Tag: COAH

Posted on

Ridgewood Planning Board Meeting to Focus on the Housing Element of the Village Master Plan

Ridgewood Planning Board

June 19,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Public Hearing on Housing Element of the Village Master Plan, and the World Mission Society, Church of God will be the focus of the June 21st ,Ridgewood Planning Board meeting.

PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE/AGENDA

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Village Hall Court Room– 7:30 P.M.

(all timeframes and the order of agenda items below are approximate and subject to change)

7:30 p.m. – Call to Order, Statement of Compliance, Flag Salute, Roll Call – In accordance with the provisions of Section 10:4-8d of the Open Public Meetings Act, the date, location, and time of the commencement of this meeting is reflected in a meeting notice, a copy of which schedule has been filed with the Village Manager and the Village Clerk, The Ridgewood News and The Record newspapers, and posted on the bulletin board in the entry lobby of the Village municipal offices at 131 North Maple Avenue, and on the Village website, all in accordance with the provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act.

Roll call: Aronsohn, Bigos, Knudsen, Nalbantian, Joel, Reilly, Dockray, Thurston, Altano, Abdalla, Patire

7:35 p.m. – 7:45 p.m. – Public Comments on Topics not Pending Before the Board

7:45 p.m. – 7:55 p.m. – Committee/Commission/Professional Updates for Non Agenda Topics, Correspondence Received by the Board

7:55 p.m. – 8:15 p.m. – World Mission Society, Church of God

8:15 p.m. – 10:30 p.m. – Public Hearing on Housing Element of the Village Master Plan

10:30 p.m. – 10:40 p.m. – Adoption of Minutes: July 7, 2015

10:40 p.m. – Executive Session (if needed)

Adjournment

In accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, all meetings of the Ridgewood Planning Board (i.e., official public meetings, work sessions, pre-meeting assemblies and special meetings) are public meetings, which are always open to members of the general public.

Members: Mayor Paul Aronsohn, Nancy Bigos, Councilwoman Susan Knudsen, Charles Nalbantian, Richard Joel, Kevin Reilly, Wendy Dockray, David Thurston, Isabella Altano, Khidir Abdalla, Debbie Patire

Professional Staff: Blais L. Brancheau, Planner; Gail L. Price, Esq., Board Attorney; Christopher J. Rutishauser, Village Engineer; Michael Cafarelli, Board Secretary

Posted on

N.J. court hears housing dispute, promises quick decision

CBD high density housing

 

A panel of Appellate Division judges heard arguments Monday on whether New Jersey’s municipalities must zone for the many thousands of affordable housing units that were not approved between 1999 and 2015. David O’Reilly, Inquirer Read more

Posted on

Mount Laurel is to Housing What Romneycare was to Healthcare

diana-ross-supremes_theridgwoodnlog

May 26,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, More or less all lawyers in New Jersey who are both intelligent and honest will freely admit that, even though the New Jersey Supreme Court has boldly declared and decreed that our state constitution mandates the ready availability of so-called “affordable housing”, the actual text of that document mandates no such thing. In other words, the New Jersey Supreme Court made it all up based on its policy preferences.

For its part, the New Jersey legislature subsequently failed effectively to fight against the Supreme Court’s usurpation of its constitutionally-bestowed power to devise and enact generally-applicable public laws. So why has the unconstitutional Mount Laurel regime survived and become so well-ingrained in New Jersey? Because the vast majority of New Jersey attorneys have regrettably maintained decades of strict radio silence on this issue, thereby allowing the Mount Laurel regime to develop the necessary patina of legitimacy. Some have done this because they fear the professional consequences of vocal dissent. In other words, they are ruled by political correctness. However most do so because they so heartily support the underlying affordable housing POLICY that they are willing to accept however much DAMAGE the Mount Laurel regime will unavoidably wreak on the integrity of our state constitution.

