It looks like InterCap Holdings CEO Steve Goldin will get to build a portion of what he originally proposed for his property in the 350-acre Princeton Junction train station area.
A settlement in the litigation brought by InterCap regarding the township’s redevelopment plan, as well as a redeveloper’s agreement, will be presented — and possibly put to vote — on Monday, November 22.
The Township Council announced the pending settlement during its the November 15 meeting and provided materials to the public days later.
The settlement calls for a total of 800 housing units — to be phased in — on InterCap’s 25 acres of property off Washington Road, along with retail development and infrastructure and amenity contributions, most notably a 80-foot promenade area that would provide a public area for residents.
“Should it be approved, it will end the litigation,” said Township Attorney Michael Herbert. “We’re at the point now where we think we came up with a proposal that makes a lot of sense from everybody’s perspective.”
According to a memo prepared by Herbert, 40 of the 800 residential units will be moderate income units based on state Council on Affordable Housing requirements.
“The development would be consistent with the present redevelopment plan, which allowed 350 units as of right and additional units based upon infrastructure and amenity contributions,” stated the memo. “Those infrastructure and amenity contributions include the construction and maintenance of a promenade, the reimbursement of redevelopment fees, and the construction of traffic improvements both within and outside the redevelopment site, justifying the additional units.”
The integrated development would not include any office space. Under the agreement, InterCap will be required to construct 70,000 square feet of retail space correlated to the phasing of residential units.
That comes in three phases, with the first 25,000 square feet of retail to be constructed no later than when a certificate of occupancy is issued for the first 251 units. By the time a CO is issued for the 501st residential unit, a total of 50,000 square feet of retail must be completed. The remaining 20,000 square feet (70,000 total) is to be constructed no later than the issuance of the CO for the 800th residential unit.
There is also a provision that requires InterCap to build an additional 30,000 square feet of retail space if, during the previous 18 months, 95 percent of the first 70,000 square feet of retails space is occupied at an average base rent of $30 a square foot.
The concept plan was designed by Jim Constantine of the Looney Ricks Kiss firm in Princeton, who will present the plan during the meeting on November 22. The plan shows a promenade surrounded by first-floor retail space.
According to Herbert’s memo, the promenade will be constructed, maintained, and owned by InterCap. The promenade, which runs through the center of the property, “will serve as the central gathering space for Township residents.” In the ordinance, officials specified that the promenade will include passive areas and active public gathering space that can host a farmer’s market and other public events.
The promenade will provide pedestrian, bicycling, and motor vehicle access and will function as a “low speed pedestrian-oriented public space through which motor vehicles travel and park.”
Parking will be available on site for all residents. “To facilitate retail activity and to attract use of the promenade by the public, the township will support InterCap’s use of shared parking at existing New Jersey Transit and township Parking Authority facilities during weekdays, after-hours, and weekends,” the memo states.
The settlement also requires InterCap to pay the township $683,000 in redevelopment fees, as well as $2.678 million for off-tract roadway improvements. InterCap will also be responsible for all on-tract infrastructure, including the construction of internal streets and portions of Vaughn Drive.
Once approved by the West Windsor Council, the settlement still has to head to the state Superior Court for approval, officials said.
“Since the InterCap litigation was filed in May, 2009, as a Mount Laurel affordable housing lawsuit, it will be necessary for the Mercer County Superior Court (Judge Linda Feinberg) to conduct a fairness hearing to determine it satisfied Mount Laurel principles and the Fair Housing Act,” stated the memo.
Once the court approves the settlement, InterCap has agreed to prepare a “stipulation of dismissal” of its lawsuit and head to the township’s Planning Board. If the Planning Board approves the development application, the dismissal of the lawsuit will become effective.
“Based on what both sides came up with, to me the settlement is reasonable,” said Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh. “Some people will say it’s too much, and some people will say it’s not enough. We had our experts review all of the proposals and offer their expert opinions. I personally feel more comfortable based on the comments from our professionals.”
Goldin did not respond to requests for comment.
West Windsor officials are expecting that the issue will generate concern in the community, specifically regarding how the plans for future development in the settlement will impact the number of school children moving into the area. So along with the concept plans, officials plan to provide information during the meeting to quell fears that might be circulating around town.
Township Council members and the administration — who all seemed to be on board with the terms of the settlement — say they will be prepared to answer questions when the plan is presented to the public.
Most council members have said that the plan is reasonable and should not impact the schools, but called for a communication plan to be rolled out when the plan is presented.
“For those of you who are concerned about the school children impact of this redevelopment, it is just way overstated; it’s overblown; it’s not real,” said Councilman Charles Morgan. “There’s going to be a lot of concern in the community at first glance when it’s rolled out, but there’s not much here in my opinion.”
Morgan referenced his campaign three years ago in which he and current Councilman George Borek ran on the platform against 1,000 housing units in the redevelopment area.
