Camden. Superior Court Judge Irvin Snyder stopped just short of throwing out the Waterfront South redevelopment plan on a technicality Wednesday morning, but he made it clear he was prepared to do so.

Instead of continuing to fight over a plan he is prepared to kill, Snyder urged attorneys representing the city and local residents to "go back to the drawing board" and settle the case.

The judge suspended the trial to allow more motions.

The problem is heavy industry, emitting foul odors and smoke, exists side by side with residents' homes, Snyder said.

Residents complain their windows are blackened by the soot in the air, which also carries the stench emitted by a Camden County sewage treatment plant.

"I feel bad for the people that live there," Snyder said as he paced back and forth behind his desk. "What's out there now is horrendous."

About 1,400 people live in the city's Waterfront South section. The area's heavy industry would remain under the plan.

The plan, though, would reroute truck traffic away from homes and add some light industry to the area. The city is proposing to rehabilitate more than 300 homes but has no money to do so.

If the proposal dies in court, it would be the third redevelopment project rejected on procedural errors. Earlier plans for Cramer Hill and Bergen Square were tossed by the courts.

Snyder told Olga Pomar of South Jersey Legal Services she should discuss options with the residents she represents.

"Why not just bite the bullet and relocate to a more palatable community?" he said.

To attorney Joseph Kenney, representing the city, he urged the city to abandon its plan to reroute truck traffic in the area and revitalize homes.

Snyder called the situation "nightmare zoning" and said he agreed with Pomar's expert planner, Marc Shuster, who testified there "may be no chance of revitalization" of the neighborhood under current conditions.

Snyder said he had been "up all night" researching the case and said he believed the plan must be thrown out because the city's master plan had expired in 1997.

State law requires any new redevelopment plan to be consistent with a master plan, Snyder said and added a plan cannot be "consistent" with a regulatory document that has already expired.

Snyder pointed out that the city's own planner, Charles Lyons, testified the master plan expired in 1997. He said he found Lyons' testimony to be "credible."

Kenney said Lyons "mis-spoke. "He was wrong," Kenney said of his own witness. "He gave a legal opinion, and he was wrong." Kenney said there is no presumption under the law that a master plan expires in 20 years, as Lyons testified. He said the old master plan was still in effect when the Waterfront South plan was debated, despite Lyons' testimony.

Helene Pierson of the Heart of Camden nonprofit group that rehabilitates homes said after court was adjourned, "There is a bigger picture here" which is affecting all of Camden's neighborhoods.

"The industry along the river is hurting Bergen Square, Lanning Square, Morgan Village and Fairview. It's creating distress in all of Camden," Pierson said. "Something big needs to happen here, like port consolidation, for real revitalization to come to Camden."

She suggested some operations of the port could be relocated to Paulsboro and other operations could be combined so they do not consume so much of the land along the city's waterfront.

Camden's port, which handles cargo shipped from all over the world, employs hundreds of local workers. But Pierson said the city should reconsider how that industrial use can be better combined with residential areas in the city.

Pomar said she would file a motion next week, raising questions about the legitimacy of the city's master plan as suggested by the judge. Kenney said the city will respond to Pomar's motion.

"We are happy the judge saw problems in the way this obsolete plan was pushed through," Pomar said. "We hope this gives us the opportunity to go back to the drawing board."

Reach Alan Guenther at (856) 317-7871 or aguenther@courierpostonline.com