By Kristine Snodgrass, Staff Writer
WEST WINDSOR — At the Planning Board meeting Thursday night, Chairman Marvin Gardner accused the Township Council of giving “special, preferential treatment” to a landowner in the redevelopment area.
The Planning Board is continuing its review of the draft plan for the redevelopment of the train station area. According to statute, it must submit its recommendation on the plan to the council by late February.
Under the current plan, Intercap Holdings, the owner of a 25-acre plot along Washington Road, would have the option to either maintain its current zoning of the property or comply with the mixed-use zoning that would be put in place with the approval of the plan, according to Planning Board attorney Gerry Muller.
Intercap Holdings Chairman Steve Goldin said the provision is “irrelevant” because the company is proceeding with its litigation against the township. The company filed a builder’s remedy lawsuit against the township in December.
Earlier this month, township attorneys applied for a dismissal of the complaint as “frivolous litigation.”
The property’s current zoning permits research, office space and manufacturing. There is about 188,000 square feet of office space on the tract, Mr. Gardner said.
No other landowner in the township is given two zoning, he said.
”If the developer now can make that decision, and let us suppose he decides he doesn’t intend to go forward with the residential zone,” he said Friday. “I think it’s important that the township be aware of that and be aware of the impact on the redevelopment area.”
Council Vice President Heidi Kleinman, a Planning Board member, said at the meeting she was unaware of the provision.
Council President Charlie Morgan said the provision was made in response to his concern the plan be “bulletproof” against litigation with Intercap Holdings.
”If Intercap doesn’t like the new provision, the answer is they get to keep it the way it is,” he said.
Mr. Muller said the council was “sensitive” to the prospect of litigation when the provision was written into the plan. Keeping the option of the zoning that was in place when the land was purchased enhances its legal defensibility, he said.
Mr. Gardner said he was concerned the provision had no end date.
If the redevelopment plan is passed, it would become an ordinance effective 20 days after its passage, Mr. Muller said. In that case, the provision would be in effect indefinitely until changed by legislation.
Also at the meeting, the board discussed the controversial housing element of the plan.
Township planner John Madden, who argued for 500 housing units on the Intercap property, said the plan still could create a “viable, vibrant town center” with 350 units as approved by council.
Under the plan, a developer would have the opportunity to negotiate for more housing units in exchange for more amenities for residents.
Mr. Gardner said shops and restaurants also could create diversity and vibrancy. Up to 150,000 square feet of retail could be built in the area, he said.
”That’s quite an incentive, I think, to create a vibrant town center,” he said.
Several board members questioned the rationale of the housing figure and how it was reached. However, Mr. Gardner said they should consider testimony from the township planner that the figure is viable and other options for vibrancy.
”I think the underlying rationale of the number… for our purposes is immaterial,” he said.

