can be you know it can be timeconuming it slow things down in the case of a BPW garage there was significant damage to the roof and so trying to get three different roofers out to uh you know in
the last week or two to to get uh to to to get estimates um was a conversation that we had at city hall and uh so this ordinance really seeks to align with with the uh the state code which um uh
requires that if you have QPA that you only need to get two quotes um if they're below threshold. So that's fairly really just a housekeeping matter I think. Are there any questions from council on
it? Okay. Uh would someone please uh make a motion to introduce on first reading ordinance number 12-2025 with the public hearing scheduled for June 26. So move second. All in favor please say I. I moving on to second reading of
ordinances. First one under consideration this evening is ordinance number 07-2025. This is an ordinance to amend the Lambertville city code 2014 chapter 10 uniform construction code enforcing agency to amend the fee
schedule. So uh we introduced this um on April 17th. Uh these these uh ordinance was requested by the construction office and makes really very minor increases to our uh our schedule of fees for uh
everything from basically all permitting fees and construction code fees. So, uh start by opening this up for public comment. If anybody in the room would like to speak specific ordinance, please step up to the podium. Is there anyone online who would
like to speak to it? Okay. Motion to close the public comment period then please public hearing. Second. All right. All in favor of closing public hearing. I I Any questions or comments from the council on this?
All right. Um, I'll make a motion to adopt one second reading granting final approval of ordinance number 07-2025. Is there a second? Second. Okay. All those in favor, please say I. I. Next, we have uh ordinance number
08-2025. This ordinance will land use ordinances article 9 historic preservation commission the land development review section 900. So uh we had a kind of a an introduction to this actually before
April 17th. We had a specific time at the first April meeting when the public could ask questions and participate in informal conversation about what uh amending this ordinance would do. Uh and uh it was also reviewed. We we introduced it on April 17th. It was
reviewed by the planning board and found consistent with the master plan and now it's back here for the second reading public hearing. So for those of you who haven't been in the room, this has been something that we've been talking about for the last couple of years. Uh it's a terrific uh update and it will allow us
to uh have more kind of uh jurisdictional uh approach to kind of historic assets here in the city potentially expanding the historic district. It'll allow us to finally become a member of the certified local government which they're only 35 in New Jersey which um and part of that opens
us up to grant funding for a variety of administrative uh and preservation projects. So uh we've talked about this a lot and it's it's great and it's you know it's already there's a lot of these practices which are you know our historic preservation commission have
already been doing as just best practices. So um uh you know I'm up to public comment and then there specific questions that I can't answer. We have Lisa Eastston and Debbie Kelly here both on the board. This is sorry commission.
This is the chair and Debbie and I have worked uh on this ordinance a lot the last couple of years. So Debbie is very familiar with it as well. So is there anybody would like to speak to this? Margaret Carelli here from Maxwell
Assets 243 and 278 Union. Um two initial points I want to make is to say thank you for everyone for their work on this. um we were at several meetings back when the flood ordinance was adopted and we were discussing um the importance of the
city becoming certified and the order. So I'm going to say thank you to saying that we asked those questions in public forum. We think it is important for the city to become certified. I had um three more I think there were clarification and maybe they could be misunderstanding
on my part but three quick points I wanted to raise. Um, one is in the definitions, the sign application says that all applications for the certificate of appropriateness for a sign are classified as minor applications. And one um thought we had
was that if that same language um was added in the definition of minor application as a new subp part C, that would provide clarification that they were going to be considered as minor applications. It's something when our tenants come into a building, they want
to be able to sign the lease, pay rent, and move in um right away. And our signs are really existing signs and we understand if we put a new sign that's that's different. But um these are existing signs. So that was one change
that we were requesting just to clarify by including the language from the definition in the sign application in the definition of a minor application. The second request that we had was there
are a list of activities actions that don't require any review. For example, replacement in kind, some maintenance activities, it replace the window in kind. And these are in section 902 subp part 1B. And our understanding of those
actions not requiring review is that no certificate of appropriateness needs to be filed for those activities. And so um in subp part one B we thought that might be clarifying text that could be added
right after the text actions not requiring review that for those actions no application or certificate of appropriateness is required. I think that's what the ordinance is intended to say. The third um request that we made is in
section three also of 902 certificate of appropriateness applications number six in section three and number um number four number six in section three and I'm
sorry number three in section four seem to be a little different in terms of the scheduling of the hearing whereas because one is a direction that the commission schedules the hearing in 30 days. Um, and the other is that they may schedule it. And so we just thought that
consistency there would be important understanding that you know holiday might not always be the 30 days but that that would be what would happen. So if you have a complete application you get a hearing in 30 days. Those are really the only comments
we had. again is very important for the city. Thank uh I think the way I'd like to proceed with this is I didn't you know this email came this afternoon so digest it and I get it.
