Borough will move ahead with project despite appeal.
By: Jennifer Potash
Concerned Citizens of Princeton filed an appeal Tuesday of a lower court’s dismissal of its lawsuit to halt Princeton Borough’s downtown garage development.
The appeal, submitted by attorneys R. William Potter and Robert Zagoria on behalf of the nonprofit organization, involves legal technicalities with a March 31 decision by Mercer County Superior Court Judge Linda R. Feinberg dismissing the lawsuit as well as a review of arguments raised in the suit.
The downtown development project, approved Dec. 17 by the Princeton Borough Council, involves a public-private partnership with developer Nassau HKT Associates LLC to build a 500-car garage, a pair of five-story buildings with retail and residential uses and a new plaza on two municipally owned lots off Spring Street. The borough’s share the garage and plaza will be paid for through a $13.5 million bond ordinance that is not subject to a referendum due to designation of the site as an area in need of redevelopment.
Another aspect of the partnership is a payment in lieu of taxes arrangement in which the developer would make an annual payment of $301,875 for a 10-year period. Either party has the option to cancel that agreement after five years, in which case regular property taxes would apply.
Concerned Citizens collected more than 700 signatures on a petition for a bond referendum on the project, which also was rejected by the court. The group supports a smaller development at the site, such as a parking deck and plaza without the residential component.
The appeal also contends Judge Feinberg erred in her analysis of whether the borough properly applied state redevelopment laws in designating the two surface parking lots an area in need of redevelopment. That crucial designation allows the borough greater flexibility in developing the site, such as partnering with a developer and using a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes program.
Mr. Potter and Mr. Zagoria contend in the appeal that Judge Feinberg failed to consider evidence in sworn certifications submitted by the plaintiffs while accepting a last-minute submission from the borough without questioning the veracity of those documents. In her 72-page opinion, Judge Feinberg said the borough’s submission was allowed to rebut allegations raised by Concerned Citizens.
Mr. Potter argues that application of an area-in-need-of-redevelopment designation to sites that generate about $500,000 in annual parking revenue is an overly broad standard and sets a precedent for other municipalities to follow.
The borough, in its court submissions, argued the two lots at the center of the downtown represent a less than optimal use for such valuable plots of land.
By that reasoning, according to Mr. Potter, "any parking lot in the downtown or even in New Jersey" could be declared an area in need of redevelopment.
Borough Attorney Michael J. Herbert said he’s confident the borough will prevail with the appellate court.
"We were hoping to end this needless litigation, which is obviously going to go nowhere," he said. "We’re going to go ahead with this project as there is a lot at stake."
Borough Administrator Robert Bruschi said work to ready the site for construction will continue. The borough is aiming for a December opening of the garage.

