Lambertville’s long-running legal fight over redevelopment of the former high school property is headed back before a judge Thursday, this time with the city seeking access to the property and asking the court to bring its current owner into the litigation.
City general counsel William Opel updated City Council on the Academy Hill litigation at its Oct. 15 meeting, less than a month after K. Hovnanian Homes’ latest court filing seeking to enforce its rights in the redevelopment dispute.
Advertisements
The court is scheduled to hear the related matters Thursday at 2:30 p.m., although Opel said the precise time was subject to confirmation based on the court’s scheduling practices.
K. Hovnanian filed a motion to enforce litigant’s rights in September, Opel said. Lambertville responded about two weeks before the Oct. 15 meeting and then filed a separate order to show cause asking the court to grant the city access to the former high school property and join its current owner as a party to the litigation.
Responses to the city’s filing were received last week, and Lambertville planned to file a reply ahead of Thursday’s hearing.
Advertisements
Asked whether the court would consider the issues together, Opel said it would.
“All the documents that have been filed so far will be available on the city website by tomorrow morning,” Opel told council.
Advertisements
The hearing adds another layer to a redevelopment battle involving the former Lambertville High School site and K. Hovnanian’s proposed 200-unit residential project.
K. Hovnanian’s plan calls for 200 townhomes, including 40 affordable units, on the Academy Hill property. The company initially submitted its proposal in March 2022 and was designated as the property’s conditional redeveloper that August.
The city repeatedly extended that designation before informing K. Hovnanian in December 2024 that it would not be extended again.
Advertisements
The disagreement moved deeper into Lambertville’s affordable-housing litigation.
K. Hovnanian moved in February 2025 to intervene in that litigation and sought revocation of Lambertville’s immunity from builder’s remedy lawsuits. The court permitted the developer to intervene that April.
In July 2025, the court revoked the city’s builder’s remedy immunity and directed Lambertville to further amend the redevelopment plan to allow the K. Hovnanian project. Later that month, the court reinstated the city’s immunity subject to several conditions, including designating K. Hovnanian as exclusive conditional redeveloper, amending the redevelopment plan and negotiating and executing a redevelopment agreement.
The city and developer have continued negotiating since then.
At its Oct. 15 meeting, council unanimously approved another extension of K. Hovnanian’s conditional redeveloper designation, keeping it in effect until at least Feb. 12, 2027, or the first council meeting following that date.
If the parties have not reached a mutually acceptable redevelopment agreement by then, the resolution allows them to negotiate another extension.
But a separate issue involving the actual Academy Hill property has increasingly intersected with that redevelopment fight: the city’s ability to gain access to privately-owned land.
That issue surfaced publicly at council’s Oct. 1 meeting, when resident Beth O’Brien questioned officials about Lambertville’s Sept. 30 filing seeking to bring property owner Merrick Wilson and Academy Hill into the litigation as necessary parties.
O’Brien specifically asked whether bringing the owners into the case could allow the city to address access needed for an environmental investigation.
Officials said at that meeting that Lambertville believed bringing the property owners into the proceeding could streamline the matter because the city had been unable to accomplish what the court sought concerning the property.
The latest court filings have also drawn scrutiny from residents.
During public comment Oct. 15, resident Judy Gleason said she was troubled by arguments raised in the opposition to Lambertville’s filing, particularly assertions involving whether the city followed court rules in seeking to add another party.
“I guess it was concerning to see what the other side, what K. Hovnanian said in response to our filing in terms of the joining another party by pointing to the court rules and places where we may not have adequately followed what the court rules require,” Gleason said.
She acknowledged officials might not be able to discuss legal strategy while the case remains active but said residents following the redevelopment want to better understand the issue.
“There’s concern of many of us in the world to see that kind of a response of you didn’t follow the rules,” Gleason said. “It is concerning and that was pretty significant, pretty much to everybody.”
Opel did not address the merits of K. Hovnanian’s argument during the meeting.
“We expected there to be opposition,” Opel said. “We’ll file with a reply on Monday.”
Gleason also confirmed with city officials that Thursday’s court proceeding will be open to the public.
Whatever happens Thursday could determine what comes next on both fronts.
