News

New Articles

• Klockner Woods: Four Years and Counting - (2/15/07)
• Rolling Acres Neighborhood Opposes Development - (2/15/07)
• SHOS joins effort to preserve NJ's first railroad - (8/26/06)

Archives

• NJ Supreme Court to Hear Levin Center Case - (10/25/06)
• No Decision Yet on Laura Ave. - (10/25/06)
• NJ Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Levin Properties - (7/19/06)
• Klockner Woods Wetlands Report Not Final - (6/13/06)
• Goodbye Dey Farm - (6/13/06)
• Goodbye Schisler Farm - (6/13/06)
• Hello New Road Through Farms - (6/13/06)
• RRC Zoning Challenged in Court - (4/27/06)
• Beautiful New Hiking Trail Opens - (6/13/06)

1) Klockner Woods: Four Years and Counting


Point of View

The contentious issue about Klockner Woods is the price. Everyone agrees the 50 acres should be preserved, but everyone has a different opinion about the true price. The key word is “opinion”.

The fact is that no one has bothered to do the necessary studies to determine the true market value. We have a wetlands report but that’s only one factor and it was completed after the deal was made. In addition, there’s the water table, floodplain, hydrology, tests for contaminants, DEP rules, Hamilton ordinances and more to consider. Save Hamilton Open Space sent a detailed packet of these issues to all concerned parties in September 2006 in an effort to have the true market value of the land determined. So far there has been no response.

In addition, no one has appeared under oath to testify about the factors that determine land value. There’s been no cross examination of witnesses. No evidentiary hearings. No development plan has ever gone before the Planning or Zoning Board to determine the lot yield which is the major factor in determining the price, notwithstanding Fieldstone’s contention and the judge’s agreement that lot yield was never a factor in the price negotiations

If lot yield was never a factor then why did Fieldstone change their original application from 256 low income senior rental units to 52 market value single family houses? And if lot yield was never a factor then why was their first offer of $6,150,000 based on 52 lots valued at $150,000 each? Further, Judge Feinberg’s opinion is replete with references to lot yield. In fact the number was at one time or another 27, 40, 41, 44, 48 or 52. And now there is supposed to be a new, never before divulged secret study with yet another number. (News Story) Lot yield is obviously THE factor in determining the land’s value.

It appears from reading the Judge’s opinion which includes a lengthy timeline of developments over the past four years that in the end what should have been a negotiation based on facts became not much more than horse trading. The two sides each made an initial offer, then split the difference.

Hamilton started at 27 lots at $46,000 each. Fieldstone countered with 52 lots at $150,000 each.

Hamilton eventually moved up to 41 lots, essentially spitting the difference.

On the lot value side, Hamilton started at $46,000 per lot. Fieldstone wanted $150,000.

Again, they split the difference at $100,000 per lot.

And all that negotiation was based on what? The wetlands study? No.

The judge signed her consent judgment June 15, 2005 which set the price at $4.1 million, or 41 lots at $100,000 each. Resolution 05-390 to hire Van Note Harvey to do the wetlands study was passed two months later on August 18, 2005. So, according to the timeline contained in Judge Feinberg’s written opinion, the deal was made prior to the study.

So just what was the basis for the agreement?

Whatever it was, it wasn’t the fair market value of the land. That’s what is missing in this tired and frustrating saga. We are mired in a swamp of opinion (pun intended), and we need to get to the high ground of facts, science and rationality.

If the Council appeals and wins then it’s likely Hamilton will again be at the negotiating table with Fieldstone. The public’s representatives need solid evidence about the land’s value to strike the best deal for Hamilton. Maybe the land is actually worth $4.1 million, or maybe it’s worth a lot less, or maybe it’s worth even more. The point is that no one knows the value. The Township Council doesn’t know. The Mayor doesn’t know. DEP doesn’t know. The judge doesn’t know. Save Hamilton Open Space doesn’t know and you don’t know. Strongly held opinions are not facts. Let’s do a real and complete study and find out the real value, end this bickering and get on with what we all want – saving Klockner Woods.