Um I would propose that uh Lisa and Debbie kind of look at your points. Um I would like to proceed with you know moving the the adoption of the ordinance this evening uh only because we worked on it for so long and uh the state historic preservation office has
declared it perfect and while it may need some amendments you know we'll look at what what you're suggesting for clarifications. We need to make sure that it's that the state historic preservation office signs on off on it because without that we can't proceed. Right. So all of this is overseen by the
National Park Service. So, if you would allow us to to look at your uh to look at your points and respond to them, uh maybe clarify them and then uh you know, assuming the ordinance is adopted this evening, you know, we can talk to the state about uh incorporating potential
changes and amendments. Um but it feels pretty strongly that I would like to get this going. Um because, you know, we have been doing it for so long and we do have the support to state as it's written. So, um we're happy to follow up with you if that's okay. That's fine. That's fine. I leave a couple extra
copies of my letter. I appreciate that. And if my if I'm misinterpreting, that would also be important for someone to call me up and tell me. Absolutely. We'll follow via email uh in the next few days. Thank you. Anyone else who'd like to speak to this
real quick? Jeff Tiddle, 33 Wilson Street. I think you should adopt tonight. It's critical to move this forward and start making the changes that we need to make time. Yes. So, thank you. I guess I just I'm sorry. I guess I
would just like to add that the uh historic commission historic zone of the city is currently central businesses and we hope through the work that the commission is going forward. So I'm sure they will make recommendations
on how to properly expand this so it encompasses more than just a quarter mile maybe that much of of our city because there are a lot of changes being made by well well
uh focused residents who are uh making changes to their exterior that do not uh live in the central business district and are therefor or outside purview of historic preservation commission. So I look forward to working towards that
goal to protect homes that have been built during the same time period as as uh central business district. But but then again we'll be under the purview of Bernie changes to the facades
of the buildings and and the beautiful mansions and smaller worker houses that grew up and it's part of our inventory and it is one of the reasons why uh we're such a
talked about destination because of circumstances where uh when Lambertville went on some night the beacon from the the beacon of course put that book together about Lambertville from the
beacon where where um where the uh importance of these buildings no matter where they are and how important they were to the city when it was mostly a manufacturing district and not so much just a residential and historic district
and very important for the 250th anniversary of our independence. So, I think I think that there's a it's it's about time um that we proceed with this and thank you so much for all your
work in in getting us to this. And I know our staff was very much involved, Cindy and Lindsay and Mayor and working closely and Cindy. Sure. uh uh all of us who had input in into that and it it's
unfort it's interesting when you look back and the reason that this is happening now was because how our ordinances were and our uh resolutions uh were all looked
at because of the terrible destruction done by IDA and if it hadn't been for something as as as as as cataclysmic as that would would not have allowed us to get to this point where we are now to
protect our historic city in in a way that generations to come will still be able to come into this city and see its history living. So I thanks thank for
all the effort that you put in and your support for this thing. Yeah. And a point that Lisa has made a couple times is that and it bears repeating is that preservation efforts, preservation management at the local level is really fundamental to a community and the kind
of community wants to be. We often talk about the kind of community we are and we want to be and we want to continue to be. And so to have the dedication of experts and people who uh understand preservation and and the importance of managing it on the local level is uh
it's a significant thing and and I have great gratitude for all the work that that the commission does. Yeah. And I just want to say thank you to you to to Lisa and Debbie for helping to helping us and and everybody Cindy and mayor everybody worked on this because it's so
important to be at this time like we're going to reinvigorate kind of the historic preservation spirit that's always been here. I think it's a great teaching for people who come that are new and I really look forward to working
on you to you know kind of talk about more about design standards what more we can do because our history is our community experience that we all like we don't really know how to express it all the time but you're creating an avenue for us to be able to express it enrich
it and you know that experience is more important than you know some of the other experiences that So our store experience is like number one. Thanks and protected right and I completely agree. I think we should be expanding obviously with each of this
and I look forward to you know protecting places not just the central business district. I think that's very critical and I know from my time on the historical board with Lisa she was talking about that four years ago. So hopefully we'll be able to do that.
