(CORRECTION APPENDED)
The Bloomfield council voted unanimously Monday night to ask representatives of Somerset Development, LLC, which plans to build 104 townhomes on the former Scientific Glass site, if they would be willing to sell the land to the township.
The conference meeting was held in the Council Chambers to accommodate a standing-room-only crowd of residents, most of whom came to support the effort to purchase the site.
During a 90-minute public comment period, many residents spoke in favor of using the land for a soccer field rather than the currently planned development.
- Some spoke of the site being on a flood plain, pointing out that development would increase runoff and flooding in the area.
- Others were concerned about increased traffic and school overcrowding as a result of the planned townhomes, as well as other developments planned throughout town.
- Still others spoke passionately about the need for the children to have a soccer field to play on, and pointed out the conditions of the current soccer fields at the Bloomfield Middle School were very poor and tended to cause injuries.
- Barry Weiner, President of the Bloomfield Soccer Club, pointed out that having a proper soccer complex could draw hundreds of competing teams to the area and bring in $750 million or more in business to the township.
Soccer has been of particular interest since the Bloomfield Boys’ U15 (age 15 or under) soccer team came in second at the national championship tournament in Aurora, Colorado, something that many residents mentioned during their support of building a soccer field.
The Scientific Glass site on Lion Gate Drive has been the subject of controversy for well over a decade. The property had been approved for town homes in 2002, a plan that was revised in 2007. Since that time, the property had been sold to Somerset Development. An adjacent piece of land was sold to Bloomfield Township last year and is being used to create a butterfly park.
The current plan is to build 104 townhomes on the site. A developer’s agreement that was drafted last year was never approved by the council, and the matter went to court. The court subsequently remanded the issue back to the Planning Board, which voted to rescind the requirement that a developer’s agreement be in place at a meeting in January of 2013.
When the resolution to approach the developer to see whether the company would be willing to sell the land to the township came up for a vote, Mayor McCarthy voiced strong objections to the plan. He told the audience that the idea of a soccer field is “pie in the sky,” and that the property owner could charge $10 to $15 million for the property, saying it was money “that we don’t have.” He pointed out that the Planning Board had already approved the development plan and that permits had been issued for the townhome project. He also emphasized that the only thing they could vote on was to ask the developer if he would be willing to sell.
Councilman Nick Joanow responded, “The process has to begin somewhere.” He went on to say that the goal is, if this property can be purchased, “it would be an ideal location for a soccer field.”
The final wording of the resolution included direction that the Township Administrator procure an appraisal of the value of the property if the developer is willing to sell the land, as suggested by Township Attorney Brian Aloia. The resolution passed unanimously.
The proposed Hartz Mountain development also had a place on the agenda at Monday’s meeting. The council had adopted a redevelopment plan for a mixed-use commercial/residential development on the site formerly occupied by the Hartz Mountain pet food company on the corner of Bloomfield and Watsessing Avenues last August.
However, in April of 2013 the council failed to approve the developer’s agreement with 192 Bloomfield Avenue, LLC, the proposed developer for the site, when the Mayor voted against it after it passed in his absence at the previous week’s conference meeting.
The application of 192 Bloomfield Avenue, LLC, to develop the Hartz Mountain site, is scheduled to be heard before the Planning Board at a special meeting on Thursday, July 25, 2013. The plan calls for 312 residential units as well as commercial space.
Councilman Venezia asked the status of the impact study that the council had voted to implement before approval of the development could take place. Community Development Director Glenn Domenick said that the study had not yet been done. Councilman Carlos Bernard said he had only voted to approve the plan with the understanding there would be a fiscal impact study performed.
Planning Board Chairman Alan LaQuaglia, who was at the meeting, said Planning Board Attorney Michael Rubin had said that the concept had not been approved by the council, and no developer’s agreement is in place, so the application cannot be approved by the Planning Board. LaQuaglia said the council can send the issue back to the Planning Board so they can hire experts and do the necessary research, including an impact study, and then the Planning Board could refer it back to the council. At that point the Mayor and council could approve it and send it back to the Planning Board for final approval.