2) Rolling Acres Neighborhood Opposes Development

Residents of Rolling Acres are concerned over two planned developments on five acres of woods along Rt. 33 between Crest Ave and the Nitti Subaru dealership.

Neighbors waged a successful battle against a Super Wawa planned for the site. Now the 100 year old woods, the last remnant of eastern hardwood forest along Rt. 33, are threatened by two strip malls and a bank. The neighborhood would like to see the woods preserved as a native species arboretum and neighborhood park. That will require public acquisition of the threatened woodlands. At a minimum the neighbors seek to preserve as much of the existing woods as possible.

They fear that the developments, which will destroy the vast majority of the forest, will cause flooding, devalue property, create more traffic on Route 33, and degrade the quality of life of the area by taking away this last small bit of open space on Route 33.

Also, that section of Route 33 is more residential / office in character vs. the endless string of strip malls west of Yardville-Hamilton Square Rd. and east of the Nitti Subaru dealership. Residents also contend that with adequate retail outlets and services and many vacancies along Route 33, the town does not need another string of stores.

Point of View

More than a dozen neighbors along with their lawyer and expert witnesses attended the Feb. 8 Planning Board meeting when the developer, Anthony Palagano was supposed to present his application.

At 9:30pm, after waiting patiently for two and half hours, residents heard the Stark & Stark lawyer representing Palagano announce that he had decided to carry the application until the Feb. 22 meeting.
He cited illness of his experts who were unable to attend the meeting.

Certainly he knew before 9:30pm that his experts wouldn’t be present. He could have requested the delay earlier in the evening instead of driving up residents’ costs for their lawyer and experts and inconveniencing them. Further, he didn’t respond to requests earlier in the afternoon by the resident’s lawyer, who got out of her sick bed to attend, to postpone the hearing.

Since the attorney knew long before 9:30 that he would not proceed, Stark & Stark should reimburse legal and other costs that were incurred solely as a result of the lawyer's refusal to divulge his plans early in the evening.

This sort of reprehensible tactic is used to wear down and stifle opposition from the people who will be most affected by the development and who have a right to more respect than what was afforded them. It’s unethical, but sadly it may be legal. The law should require automatic dismissal of an application whenever a developers' lawyer engages in such tactics. The Planning Board should at the very least reprimand such behavior. Ultimately the law that lets developers pull stunts like that should be changed.

3) SHOS joins effort to preserve NJ's first railroad.

Chartered in 1832, the Camden & Amboy (C&A) was the first railroad chartered in NJ and the third in the U.S. Conrail no longer uses a 5.7 mile stretch of the line that runs parallel to Rt. 130. Most of it is in Washington Township, but a portion is in Hamilton. The entire length of the line is eligible for historic preservation.

Washington Township has plans to create a redevelopment zone along Rt. 130 and favors abandonment of the land by Conrail. The right of way would be sold to a developer(s) and become part of adjacent properties. That would be the end of the rail corridor.

SHOS favors preservation of the right of way and transforming it into a bike-hike “rail trail”, essentially a linear park. This could be incorporated into Washington’s development plans and become an attractive recreational feature and even contribute to economic development and increase property values. It is adjacent to the new Washington Town Center and would be a valued recreational amenity for those residents.

Hamilton’s Historic Advisory Commission, the NJ Sierra Club, the C&A Trail Conservancy, the Pennsylvania Railroad Technical and Historical Society all support preservation of the right of way. Mercer County may be interested in preserving it.

Further, via a “rail banking” option, if the need ever arose, the right of way could be converted back into a passenger or freight rail line.

There are many such “rail trails” around the country. The Rails to Trails Conservancy is a national organization that supports this type of re-use of abandoned railroads. (link to www.railtrails.org).

The current ruling by the Surface Transportation Board, the federal agency that rules on rail line abandonment’s, provides 180 days for someone to purchase the 5.7 miles of the right-of-way.

The 180 day time period will expire June 5, 2007.