All right. May I have a motion to adopt on second reading granting final approval to ordinance number 08-2025. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Uh wish to close the public hearing on this. Thank you. Second. All in favor of closing the public hearing.
Thank you. It's easy to get lost once in a while. Um so now I would ask for a motion to adopt on second final approval to ordinance number 08. I'll second it. All in favor, please say
I. I. Motion carries. The next uh ordinance is ordinance number 10-2025. This ordinance would amend the revised general ordinances of the city of Lamville 1990 Zing 406 central
business district zoning 406.13 conditions for a campus retailer. Um we've also had some conversations about this before. Now it was introduced and on April 17th. There were a couple of conversations at previous meetings about ways in which we could potentially
structure this. Um it was reviewed by the planning board consistent with the master plan on May 7th by yes. Uh and we are the public hearing and second reading. So at this point I would like to ask
anyone who is interested in speaking to ordinance number 10-2025 to please step to the podium name and address room. Is there someone like a motion to close public hearing on this ordinance please?
Second. All in favor please say I. I thank you. Motion carries. And now I would ask for a motion to adopt our second reading granting final approval of number 102. Second. All those in favor correspondence. I previously noted
the letter um development um JCPL to set a rate for rider loss revenue adjustment mechanisms but Delaware township notice of amendments to their
master plan state of New Jersey has an application period for transportation. Just one uh one other thing I I noted in Lambertville matters. I just want to say it here um that still
working on a couple of projects in the city. Uh the church street uh repaving held up just a little bit. The DOT has had some revisions to our final um set of plans. Hoping to get those turned around pretty quickly. Maybe another month or so before we able to bid on
that. And small informed about. So we wanted to just talk briefly about the potential sale of the chill. This is something that's come up in a couple of emails today and I know a couple council members are interested in just understanding kind of what the
process is here and um Bill have a conversation email exchange with the the potential purchaser. I just feel kind of walk us through the process of this play out here.
[Music] The attorney for the entity that was acquiring interest in the existing Union Chill reached out and asked about procedures with regard to local approvals for the transfer of interest.