The council agreed unanimously to send the matter back to the Planning Board with the provision that the financial impact study be done, and the Planning Board will then come back to the council with their recommendation.
During the public comment period, several people had spoken about the Bloomfield Animal Shelter, asking when volunteers could return to the shelter. Resident Greg Sabol spoke of kennel stress and said that the dogs were not getting enough walks, which leads to them becoming less social and less likely to be adopted.
Township Administrator Ted Ehrenburg provided an update on the status of the shelter during the meeting. He explained that the shelter responsibility had been passed from the Health Department to him, and that he has been working on “sorting out” its troubles. However, he said, the shelter manager resigned on Good Friday through an email and left no structure in place for the volunteers.
He stated he has a group working on putting policies and procedures in place, and the Township Attorney is reviewing an RFP that will be used to solicit new management for the shelter. He explained there are some dogs at the shelter that have issues, including one that bit a person who had been there to adopt him, and he was not going to bring new volunteers in without supervision and proper training.
Ehrenburg also addressed the many questions he has received regarding the fate of Memphis, the dog that was deemed unadoptable by the previous shelter manager and the Health Department and was sent, through the Neighbor-to-Neighbor Network, to South Dakota to be trained. He said that Memphis is now the property of the trainer there and the Health Department no longer receives any updates.
The administrator emphasized he was not here when the transfer took place, and has no knowledge of the process or the whereabouts of Memphis. However, he said he had looked into it at the request of the Mayor and had spoken to Jeff Coltenback, the local trainer who, along with his wife Diana, still wanted to adopt the dog. Ehrenburg said he had been informed that Coltenback had the contact information for the trainer in South Dakota. He said he had spoken with Coltenback, but that Coltenback did not choose to reveal how much contact he has had with the trainer.
The last item on the evening’s agenda was brought up by Mayor McCarthy, who has been questioning attorneys’ fees that have been charged to the township. First he questioned Tax Assessor Joe Pisauro about expenses incurred as a result of litigation involving several properties. Pisauro had not had enough time to look into the questions and was not prepared to respond, according to the Township Administrator.
McCarthy then questioned the fees charged by Township Attorney Brian Aloia for consulting with the Board of Health regarding Memphis during 2012, which he had brought up at a previous meeting. Finance Director Robert Renna said that the contract the council approved with Aloia allowed him to charge for business performed outside the scope of his usual duties.
The Mayor denied that, saying that it says he is paid either $135,000 a year or $140 an hour, not both. Renna said it was in the RFP and the resolution memorializing both the RFP and the contract. Township Administrator Ehrenburg said the previous administrator approved the bills. The discussion became heated, and Councilman Michael Venezia suggested that the Assistant Township Attorney be asked for his opinion. No action was taken.
In other business, Councilman Joanow asked for the status of the newly-built parking garage in Bloomfield Center. Mayor McCarthy said he had heard there would be a “soft opening” on July 29, 2013, which was confirmed by Parking Authority Board Member Bob DeMarino, who was in the audience. He said it would take place at 4 p.m. on that date. McCarthy also said Parking Authority Attorney Joe Baumann would be at the next conference meeting to provide a full update.
Councilman Carlos Bernard requested that Police Chief Goul look into the feasibility of opening a police substation in the 3rd Ward. The Chief said he would, and said that the substation’s purpose would be to become involved with the public and provide community policing and problem solving.
The next meeting will be a regular meeting to be held on Monday, August 12, 2013, in the council chambers at 7 p.m. There will be no other council meetings before then due to the summer schedule.
(UPDATE: Article has been updated to correct misstatement about the site of the future butterfly park. It was a separate site, not part of the Scientific Glass site. In addition, Bloomfield never did own the Scientific Glass site so they are offering to purchase it, not buy it “back.”).
Ehrenberg on an internet radio show refused to comment about Memphis, stating he wasn’t in Bloomfield when this all went down. A few minutes later, however, and at the council meeting he had strong opinions as to why Bloomfield hasn’t had a successful volunteer program. How the heck would he know? As he stated re Memphis, he wasn’t here then! You have to wonder just who he’s been talking to. I guarantee you it hasn’t been any of the former fired veteran volunteers.
