HOPEWELL: Pennytown purchase plan approval postponed

Officials agreed to continue public hearing on the proposed ordinance Nov. 10.

By John Tredrea, Staff Writer
   A Hopewell Township proposal to buy the Pennytown Shopping Village and use the land for affordable housing ran into considerable public opposition during Monday night’s Township Committee meeting.
   A bond ordinance was introduced Oct. 14 under which the shopping center, located on Route 31 just north of Route 654, could be purchased from Aadheenam Vedanta Center, Inc. of Piscataway. That firm is the contract buyer of Pennytown from township resident Bruce Meier.
   After taking over a half hour of public comment on the matter, the committee agreed to continue the public hearing on the proposed ordinance Nov. 10. An adoption vote on the proposed ordinance could be cast that night.
   Under the proposed ordinance, the township would appropriate $7 million for the deal. Of that amount, $6.1 million would be earmarked for the land purchase, $500,000 for demolition and other associated soft engineering costs, with the balance going toward closing costs and other expenses.
   The measure states in part that the Pennytown tract is, in the committee’s belief, is “well-suited for redevelopment, including affordable housing.”
   Mayor Vanessa Sandom, also a member of the township Planning Board, said that board has recommended that about 60 affordable housing units be put on the Pennytown site.
   During the public hearing, Martha Goss of 10 Chase Hollow Road said she was concerned about possible loss of fire protection in the area. Ms. Goss’ home burned down a number of months ago. Firefighters, as has been their practice for years, used a pond at Pennytown as a source of water to fight the blaze. There are no fire hydrants in that area of the township.
   Several other residents made similar comments. “I’m concerned about fire protection and also about the influence of low-income housing,” said Don Haines, also of Chase Hollow Road.
   Several residents expressed concern over the amount of money involved in the proposed deal during what one man called “the amazing meltdown of our financial situation.”
   A woman said a loss of property value to neighbors was inevitable if the affordable housing is built at Pennytown. “Are our taxes going to go down along with our property values?” she asked the committee.
   Mayor Sandom said the committee and its staff of professionals would respond, on Nov. 10, to all the issues raised by residents on Monday night.
   Committeeman David Sandahl, who termed the state’s affordable housing requirements “crazy,” said the township has until Dec. 31 to submit to the state a plan under which the township would provide between 400 and 500 units of affordable housing during the next 10 years.
   The township also has proposed a Project Freedom facility for the disabled on Denow Road, between Route 31 and Brandon Farms. That would include about 70 affordable units, the mayor said. That idea is still in the discussion stage, with no formal site plan having been submitted to the township yet.
   The mayor and township attorney, Steve Goodell, said adoption of the ordinance does not mean the purchase of Pennytown is inevitable. They said the township would have three months after adoption to perform its “due diligence” — that is, to determine if it actually is feasible to build the affordable housing there. If it is determined that it is not feasible, the sale would not take place. Issues that would addressed by the feasibility study would include water and sewage. There are wells and an on-site septic system at Pennytown.
   The current requirements of the state Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) have municipal governments throughout the state in a frenzy. Over 220 towns are financially supporting a League of Municipalities lawsuit against the COAH requirements, which Pennington Borough Councilman Glen Griffiths recently called “the most absurd thing I’ve encountered in my adult life.”
   As Messrs. Sandahl, Griffiths and many other officials have noted, a municipality’s failure to comply with COAH requirements could result in a “builder’s remedy” lawsuit. Such a lawsuit, which would be filed by a developer, could result in construction of many more units than would be the case otherwise.