This is such a brutal attack on the New Jersey State Constitution that it arguably amounts to a violation of the United States Constitution. This is because the Mount Laurel regime is both judicially-created, and judicially-enforced, and therefore deprives New Jersey residents of the small “r” republican form of government the U.S. Constitution guarantees to all U.S. citizens. As a rueful result, New Jersey is now poised to be used by political progressives as a constitutional-law-based model for imposing a similar housing policy on the rest of the country, much like Massachusettes’ all-encompassing healthcare regime (i.e., Romneycare) was used by Obama and Ridgewood’s own Jonathan Gruber as a template for foisting the Affordable Care Act (i.e., Obamacare) on every U.S. citizen that currently draws breath.

Posted on

N.J. court to hear dispute on affordable-housing numbers

Projects_theridgewoodblog

The New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division will hear arguments June 6 on whether municipalities have an obligation to zone for affordable-housing units that they did not allow between 1999 and 2015. David O’Reilly, Inquirer

https://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20160524_N_J__court_to_hear_dispute_on_affordable-housing_numbers.html

Posted on

Ridgewood Councilwomen Knudsen Takes Time to Expalin the Route 17 housing issue and process

susan village council
April 30,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Council women Susan Knudsen explains the Route 17 housing issue and process:

“All, Just my brief explanation of the issue being discussed. First, please understand I was absent from the 4/19 PB meeting due to an emergency medical matter; however, I can offer background info, process moving forward and meeting details as confirmed by our PB secretary to ensure the accuracy of my comments specific to the 4/19 meeting.

As required by law the planning board must prepare and submit a Housing Element Plan. Included in the preliminary discussions were several acres along the route 17 corridor and West Saddle River Road. Those details include low density townhouses, or some type of housing, along with the required small % set aside for affordable housing. Tremendous efforts are being made to protect and enhance the surrounding residential neighborhood by including very specific requirements to be applied to any future development.

There has been no public hearing and the approval on 4/19 was simply for our Village planner to continue his work on the Housing Element. Any public Hearing will require proper public notice as required by law. That has not occurred and there has been no formal (legal) adoption of the Housing Element. The Public Hearing will be scheduled for mid-May, or possibly later, mindful of the timing pursuant to a judge’s order requiring PB Housing Element and Fair Share Housing Plan be submitted by the 6/30/16 deadline.. Any zoning change is subject to Village Council approval and adoption via ordinance requiring additional public hearing(s). The Housing Element will include several other locations in different areas throughout the Village – the entire process is ongoing.

The reporter’s reference to “developer” presumably suggests any future development would be required to follow the zoning regulations including height, setback, buffers, density, etc. Presently, to my knowledge, there’s no developer involved in any of the subject properties in the Housing Element.

To be included in future PB/VC updates please email sknudsen@RidgewoodNJ.net. Also, I encourage residents to check the Village website for meeting and agenda info. Again, there has been no public hearing on this and no changes have been adopted for this acreage or the other locations. Because I was absent for the 4/19 meeting my VC report on this was delayed and will be part of my next VC report.”

Posted on

Ridgewood’s Planning Board reviews litigation matters, affordable housing

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

BY MATTHEW SCHNEIDER
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

RIDGEWOOD – The village’s planning board met Wednesday night in the hopes of coming to decisions in regards to pressing matters currently before the board such as Valley Hospital and the village’s affordable housing obligations.

 

https://www.northjersey.com/community-news/clubs-and-service-organizations/members-review-litigation-matters-affordable-housing-1.1529792

Posted on

N.J. judge challenging whether municipalities still face past, unmet affordable-housing obligations

Projects_theridgewoodblog

BY MARINA VILLENEUVE
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

A state judge has challenged a core argument by more than 200 municipalities opposing advocates’ call for construction of more than 200,000 low- and moderate-income housing units statewide over the next 10 years.

Judge Marc Troncone’s Feb. 18 ruling in Superior Court, Ocean County, marks the second time a judge has ruled that local governments can’t ignore the housing demand that’s built up since 1999 amid stagnant action on the issue.

Troncone is one of 15 judges reviewing the affordable housing plans of hundreds of municipalities statewide — and what should be their baseline numbers.

Both municipalities and housing rights groups cite experts with sharply different ways of calculating so-called affordable housing needs until 2025. Each side says it is the one being realistic.

