HAWORTH, N.J.—A draft settlement agreement between Haworth and Fair Share Housing Center—set for a fairness hearing June 20 in Superior Court—establishes the borough’s current obligation at 223 affordable units. These are to be addressed through so-called “inclusionary developments,” overlay zones for future affordable housing, and ordinances mandating affordable set-asides in new developments.
An “inclusionary development” includes market-rate units for sale or rental, plus generally a set-aside of 15 percent of rental units and 20 percent of for-sale units for affordable housing.
Residents or interested parties wanting to comment or object to the proposed settlement must file comments by June 6.
Also, any individuals or parties wishing to express an opinion must notify Superior Court Judge Christine Farrington and all counsel of record by June 13 to be heard on the matter.
“We really had to balance the mandatory requirements to offer affordable housing with the goal of not changing the character of Haworth,” said Councilman Glenn Poosikian May 23.
“We did the best we could with finding locations,” he said, noting no one on the council was against affordable housing but Haworth has little available space for new housing.
While 223 affordable units is proposed to settle Haworth’s third round (1999-2025) affordable housing obligations, the settlement agreement notes the borough has a “realistic development potential” (RDP) of only 28 units, or units to actually be built between now and 2025.
For Haworth, settlement of its affordable housing obligations has been a nearly four-year process with 19 extensions of immunity from so-called “builder’s remedy” lawsuits—which would allow a developer to propose a high-density multifamily development should a municipality fail to satisfy local affordable housing obligations.
Since July 2015, Haworth has negotiated to resolve its affordable obligations and been granted continuous extensions from Superior Court in Hackensack.
During a March forum on affordable housing negotiations, Borough Attorney Robert Regan—who negotiated Haworth’s affordable settlement as well as that of other municipalities—noted that Fair Share Housing Center proposed an obligation of 307 affordable units, an independent consulting firm proposed 223 units, and Haworth’s 2015 Fair Share Plan proposed an 85-unit obligation.
‘Realistic development’
The proposed settlement includes 223 affordable units but only obligates Haworth to construct 28 affordable units, defined as its “RDP” or realistic development potential.
Most of the 28 units will be satisfied by two new developments: one at Schaefer’s Gardens’ 5.5-acre property, and a second one at a 2-acre site on Massachusetts Avenue.
Other units will be satisfied with affordable housing “credits” earned through supportive housing, family rentals, affordable housing rentals, and adoption of overlay zoning for specific properties to require future affordable units.
Two sites, 76 units
The draft agreement proposes an inclusionary development by Lakeshore Developers LLC, which will construct a 41-unit multifamily complex on the 5.5-acre Schaefer’s Gardens site with nine affordable units.
The second proposed development is a 35-unit complex on Massachusetts Avenue with 21 market-rate units as well as 14 affordable units that include eight family rentals, two age-restricted units, and four one-bedroom supportive housing units.
Also, an “accessory apartment program” of affordable rental units is proposed for properties that front Schraalenburgh Road and Hardenburgh Avenue.
Two “accessory” units will accommodate very low income residents, three for low income and five for moderate income residents, notes the plan.
Income thresholds for rental and for-sale affordable units are established by the state for six zones statewide.
The plan notes the accessory apartment program would create a self-contained residential dwelling within an existing home.
Funding to help implement and subsidize the business district mixed use affordable units and accessory apartment program may be available through the borough’s affordable housing trust fund, which totaled over $355,000 in late February, said the plan.
Massachusetts Avenue site
The proposed 35-unit Massachusetts Avenue development project is a collaborative effort with Bergen County United Way, and a developer to be determined, notes the plan.
The project includes development of a memorandum of understanding with them, identification of funding sources, alternative local funding sources in case grant funds are not available, a project schedule, oversight entity, and a legal requirement to begin construction within two years of settlement approval.
Other settlement elements include: overlay zoning for affordable unit set-asides in mixed-use development for up to 12 affordable units per acre in the “D” business district; increased overlay zone density from 6 units to 8 units per acre on White Beeches Driving Range; and a mandatory affordable housing set-aside ordinance (15 percent for rental units; 20 percent for market-rate units) in new local development.
While the 223 affordable housing unit obligation in the settlement appears higher than officials predicted, borough council members have repeatedly stressed at several public sessions that they wanted to do everything to avoid ending up in a legal battle with Fair Share Housing Center over affordable obligations and how to calculate its final obligation.
A well-attended March 12 public forum on the affordable housing plan spelled out most options that appeared in the final settlement plan, although borough planner Caroline Reiter said then it was undecided whether a 100 percent affordable project on Terrace Avenue or an inclusionary development on Massachusetts Avenue would be included.
Poosikian said while some residents may be under a “misconception that affordable housing means bringing in new residents from other communities” the affordable housing also gives older residents with reduced incomes an opportunity for lower-cost housing in town.
“It was a balancing act we were tasked with,“ he noted.
‘Did the best we could’
“What residents need to understand is we’re [Council] all residents also. We’re not happy with being forced to make any type of settlement with Fair Share…but we did the best we could to satisfy the mandate,” said Poosikian.
He said council members and Regan were able to minimize the areas and densities to be developed, reducing project size on the proposed Schaefer’s Gardens site and the Massachusetts Avenue site.
The Massachusetts Avenue proposal was limited to two of eight available acres there, he said, following negotiations with Fair Share Housing Center.