Um my understanding is they pending application cannabis review commission which is a state commission that oversees recreation cannabis licenses and uh the city's ordinance doesn't have
a specific provision with regard to transfers. Um the only the only overlap really was that with regard to process was that um with regard to specific owners they
had to pass the background check and um the state law requires that transfer ownership interest that the new owners pass background check. So that would have
been satisfied for the state. That was the only issue that I saw that they would have had to make an application to transfer. So because this transfer is
contingent upon state CRC approval, there's nothing really to do. I did ask that the attorney provide a notice to the city of the transfer so the city could update its files as to
the new ownership interest in the existing doesn't impact the city's um tax contribution agreement with the existing so that when the city receives presuming
or if you have commission [Music] transfer the city of their application because these municip information and there's no impact to planning board
approvals or any existing uh anything else. My understanding based on what was represented to me by the attorneys was that The only thing that was changing was who owned the existing licency entity. Obviously, if there
expansion use that impact their compiance with the zoning regulations for cannabis retailers, then they would have to deal with that. Then the city would definitely have a role to play there to
step in. But just for you know transfer interesting As far as I know, as far as [Music] So, Bill, you're saying we consume they will operate, they will
continue to operate as they have been when they were just union chill. What was represented to me is that they're stepping into the shoes of the prior owners. That's what so they have no plans to
expand the operation as far as I know. Um can they change their mind without us getting without the city being involved? No, they um there is a provision in the the regulations and the code that they have
to comply with zoning laws. So they have they have an additional use approval from the planning board. So um if there's any change or expansion in the existing fact to stay in compiance with that
[Music] um you know there there has been some there's been some um you know discontent among neighbors uh regarding the operation. do we have an opportunity to
step in and ask about um remediation they may want to consider? Um you know I don't know off hand what those would be but it's just an opportunity to kind of help the neighbors out. Um, do we have any violations on regard
to none that I know of? What I would what I would say is I don't know the attorney while I to have any suggestions happy to reach out to him again and let some of the issues that
are going on. I think they need they should they possibly meet with the neighbors. That would be the first. Right. Right. Yeah. I would like to Yes. maybe suggest that we you know have some type of a a forum
with them to meet with the neighbors, meet with the city first of all, introduce themselves so we get an opportunity to also share with them what we think that neighbors are and our businesses. But I you know you guys are nodding out there. But in terms of the
ongoing issues that we're able to to to deal with them because you know they're new to the community and there have been issues and you know that you know whether or not it's adjusting the lighting to what goes on in the neighborhood to you know providing a
better buffer how they allow people to double park. You know we have people who then have to rely on calling the police and doing some things. And really, you know, if you're operating a business, you know, it's incumbent upon you to take the first step to, you know, to
right to provide good service, have good patrons and, you know, and we have that other places, they should be able to do that here. Excellent. lot of initial conversations that and there was some things that were agreed
on early on as far as how that site works uh that uh were done I think I'm not quite sure how they got approved what was the mechanism for approving them uh other than the you know the planning
board and the traffic study but I think there's some now that we've been through it for a while. Uh we should we should really re-examine the changes that were made and see if they work the way we thought they would. And I don't know if
that's a planning board issue or something that you want to talk directly know to the applicants, the new owners on it. You ask what what changes you mean? Now there there were ent exits and
entrances and there was a lot of concern about entrance and exits off of Elm Street. And so the solution at the time still was you can only go in off of Elm
Street but you can go which is and go out the driveway up on Union Street when it's I think it would we should talk about the possibility of of taking the entrance off of Elm Street and use it as
an emergency entrance or exit. So that way it would stop cars from coming past the houses not only down Elm Street but also through the Elm Street entrance and give the people who live
along Elm Street a little break in the traffic and have just required to go in and out of the double driveway that's next to the restaurant. Yeah, I mean we can certainly look at this but my the driveway that that is currently
used as the exit. I don't know how wide it is, but and I'm sure the engineers looked at this and determined in terms of the best traffic flow. Happy to look at it. I I don't know that I mean I have trouble visualizing that as a two-way driveway.
I just don't know that it's wide enough. Um I live behind it for many years. I don't think that's wide enough. Yeah. union where on the hash house is I don't but I think we should then maybe they'll they could buffer the
better street right the lighting issue has been an issue you know well we can take a look at it but the lighting lighting is established by I mean this is a regulation established by the CRC it's not I think the name well I think
No, if if the neighbors have specific concerns now, you can you can write them to us and we'll we'll address them as we always do. I don't want to get into a long discussion here. We don't have a planning board resolution. We don't have measurements.
