Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lambertville council schedules advisory committee as residents press to remove contaminated redevelopment site
Summary
After weeks of public concern, the council said an advisory committee to evaluate alternative sites for the contested redevelopment will be appointed Dec. 5; residents continued to press the council to remove a large, allegedly contaminated parcel from the plan.
Lambertville’s City Council told residents it will appoint an advisory committee at its Dec. 5 meeting to examine alternative sites for a disputed redevelopment parcel, after multiple public commenters said the currently favored site is contaminated and unsuitable for inclusionary housing.
The mayor said the advisory committee “is ready to be appointed at the December 5th meeting” and will include representatives from the planning board, the zoning board, the municipal housing liaison, the affordable-housing attorney and the city planner. The mayor said the committee is expected to begin meeting “early in January” and will meet at least twice a month with a plan due by the end of June.
Residents who spoke at length during both public-comment periods urged the council to remove the large site from the town’s plan and search for vacant land instead. A commenter identified in the transcript as TI 33 Wilson Street said the property has sat idle for decades, called it “inappropriate,” and urged petitioning the state to take the parcel under the Site Remediation Act because, the speaker said, the property is “polluting our groundwater.” That claim was disputed by other speakers only to the extent that officials said they lacked authority to disclose ongoing confidential negotiations; the contamination allegation was not resolved during the meeting.
Several residents also warned that keeping the site in the redevelopment plan would sharply increase housing-unit counts, parking demand and sewer/water use, and could aggravate flooding and runoff concerns. Council and staff acknowledged those concerns and said more technical review will follow. The mayor and council repeatedly emphasized that some negotiations and contract-related details remain confidential and therefore not yet shareable publicly.
Councilmember remarks at the meeting reiterated a desire to balance historic preservation, tourism and growth, and the mayor suggested reviewing master-plan guidance and pursuing additional technical and legal resources if necessary to protect the community’s interests.
Next steps: the council will formally appoint the advisory committee at the Dec. 5 meeting, staff will provide a timeline to the public, and the committee is expected to produce recommendations by the end of June.
