(rshsdepot) Upper Montclair, NJ

[I95BERNIEW_@_aol.com]

From The Montclair Times.
 
Bernie Wagenblast
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 
Historic train station  damaged in fire: Town, NJ Transit dispute insurance  
responsibility  
Wednesday, November 01,  2006  
By ERICA ZARRA
of The Montclair Times  
A recent effort to remove the fire-ravaged Upper Montclair  Train Station 
from a historic registry of places, along with a disagreement over  insurance 
provisions on the 1892 structure, has mired its future in red  tape.

NJ Transit leases the station to Montclair, which has then  subleased it out, 
most recently to the Round Trip Fare Restaurant. Round Trip  Fare had 
occupied the facility when a two-alarm fire in February blazed through  the station, 
burning the roof, charring the beams and gutting the  framework.

For the past nine months, the destroyed structure has sat on  the edge of a 
busy Upper Montclair Business District, boarded up with plywood, a  stark 
contrast to the shops and eateries located near it.

NJ Transit  recently requested that the state Department of Environmental 
Protection’s  Historic Preservation Office de-list the Upper Montclair Train 
Station from its  historic registry.

“De-listing gives us the ability to work directly with  the town, the Upper 
Montclair Station Reconstruction Committee, in conjunction  with the Montclair 
Historic Preservation Commission, to design an architectural  design that fits 
into the historic fabric of the community,” NJ Transit  spokesperson Penny 
Bassett-Hackett told The Times. “De-listing also allows us to  expedite the 
process of building a facility there … We are mindful of the  community wanting to 
keep the [former] look of the  station.”

Bassett-Hackett said that NJ Transit expects to hear the state  DEP’s 
decision in about 45 days.

Montclair Preservation Consultant Mary  Krugman views de-listing differently, 
as expressed in a letter she wrote this  week to state officials.

“Of critical and immediate concern is an effort  to de-list the property from 
the New Jersey and National Registers of Historic  Places. A likely result of 
the de-listing would be the demolition of this  historic building — in itself 
a loss to the community,” Krugman  stated.

“… De-listing the station would take away the regulatory  protections under 
the New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act that would help  guide its 
preservation. Many in Montclair are hopeful that the outcome will be  the 
sen-sitive rehabilitation of the damaged station.”

Confusion over  insurance on the structure has also entangled the matter, as 
is evidenced in  several detailed correspondences obtained by The Times 
between Township Manager  Joseph Hartnett and a NJ Transit official.

In a letter dated Sept. 27,  Hartnett wrote to NJ Transit Executive Director 
George Warrington that questions  had been raised about a proposed settlement 
of a fire damage claim on the Upper  Montclair Train Station. As a result, 
Hartnett explained that he decided to make  a fresh review of the entire matter.

Hartnett wrote that “the lease  establishes that property damage and fire 
insurance were the responsibility of  NJ Transit and not Montclair.”

“… It is the clear and unambiguous  intention of the lease agreement, as 
provided on page 21, that it is NJ  Transit’s responsibility to provide ‘
property damage and fire insurance  coverage’ for the Upper Montclair station and all 
the stations covered by the  lease,” Hartnett stated.

“We believe in a cooperative public/private  partnership between all involved 
will result in a new facility we will all be  very proud of. We stand ready 
to work together with NJ Transit to make it  happen,” the township manager 
stated.

In a second letter, Hartnett raised  the question, “With respect to the 
insurance provisions of the lease, why would  parties to an agreement who intended 
that the Lessee provide insurance, not  describe in any way whatsoever how 
much insurance the Lessee should provide? How  would anyone ever know there was 
compliance with the agreement?”

Hartnett  hypothesized in his letter that a number of situations could 
subsequently occur:  The lessor [NJ Transit] receives $1 million in insurance 
proceeds and “just  pockets it, or rebuilds a $50,000 shed.” The lessor receives 
$50,000 in  proceeds, but demands that the lessee [Montclair] pay for a $1 
million  replacement. The lessor and lessee are in disagreement about what needs to 
be  built and whether the insurance proceeds are sufficient.