Troncone’s opinion specifically questions a Dec. 30 report, commissioned by a group of 283 municipalities, putting the need at just under 37,000 units. The Philadelphia-based Econsult Solutions report doesn’t include the “gap period” of 1999-2015, when a state agency failed to set affordable-housing quotas for communities..

https://www.northjersey.com/news/n-j-judge-challenging-whether-municipalities-still-face-past-unmet-affordable-housing-obligations-1.1521053

Posted on

Affordable housing divide: Judges to reconcile differing estimates of need in NJ

Projects_theridgewoodblog

Affordable housing divide: Judges to reconcile differing estimates of need in NJ

JANUARY 18, 2016, 11:25 PM    LAST UPDATED: TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 2016, 7:41 AM
BY MARINA VILLENEUVE
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD

Last spring, a study commissioned by a housing-rights group found that New Jersey municipalities must collectively provide more than 200,000 units of low- and moderate-income housing by 2025. Now, a new report paid for by 230 towns has put the need at just under 37,000.

Which calculation is correct — or, as the case may be, more correct — will be up to state Superior Court judges in 15 regions. The state Supreme Court last spring tasked them with reviewing the plans of hundreds of New Jersey municipalities to provide housing for people of modest means.

Units of measurement

There’s a wide disparity in estimates of how many more affordable-housing units are needed in New Jersey over the next 10 years. Here’s what a housing advocacy group and a consultant working for 230 municipalities suggest:

Fair Share Housing Center: 200,000+

Econsult Solutions: fewer than 37,000

Which calculation is correct — or, as the case may be, more correct — will be up to state Superior Court judges in 15 regions. The state Supreme Court last spring tasked them with reviewing the plans of hundreds of New Jersey municipalities to provide housing for people of modest means.

The Supreme Court’s ruling effectively disbanded the state Council on Affordable Housing, which for 15 years failed to implement affordable-housing guidelines that furthered decades-old state Supreme Court mandates.

The difference between the two reports stems from disagreements over how to interpret the Supreme Court’s action, the future of the state economy and whether to count any housing need that went unfulfilled during those 15 years. Those issues are likely to be hashed out over the next several months in court.

Meanwhile, civil rights groups in New Jersey are lambasting the municipalities’ report, saying it severely undercounts tens of thousands of working families, seniors and people with disabilities.

“If mayors across New Jersey refuse to do the right thing, we are going to have to force them to through the courts,” Frank Argote-Freyre, the president of the Latino Action Network, said in a statement last week. “New Jersey can be better than this and is better than this — but it is going to take continued work to overcome their discrimination.”

It is not clear how the matter will be resolved, said Joe Burgis, whom the courts have selected as a “special master” to review the housing plans of five Passaic County municipalities.

Will the 15 judges “be getting together to come up with a definitive set of numbers, or will the individual judges go out on their own and make their own individual determinations for their region as to what their numbers should be?” said Burgis, whose Westwood-based firm, Burgis Associates, represents municipalities in North Jersey, including Bergen County. “We still don’t know the answer to that question yet.”

Depending on what happens, some municipalities might also file new affordable-housing plans or amendments based on the report that Econsult Solutions, a Philadelphia-based consulting firm, prepared at the behest of the 230 municipalities, Burgis said.

It’s the latest head-scratcher in decades of debate over how much affordable housing New Jersey municipalities must provide under the terms of a series of state Supreme Court decisions. Those rulings, which are collectively called the Mount Laurel doctrine, established that a municipality’s land-use regulations must “affirmatively afford a reasonable opportunity” to fill its “fair share” of its region’s affordable-housing obligation.

Municipalities that met a court deadline last year were granted five months of immunity from “builder’s remedy” lawsuits, which allow developers to successfully argue that their multifamily housing projects could help satisfy a municipality’s affordable-housing obligation.

 

https://www.northjersey.com/news/affordable-housing-divide-judges-to-reconcile-differing-estimates-of-need-in-nj-1.1494559

Posted on

Affordable Housing Deadline dictates housing dialogue in Ridgewood

Projects_theridgewoodblog

NOVEMBER 16, 2015    LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2015, 2:23 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

With the deadline to submit a housing element to the courts, village officials must act diligently to avoid possible lawsuits and meet its affordable housing obligations.