“We’re not going to see 1,000 housing units,” Morgan said. “We’re going to see housing, but we’re not going to see anything that’s alarming. We need to anticipate the fears of the community that this thing might generate and have our conversation ready about why those fears might be misplaced, or they’re addressable.”
Further, Morgan said, “I am satisfied that what we’re doing is in the best interest of the community.”
Morgan referenced the finance subcommittee meetings that were held during deliberations on the redevelopment plan. During those meetings, the township brought in former school board member Stan Katz, who was renowned for his statistical analyses of the number of school children brought in by each new development, as well as a statistician from Rutgers University, both of whom testified that there would be no severe impact to the school district.
“The fear factor on children is totally misplaced,” said Morgan, who said that historically, the tightest attendance has been at Maurice Hawk.
“Even Maurice Hawk will not be overwhelmed with students because the phasing is such that the number of children coming in over time is going to integrate with a projected decline in our school population,” Morgan said. “Absent redevelopment, they are projecting a decline in the school population, but even that decline in school population is not going to result in any immediate foreseeable savings because you don’t cut teachers and buildings and administration just because you have a slow decline in school population.”
Borek agreed, saying that this year for the first time, Maurice Hawk created a kindergarten class of about 30 students because it had the room after a decline in enrollment. This means that schools can absorb any new students coming into the area from the redevelopment.
In addition, Councilwoman Linda Geevers said that the number of school children rises when there is development that includes child-friendly amenities. “The redevelopment area on the west side does not have child-friendly amenities like pools, tot lots, swing sets, tennis courts, or basketball courts,” she said. “Will there be children who live there? Yes.” But the number will be limited.
On the agenda for approval on November 22 is a resolution approving the settlement and redeveloper’s agreement. But in the future, the Township Council will also be asked to consider two ordinances. The first one puts into place the standards as they apply to the InterCap property and identifies the areas of the redevelopment plan that will not be applied to the InterCap tract.
The second ordinance guarantees that the terms of the settlement and redeveloper’s agreement will remain in place, even if the township’s redevelopment plan is struck down in a third party litigation, even though Planning Attorney Gerald Muller explained in a memo to council that none has been filed to date.
The settlement comes in the 11th hour for West Windsor, as a pending trial is looming on the horizon in front of Judge Linda Feinberg in state Superior Court.
In May, 2009, InterCap filed a lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of West Windsor’s redevelopment designation for the 350-acre area around the Princeton Junction train station. The lawsuit followed a series of public presentations put on by Goldin for the community at his own expense to try to garner support for his plans for the area before the council adopted its own plan in March, 2009.
The township’s redevelopment plan calls for a total base number of 483 housing units consisting of 311 market-priced units and 172 affordable housing units. As for non-residential development, the plan proposes 207,910 square feet of retail with the potential option to increase retail floor area in District 1 — which encompasses the 25 acres off Washington Road owned by InterCap Holdings — by an additional 67,500 square feet along with 7,500 square feet of added office space.
Five other parties — including transportation giant Amtrak — joined InterCap’s lawsuit in August. Those property owners include two owners of property in the Ellsworth Center — Ellsworth Realty Associates, which owns 19 Cranbury Road, and Won Chang Realty, which owns 33 Cranbury Road; the Avante site at 70 Washington Road, which is owned by Far Sighted Investments; and the parking facility at 43 Station Drive, owned by Sidetrax Inc.
The lawsuit involved InterCap’s challenge of the designation of the area as “in need of redevelopment.”
If a settlement is not reached and the case heads to trial, a ruling in the developer’s favor could, in the worst case scenario, void the township’s redevelopment plan.
West Windsor’s attempt at thwarting a trial was shot down on June 22, when the Appellate Division of the State Superior Court denied the township’s interlocutory appeal to do so.
The township had filed the motion to the Appellate Division to question whether InterCap had a right to challenge the designation of the area in need of redevelopment since it had not filed a motion for three-and-a-half years and then participated in the redevelopment process, township attorneys said. The motion was filed after Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg ordered that both sides prepare for a trial on the matter, and then re-affirmed her decision when West Windsor appealed.
In recent months, InterCap Holdings CEO Goldin said InterCap had submitted a number of settlement offers. In July and August, Goldin ran an advertising campaign calling on residents to urge the township to come to a settlement. That campaign drew some comment from township officials at the time, who called the ads misleading, hinting that the campaign has hurt InterCap’s position at the negotiation table.
If a settlement is not reached, nullifying the redevelopment plan through court would pave the way for InterCap to seek to have its previous zoning also voided. If the redevelopment plan or process is invalidated by the court, InterCap attorney Richard J. Hoff Jr., of the Bisgaier Hoff law firm of Gibbsboro, has said in the past that the developer would re-file a previous lawsuit that challenged the old commercial zoning of the property.
