Lawsuit challenges overlay zones

Ordinances enabling housing for seniors on Ridge are targeted.

By: David Campbell
   Nineteen Princeton Township residents have filed a lawsuit to overturn two township overlay ordinances that encourage high-density senior housing on the Princeton Ridge.
   "Our neighborhood is at stake," said plaintiff Tom White of Mount Lucas Road. "This is an area that has been protected for 20 years by low-density zoning, and it’s just unconscionable."
   The lawsuit, filed Thursday in state Superior Court by Friends of Princeton Ridge, contends the overlays violate environmental policies in Princeton’s Master Plan and a 1995 regional-center designation under the State Development and Redevelopment Plan that seek to prevent sprawl and protect the sensitive Princeton Ridge.
   "By diverting this type of development to environmentally sensitive lands rather than the town center, the ordinances in and of themselves are unreasonable for the region in terms of density and the location," said Freehold attorney Robert Munoz, who is representing the plaintiffs.
   Princeton Township Attorney Edwin Schmierer said the overlays are not inconsistent with environmental protection on the Ridge — and, in fact, helped to promote senior-housing policies in Princeton’s Master Plan.
   "There’s a need for senior housing and there is also a need to protect the environment," Mr. Schmierer said. "Those two community values can be balanced."
   The township expects to answer the neighborhood group’s complaint sometime this month and meet with Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg in March, Mr. Schmierer said.
   The Township Committee on Dec. 17 unanimously approved two overlays that allow housing for seniors 62 or older on a 30-acre site off Mount Lucas Road and Route 206; a roughly 20-acre site off Mount Lucas Road near Herrontown Road; and a 20-acre site off Bunn Drive near McComb Road.
   Under the RSC-1 (Residential Senior Community-1) overlay, a maximum of five units per acre would be allowed on the Mount Lucas sites, and the RSC-2 overlay would allow a maximum of seven units per acre on the Bunn Drive site.
   All three sites are located on Princeton Ridge and have some wetlands, streams or other environmentally sensitive areas.
   A draft of the ordinances was reviewed this summer by the Zoning Amendment Review Committee, and in public hearings before the Princeton Regional Planning Board and Township Committee this fall.
   Neighbors resorted to legal action after their arguments at those hearings fell on deaf ears, according to Frank Castellana, a plaintiff in the lawsuit.
   According to the suit, the overlays conflict with Master Plan environmental constraints for the Princeton Ridge and violate the 1995 regional-center designation under the State Plan intended to focus development in the center of town and protect sensitive outlying land.
   The center designation makes available state funding incentives that Princeton could lose if the state removed the regional center designation.
   Complaints filed with the State Planning Commission by the Sierra Club and the New Jersey Association of Environmental Commissions were to be reviewed this week, but that meeting was canceled following recent layoffs of 600 state workers by Gov. James E. McGreevey that left the commission bereft of staff.
   The lawsuit also contends the ordinances will fail to meet their stated goal of providing moderately priced housing for seniors but will entice developers to build condominium housing for affluent buyers.
   In addition, the suit claims the ordinances do not support the senior-housing policy in the Master Plan because they cannot limit residency to seniors from Princeton.
   The plaintiffs say the ordinances were pushed through the review process for political reasons, thereby violating procedure requiring the township to adopt a resolution acknowledging inconsistencies with the Master Plan when the overlays were approved on Dec. 17.
   The Township Committee last week approved a resolution acknowledging the overlays’ inconsistency with the Master Plan provision limiting new senior housing to 75 units, but stating the ordinances further the plan’s policy to promote senior housing.
   The resolution also states the overlays are consistent with the center designation under the State Plan because public water and sewer are readily available to the three sites, and clustered development will protect sensitive lands.