Housing was a major topic of last Monday’s meeting as affordable housing and how to proceed in regard to the issue of multifamily housing in Ridgewood’s Central Business District (CBD) came to the forefront.

The village successfully applied for a declaratory judgment seeking immunity from possible builder’s remedy lawsuits in July and was given five months to come up with a housing plan to be submitted to the court.

Village Attorney Matthew Rogers noted the court had found Ridgewood had been acting in good faith, which can be at least partially attributed to the inclusion of the Planning Board’s June 2 decision to amend the master plan and create new zones that allow residential and mixed-use development in previous commercial areas.

Rogers said he advised the court the council was carrying the ordinances in order to conduct additional studies as to the impact new housing would have on the village.

The housing element must first be determined by the village’s Planning Board, as it is the sole arbiter of the master plan document. The plan must then be submitted to the Village Council for consideration and adoption before the Dec. 7 deadline.

However, Rogers said there were a couple of “major impediments” to accomplishing that task.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/deadline-dictates-housing-dialogue-in-ridgewood-1.1456572

Posted on

Ridgewood’s affordable housing obligations discussed

Projects_theridgewoodblog

NOVEMBER 10, 2015    LAST UPDATED: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2015, 9:51 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Affordable housing obligations have been a hot topic in municipalities all over New Jersey in the wake of the state Supreme Court’s decision in March to return jurisdiction in cases on affordable housing to the courts.

DSCF7229

photo by Boyd Loving

Like many other municipalities, Ridgewood is in the midst of litigation on the matter while attempting to clarify its exact affordable housing obligation.

The village is preparing a plan to submit to a judge by December on how it will meet its obligation.

DSCF7232

photo by Boyd Loving

Jeffrey Surenian, an attorney whose practice focuses exclusively on representing municipalities in affordable housing matters, gave a presentation at last Wednesday night’s Village Council meeting in order to shed some light on the issue.

The council was expected to discuss the issue further as part of its work session later in the meeting, but postponed talks as a public hearing pushed the start of the regular agenda past midnight.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/coah-guidelines-detailed-in-ridgewood-1.1452217

Posted on

The ‘Affordable Housing’ Fraud

realestate_forsale_theridgewoodblog

Thomas Sowell | Sep 29, 2015

Nowhere has there been so much hand-wringing over a lack of “affordable housing,” as among politicians and others in coastal California. And nobody has done more to make housing unaffordable than those same politicians and their supporters.

A recent survey showed that the average monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco was just over $3,500. Some people are paying $1,800 a month just to rent a bunk bed in a San Francisco apartment.

It is not just in San Francisco that putting a roof over your head can take a big chunk out of your pay check. The whole Bay Area is like that. Thirty miles away, Palo Alto home prices are similarly unbelievable.

One house in Palo Alto, built more than 70 years ago, and just over one thousand square feet in size, was offered for sale at $1.5 million. And most asking prices are bid up further in such places.

Another city in the Bay Area with astronomical housing prices, San Mateo, recently held a public meeting and appointed a task force to look into the issue of “affordable housing.”

https://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2015/09/29/the-affordable-housing-fraud-n2058059

Posted on

Reader says Former Red Cross Building points out the problems with spot zoning

Projects_theridgewoodblog

I fully support using this structure for affordable housing. But it points out the problems with the spot zoning created by the planning board’s decision to open up downtown ridgewood to developers.. More and more property owners are going to seek to build apartments in downtown Ridgewood. If i owned a one story structure for which I got one rent from one tennant, i would be a fool not to want to build a four story structure and bring in 50 tenants like the developers have now been given the green light to do. This is the floodgate that the planning board foolishly or intentionally opened. While Gail Price said it wasn’t spot zoning, she was wrong on that issue as she has been on so many of her irrational decisions pro-development, pro-hospital rulings over the past four or five years.

Posted on

Affordable-housing project on the agenda in Glen Rock

glen_rock_theridgewoodblog

AUGUST 10, 2015    LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2015, 1:21 AM
THE RECORD

GLEN ROCK — The Borough Council has scheduled a special meeting tonight to continue public discussion on a proposed affordable-housing project for physically and developmentally disabled adults.

