DCA to Review COAH Fees Where Homes Destroyed Due To Fire, Flood

New Jersey Department of Community Affairs Commissioner Joseph Doria has sent a letter to State Senator Steve Oroho advising that DCA will “review its rules to address this type of unique situation where a family needs to rebuild its home as a result of fire or natural disaster.”

It appears that this action is the result of recent press accounts regarding a Franklin Township family whose home was lost in a fire and, as a result, a demolition fee is generated under the new COAH regulations adopted June 2. While the Township may waive the fee to the homeowners, it would still be responsible for the affordable housing obligations generated by the demolition and “new” construction unless it successfully petitions COAH for a waiver. Senator Oroho represents Franklin Township.

For the full story from the Star Ledger, click here.

For the Star Ledger’s editorial on the issue, click here.

Environmental Groups Call For Conditional Veto of Permit Extension Act

While the Permit Extension Act passed the Legislature with bipartisan support, environmentalists fought hard to water down provisions of the bill during the committee process in June. However, not satisfied with the compromises they helped broker during the Legislature’s consideration of the bill, environmental groups held a press conference yesterday calling on Governor Corzine to conditionally veto the Act and identified key sections of the bill to modify.

Given that the Governor made it a priority to have a quick signing of the amendments to the Fair Housing Act into law, legislation decried as anti-growth by many groups and which the League of Municipalities opposed as creating a substantial burden on municipalities to absorb the cost of affordable housing generated as a result of non-residential construction, while the Permit Extension Act has languished, there is substantial concern from smart growth advocates and the development community that the Governor will yield and conditionally veto the Permit Extension Act. According to a joint press release from the Sierra Club and New Jersey Environmental Federation, approximately thirty environmental groups support a conditional veto.

The groups asked the Governor to fix the following issues in the bill:

* Eliminate the Dracula Clause, which would bring back approvals and permits that have already expired in violation of the right to due process guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Many of the projects that have lapsed and would now be brought back to life include some of the worst proposals in New Jersey, including Cherokee in Camden, Encap, and dumping dredge spoils in Palmyra Cove Nature Center. This provision would have tremendous environmental impacts.

* Provide for good planning, especially in redevelopment areas where communities have changed their zoning to promote appropriate redevelopment, such as transit villages and affordable housing, as well as in communities that have amended their Master Plans and zoning ordinances. In the past eighteen months cities like Newark and Jersey Cities, as well as many towns such as Bernardsville, have worked to redo their Master Plans and zoning. This bill would thwart those actions.

* Exempt Planning Area 4, which is the state’s prime agricultural land and necessary to maintaining a vibrant agricultural economy.

* Exempt the Global Warming Response Act and other important standards that are being set to help New Jersey reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a clean energy economy. The bill in its current form would exempt many new developments from meeting more stringent energy efficiency and green buildings standards for homes or commercial buildings.

* Clarify the extremely open-ended definition of “approval” by deleting the last nine lines of the definition.

“In the midst of presidential politics, Governor Corzine has to govern New Jersey, including deciding the fate of the Permit Extension Act. Within two weeks, he will decide whether or not to undermine core environmental and public health protections, good planning and the constitution,” commented Dave Pringle, Campaign Director of the New Jersey Environmental Federation. “Despite assertions to the contrary, developers aren’t motivated here by the public interest of economic stimulus, which this bill won’t provide anyway, but rather by a special interest – further lining their already well-lined wallets.”

For the full press release from the Sierra Club’s website, click here.

For a Courier News article on the issue, click here.

Rebuilding of Home Destroyed by Fire Triggers Municipal COAH Obligation

Over the last several weeks, the Senate Republican office has issued a number of press releases that point out some of the anomalies (some might say absurdities) in the Council for Affordable Housing’s (“COAH”) recently-adopted third round regulations and the amendments to the Fair Housing Act involving a new statewide development fee for most non-residential construction of 2.5 percent.

The attached story from the Star Ledger contains a particulary anomalous/absurd application of the new rules. Here, a Franklin Township family whose house burned down triggers the “demolition” requirements of the new COAH rules. As a result, the Township is charging them a development fee. While a COAH spokesman notes that the municipality can waive the fee, the fact is that the municipality still accrues an obligation for affordable housing under the new rules.

Under the new regulations, demolitions are considered a “source of secondary housing demand, as they eliminate housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households,” according to [State Senator Steven] Oroho. The rules removed a prior exemption for the demolition and replacement of a home, in which a homeowner was not on the hook for a COAH fee.

“The court mandated that we change our methodology and we increase the obligation (of towns to provide affordable housing), and as part of that, all growth is included,” [DCA spokesman Chris] Donnelly said of an appellate ruling.

