Residents urge strong safety, transparency measures as Lambertville advances Hill redevelopment plan

Dozens of residents told the Lambertville City Council on Aug. 15 they are worried the proposed redevelopment of the Hill—described in the agenda as a roughly 200-unit project—could worsen traffic, flooding and contamination risks for nearby homes.

“With this redevelopment plan adding up 200 homes and potentially 400 cars, all making a right-hand turn directly in front of my home, I am deeply concerned about my personal safety, my peace of mind, and my quality of life,” said Beth O’Brien, who identified herself as a resident of 2 Handoff Street. She called on the council to add safeguards, including limiting construction hours, setting predetermined construction-vehicle routes and asking the New Jersey Department of Transportation to confirm local streets can handle heavy trucks.

Why it matters: Residents repeatedly cited stormwater, pedestrian safety and potential soil contamination as issues that could alter the footprint, cost and timing of any redevelopment. Multiple commenters said that critical plan documents were not publicly accessible in advance of the council’s first reading, limiting meaningful public review before future votes.

Council members acknowledged the concerns and said the redevelopment work is at an early stage. “The questions that have been raised about protection of pedestrian safety and construction and storm water runoff are good thoughts,” Councilwoman Kaminsky said, adding that those topics are addressed during the redevelopment-agreement phase. The mayor and other council members also said they would explore making closed-session minutes available, redacted as required by law, to improve transparency.

Technical and legal concerns: Several speakers urged the city to commission independent environmental and engineering reviews. Dave Bird, a resident who cited a July court order affecting the city’s builder’s-remedy immunity, said the city’s publicly available record lacked engineering studies addressing steep slopes, storm water and contamination. “The judge’s decision was based on the response to the filing provided by the mayor and the city professionals,” Bird said. He warned that absent clear technical assessments, the development’s alignment and safety measures could change substantially and put residents at risk.

Council response and next steps: The council introduced Ordinance 22-2025 to amend the High School redevelopment plan and scheduled a public hearing for Sept. 18, 2025. Staff and council indicated a dedicated web page will host the plan documents and that a timeline of subsequent steps (planning-board review, redevelopment agreement negotiations and court filings where required) would be posted. Council members repeatedly emphasized the process is early and publicly reviewable, while residents asked for faster and clearer access to technical materials.

What remains unresolved: Residents pressed for immediate, specific commitments—such as independent soil testing, defined construction routes, and guaranteed pedestrian improvements—before the redevelopment moves forward. Council members said those topics will be addressed during negotiations and planning-board review but did not commit to a particular independent study or scope at the meeting.

The council left the matter open for future hearings; the redevelopment plan proceeds to the planning board after the Sept. 3 meeting and returns to council for a second reading on Sept. 18.