Towns that believed they had complied with state requirements to provide an opportunity for the development of affordable housing were rudely awakened by the state Supreme Court’s decision to allow the courts to hear challenges to their fair share housing plans earlier this year.
The March 10 ruling by the state Supreme Court was the result of the state Council on Affordable Housing’s inability to adopt updated regulations. That ruling means developers and others interested in providing affordable housing can now take a town to court.
Wednesday night, the Princeton Council and the Princeton Planning Board met jointly to learn about the impact of the March 10 ruling on the town’s fair share housing plan, which was adopted in 2008 but never acted upon by COAH. Towns that have not adopted “fair share” housing plans are subject to lawsuits from developers.
Soon after the state Supreme Court’s so-called Mount Laurel II ruling in 1985 requiring towns to provide their fair share of affordable housing, COAH issued its first round of numbers for towns in 1987 and an updated, or second round several years later. The “second round” expired in 1999, and has not been updated.
“The focus of (this) meeting is to educate you about the ‘third round obligation,’ the court decision and the town’s next steps,” town planner Lee Solow said. Princeton adopted its third round fair share plan in 2008. It calls for providing 358 units of affordable housing.
To avoid a “builder’s remedy” lawsuit or similar litigation, towns such as Princeton can file for a declaratory judgment in court that says their fair share plan is “presumptively valid,” Mr. Solow said. The deadline to file for a declaratory judgment is July 8.
Princeton’s third round “fair share” plan consists of several strategies to meet the town’s needs, including redevelopment; providing for developments, all of whose units are affordable; allowing for accessory apartments that are restricted for affordable housing; and group homes for special needs clients.
It has already provided for 100-percent affordable housing developments, such as Princeton Community Housing’s Harriet Bryan House on Elm Road. There are units set aside in the redeveloped site at Witherspoon and Spring streets, and the Acorn Glen assisted living facility has set aside five rooms.
The third-round fair share plan also identifies vacant parcels that could be developed to include affordable housing units, Mr. Solow said. One site is a parking lot on Franklin Avenue, opposite the former Princeton hospital. A second site is adjacent to the Princeton Shopping Center, on Terhune Road.
There is also a spending plan for money collected from residential and commercial developers, consultant Shirley Bishop told the council and the Planning Board. Development fees could generate about $250,000 per year, which could be spent on rehabilitation of homes whose owners are income-eligible. Money from the fund also could be used to help with closing costs or down payment assistance.
After filing for the declaratory judgment, the next steps include having the Planning Board revise and update the Housing Element and Fair Share Plan, and for the mayor and council to also update the Fair Share Plan and identify sites for the construction of affordable housing in conjunction with the Planning Board.