Bergen County’s United Way is in talks to purchase land on Glen Rock’s Bradford Street, the site of a condemned home abandoned years ago.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/housing-plan-for-disabled-on-agenda-1.1389724

Posted on

Who will benefit from high-density housing in Ridgewood?

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

JULY 31, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JULY 31, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Who will benefit from high-density housing plans?

To the Editor:

My family moved to Ridgewood in the early 1950s, living first on Lincoln Avenue then buying our family home in 1957. I was born here and went through the public schools, for which my father worked most of his adult life. So if anyone has seen “change” in this town, I have.

Some change has been for the better; for instance, the ethnic and racial mix is a bit more diverse. Some has not. While superficially we are more varied, with a wider range of skin tones and ancestry than in my youth, Ridgewood is increasingly homogenized economically. Growing up, I knew families from all socioeconomic levels. Now, blue-collar and other regular working folks — people who made things — are crowded out, and only investment bankers, hedge fund managers, and others who “make” only money dominate. With that comes a certain mindset, one which, to borrow Oscar Wilde’s quip, knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Of that group, some may have come for good schools or even because they like it here. Others may have moved here for the cachet of a “golden zip code” or snob appeal, or as a rung on the ladder toward someplace more exclusive, say Alpine or Short Hills, or with the hope of making some money in a town where housing values have held steady even in downturns, due to the precise thing that high-density housing would destroy, namely, Ridgewood’s small-town ambiance.

It’s no mystery why the advocates of high-density housing would want it: this being Ridgewood, it will be high-priced, and there will be lots of money to be made in the short run. Unfortunately, when Ridgewood loses the character that made it desirable in the first place and becomes just Fort Lee with a longer commute, values will drop; but by that time, they will have pocketed their profits and have no reason to care.

To discuss in detail all the reasons high-density housing is wrong for Ridgewood would expand this letter to un-publishable length. I will simply end by quoting two Latin maxims: “cui bono?” (Who benefits?) and “res ipsa loquitur” (the thing speaks for itself).

A.C. Willment

Ridgewood

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/letter-to-the-editor-who-will-benefit-from-high-density-housing-in-ridgewood-1.1384087

Posted on

South Bergen towns sue COAH, seek protection from litigation

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

JULY 23, 2015    LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, JULY 23, 2015, 12:32 AM
BY KELLY NICHOLAIDES
STAFF WRITER |
SOUTH BERGENITE

The municipalities of Carlstadt, East Rutherford, Lyndhurst and Rutherford have filed lawsuits in Superior Court against the Council on Affordable Housing and Mt. Laurel ruling.

The municipalities seek declaratory judgment granting temporary immunity from exclusionary zoning lawsuits also known as builder’s remedy lawsuits, five months to complete an updated affordable housing methodology and judgment of compliance and repose, the documents read.

The COAH process has inundated courts since the agency failed to adopt new third round regulations. COAH third-round obligations from 2004 were challenged in 2007, with the Appellate Division invalidating various aspects of regulations, and a revised third round was published in 2008, only to have amendments added. The transfer of jurisdiction to the courts later showed that the growth-share methodology was invalid, and COAH should use methodologies adopted in the first and second rounds. COAH deadlocked on adopting revised third-round regulations, and the Fair Share Housing Center filed a motion to enforce litigants’ rights. The court ruled COAH’s administrative process non-functional, and allowed developers to go directly to court bypassing the agency — setting up towns for lawsuits from builders.

Although municipalities had until July 8 to submit their affordable housing plan to the court, East Rutherford, along with at least 70 municipalities, is asking for a five-month extension from the date of the court ruling and opted to hire experts to come up with a new methodology to calculate fair share housing since COAH failed to adopt revised regulations. The towns hired Robert W. Burchell and Rutgers, in a Municipal Shared Services Defense Agreement to prepare a statewide fair share affordable housing analysis to be undertaken by Rutgers and Burchell. Burchell will analyze any challenges to the Initial Fair Share Analysis and prepare a rebuttal report for the court

https://www.northjersey.com/news/towns-sue-for-5-month-coah-plan-extension-1.1379122