John Hart: expect some lawsuits
By:John Tredrea
After four hours of public comment in the Central High School auditorium July 6, the Hopewell Township Committee adopted three ordinances that amend the township zoning code to reduce the amount of development that will be permitted.
Voting in favor of all three ordinances – one of which is a new zoning map – were Mayor Marylou Ferrara, Deputy Mayor Jon Edwards, committee members Kathy Bird and Robert Higgins, all Democrats. Republican John Hart abstained on all three votes, saying "the language" of the ordinances and the boundaries of the new or changed zones they create "need to be reexamined."
Of particular concern to Mr. Hart – and to affected landowners, several of them represented by attorneys at the June 21 and July 6 public hearings on the ordinances – was the switch to four-acre residential zoning of heretofore industrially and commercially zoned tracts on both sides of state Route 31 between Marshall’s Corner and Titus Mill roads.
Representatives of those property owners say the economic value of the land is being drastically reduced – if not completely eliminated – because the market for housing along Route 31 is, and will continue to be, absolutely nil.
"This zoning makes no sense," said attorney Robert Ridolfi for his client Teresa Vogler, whose 10 acres at the northwest corner of state Route 31 and Marshall’s Corner Road have been rezoned from commercial to four-acre residential. Speaking about two hours before the ordinances were adopted, Mr. Ridolfi said: "No one is going to buy a house on Route 31. This is a taking (of Ms. Vogler’s land). You’re zoning the property into inutility. You’ve got to take more time and use common sense on this."
Mr. Ridolfi was not the only attorney to use the word "inutility." It was also used by Allen Porter, representing the Freedman family, which owns the Kooltronics factory and 100 undeveloped acres – now changed from industrial zoning to four-acre residential – at the southeast corner of the junction of Route 31 and county Route 654.
At the June 21 session, Mr. Porter said such rezoning would be "confiscatory" and would not stand up to "judicial review" because it would consign the land to "economic inutility."
Shortly before the adoption vote, Mr. Hart predicted the rezoning will get the township sued, and that the township will lose.
"If you think you’re not going to get litigation, you’re dead wrong," Mr. Hart said. "There’s money in this township. They’ll use it. We’ll lose."
Also eliminated by the rezoning is the industrial-office park designation of hundreds of acres on the west side of Scotch Road. These lands are north of I-95, south of county Route 546 and east of Jacob’s Creek. This land now is zoned Valley Residential (VA), which calls for lots no smaller than four acres. VA replaces R200 (two acres) in large areas of the central, east-central and west-central township.
Mountain Conservation (MC), another residential zone, requires that lots be at least six acres. MC replaces R250 (three-acre zoning) in most of the northern one-fourth of the 58-square-mile township.
As was the case at the June 21 meeting, many owners of residentially-zoned properties that now have been changed from R200 and R250 to VA and MC, respectively, said this week the downzonings are unfair.
Typical of many comments were those of Joan Muscente, whose family has owned 52 acres off Hopewell-Rocky Hill Road for 25 years. She implored the Township Committee not to downzone. "I don’t think you have any idea of the pain you’ll cause," she said. "Many of you work for state government. You have pensions and don’t have to worry about a thing. But I have no pension. My land is all I have. I’ve worked 60-hour weeks for many years so the view of my land could be enjoyed . . . farmers don’t make money on their land. I’m still paying my mortgage . . . if you like open space, you should shut your mouths and open your wallets."
At the hearings, about as many residents supported the downzoning as opposed it. Like several others who spoke, county Route 518 resident Joe Kowalski said the township is not obligated to zone land in such a way as to maximize how much money owners can make when they sell it.
"Investment in land, like any other investment, is a risk," Mr. Kowalski said. "The Valley has already exceeded its resources. Our quality of life is dwindling. Traffic is increasing, and groundwater contamination. Groundwater recharge is decreasing." A township resident for 28 years, Mr. Kowalski urged the committee to enact the downzonings, "to preserve our rural, historic community" by reducing pressure on "roads and schools" and other infrastructure.
Not convincing to many opponents of the change from R200 and R250 and VA and MC respectively was the contention of committee members, including Mr. Hart, that the downzoning will put into local ordinances only what the development potential of the land has been demonstrated to be, by actual construction, for more than 10 years. Limiting development in these areas, officials say, are environmental constraints such as steep slopes, rocky soils that percolate poorly and wetlands.
"If certain areas are already limited by environmental factors, I don’t see the need for an ordinance to confirm that," said Stanley Stolarski, an opponent of the downzonings. Several other residents made similar statements.
Before the Township Committee voted, each committee member expressed personal views on the issue. Speaking at the most length was Committeeman Higgins, who expressed strong confidence that the committee is on firm legal ground with the zoning changes, which affect about three-fourths of the township.
"Based on the research I’ve done and that our professionals have done, I believe the facts and law are on our side," Mr. Higgins said. He added that the zoning changes are not "a taking" of land "in any sense. Those kinds of claims by lawyers do not meet statutory or case law."
Mr. Higgins termed "threats of lawsuits" to be "economic blackmail by developers" and said he wanted township attorney John Bennett "to investigate whether we can recoup our lawyers’ fees (from losing parties) if we win in court."
Like Mayor Ferrara and Deputy Mayor Edwards, Mr. Higgins said limited groundwater resources are a key factor driving the need to downzone. "We don’t have the water supply to sustain 40 lots on an 80-acre tract" in the now-dissolved R200 zone, he said. "It’s our responsibility, under police powers" defined by state law, "to protect our water supply. We can’t compromise our public water supply, and we have to take into account future generations."
Mr. Edwards and Ms. Bird noted the onslaught of traffic the township could have been faced with in the future if the potential for commercial development were not reduced. Under the old zoning code, Mr. Edwards said, there was potential for 40,000 new jobs, which could bring an estimated 155,000 more cars in and out of the township each day.
"I don’t want to sound like an alarmist," Mr. Edwards said, but "that number of cars would form a line that would reach from here to Flemington. The line would be 60 lanes wide!" He added that 40,000 jobs would require at least five times as much office space as one of the two towers of the World Trade Center in New York City.
Mr. Hart disagreed. "People aren’t going to develop their properties to the max," he said. "They take a lot of pride in how their developments look. They want landscaping and other amenities."
By way of example, Mr. Hart said his family’s new Rosedale Mills store, on the eastern side of state Route 31, could have been 40,000 square feet. After land was set aside for landscaping, detention basin and driveways, a 12,000 square foot building was erected, he said.