A lawsuit challenging the municipality of Princeton’s rezoning of the former SAVE animal shelter property, which would permit the development of affordable housing is making its way through Mercer County Superior Court.
Oral argument on the lawsuit filed against the Municipality of Princeton is scheduled for Feb. 26 in Mercer County Superior Court in Trenton. It will be argued in front of Mercer County Superior Court Judge Mary C. Jacobson.
The 3-acre parcel, which is on the corner of Mount Lucas Road and Herrontown Road, was rezoned by Princeton Council from S-2, which permits commercial uses, to AH-3, which allows affordable housing.
A 65-unit affordable housing development has been approved by the Princeton Planning Board on the property. The rental apartment development contains 64 affordable housing units, plus an apartment for the building superintendent.
The Old Orchard Village Homeowners Association Inc., which manages the adjacent residential development on Old Orchard Road, seeks to void the ordinance that rezoned the land for the development.
In anticipation of the oral argument next month, Jacobson has ordered the Old Orchard Homeowners Association Inc. to file its legal brief by Jan. 17. The Municipality of Princeton must file its opposition brief by Feb. 7. The homeowners association will file its reply by Feb. 14.
The former SAVE site is one of several sites earmarked for affordable housing in a settlement agreement reached between the Municipality of Princeton and the Fair Share Housing Center, which sued the town over its lack of affordable housing. The settlement agreement was approved last month.
The lawsuit, which was filed in May, claims that the ordinance was adopted to “spot-zone a specific parcel of land” to allow for the development of affordable housing, based on a plan that was not consistent with the Princeton Master Plan or the 2017 Master Plan re-examination report.
The Princeton Municipal Code and the Master Plan consistently and repeatedly cite the importance of preserving the quality of life of residential neighborhoods, the lawsuit said. But the new ordinance does not preserve the quality of life for the Old Orchard Village subdivision, the lawsuit said.
The new ordinance allows for an “excessive” number of affordable housing units, at nearly 22 units per acre, in an “inappropriate location,” given the size of the property and the surrounding neighborhood, the lawsuit said.
It permits “high-density residential development inconsistent with the much less dense development in the surrounding area,” according to the lawsuit.
The ordinance allows the construction of four, 45-foot-tall multi-family apartment buildings next to two-story attached single-family homes, the lawsuit said. There are 12 single-family attached units in the 7-acre Old Orchard Village development, next to the former SAVE site.
“Seeking to partially satisfy a municipality’s unmet affordable housing needs is not a legal justification to rezone the parcel at the density and bulk standards proposed. The need to provide housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income need not lead to poor planning,” the lawsuit said.
The town acknowledged that the purpose of the ordinance was to create a “realistic opportunity” to develop low- and moderate-income housing and to address its fair share housing obligation under the New Jersey Fair Housing Act.
The lawsuit stated that the ordinance “inappropriately places a disproportionate amount of affordable housing at the parcel, as compared to other locations in Princeton,” and was intended to get around certain legal requirements “in order to permit development of the parcel consistent with the developer’s (900 Herrontown Princeton LLP) concept plan.”
Princeton Council’s adoption of the ordinance was “arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable and contrary to law,” the lawsuit said. The homeowners association is attempting to have the ordinance declared to be void.