As for Jeff Coltenback and Memphis, why the heck should they share anything with anyone in town hall? They’ve been manipulated, maligned and lied to. Karen Lore holds all responsibility for what happened with Memphis, as does the Board of Health aka her rubber stamps. They are the ones to be held accountable, not Jeff and Diana Coltenback.
error error error
The Town of Bloomfield NEVER owned the Scientific Glass property – so the concept of “buying it back” is an error. The 5.7 butterfly park was NEVER part of the Scientific Glass site.
Please correct.
Pat Gilleran
former chair Bloomfield Open Space Trust Fund
Pat, thanks for the correction. I have made the necessary corrections and noted it in an appendix and at the top of the article. Sorry for the confusion on my part!
The corrections that Ms. Gilleran suggests are hardly “minor” in nature. And pretty much sum up why it’s hard to take this site seriously about most anything, since this stuff happens so often.
Really, when Ms. Galant was here there was evidently a firmer hand on the editorial reins.
And why isn’t the “featured comment” updated on a daily basis? The “current” one is getting moldy.
Cathar, we make every effort to be accurate. No one called the misstatements “minor,” and we made sure to correct them. Even the NY Times publishes corrections every single day!
I doubt very much that those who write for Baristanet make and take “every effort” to ensure the accuracy of their stories, Mimi. This is altogether too obvious on a daily basis here.
And there’s a difference between typos and misspelled names and the kinds of errors Baristanet seems to specialize in, honest.
Cathar, perhaps you didn’t notice that I am the writer of this article. I cover Bloomfield, and I do indeed do my best to be accurate. If I make a mistake I am very unhappy with myself, believe me.
One item that did not make it into this story was mayoral candidate Russ Mollica’s statement during the public comment period.
Russ noted that Mayor McCarthy claimed during a recent council meeting that Councilman Michale Venezia, who is also running for mayor, met with the developers of the Hartz Mountain property and members of the local political machine (the Strumolos and friends) with which Venezia is allegedly affiliated, when the proposal for Hartz Mountain included only commerical/retail space and no residential units, and that the proposal morphed to include the 312 apartments after that alleged meeting.
Russ also noted McCarthy’s claim that Venezia has accepted campaign contributions from the Hartz Mountain developer and his associates, which Russ said have been verified from the campaign finance reports that Venezia was required to file with the state.
Russ then directly addressed Venezia to ask if he would recuse himself from voting on any matter pertaining to Hartz Mountain, as it would in Russ’ opinion constitute a conflict of interest for Venezia to vote on a project when he accepted political donations from the developer.
After a long period of smug silence, Venezia finally responded that Russ would find out when a vote on the project came up, a response that was met with hisses and subdued boos from the audience.
While the mayor’s claim about the Venezia’s surreptitious meeting with the developer and members of the machine seem to be unverifiable hearsay at this point, that does not appear to be the case with the campaign contributions that Venezia accepted from the developer and his associates.
It is most unfortunate that Bloomfield has failed to enact a “pay-to-play” ordinance that would make it illegal to take cash from developers working on redevelopment projects in town, but just because a practice may still be legal under the letter of the law does not necessarily mean that it is ethical.
Accepting campaign cash from the developer for a major redevelopment project town creates the appearance of impropriety, and it is reasonable for people to question Venezia’s objectivity on this matter because of it.
Councilman Venezia should never have accepted campaign contributions from the Hartz Mountain developer and his associates. He should do the right thing now by returning that money and recusing himself from all future council votes pertaining to this project.
Yes, Mimi, I did notice that you wrote the post above.
But in truth all the writers at Baristanet seem to flow into each other. That’s not a good thing, either.
“Yes, Mimi, I did notice that you wrote the post above.
But in truth all the writers at Baristanet seem to flow into each other. That’s not a good thing, either.”
—so you have no idea what you are talking about—and it’s not your fault.
you are now qualified for a spot in the House GOP Caucus…
“After a long period of smug silence, Venezia finally responded that Russ would find out when a vote on the project came up, a response that was met with hisses and subdued boos from the audience.”
