EMERSON—The borough attorney says construction on Emerson Station, the 147-unit residential mixed use complex, including 15,000-square foot of retail space downtown, is progressing — but the legal process between the redeveloper and borough is moving along much slower.
Both the borough and redeveloper have filed dueling lawsuits, the redeveloper alleging delays and obstruction and discrimination on the borough’s part while the borough charges the redeveloper with false allegations, delay, and failing to fulfill its contract to build the massive downtown project in a timely manner.
McCann said both sides are conducting discovery and continue to interview witnesses to further bolster their cases.
He said maybe by the end of summer or early fall both sides will finish taking depositions and move to trial or continue possible further negotiations.
Last summer, McCann had said he anticipated a revised redeveloper’s agreement to soon be finalized between the borough and redeveloper.
However, that did not occur, he said recently.
Also, last summer the Superior Court appointed a Mount Laurel implementation monitor to help expedite the 29 units of affordable housing approved as part of the mixed-use complex: including 22 on-site units and seven offsite units.
McMann told Pascack Press on July 11 that there is no construction schedule yet set nor an updated agreement signed between the borough and Emerson Redevelopers Urban Renewal.
He previously said that there was no timeline or construction schedule included in the original agreement signed late in December 2018 by the prior administration, helmed by Mayor Louis Lamatina.
Instead, he observed that construction continues on the parking garage and foundation elements of the 147-unit luxury apartment and retail complex abutting the downtown train stop.
About a month ago, Mayor Danielle DiPaola — who voted against the scale of the project while on council and ran for mayor against “overdevelopment,” only to inherit the agreement — observed that work was occurring regularly and that then the second floor was going onto a slowly rising parking deck.
In March, McCann had reported that the borough had asked nine questions of the redeveloper following a presentation they made requesting that 129 Kinderkamack Road be rezoned for seven offsite units of affordable housing.
No answers have been provided to those questions, McCann said, which were necessary and needed to help the borough understand issues surrounding 129 Kinderkamack Road’s purchase for future affordable housing.
He said it’s likely the nine questions may be asked to certain individuals that the borough interviews for its legal case against the redeveloper. “We really need to know that information (about 129 Kinderkamack’s purchase). This demonstrates to the court that they’re not cooperating. Instead they’re operating out of some developer’s playbook,” he charged.
He said as both sides depose individuals they suspect of having information relevant to their case, the trial stage moves closer and closer.
“For now everything’s status quo,” said McCann, noting there was little updated information to report on. He said being in the discovery phase means both sides are working hard to put their cases together before going to trial.
He said as depositions continue, the two sides may find it beneficial to meet together, possibly in a case management conference, to assess before Superior Court Judge Gregg Padovano where the other stands, and their status in moving towards a trial.
The borough is suing the redeveloper over $500,000 the borough believes it is owed in construction services to build a new ambulance corps. The borough deeded the ambulance corps property at that value to the redeveloper as part of the original project agreement.
The redeveloper alleged the borough did not provide final construction designs by Dec. 31, 2019, a deadline initially agreed to, thus nullifying its obligation to reimburse the borough for the property.
The borough has challenged the negotiated deadline, claiming the redeveloper knew it could not be met.
“The wheels of justice turn slowly,” said McCann, noting both sides are working but that nothing can yet be reported publicly.
Borough waiting on answers
In March, McCann told Pascack Press the redeveloper “asked the council for a favor to change the zoning.”
Citing two of the nine questions submitted by council that the redeveloper has not yet answered, he said, “But did you know what it was zoned for when you bought it? What’s the basis for your request?” McCann also had asked the redeveloper when it closed on 129 Kinderkamack Road; where else in town the seven off-site affordable units could be located; the date the redeveloper knew that Emerson knew it intended to use 129 Kinderkamack for affordables; whether the redeveloper knew that 129 Kinderkamack was not zoned for multifamily housing; how many alternative sites were considered; and when the redeveloper decided not to partner with Habitat for Humanity in constructing the off-site units.
“We’re disappointed that they haven’t got back to us on those questions. We just wanted to report those to the residents,” McCann told Pascack Press.
In October 2021, we reported that site work had been suspended after toxic soil contamination from perchlorethylene, a common dry cleaning agent, had been discovered at the site of former Ranch Cleaners at 190 Kinderkamack Road.
Calls and emails to attorney Joseph B. Fiorenzo, of Sills Cummis & Gross, P.C., representing the redeveloper, were not returned by press time.