An online petition to “stop unnecessary development in Livingston” has garnered the support of over 1,400 people after a contentious redevelopment ordinance was on the Township Council agenda for voting last week.
The MoveOn petition, addressed to Livingston’s Town Council and Mayor Michael Vieira, requests that Council members vote against the redevelopment plan for 45 South Livingston Avenue. The ordinance was tabled during the July 24 meeting.
“The reasons to initiate the petition are to generate awareness regarding the lack of transparency and thorough analysis of the impact of a (roughly 60-foot) apartment complex in the middle of the prime location of the town,” Ashish Nachane wrote to the West Essex Tribune.
Nachane, who created the petition, said it was the work of several Livingston residents.
“The strain it is going to put on the school system, the township services, including the police, the fire department, the water and sewer etc. are not completely thought through,” Nachane said.
Nearly 40 residents spoke during the July 24 Town Council meeting, raising concerns that were echoed in the petition: “overcrowded” levels of school enrollment, poor water quality, “overstretched” police and firefighter personnel, and “outrageous” and “dangerous” traffic on Livingston Avenue were cited as reasons to vote against the plan. According to Nachane, several questions asked by residents at the meeting were not addressed.
“We do not want it, we think it’s bad for our schools, we think it’s bad for safety, we think it will significantly impact our quality of life, and that it will have deleterious effects on the character and feel of our community,” the petition reads.
Mayor Vieira decided to table the vote after public comment closed. “I’m not sure what I’m going to do in the long run, but I do need a couple questions answered before I can approve this… but clearly something can be done to improve this,” he said at that meeting.
As it stands, the redevelopment plan would pave the way for a 276-rental unit property to be built on the South Livingston Avenue site, and calls for a density of 40 units per acre. Fifteen percent of the units would be designated for low- and moderate-income tenants. In a meeting held earlier last month, the Planning Board found that the redevelopment is consistent with the master plan. Board member Richard Dinar took a “minority position” against the project, sharing similar concerns of residents.
“We understand that this prime space needs to be developed, but there can be other alternatives to use this space in a way which will complement the current residential needs and not to go ahead and approve a (276 unit) apartment complex,” Nachane wrote to the Tribune, citing “building a school” or “retail complex” as proposed alternatives.
Municipalities throughout New Jersey must abide by the Mount Laurel doctrine, which requires designated zoning for a “fair share” of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income families. The nonprofit Fair Share Housing Center reaches settlements with towns in Superior Court, which outline how many affordable units can be created in proposed locations.
These settlements, one of which Livingston had reached initial agreements with in 2020, protects towns from builder’s remedy lawsuits until 2025. This gives towns the authority over developers to determine where affordable housing units are located.
Livingston residents are not the first to raise concerns over New Jersey’s approach to affordable housing. Towns across the Garden State have banded together to address their worries for safety, disrupted neighborhood feel and environmental risks that they say come with these development projects.
Residents of other New Jersey municipalities who have opposed development in their area have organized non-profit groups, delaying proceedings and appearing at public town hearings.
Similar to Livingston, Millburn’s nonprofit group “Concerned Residents for a Better Millburn,” launched a Change.org petition over a year ago, which over 2,000 people signed. Residents opposed zoning changes that would allow complexes with 40 units per acre. It advocated for the town to remain a “small close-knit suburban community comprised mainly of single family homes,” according to the group’s website.
Other towns across the state that are organizing together include Haddonfield, Saddle River and Park Ridge. Housing advocates have expressed concern over the trend, stressing that delays in votes can cut down New Jersey’s already short supply of affordable housing.
The state lacks over 200,000 rental homes affordable and available for extremely low income renters, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, and the Fair Share Housing Center is looking to add an estimated 70,000 affordable homes in the next decade.
“We would love to welcome more residents to town! However, not like this,” the Livingston petition reads. “It would have to be done in a planful, safe, and socially/economically responsible way.”
An update on the petition indicates that organizers will be in attendance at the next Council meeting, scheduled for August 14.
The petition can be read in full at tinyurl.com/2sz7w2yn.
