 |
Chairman Ron Scott Bey (at left) prepares to open the meeting. |
 |
A portion of the audience; it grew much larger as the meeting got under way, with many standing along the walls. |
The agenda for Thursday's Planning Board was simplicity itself: memorialize three actions previously taken, take up one development application (the Coriell Mansion) and a public hearing on two potential redevelopment areas as previously advertised (see ad here).
As it turned out, it was an evening of unforced errors.
The memorializations were disposed of relatively quickly.
Next up was the Coriell Mansion matter. The owner proposes to turn it into a Bed and Breakfast.
Board Chairman Ron Scott Bey announced that the Board had yet to receive Fire, Police and Engineering reports on the proposal (unforced errors 1-3?).
After some back-and-forth about how to proceed, the applicant and the Board agreed to move forward with the stipulation that if any of the three reports raised concerns, the applicant would have to return to the Board.
Next, the applicant's engineer prepared to go over the itemized list of issues -- casually mentioning the date of the letter he was citing.
Chairman Scott Bey stopped him, saying that that was not the date of the letter in the Board packet and that needed to be the document from which they all worked.
The engineer said he did not have a letter with the date specified by the chair. Nor did the attorney or anyone else on their team. (Unforced error 4?)
After more back-and-forth including an apology by Chairman Scott Bey, it was agreed the engineer would go forward from his list and be stopped if there was a conflict.
The engineer covered the six points (which included plans, utilities, lighting, and storm water retention among others).
Vice chair Horace Baldwin summarized the three matters agreed upon and Chairman Scott Bey announced that the matter would be carried forward to the September 19 meeting.
Next up was the redevelopment study(s). (The agenda listed two: a non-condemnation study and a condemnation study; the legal notice cited above is for the "condemnation" study only.)
It was the prospect of the condemnation redevelopment study that had gotten out the large crowd which eventually numbered approximately 70 people.
As the Coriell Mansion crew cleared out, city staff and consultants moved in and put what appeared to be the opening slide of a presentation on the drop-down screen behind the chair's seat.
 |
The opening slide of the presentation that was not made. (Image courtesy Timothy Priano) |
After a ten minute recess, Chairman Scott Bey reconvened the meeting and announced that because of the time and space requirements for the hearing, it would be postponed to an undetermined date in the near future.
At this point, board attorney Peter Vignuolo advised the public that the ONLY role the Planning Board plays in redevelopment plans is to determine whether the site(s) proposed by the Administration meet the criteria of the NJ land use laws in order to be declared "in need of redevelopment".
The board attorney underscored that the decision of whether an area was to be "non-condemnation" or "condemnation"*** was not in the Board's purview, but in that of the Administration.
(He also said the Fire Chief recommended the meeting be suspended because of the size of the crowd.)
Comparing Vignuolo's statement with the legal notice --
PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF PLAINFIELD, NEW JERSEY PUBLIC HEARING ON A CONDEMNATION AREA IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT INVESTIGATION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on September 5, 2019 at 7:30 p.m. at the Plainfield City Hall Library, 515 Watchung Avenue, Plainfield, New Jersey, the City Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing to consider whether to recommend to the City Council that all or a portion of the following properties (collectively, the "Study Area") should be designated as a Condemnation Area in Need of Redevelopment, in accordance with the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law, N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-1 et seq. (the "Redevelopment Law") which authorizes municipal governing bodies to designate certain areas of the municipality as being in need of redevelopment. (emphasis mine -- DD)
--it seems that the City made another unforced error (number 5?) by mentioning "condemnation" in the legal notice.
As if all this were not enough, board member Sean McKenna protested that the large audience was there because of the "condemnation" language and wanted to be heard.
Chairman Scott Bey insisted that with no hearing there would be no discussion. After some wrangling, Scott Bey put it to McKenna to make a motion to the Board on the matter.
McKenna proposed that Chairman Scott Bey reach out to the Administration to call for a public meeting including the City Council to discuss "condemnation" and "non-condemnation" scenarios. The roll call vote was unanimous in favor (9 voting; member Anthony Howard was not present).
When and where?
Stay tuned.
The next meeting of the Planning Board is Thursday, September 19, 7:30 PM in City Hall Library. The Coriell Mansion matter will be taken up again -- hopefully.
***In "condemnation" plans, the municipality may exercise its right of eminent domain to compel property owners to sell to the municipality at an appraised price. These plans are often litigious, with long, drawn-out, and costly court battles. The municipalities do not always win. "Non-condemnation" plans on the other hand, leave it to a developer and individual property owners to work out a sales price. Both the Quin apartment complex and the coming Wawa on South Avenue are "non-condemnation" projects.
View today's CLIPS W here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.
About Cookies: This blog is operated by Google, which uses cookies to improve the user's experience. By continuing to read this blog you agree to their use.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment