Meeting attendees heard opinions for and against Brancroft redevelopment at a commissioners’ work session on Nov. 12.
The Nov. 12 Haddonfield Commissioners work session concluded after four hours with the future of Bancroft’s redevelopment still in flux, as both the amendments to the redevelopment plan and a resolution that would designate Woodmont Properties the official developers did not get to a vote.
With neither the resolution nor the ordinance passing, the borough may now be in a breach of contract with both Woodmont Properties for failing to come to a conclusive decision and also at risk of losing immunity from builder remedy lawsuits, said Fair Share Housing Center lawyer Esme Devenney at the meeting.
“As my colleague mentioned, Fair Share has been flexible in figuring out what is the most suitable for the site but the time has come, a project has to move forward for the constitutional obligation,” Devenney said. “What that means is if the ordinance is not adopted, Fair Share Housing Center will file a motion to enforce our agreement, and the remedy for that would be seeking to revoke the immunity that Haddonfield has from builders’ remedy lawsuits.”
She explained what losing immunity would mean in laymen terms: “A developer can come in and file a builder’s remedy and Haddonfield will not have any choice over what gets developed to conclude that obligation,” she added. “So any discussion on design or unit amount is going to be completely out of your control.”
The Bancroft redevelopment is an issue that has spanned more than a decade, but saw movement earlier this year, when Woodmont became the conditional redeveloper of the site out of nine RFPs submitted. The 180-day period to negotiate and execute a redevelopment agreement and purchase and sale agreement expired on Nov. 18.
If both the recommended amendments and the resolution approving the sale agreement had been approved, it would have enabled the borough to move forward with redevelopment. It would have also been able to fulfill the third round of a Fair Share housing obligation that requires 10 units of affordable housing at Bancroft. Woodmont’s plan was to develop 120 units, with 18 affordable housing.
The lack of a vote at the commissioners’ session reflected the town’s division on the topic. During public comments, close to 30 people spoke both in favor of moving forward with the project and against it. Those who prefer moving forward cited not wanting to “kick the can down the road” for meeting the affordable- housing obligation and felt Woodmont came closest to what the borough wanted.
Opponents noted that new Commissioner David Siedell had successfully campaigned on not moving forward with the current developers. Still others at the meeting called for open space, an idea raised previously by Mayor Colleen Bianco Bezich earlier in the process that was rejected by fellow commissioners due to a potential tax increase. Additionally, planning board had rejected the proposed amendments that would have clarified that the developers could also build rental apartments and that they could use 8.2 acres – rather than 7 – to build 105 market-rate multi-family units.
Other opponents of the ordinance were concerned with the impact the development could have on borough traffic and schools.
Ultimately – though Bianco Bezich made efforts to move forward with both the ordinance and resolution – Commissioner Frank Troy did not second either and both measures died. Likewise, Troy’s effort to table the ordinance was also not seconded by Bianco Bezich. For another vote to take place, both would need to be reintroduced on first reading. Troy acknowledged that the issue wasn’t about the Fair Share affordable-housing obligations, but the density and future of the property, which was part of his reasoning to hold off on the vote.
“The Woodmont plan, it’s not a bad plan at all, it’s just I have to represent the people that elected me and their thoughts on it,” Troy explained. “… If we had a forum of sorts and the feedback was, ‘We don’t care if it’s for sale or rentals, we just want something available in this range,’ I have no problem adjusting my position on it, too. It’s more about just getting the feedback from the people.”
Bianco Bezich shared the rationale for her vote and described efforts behind the scenes that had failed, such as asking landlords if they would be interested in deed-restricting their properties, or early discussions about keeping Bancroft as open space. That idea faced pushback out of fear of tax hikes.
“We never hit 100% consensus on Bancroft,” the mayor acknowledged. “Frank (Troy) came in looking for sale, I came in with this amazing park concept and (former commissioner) Kevin (Roche) came in with rentals. And we all really worked hard to achieve a compromise because we were listening … It was evenly balanced.”