I think we should consider though is do we want to have the city have the ability to approve these in the future or should we be in ordinance? And I think that's absolutely something we should feel because unfortunately I think this was an oversight. Certainly wasn't anything I thought of when I helped participate, you know, from the
public side to create this ordinance. You know, we've had it for a couple years. We always talked about how we were going to modify it. Uh that's certainly something I think we need to consider because I was surprised when I saw the city did not have the ability to have a voice in the transfer of it. And when it comes to something like
cannabis, I mean, the reality is the reason why the cannabis companies that are doing business here in Lambertville is because they came here, they sat to the meetings, they they listen to the public, they establish a dialogue with the neighbors, and if these new people are going to come in and say, "Oh, well, this other person made those deals. I'm
not going to, you know, listen to the neighbors." That's a big problem. And I don't want to have to wait till the end of the year when that permit's coming up to reissue it. I want to get ahead of that. So, I think we need to change the markets to prevent this from happening without us taking a position. So, and they should have a form with the
neighbors, right? Well, we're recommending we can make that happen. So, right now, we don't have we don't have very loud voice in it because it's already been approved and there's no the cannabis commission. I know. I mean, I you know, I think it's important that we
air this um we see, you know, the public has an opportunity to come forward and to your point, Councilman, about a new entity coming in saying, "Well, I didn't know anything about those agreements, so I'm not I'm not accountable." Um, you're
right. We need to get ahead of that. And, you know, having the public participate in that and and communicate. It's also a major corporation that wants to buy this over. Before it was, you know, two people from New Hope and two other local people and this is a big big difference. So, we need to change the
ordinance and update it to make sure that we can keep track of who is owning the businesses here. Well, one one thing that we were able to put into the ordinance, especially for Union Chill, was the landlord,
uh, was to provide parking spaces for the residents along Elm Street that back to the backed up to the parking lot. Now, I don't know if that's been done, but that's what the owner owner of the property was supposed to
do. Dedicate parking for one car for each of those houses in the lot. So, we're looking at the Yes, stuff like that.
Announcements. Pride parade this Saturday 11 a.m. there. See you there. Be square. Forward to it. Um, Memorial Day, uh, the city hall offices are closed on Friday, May 23rd. It's Monday, May 26th. Memorial Day parade will open
26 off at 9:00 a.m. Cherry Street. Department of Public Works will switch to a summer hour starting June 2nd. So that's an hour earlier. The heat out of the yard a little earlier in the
day, part of the day. So will begin at 6:00 a.m. So please plan coordinated. Second public participation uh session is now open. If you'd like to speak, please step to the podium unless you have mobility issues. Please state your name and address. Three minutes of
uninterrupted [Music] time. Council may or may not. I'm not sure but just one thing on Shield coming out around There's room, but I don't know if there's a wall there. Is there a drop off? There's a big drop
off. Five feet drop off. Yeah. So, that's would be your problem. I just wanted to bring up a because I've been involved with this issue for years. So, in New Jersey, the the law, it's called the time of application law. It used to be in New Jersey that you could change the zoning up until approval at a
planning board. In 2010, it's changed to the time of application. the application has to be complete. It has to have there's a case on top of that called the Dunar decision uh where basically they found that the application wasn't complete. So therefore, well, the
lawsuit, it has to be complete, but there's some misinformation that kicked it out. There's a case in Franklin you can look up, but I mean in Franklin Township, but point is in NJ 4455D-10.5, you can until the application is deemed complete by the planning board, you can make a
change. Now to do or any other ordinance that deals with land use. Now doing zoning change might be time consuming and as long as the changes are backed up by master plan but things like parking or storm water other directly across from the back door
of Union. So I've got a bird's eye view. I was also on the traffic study with Steve. Um, I don't believe because we watch this pretty carefully that if you had one way, one way, what's going to happen is they're going to start parking on
North Union even more. They're not going to be able to take the turn into the parking lot. And from my observation, the easier the better. People double parking the cars running. It's still a problem. I mean, nobody's screaming at my door yet this year, which happened