“In this lease,  the fact that there is no delineation whatsoever in words or 
numbers of what  property damage and fire insurance coverage is to be 
provided (a dollar limit,  replacement value, historic replication, etc.) is another 
factor that speaks  clearly that it was not the intent of the parties that 
Lessee carry said  insurance, but rather that the owner/Lessor was responsible,” 
Hartnett  wrote.

In an Oct. 3 response to Hartnett’s letters, James M. Zullo,  senior director 
of real estate and economic development for NJ Transit, wrote,  “We must 
respectfully disagree with your conclusion that it is the  responsibility of NJ 
Transit to carry property damage and fire insurance on the  stations. To the 
contrary, we believe that to carry such insurance coverage was  the 
responsibility of the Township and its sublessee, not NJ Transit, and that a  plain reading 
of the Lease incontrovertibly supports this  position.”

Zullo points out that the lease stipulates NJ Transit is  responsible to 
provide property damage and fire insurance for station parcels “…  except that 
property owned, leased, or otherwise in the possession of the  Municipality, its 
sublessees and permittees will not be covered by this  policy.”

Zullo wrote that according to the lease, the insurance coverage  of the 
property is the sole responsibility of Montclair.

“Consequently,  we see no way that the absence of a dollar limitation on the 
fire insurance  coverage excuses the Township from responsibility to carry 
fire insurance, an  obligation about which there is no ambiguity in the lease,” 
Zullo concluded in  his letter.

Hartnett and NJ Transit declined to comment on the dispute,  as it is a legal 
matter.

The previous update on the train station was  when Hartnett announced during 
a Township Council meeting in late September that  he received a telephone 
call from a NJ Transit official questioning aspects of  the train station damage 
claim.

Hartnett then requested that the Garden  State Joint Insurance Fund (GSJIF) 
postpone the settlement of the station from  its meeting agenda on Sept. 27.

In the interim, many commuters and  residents who pass the stations’ remnants 
have been compelled to scrutinize the  structure’s history for resolve.

As The Times has previously reported, in  May 2003, Montclair had awarded the 
Upper Montclair Train Station lease to  Richard O’Donnell, agent for the 
Daily Soup Franchise Management  Group.

Alan Trembulak, now the township attorney, acted as O’Donnell’s  legal 
counsel.

According to documents, O’Donnell signed a five-year lease  with a guarantee 
of payment and agreement to fulfill the tenant’s  obligations.

The lease included several clauses which set the monthly  rent at $6,000 with 
future increases, $2 million for personal injury, and  liability insurance 
for loss or damage to the property valued at no less than  $500,000.

In December 2004, Montclair approved a second resolution that  reassigned the 
lease to Heather Maoine and Kim Sisco of Vanilla Box LLC, which  operated the 
Round Trip Fare Restaurant.

The lease had a “fire and other  casualty clause” that mandates the tenant 
is responsible for continuing payment  of rent after the building is damaged — 
unless the building has been deemed  uninhabitable, and then the rent would 
cease.

Hartnett has acknowledged  that Montclair’s lease with the owners of Round 
Trip Fare Restaurant was  immediately terminated following the fire.

Subsequently, The N.J. State  Police Arson and Bomb Investigation Unit ruled 
the cause of the fire  undetermined.

In May, Trembulak began issuing several notices to the  Round Trip Fare for 
failure to pay rent, maintaining that the restaurant company  was in default of 
its sublease.

Meanwhile, a municipal committee was  created to determine the station’s 
future and Montclair officials indicated they  were looking at federal, state or 
county aid to help restore the structure.  Hartnett has also indicated that 
several private entities have expressed  interest in constructing a new building 
on the site.

The Upper Montclair  Train Station, with its rustic interior, mock 
Tudor-style beams, and grooved  tiles that lined the roof, was considered by many people 
to be the most ornate  of the municipality’s six rail stops.

Contact Erica Zarra at _zarra_@_montclairtimes.com_ 
(mailto:zarra_@_montclairtimes.com) 

=================================
The Railroad Station Historical Society maintains a database of existing
railroad structures at: http://www.rrshs.org

------------------------------