University seeks change in calculating affordable-housing obligation

School argues its new buildings will not significantly increase employment, the current basis for determining the fair-share requirement

By: Courtney Gross
   From the proposed arts neighborhood to the prospective chemistry building, Princeton University is preparing, once again, to change the face of its campus.
   As the university continues to plan its first major expansion in over 30 years, questions have surfaced that go far beyond whether the building is made of brick or steel or whether its architect hails from Canada or Switzerland.
   Because for each square foot the university builds, it now faces a new, state-imposed social obligation: a requirement to contribute to Princeton’s affordable housing.
   For the past three decades, New Jersey municipalities have had to address the need for low- and moderate-income housing and provide realistic opportunities, through planning and zoning regulations, to fairly accommodate those populations.
   As part of the state Council on Affordable Housing’s most recent guidelines, established in 2004, municipalities must now also address the projected growth of residential and nonresidential development — both of which create an additional affordable-housing obligation.
   With every restroom the university adds to an existing building or any research facility that breaks ground, a new affordable-housing requirement is assigned to Princeton Borough or Princeton Township.
   The township and the university are now attempting to get those guidelines changed.
   Moving beyond the typical Planning Board approvals and zoning board overlays into a larger political arena, Princeton University and the township have collectively taken a step that could affect all of the state’s 58 colleges and universities.
   In response to a motion filed with the state by the township in January, COAH has created a task force that is investigating whether the obligation under the new standards for research institutions, such as Princeton University, to provide affordable housing based on job creation and building square footage is unrealistically inflated.
   The most recent COAH guidelines conclude that as more jobs are created through new development, there is a greater need for affordable housing. But while that may seem like a logical argument, both university and township officials claim it is unfair to research institutions like Princeton University.
   Currently, COAH’s rules do not provide a category for higher education institutions. Thus, the university’s growth share is treated just as any other office or industry development would be.
   But unlike corporations or businesses, university officials said, as the Ivy League institution expands, it does not generate greater employment.
   Robert Durkee, university vice president and secretary, said the practical impact of the COAH guidelines is that many employees "are counted twice."
   Because the university’s expansion is generally created for transient populations, specific jobs are not attached to specific spaces, Mr. Durkee said. For example, he said, many professors may work in one building’s lab or classroom space, while their office is across campus.
   The university currently abides by COAH’s calculation that equates three jobs with every 1,000 square feet of new construction. Under that calculation, Mr. Durkee said, the approximately 70,000-square-foot Friend Center, which opened in 2001, creates 210 jobs, and thus a substantial affordable-housing obligation.
   In actuality, that building has 12 employees, he pointed out.
   In comparison, for educational facilities serving kindergarten through high school-age students, one job is created for every 1,000 square feet.
   For the university, new construction that was included in the third-round fair-share plan — a COAH requirement that calculates a community’s development growth from 2000 to 2014 — the state estimates it would create more than 2,000 new employees, Mr. Durkee noted. But he noted that number in actuality is fewer than 100.
   "From the beginning of the discussion, we have accepted that going forward we would and should have an obligation to construct affordable housing," Mr. Durkee said. "The issue was magnitude."
   Township officials said the township’s growth-share obligation through 2014 is projected as 118 affordable units. The township currently has an estimated 565 affordable units, officials said.
   Following the submission of the township’s fair-share housing plan in December 2005, township officials submitted the motion to COAH that would, if approved, cut the university’s obligation by approximately two-thirds.
   Although COAH found the township’s argument persuasive, the council decided to dismiss the waiver and instead study the effect of growth share on higher-education institutions throughout the state by an internal task force.
   Chris Donnelly, a spokesman for the state Department of Community Affairs, which oversees COAH, said the task force meetings are confidential, and he therefore could not comment on the status of the group’s efforts.Mr. Donnelly could also not specify when the task force would make a decision on any possible new guidelines.
   But university officials certainly hope it will be in their favor.
   "We’re hoping COAH will recognize that the formula as it applies to academic buildings ought to take into account the particular nature of academic buildings," Mr. Durkee said.
   In conjunction with the current effort to change the state guidelines, a subcommittee of the Regional Planning Board of Princeton is examining a draft ordinance that outlines the township’s growth-share obligations. According to the draft, for every 25 new jobs — or, for the university, every 8,333 square feet — an affordable unit would have to be constructed.
   Township Attorney and Assistant Counsel for the New Jersey State League of Municipalities Edwin Schmierer said COAH’s new growth-share guidelines make sense, except when they are applied to higher-education institutions.
   "The concept is a good one," Mr. Schmierer said. "As your community grows, part of that has to address affordable housing." But, he continued, "We believe the university’s growth doesn’t come anywhere near office growth."
   Should COAH change the university’s affordable-housing obligation, the township’s ordinance would reflect those revisions, Mr. Schmierer said.
   No matter what the outcome, township officials said, they look forward to creating unique partnerships, such as agreements between nonprofit organizations and the university to build affordable-housing developments off campus.
   For example, the university is currently negotiating with Princeton Community Village to build housing units within the Bunn Drive development to address its affordable-housing obligation resulting from the construction of its new chemistry building.
   These kind of arrangements will be regulated in the township’s growth-share ordinance set tentatively for further review in January.
   "We’re working on a fair resolution to this new round of COAH obligations," Princeton Township Mayor Phyllis Marchand said, "especially (for) the university and other institutions that may be expanding their space, but are not creating the need for housing."