Prior Resolutions of Approval submission

fundameatal character of the original site, demonstrating that the Subject Property has been developed over the years and continued development is not inappropriate at the Subject Property. 18. The remains of parts of fences and the damaged metal shell of a greenhouse, which has been clearly abandoned for over half a century, based on the credible testimony of Mr. Hayden, are not a basis upon which to deny the Application. 19, Further, as the testimony has noted, the original McClellan house was destroyed many, many years ago, well before Seton Hall ever came on to the Subject Property, and that the gardens which may have been planted by the Olmsteds starting in the late 1930’s or 1940’s on the northern portion of the Subject Property have become overgrown and are no longer maintained. 20. The southern portion of the Subject Property has developed and was used as a school prior to Seton Hall’s use of the Subject Property. 21. Concerning the historic significance of the Subject Property, Mr. Hayden’s testimony was most credible. His written report and testimony demonstrated that none of the remaining structures, which clearly are in a state of disrepair or are partially destroyed, are eligible for or are on the National Historic Register because they lack historic significance and historie integrity. Nothing on the Subject Property qualifies for a designation under the National Historic Register. 22. The objector’s proffered historical expert Kathleen Galop lacked the same credibility. She primarily testified with -27-