Lackawanna Plans Hit Big Speed Bump In Montclair

MONTCLAIR, NJ — Plans to renovate Lackawanna Plaza have hit a major speedbump due to an ongoing lawsuit against the Montclair Planning Board, developers reported Thursday.

For years, The Hampshire Companies and Pinnacle Companies have been trying to redevelop Lackawanna Plaza in Montclair, the site of a historic former train terminal. In April – after gaining approval from the planning board – the companies announced that a 216,772-square-foot, mixed-use project was officially in the works, including residential, retail and office spaces.

There are plans to make 20 percent of the residential units "affordable housing." In addition, developers announced they landed a tenant to replace the vacant Pathmark supermarket at Lackawanna Plaza.

The project was expected to kick off this year.

• See related article: Lackawanna Plaza Construction To Begin In 2019, Developers Say

However, the Lackawanna Plaza plan has hit delays due to a recently launched lawsuit, which seeks to reverse a previous decision by the board and nix the project’s site approval, sending everything back to the drawing board.

The Hampshire Companies and Pinnacle Companies decried the lawsuit on Thursday and said it will have several negative consequences for Montclair residents, including the delay – or potential loss – of new jobs, tax revenue and affordable housing, as well as a long-awaited supermarket.

Learn more about developers' plans for Lackawanna Plaza.

OPPONENTS: ‘A BETTER LACKAWANNA’ IS NEEDED

The originators of the lawsuit have created a corporation, “A Better Lackawanna LLC,” as well as a website that outlines their complaints against the current development plan.

The group identifies themselves in their lawsuit as “concerned residents, Montclair taxpayers and historic preservationists.”

The group’s website lists several complaints about the project and its site plan:

The Master Plan – “Montclair’s Master Plan was created to allow for growth yet still maintain livability. The Lackawanna development plan violates many aspects of the Master Plan; in fact no attempt was made by the Planning Board to make the developer comply. Examples include the needless destruction of historic structures and the creation of a giant parking lot as a “front yard.” Two alternative plans were presented which would not violate the Master Plan yet neither the Planning Board nor the developer considered these.”

Traffic Planning – “There is currently no legal way to make a left into or out of either new parking lot entrance, on Bloomfield Avenue or Grove Street, yet the developer’s design (and traffic study) does not take this into account. The public was not presented with an opportunity to question or comment on the traffic plan in light of the no-left hand restrictions.”

Parking – “The planned parking lot will be much larger than it is now, however it will be half the size required by zoning. This is because the approved building is massive, leaving little room for cars. This is called a “self-created hardship” in legalese. Do we really want a football field of asphalt (bigger than even Whole Foods’ parking lot in West Orange)? A valet car operation will be allowed to use street parking yet the Planning Board’s expert said there would be no impact from this – in an area of town already critically short on parking.”

Oversight – “The approved plan is not what is being built. The developer insisted on a 47,000 square foot building (about the size of a big box store on the highway) despite a supermarket expert testifying this is far too large for a viable market in a downtown setting such as Lackawanna Plaza; in fact, Lidl wants only 29,000 square feet, yet the Planning Board approved the larger building without clarifying how the remaining space would be used (space which could have been used to meet zoned parking requirements). At a minimum, the Planning Board should have required new traffic studies, a new loading dock design, and new signage renderings. Importantly, the public was not allowed to question the developer or its experts on the new design.”

Procedural Issues – “There were dozens of procedural irregularities during the Planning Board process, any one of which justify an appeal, and which, taken together, show how the Planning Board never seriously considered any negative impact from this massive project. From the outset, the Mayor and Town Council made clear they wanted this oversized development, despite what an independent Planning Board might have concluded or what the public wants. In fact, public comment and the right to question expert testimony was suppressed repeatedly during the application and approval process.”

Local History – “Montclair’s Lackawanna Terminal has survived two prior demolition attempts, and is fighting for survival a third time. It is one of New Jersey’s “10 Most Endangered Historic Places.” It is listed on State and National Historic Registers, and a key building within Montclair’s Town Center Business Historic District.”

Read the full lawsuit.

Priscilla Eshelman, a Montclair resident who is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, offered a statement about the legal action earlier this week on Patch.

“It is entirely fitting that Lackawanna Station has become the battleground for the soul of Montclair’s future,” Eshelman wrote. “It is the most iconic site in town and the reason Montclair grew to be the diverse, vibrant community it is. What happens next will tell the story of Montclair’s citizen involvement in 2019.”

Eshelman continued:

“Even more than asking what kind of town infrastructure is being created for the next generation, Montclair residents should be asking what example of government they want to leave for their children. A ridiculous lack of parking (this project has 50% – 383 fewer parking spaces – than required by zoning), a traffic nightmare (no legal left turns into the shopping center), and the loss of a dedicated walkway used by the public for 30 years (with no documentation made public which supports this privatization of public access) are all detrimental to the future of Montclair. Much worse would be cynically ignoring the Planning Board’s actions which have led to this lawsuit.”

Story continues below

DEVELOPERS: ‘THIS WILL COST MONTCLAIR’

Hampshire and Pinnacle fired back against their detractors on July 18, issuing a statement that decried the lawsuit.

According to the developers, the legal action will delay the opening of a new grocery store at the location, which the residents of the town’s 4th ward have long desired following the demise of the local Pathmark.

• See related article: Lidl To Fill Supermarket Void At Lackawanna Plaza In Montclair
• See related article: Death Of A Supermarket: Montclair Pathmark At Lackawanna Plaza Closes

“The [project’s] opponents claim they were marginalized during this process, and yet the township held over a year of hearings with extensive public input and participation leading up to the project’s approval,” said Robert Schmitt, principal of The Hampshire Companies.

“The planning board took a methodical and careful approach to balance the objectives of the neighborhood, development and community at large, and asked us to make numerous changes to this site plan, including cutting the residential portion by nearly 40 percent,” Schmitt continued.

Brian Stolar, president of The Pinnacle Companies, said the lawsuit will cost Montclair taxpayers in excess legal fees and lost taxes on the project every day it is delayed, as well as jobs and affordable housing for local residents.

“Yet again, 4th ward residents will have to wait even longer to have affordable groceries in their area,” Stolar said. “The small faction of residents suing is controlling the fate of tax revenue for 40,000 Montclair residents and thousands in the 4th ward who have told us repeatedly that they need a grocery store at that site.”

• See related article: Montclair's 4th Ward Is Facing 'Food Insecurity,' Needs Grocery Store

Learn more about posting announcements or events to your local Patch site. Send local news tips and correction requests to eric.kiefer@patch.com. Don’t forget to visit the Patch Montclair Facebook page.