Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Providence planner outlines obligations, deadlines for "fourth round" affordable housing
Summary
Borough planner McKinley Mertz told the council and residents that New Providence has a nonbinding DCA fourth'round obligation of 198 units (down from the DCA'calculated 210 after local review), explained the realistic development potential/unmet need framework, and urged the borough to adopt its housing element by June 30, 2025 to retain immunity from builder's remedy suits.
McKinley Mertz, the borough planner retained by New Providence, presented a detailed briefing Wednesday on the state's fourth'round affordable housing rules and the borough's options for meeting a municipal obligation of 198 units.
"The fourth round starts 07/01/2025 and goes to 06/30/2035," Mertz said, framing the decade'long planning horizon towns must now address. She summarized the history behind today's rules, citing Mount Laurel cases and the disbanding of COAH, and described how the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) produced nonbinding municipal numbers last fall.
Why it matters: adopting a housing element and fair share plan before June 30 will preserve New Providence's protection from builder's remedy suits while the borough finalizes mechanisms to meet its realistic development potential (RDP) and address cumulative unmet need. Mertz warned that losing immunity can expose municipalities to litigation that may force denser development and financial penalties.
Mertz described how obligations are allocated and credited: municipalities use vacant land adjustments and RDP calculations to show how many units can realistically be developed now; remaining units become "unmet need" that must be planned for. She said New Providence audited the DCA land'capacity data and removed about 8.8 acres of ineligible polygons (railroad right of way, cemetery, library open'space), which reduced the borough's municipal number from 210 to 198.
She also reviewed common mechanisms to meet obligations: overlay zoning (centering density near the train station), inclusionary developments (market projects with set'aside affordable units), and limited 100% municipal projects. On administrative practice, Mertz said the borough contracts with Community Grants, Planning, and Housing to run marketing and lotteries and described the invasive income verification administrative agents use.
During question time, council members and residents pressed on two recurring concerns: the builder's remedy process and school or infrastructure impacts. Mertz warned of the stakes: "It is very serious when this happens," and cited a past case — Englewood Cliffs — where the court ordered a municipality to deliver many more units and pay developer fees. On schools and other off'site impacts, she said site plan, planning board review, and DEP permits remain required and that the borough is coordinating with the school district.
Residents asked whether 100% affordable projects or changing set'aside percentages were being considered; Mertz said those options are on the table but that 100% projects are difficult to finance and that the fourth'round rules changed how bonus credits are awarded. She pledged the administration would post the full presentation and underlying analysis on the borough website and return with specific mechanisms once the updated vacant'land adjustment and RDP are complete.
The meeting closed the public hearing after several residents and stakeholders spoke. Next steps: the borough must finalize its updated vacant land adjustment and adopt a housing element/fair share plan before the June deadline to extend immunity into the fourth round.
