Construction at Princeton University could boost obligation to provide low- and moderate-income homes.
By: Jennifer Potash
In a bid to get out from under potentially burdensome affordable-housing requirements, the Princeton Borough Council approved a letter Tuesday listing numerous objections to the proposed regulations.
All municipalities must meet a quota of low- and moderate-income housing established by the state.
The borough has until today to submit comments about the proposed guidelines by the state Council on Affordable Housing for the third-round, fair-share plan. The new guidelines change the formula municipalities use to determine how many affordable-housing units they must provide. Most critical to the borough, the new formula includes a "growth share" strategy that ties new housing to the number of new jobs created in a municipality.
If approved by COAH, municipalities would have to provide one affordable unit for every eight units of market-rate housing constructed and one unit for every 25 jobs created by new nonresidential development. A formula is used to determine the number of jobs created by nonresidential construction. For example, every 8,333 square feet of office, library or lecture hall space represents three new jobs under the proposed formula.
Under the previous COAH rules, municipalities had to provide their fair share of affordable housing based on factors such as available undeveloped land.
Based on the current status of projects approved or built since Jan. 1, the borough will be responsible for about 50 affordable-housing units under the new quotas, according to Derek Bridger, borough affordable-housing coordinator.
The borough wants COAH to make some key changes to the proposed rules including deleting a provision that exempts nonprofit organizations from providing affordable housing.
With much of Princeton’s land unavailable for development, the larger-scale new construction that will require new affordable-housing units will likely take place at Princeton University.
The university has also written to COAH objecting to the proposed rules, said Pam Hersh, director of community and state affairs. The university is absolutely in favor of affordable housing and the growth-share formula, she said, but raised objections mostly on technical issues.
One of the university’s objections is the requirement to add affordable housing for academic buildings that require no new employees.
"We believe that affordable housing demand for academic buildings should be based on actual full-time employment increases per new academic facility, not on square-footage calculations," Ms. Hersh said.
If the COAH rules are approved, the borough may consider a local ordinance requiring nonprofits to provide affordable housing created by their own expansion or new development projects.
Another potential headache for the borough in the proposed rules is COAH’s plan to make its regulations, once approved, retroactive to Jan. 1.
Several of the projects approved or built in the borough would not meet the affordable-housing rules.
One example is Palmer Square’s Hulfish North luxury townhouse development that includes 10 affordable-housing units. The sticking point is an agreement that allows Palmer Square to pick the tenants from a list supplied by the borough.
Mayor Joseph O’Neill said the requirement is a hardship since the borough "does not have the ability to go back to renegotiate" the agreement.
In other action, the Borough Council reviewed the third-quarter financial statement presented by Borough Administrator Robert Bruschi.
The borough’s revenues and expenditures, between July and September, were on target, Mr. Bruschi said.
The borough’s downtown garage also is meeting revenue goals, he said.
Revenue from municipal court fines declined slightly and the borough will continue to monitor the situation. The borough raised the price of a municipal parking ticket earlier this year, but that turned out to be a wash after the state siphoned 75 percent of the increase, Mr. Bruschi said.