Lawsuits Call for 419 Units on Birchwood, 186 Units on South Ave.

Small herds of deer now trot around the office buildings on Birchwood Avenue at sunset in this quiet corner of town. But if a Paramus-based developer has its way, those office buildings will soon be replaced by 419 rental units.

"This will forever change the character of Cranford and the sensible planning we had," Mayor David Robinson said in October. "There are a lot of environmental concerns, and the level of density proposed is extraordinary."

The S. Hekemian Group bought the property last year, and in October 2008, it proposed a plan to build 356 market rate units and 63 units of low- and moderate-income housing. Five weeks later, the developer filed a suit in New Jersey Superior Court claiming that Cranford is in violation of its constitutional duty to create sufficient opportunity for the construction of low- and moderate-income housing.

Each of New Jersey's 566 municipalities has a constitutional obligation to accommodate low- and moderate-income housing, according to a series of Supreme Court decisions known as the Mt. Laurel decisions. These were followed by the Fair Housing Act of 1985, which created the Council on Affordable Housing. Now, municipalities have the option of seeking certification with COAH by filing a plan that outlines their obligations and how those obligations will be met. Municipalities that do not file such a Housing Element and Fair Share Plan leave themselves open to "builder's remedy lawsuits," like the one filed by Hekemian last November.

Cranford submitted its Housing Element and Fair Share Plan last December, only after it had been named a defendant in two builder's remedy suits: the one relating to the Birchwood property and the other relating to 555 South Avenue, where Lehigh Acquisitions Corp. proposes a 186-unit development, more than double the 80 units outlined in the property's current redevelopment plan.

The lawsuit regarding 555 South Ave. is primarily a question of density.

"The plan made with the developer was to build 60 age-restricted units," said Deputy Mayor Mark Smith, referring to the original plan to build housing on that site. "You can do the math there—it's about 12 units per acre. In Cranford, that's higher than average but not outrageous.

"Now multiply that by three," he said, referring to what Lehigh is calling for in its suit. "You go from 12 per acre to 36 per acre. That's significant change."

The proposed development on Birchwood Avenue is more complicated and controversial, as it could result in high-density housing replacing partially used office buildings in a quiet corner of the township.

Not only is it "stunning in size," according to Smith, who compared it to putting one quarter of Garwood's population on seven acres in Cranford, but it comes with an additional list of concerns.

"It has a lot more environmental constraints and limited access," he said. "Orange Avenue is pretty close to capacity when school is coming into session and going out of session."

"People on Wadsworth experience an increase in flooding in their own basements," he added. "I think people are concerned about potential change to drainage patterns over there."

Smith's comments echo the concerns of residents, many of whom have been outspoken since before Hekemian bought the property.

"It'll be the ruination of the community if it's allowed to prevail," said Vincent Buontempo, who has lived one block over, on Bloomingdale Avenue, since 1971. "Just to bring in some affordable units, you're going to sacrifice a neighborhood? Where are you going to put 800 cars? Where are you going to put traffic signals up?"

Buontempo also feared that if one property zoned for office buildings were changed to a residential zoning, other commercial property owners would try to do the same, resulting in an "avalanche."

"There are a lot of people dead set against this just because—without regard to the people—they're going to uproot a zone, a zone we're collecting taxes on," he said. "How long before you think the others are going to follow suit?"

"Their motives are profit," he added. "Nothing else. They could care less about the community."

But at an Oct. 8, 2008 Township Committee meeting, Peter Hekemian, vice president of development for the S. Hekemian Group, and attorney Stephen Eisdorfer, presented their development as a mutual opportunity for the group to help Cranford meet its affordable housing obligations, according to meeting minutes. At that time, Cranford had not yet filed an updated plan with COAH.

Proposed units would range from 750-square-feet, 1-bedroom units, to 1,000-square-feet, 2-bedroom units, Hekemian, said, adding that impervious surface coverage would be at or below the permitted amount and that the project would yield 11 acres of open space that would be dedicated to the state for environmentally friendly use.

More than a dozen residents spoke against the project, including John Hrebin, a member of the township's environmental commission and a 33-year resident of Cranford Avenue, just around the corner from the proposed development.

"This is not news," he said this month, reiterating the environmental concerns that he and his neighbors have had for years. "We had two big storms within six months of each other, and the area was under water. We don't have the emergency services to rescue people out of this area. We're just asking for trouble if we ever build on that property."

"This area of town is not set up to handle it," he added. "It'd be chaos. We would have to build a new school, and I don't think Hekemian is going to pay for that."

The lawsuits are likely to be heard early next year, according to township officials.

Editor's Note: This is the third installment of our affordable housing series. Click here to find out more about COAH (like what low and moderate incomes are in Cranford). Click here to find out what the town proposed in its affordable housing plan.