LHS Site Plan Environmental Impact and Lack of Transparency
By admin on Jun 7th 2024 07:58AMAn open letter by Shaun Ellis to Mayor Nowick and City Council addressing environmental and transparency concerns with the LHS Redevelopment Plan after the June 6th, 2024 City Council Meeting.
Dear Mayor and Council,
My head started spinning at the meeting last night when the Mayor was talking about creating incentives for residents to install rain barrels and permeable surfaces on their properties while simultaneously advocating for clear-cutting 12 acres of forest directly above the city. It makes me think of industry strategies that place the environmental burden on consumers (aka, "carbon footprint"), shifting focus away from the corporations and systemic government policies that promote unsustainable and harmful practices on a macro-level. Yes, we all have a part to play in managing stormwater, but let's get real about who and what has the most impact. This is conflicting messaging and seems hypocritical to me.
Last night I asked why the Affordable Housing Fund (~$300K) was not being used to incentivize affordable housing. 75% of expenditures went to "administration" last year, and 100% in past years on record. The City Clerk said that $20k was paid to a homeowner on Main Street to convert their garage to an affordable unit, but stated that there has been no communication to the public about the potential for City grants/assistance to turn a rental or ADU into an affordable unit that contributes to our FSHC obligation. It's not an "incentive" if people don't know about it! I just paid $6000 into this fund and I want it to be used for affordable housing as intended, not vague "administration" costs. I would be happy to help promote these direct incentives in our community. Can you share with me what the City is offering residents who might be interested in the kind of assistance that was extended to 26 S. Main Street?
And as I mentioned, according to the City Tax Assessor, several developers have gotten away with paying a fraction of what they should have contributed to the Affordable Housing Fund. I wanted to verify this, so I placed an OPRA request with the City for records of all the contributions to the fund in May of 2022. This request was reviewed on 6/14/2022 yet remains unfulfilled with no reason given. Public record requests are supposed to be fulfilled within seven days. Can you share the records with me, or give me a reason why this remains unfulfilled more than two years later?
And on the subject of public records, I am eager to see any City documents that may pertain to the municipal landfill on Connaught Hill. From conversations I've had with folks who remember it, the size and location of the landfill on the map included in the 2024 Redevelopment Plan is not accurate. Since there is no cited source provided for the map rendering, I would like to verify that what is presented in the Redevelopment Plan is accurate and consistent with official records.
Thank you,
Shaun Ellis
-----
The Mayor's response:
-----
I haven't had time to distribute this note from K.Hovnanian yet, but I'll include it here. The note was sent in response to a question from a Washington Street resident about the former landfill. Hope it answers some of your concerns.
Best,
Andrew
In response to [another neighbor's] question below, before the high school building burnt down, it housed Taurus Corporation, which ceased operations in 1988 and triggered investigation requirements under New Jersey’s then applicable environmental laws. Investigation and remediation activities were conducted from 1989-1991 and completed to the NJDEP’s satisfaction; the NJDEP issued a Negative Declaration Approval in May 1991 to close the case. More recently, as part of K. Hovnanian's due diligence, its environmental consultant, Ransom, performed additional investigation of potential soil and groundwater impacts around the former building to confirm compliance with current regulations and standards. Ransom reports that contaminants of concern were identified in shallow soils around the former building footprint and are suspected to be associated with ash and cinders from the burned down building. Removal and off-site disposal of the impacted materials and soils will be required as part of our site redevelopment but there is no impact to groundwater. Ransom further reports that other limited contaminants identified in those soils will require remediation but likewise do not impact groundwater.
----
Addendum:
----
On July 23rd a Connaught Hill resident's well water test revealed ten times the amount of PFAS "forever chemicals" that the EPA allows in drinking water. Many residents have been ill for years with PFAS-related illnesses and are finally putting the pieces together. K Hovnanian is either negligent in its testing or is lying to the public. They never responded to requests for documentation confirming their assertion that there is no impact to groundwater from the former teflon-coated product manufacturer that operated for decades on the site.