EMERSON—A new trial date has been set for Monday, Nov. 4, at 9 a.m. in the nearly 4 1/2-year-old Superior Court case filed by Emerson against the redeveloper of Emerson Station. The borough is seeking to recoup $500,000 for construction services. Judge John O’Dwyer will preside.
Additionally, the Tuesday, Oct. 1 council meeting has been rescheduled to 6 p.m. The meeting will feature a presentation by Emerson Redevelopers Urban Renewal, who are seeking relief from local zoning ordinances to construct seven affordable housing units at 129 Kinderkamack Road. The redeveloper is required to complete 29 affordable units, including the seven off-site units.
Emerson’s lawsuit, filed in June 2020, seeks $500,000 in construction services allegedly promised by the redeveloper in exchange for the deed to a former ambulance property. This property was transferred as part of the Emerson Station project, a 147-unit, mixed-use complex downtown, which remains incomplete. The project includes 15,000 square feet of retail space and 29 affordable housing units.
The potential impact of the Tuesday, Nov. 5 General Election on the trial schedule remains unknown. Meanwhile, the final concrete pour for the parking garage at the site was scheduled for Sept. 24, but there has been no update on the project’s progress.
One of the principals of Emerson Redevelopers Urban Renewal (ERUR), Accurate Builders, is also facing a foreclosure lawsuit over missed mortgage payments and reserve fund deficiencies on an $8 million mortgage for a separate project in Kenilworth. JMF Properties is the other partner in the Emerson Station project.
ERUR is also being sued by a subcontractor for nearly $1.4 million in unpaid invoices. Additionally, the developer faced a potential tax lien sale on its property at 129 Kinderkamack Road for unpaid 2023 taxes exceeding $10,000.
A tax lien sale to recoup $10,050.38 in unpaid taxes on 129 Kinderkamack Road is scheduled for 10 a.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 1, at Borough Hall, according to Borough Tax Collector Lauren Roehrer. Four other properties with unpaid 2023 taxes are also listed for the sale. Roehrer explained that public notices for unpaid taxes are published four times before the sale, and the owner can repay the taxes at any time before the sale begins.
In 2021, the redeveloper paid off its 2020 taxes only after the parcels involved in the redevelopment were set for a tax lien sale. At the time, the redeveloper still owed its 2021 taxes.
The 129 Kinderkamack Road property, currently a vacant home surrounded by privacy fencing near railroad tracks, is across from a doughnut shop and dry cleaners. ERUR purchased the home several years ago with the apparent intent of constructing the seven off-site affordable units there.
However, the borough and ERUR have clashed over the proposed use of the property. ERUR has requested a zoning change to build the affordable units, while borough attorney John McCann has questioned the validity of this request. The redeveloper argues that the 2018 agreement entitles them to a zoning change, but McCann stated no such change was granted in the original agreement.
The borough has submitted nine questions to ERUR regarding the 129 Kinderkamack property and is awaiting responses before considering any zoning change. McCann noted that no replies have been received as of yet.
The property is zoned as part of the Central Business District (CBD-15), which permits only commercial or mixed-use commercial buildings with ground-floor commercial uses. McCann and planner Caroline Reiter, of Statile & Associates, indicated that the December 2021 request for a zoning change was the first they had heard of plans to use the site for affordable housing. McCann emphasized that these questions must be answered before any zoning change is considered.
The nine questions posed by the borough include: what was the site zoned for at the time of purchase; what is the basis for the zoning change request; when did the redeveloper close on the property; where else in town could off-site affordable units be built; when did the redeveloper inform the borough of its intent to use 129 Kinderkamack Road for affordable housing; did the redeveloper know the parcel was not zoned for affordable housing; how many alternative sites were considered; and why was Habitat for Humanity not chosen to build the off-site units.
Efforts to reach McCann for further comment were not immediately returned.