If Venezia is elected it will be just more of the McCarthy administration. Arrogance, lack of respect for voters and taxpayers, lack of transparency and an innate problem with the truth. Same circus, different clowns.
And Cathar, I know for a fact Mimi does all she can to get the facts straight when she covers anything in Bloomfield and goes out of her way to be neutral. I don’t read everything on Baristanet (hasn’t been the same since Deb Galant left) but I do read Mimi’s reports and find them more indepth and factual than anything I read in our two local papers. Lay off Mimi!
Cathar,
If the corrections were “minor” I would not have asked for them. Thank you Mimi for making them so propmtly and noting that the article had been revised. So – go away nasty little cather- play somewhere else
I happen to know the history of the site because I live in the area and because I was on the Open Space Trust Fund Committee. With that said I had to look up the lot, Block, Previous owner and developers name – none of that information was available atthe town council meeting.
Mimi – I appreciate the coverage- without you there is no coverage of Bloomfield on Baristanet.
Will you cover the opening of a new store in Bloomfield- one that is oepning in the next week. It’s the Tiseo Skate and Bike shop- named after Bloomfield’s famous BMXer (our skatepark is named after him as well)
417 Broad Street
Bloomfield, New Jersey 07003
Phone (973) 748-2453
Email scotty@tiseos.com
Website https://tiseos.com
facebook – https://www.facebook.com/TiseosBikeSkateShop
One thing of concern is the deed for the street – the town council refused it – probably because by making it a town street the developer can go ahead with the development.
Mayor McCarthy has now pointed out that the developer can take the street private which would mean that people won’t be able to get to the Butterfly Park.
I’ve been told that the Mayor and the former township administrator, Yoshi Manale brokered the deal between the former owner of the proposed townhouse site and the current developer. The property sold for 1.8 million in 2012- The people of Bloomfield (Open Space Trust Fund)could have purchased it at that bargain price. Now the Mayor is saying that the developer may ask $15 million for it.
You’ll only hear me say this this time TAKE THE DAMN PROPERTY VIA EMINENT DOMAIN – we need it to stop the flooding and for recreation. Get it appraised and pay them what the land is worth. This will also stop the traffic nightmare that this developer is trying to force on us- we already have 68 townhouses in that area with only a 1 lane road for ingress and egress. 104 townhomes will bring at least 208 cars (all the townhomes are 2 & 3 bedrooms)so we’ll have at least 334 cars coming out of this small street and flooding into Broad St.
I really think that until you or a loved one is disabled that you don’t know how difficult life can be. In March 2012 at a Bloomfield Health Department meeting in the Municipal Building- my husband – Greg Sabol was denied access to the handicapped public restrooms- when he inquired of the head of the Health Department and the police that were protecting her from the crowd he was told that NO ONE HAD THE KEY.
Then at a town council meeting he was told that the handicapped bathrooms on the 2nd floor of the Municipal building were only for township employees and that he could have used the handicapped bathroom IN THE BASEMENT.
Then the town put up signs on all of the handicapped bathrooms saying that there was a handicapped bathroom IN THE BASEMENT.
SO- THE DISABLED GUY WHO HAS MAJOR MOBILITY PROBLEMS GETS TO WALK way further than you or I to actually get to the bathroom (that reminds me – I’ll have to check and see if the bathroom is actually open in THE BASEMENT)
NOW – when he goes to the Bloomfield Public Library – the elevator is permanently broken – THE HANDICAPPED BATHROOMS ARE ON THE 2ND FLOOR – he is told he must use the handicapped bathroom IN ANOTHER BUILDING.
Can he go to a Library Board Meeting to complain? – they are held on the 2nd floor of the Library.
Is it important that the disabled have access in all public buildings – NOT IN BLOOMFIELD
When he comes to a Town Council meeting to ask that the issue be addressed- that grants be applied for – that the elevator be fixed- NOT A SINGLE REPORTER INCLUDES IT IN THEIR STORY
It is indeed very important that public buildings be handicapped accessible. Will make sure to include it next time he (or some else)speaks about it. There was so much else going on this past Monday it got overlooked. I believe it was mentioned in a previous article but I am not positive.