In order to protect itself against the possibility of facing a builder’s remedy suit, the West Windsor Township Council moved forward on May 4 with two resolutions, one of which adds a piece of property to its plan for fulfilling its responsilbities under the third-round state Council on Affordable Housing regulations.##M:[more]##
The other resolution designates a team of township officials to enter mediation discussions with the two parties that have filed objections with the township’s plan since it was submitted in December.
In December, council endorsed the housing element and fair share plan needed to address West Windsor’s third-round Council on Affordable Housing obligations, allowing the township to submit its plans to COAH before the December 31 deadline.
The sites in the plan include a 380-unit development planned on the Princeton Theological Seminary land off Wheeler Way; 35 affordable units from a development in the area of Princeton-Hightstown and Old Trenton roads; four or five credits from a group home the Eden Institute proposes to develop on Wood Hollow Drive; and 15 additional affordable units at the Project Freedom site on the Maneely tract off Old Bear Brook Road. Project Freedom is a non-profit organization that develops barrier-free housing to enable disabled individuals to live independently.
The township’s cumulative fair share obligation for the first through third rounds, using COAH projections, is 1,”413 — 899 for the first and second rounds; 491 in the third round; and 23 third round rehabilitation share credits. Officials calculated that with units already accounted for in prior plans, together with rental bonus credits carried over from the second round, 1,”298 of those units have already been satisfied, leaving 115.
The DiMeglio site, a 14.29-acre tract on Clarksville Road, will produce 114 total units, 91 of which are market-rate and 23 of which are affordable. The township’s obligation will also be met with the help of the Eden Institute, which will be acquiring a single-family home on Wood Hollow Drive to house five adults with autism.
In March, the Fair Share Housing Center of Cherry Hill filed an objection with COAH, alleging that the township “has continued its long history of failure to comply with the State constitution’s prohibitions against exclusionary zoning.” The organization describes itself as a non-profit group working to ensure that low and moderate-income people in New Jersey have more choices about where to live
The challenge came less than a month after a filing by InterCap Holdings. In that challenge, InterCap objects to the township’s housing element and fair share plan, which it submitted in December to comply with the new COAH regulations. At the heart of the objection is the contention that West Windsor has understated its affordable housing obligations and that additional affordable housing should be provided for within the plan and West Windsor. It also suggests that the InterCap site would provide a great location for helping the township meet its affordable housing obligations.
According to the Fair Housing Center objection, the organization lists four reasons for its opposition. The first is that the organization claims that the township “plans to claim bonuses of 44 percent of its obligation, even though COAH only allows bonuses for 25 percent of a municipality’s Fair Share obligation.” According to the document, the township urges COAH to accept the credits based on “a convoluted argument found elsewhere in the plan claiming that COAH should allow the 25 percent based on the municipality’s full projected growth share, even in the municipality has, in this case, claimed hundreds of units in exclusions that reduces its projected growth share significantly.”
The second reason the group states is that it believes West Windsor inappropriately claims exclusions based on third round sites. The township reduces its obligation from 861 to 491 units through taking exclusions based on unbuilt prior round sites. However, the group alleges, several of the sites — Estates at Princeton Junction, Meadow Lane Apartments, Bear Creek, Akselrad/West Windsor Gardens, and the DiMeglio site — are being moved to the Third Round for credit. “As such, these units effectively are getting two credits towards the third round,” the document states. “Because these units are not required to meet West Windsor’s prior round obligation, but rather their third round obligation, the township should not be able to exclude them and should add additional compliance mechanisms to its plan to meet the 180 credits improperly excluded.”
The third complaint alleges that the township inappropriately claims exclusions based on sites that it has delayed through litigation. The township has claimed the right to reduce its fair share obligation by an additional 123 units for the Estates at Princeton Junction. “The only reason these units are being built in the third round period is because of the decade of litigation based n the township’s illegal refusal to approve this development,” the challenge states.
The final complaint alleges that the township has not shown how it will meet the “very-low-income requirements,” especially the “family very-low-income requirements.” The document states that the township’s plan does not include a specific number of very-low-income units, although it notes that West Windsor is trying to find documentation to show that a certain number of its units are very-low-income. None of these units are family units, it alleges.
Since that time, COAH has reviewed the two objections and has responded. In a letter to the mayor on April 16, COAH wrote that the objections were “deemed compliant” with state law, and that the township should submit a response to the objections within 20 days of the letter — or by May 6, at which time COAH will appoint a mediator.
The letter advised the township to submit a resolution adopted by the council in which it designates their representatives, authorizes them to negotiate on its behalf, and authorizes one or more of that team to execute any written agreement reached during mediation on its behalf.
During the May 4 meeting, the council adopted a resolution that adds the DiMeglio property to the affordable housing plan “as a way of strengthening our position,” Township Attorney Michael Herbert explained.
Herbert explained that council has a longstanding agreement with Akselrad for a piece of property on Meadow Road and that there is going to be a swap that would allow for more affordable housing on the DiMeglio site, which would “take away necessity for providing affordable housing in other areas.”
The council then selected its mediation teams, one in dealing with each objector. The first team in dealing with InterCap consists of Herbert, Planning Board attorney Gerald Muller, Township Planner John Madden, Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh, Planning Board Chairman Marvin Gardner, and Councilwoman Diane Ciccone.
Council selected Ciccone based on the fact that she and Councilwoman Heidi Kleinman had served on the Planning Board since the township’s fair share plan was being drafted. Kleinman, however, did not seek re-election and will be vacating her seat on council on July 1, when Kamal Khanna will take her place.
Council President Charles Morgan said he was concerned, though, that the matters may not be resolved by November, at which time Ciccone has to face election to maintain the vacated seat, and there is a possibility that she will no longer be a council member.
However, “with Diane’s background, she does mediation, and I think she would fit perfectly on our team,” Councilman George Borek said about Ciccone’s selection.
In dealing with the Fair Housing Center, the council chose the same team, but without Herbert, stating they felt that both attorneys were not needed in this case.
InterCap Holdings CEO Steve Goldin said he was pleased with COAH’s decision that his company’s objection was deemed compliant. “The response by COAH happened much sooner than we anticipated,” Goldin said. “We thought it might not be until the end of the year that they initiated” the process.
