Council introduces ordinance to remove borough hall from mill plan

Will Planning Board agree?

By Vic Monaco, Managing Editor
   HIGHTSTOWN – For the second time in a month, Mayor Bob Patten broke a Borough Council tie this week marking more compromise aimed at redeveloping the former rug mill property on Bank Street.
   On a 4-3 vote — with council members Patrick Thompson, Ryan Rosenberg and Constance Harinxma dissenting — the governing body introduced an ordinance Monday that, among other things, would drop a requirement that the mill redeveloper refurbish or rebuild the nearby municipal building. The ordinance would allow the borough to accept, in lieu of that work, a contribution of $350,000 from landowner and developer John Wolfington, of Greystone Capital Partners.
   Mr. Rosenberg pointed out that relinquishing that mandate goes against the wishes of the local Planning Board, which had been given that option in June.
   ”We already asked the Planning Board, ‘Do you want to modify the plan?’ and they said, ‘No we don’t’,” Mr. Rosenberg said.
   But Borough Attorney Fred Raffetto said the new ordinance, which now heads to the Planning Board for review, gives that board a chance to comment on additional and more specific proposals for change. They include reducing the minimum nonresidential space from 35,000 square feet to 20,000, at least half of which would be in a free standing, two-story building on the east side of Bank Street, across the street from the mill.
   ”If they’re upset, believe me, you’ll hear from them,” Mr. Raffetto said of the planners.
   Planning Board Chairman Steve Misiura, who attended the council meeting, said afterward that he agreed with Mr. Raffetto’s comment.
   ”There may be members who feel strongly about that,” he said in a reference to dropping the borough hall requirement.
   Mr. Misiura repeated that he was more concerned with a potential loss of additional nonresidential space, and that the free-standing building has made him more comfortable.
   The Planning Board is expected to discuss the matter Oct. 15, with the council possibly holding a final public hearing the next night.
   Resident J.P. Gibbons, of North Main Street, said he believes Mayor Patten and Borough Council President Walter Sikorski, who both sit on the Planning Board and the Greystone committee, should not take part in the planners’ next discussion.
   ”Let the Planning Board do its own thing,” he said. “You’ve already had enough input.”
   But Mike Theokas, the lone Republican candidate for two open council seats, told the council he disagrees with that notion.
   On Sept. 3, by the same 4-3 vote, borough leaders designated Mr. Wolfington as the redeveloper of the long-delayed project with the caveat that both sides enter into a redevelopment agreement within 90 days.
   Mr. Wolfington was previously named conditional redeveloper in 2004, long before he bought the land. But that designation lapsed in the fall of 2005 when the two sides couldn’t come to terms.
   Since that time, the borough has raised the number of allowable residential units at the site to 130, a number Mr. Wolfington has apparently said he can deal with financially if he doesn’t have to work on borough hall.
   Before voting no Monday, Mr. Thompson expressed displeasure with both the ordinance and Mr. Wolfington.
   ”We passed this redevelopment plan three years ago because we wanted the ability to determine who could develop this site and how it should be developed,” he said. “Now we have a developer who can’t build the number of units that we prefer; can’t provide the amount of nonresidential, retail space we prefer; and can’t provide the borough hall (work) we prefer.”
   Mr. Thompson also asked if the pending redevelopment agreement would remain in place if Mr. Wolfington sold the property, and Mr. Raffetto said the land cannot be sold without borough approval. On Tuesday, he explained that the pending redeveloper’s agreement would prohibit such a sale without local approval until the project is completed.
   On Tuesday, Rich Almquist, vice president of development for Wolfington Companies, said he had just talked to Mr. Wolfington and had been assured, “We’re not selling it to anybody.”
   Late last week, Mr. Almquist expressed optimism that the redevelopment agreement would be hammered out by the 90-day deadline.
   ”I don’t see any reason why not,” he told the Herald. “The agreement is pretty far along in negotiations and we have plenty of time to get it wrapped up.”
   The pending agreement also calls for Mr. Wolfington to contribute $100,000 for parks and recreation and $35,000 for streetscape improvements to Bank Street.
   In addition to dropping the borough hall requirement, the new ordinance would allow the redeveloper to apply for a PILOT program, under which the borough could accept payments in lieu of taxes and, if it desires, keep all the money in borough coffers. That plan came under fire last week from leaders of the regional school district and East Windsor for its potential financial impact.
   In light of that criticism, Borough Council President Walter Sikorski said Monday that he was comfortable with the new ordinance, in part, because it requires such a PILOT application be dealt with in a separate ordinance.
   The PILOT program is expected to generate $750,000 annually once all the units are occupied. Some borough officials have said the school district would likely get some of that money to cover the costs of educating new students who come from the planned development.
   Ms. Harinxma, who has decried the loss of retail space, asked Monday if the residential units planned at the site, mostly condominiums, could be rented, and Mr. Raffetto said no.
   Politics briefly took center stage Monday night, as two council candidates and a local party chairman had their say. Both Mr. Theokas and Democrat Jeff Bond, who sits on the Greystone committee, voiced support of the ordinance and chastised the council dissenters.
   Mr. Bond said those opposed to Monday’s action should offer alternatives.
   ”I’m not thrilled with this but I’ve come to accept it,” he said.
   The alternatives he said he sees are doing nothing with the land, seeking another developer or trying to acquire the land through eminent domain.
   ”Just to let it sit there is not good enough,” he said.
   Mr. Theokas said, there’s “no other, magical developer going to appear and offer us Shangri-La.” He added that the lack of “cohesion” among the all-Democratic council is “disturbing” to him .
   Torry Watkins, head of the local Democratic Party replied Monday night by saying, “I’m shocked to hear Mr. Theokas thinks decisions should be made along party lines.”