But Oroho and Franklin Mayor Paul Crowley counter that replacing a home that was lost in a fire is not “growth,” but simply keeping the status quo.

“This is not a redevelopment or a demolition. The Ferraro family is simply trying to rebuild their lives after a fire destroyed their home and killed their dog. The house burned to the ground. This was an act of God,” Oroho said.

For the full story, click here.

For a link to Senator Oroho’s press release and other Senate Republican press releases on the COAH rules and Fair Housing Act amendments, click here.

Motion to Stay Deadline for Filing of Third Round COAH Plans Denied by Council; League of Municipalities to Appeal

On Wednesday, August 13, the New Jersey State League of Municipalities’ motion tfor a limited stay of the requirement that municipalities submit a third round affordable housing plan by December 31, 2008, was denied by the Council on Affordable Housing (“COAH”).

According to the League, the denial was expected and the League will file an appeal of COAH’s determination. In a statement from Bill Dressel, the executive director of the League, he notes that the motion, “[i]f granted, [] will allow municipalities to continue to satisfy their affordable housing obligations by imposing obligations on developers. The purpose of the stay is to prevent municipalities from again expending significant financial resources into plans when the regulations are being challenged, already being proposed for change by the agency and further regulations will be required in light of the approval of A-500.”

For the full release by the League, click here.

Appellate Division: Long Branch Did Not Provide Substantial Evidence to Support Redevelopment Designation

In one of the battlegrounds over redevelopment and the use of eminent domain in the state, the Appellate Division has ruled that the City of Long Branch failed to establish sufficient evidence that certain residential properties in the Beachfront North redevelopment zone met the criteria for an area in need of redevelopment. The court also dismissed other contentions of the homeowners, including claims of conflict of interest of the City Attorney and upheld the City’s delegation of authority to commence condemnation proceedings to the designated redeveloper. Long Branch v. Anzalone, A-0067-06T2 et als. (N.J. App. Div. August 7, 2008).

According to the Asbury Park Press:

The Appellate Division of Superior Court, relying on the 2007 decision in the Gallenthin Realty Development Inc. v. the Borough of Paulsboro case, found that Long Branch’s 1996 report did not meet the heightened standard for blight and so it reversed Lawson’s decision appointing condemnation commissioners for the affected parcels.

“We agree with appellants that material facts are in dispute regarding not only whether substantial evidence supports a finding of a need for redevelopment,” but also regarding other issues such as whether taking that neighborhood is integral to the overall redevelopment plan and whether its inclusion is necessary in the redevelopment plan.

Also, Lawson will determine whether taking the properties represented a change to the redevelopment plan that would have required it to be readopted, and thus require a new series of public notices and hearings.

MTOTSA maintains it was always told that its neighborhood was safe and would be redeveloped as “infill,” which it took to mean as development on existing or available properties. Absent a definition, however, Lawson will have to define that term as well, the appellate panel said.

“We agree with appellants that . . . the city did not find actual blight‚ under any part of the law, ‚that the record lacked substantial evidence that could have supported the New Jersey Constitution’s standard for finding blight and that the absence of substantial evidence of blight compels reversal,” the appellate panel found.

For the full Asbury Park Press article, click here.

For the Star Ledger article, click here.

Somerville To Seek New Responses to RFP for Landfill

Somerville has decided to reissue a request for proposals for redevelopment of the former Somerville landfill bordered by Route 206 and the Raritan Valley rail line. The RFP was sent out to dozens of builders but only one response was received by the March 2008 deadline.

The redevelopment area includes the 112-acre abandoned landfill which is proposed to be transformed into a transit-oriented retail and residential development.

For a copy of the Star Ledger article, click here.

For a link to an overview of Somerville’s redevelopment areas, click here.

Affordable Housing and the Highlands Master Plan: Imperfect Together?

Despite the substantial impediments to development in the Highlands imposed upon over half of the acreage in the region as a result of the Highlands Act, environmentalists are not satisfied. Several last minute amendments to the plan proposed by the environmental lobby on the eve of the Highland Council’s public hearing to vote on the Highlands master plan were rejected. As a result, environmental groups have been lobbying Governor Corzine to veto the Highlands master plan.

The latest argument being presented to defeat the current master plan is that the master plan adopted by the Highlands Council does not take into account the new affordable housing rules and legislation (A-500/S-1783), which was signed into law by the Governor on July 17 – the same date the Highlands master plan was voted on by the Council. As a result, environmentalists argue, the Governor must veto the plan so the Council will incorporate the changes to the Fair Housing Act into the plan.

The Star Ledger reports on the perceived incongruities between the plan and A-500 here.