before. Um, also the driveway next to Hash House, a few of the people that we uh know because it's a fairly tight community that work in the building, the spokes building. So, it's a terrible turn to try to make the line of sight is
awful. There probably should be some kind of a mirror or or some kind of way to tell, but I mean, people always get put there on a fairly regular basis. Um, also people tend to pull in
Elm into the oneway, parked there, run in, back out. Almost got my dogs the other day. I mean, and I went into the guy's face and he called me a very bad word. Um, it should never be used. So, I would appreciate and I would expect these new
people to come and sit on my porch as the prior warmers have. Um, we and our row are the people that are directly affected on. And Andrew, I don't know if you have, you know, anything affecting you. being down just a house or two. Um
[Music] I think I bet um but I think the traffic study was good for the time but I think there is more traffic than we
imagined and more people and I'm really hoping Pency passes a you know a need law so that they will all we still need somebody doing something you know incorrect and it's it's not our community that's doing this so I don't
know what the answers are except yes I would relish conversation no I don't agree with you and we need to add some kind of a mirror or something because that is a bad turn by hash house which is getting more and more crowded because they're opening now more hours just as
an eye so we have the parking down there has become increasingly difficult There's a lot of pedestrians that walk there, too. If you're trying to make that turn, it's really it's very [Music] unsto lately. So, uh, you know, I did
ask Union Chill to put up those signs on Elm Street indicating one way into the parking lot. So, uh, that was at the request of one of the neighbors and they did immediately. The other thing that we did was put a stop sign, um, at the exit
of the hash house. So, because I I walked out regularly. I almost I almost got hit. I mean, people people don't necessarily think the sidewalk is a sidewalk when they're going out of there. Um, so, so we did put a stop sign there and I' I've noticed it gets a little it's a little bit better, but
like a lot of places in Lambertville, if you're trying to turn left or right off any one of the side streets off to North Main Street, can be super problematic. I mean, you would have to clear, you know, two or three parking spaces to get really good sight distance down. And that's exactly true there as well. You
have to inch out. And and I know that people don't always inch out because they don't know what the heck they're doing or where they are. Um but uh I think the stop sign has made a little bit of a difference. That's a good addition. The other thing that that we we thought about doing we haven't done yet would be to
put just a small sign in the in the verge of pedestrian you know be caution right pedestrians caution exiting traffic or whatever might uh might be a little helpful as well. Oh, may I suggest since cash house is open on um Friday and Saturday nights I believe
that perhaps be illuminated or you know reflective like bright green or something. What the sign? The sign coming out of the parking lot. Stop sign is just a regular stop. No big pedestrian if you're adding an additional sign now that they're opening
even that it has to be a little more prominent. They just put up and they're not open for dinner. Oh, good. [Music] Yeah, thank you for the stop sign. That's
more than likely have a meeting with our engineer on this. Um, just as you were speaking and it's tough exit from their opportunity. Maybe maybe the decision is to say right turn only. So you'll have
someone trying to make a left turn which is almost fine. And then perhaps we have to perhaps we have to eliminate a couple of spaces on either side of that driveway. You know, things that we wouldn't we didn't do at
the time because parking is such an issue, but but maybe we'll just re readress the ins and outs of that. In addition, I might um I don't know if it already has, but I know that building has been for sale. I don't know if it's
sold yet. So, has anybody talked to I I don't see the uh who had owned it here. I don't know if it's been sold. So, that's also, you know, part of their the new owners will have to be on top of everything as well.
Well, my understanding is there's only one dedicated parking spot for that restaurant and not No, no, I mean at the Spoke Works the Spoke Works building has been up for sale. I'm sorry. It wasn't there being sold anytime soon. I spoken
to the property owner several times. So and and also if I just take one more moment of your time since that since the dispensary is open a very active and and
respected commercial use has opened up where uh uh building was uh used for and it's now engineering company it [Music]
It opened up in the at the north end of the spoken sports. Yeah. No, the architectural firm. Yes. So that's that's also adding to the vehicular traffic back. That's where I
was. We'll look at Okay. Thank you. looking forward to meeting. Anyone [Music] else motion to close public comment? [Music]
I motion to everybody. Everybody. [Music]