Belmar council adopts overlay zoning to meet court-ordered fair-housing terms amid resident concerns over notice

Belmar Borough Council voted to adopt overlay zoning ordinances the council said are necessary to satisfy a court-conditioned settlement addressing the borough's round-4 fair-housing obligations.

The council and staff stressed the action is intended to preserve the borough's control over zoning and maintain the borough's temporary immunity from builder's-remedy lawsuits. "If the borough doesn't do it by the sixteenth, the court will not issue a judgment of compliance and repose, and under the statute [the borough] will be immediately stripped of its immunity," staff warned during the workshop discussion. Council members and residents responded with questions about notification and the overlay's potential effects on single-family areas.

Why it matters: The ordinances were presented as part of a negotiated settlement with Fair Share Housing Center and the court to meet the borough's unmet affordable-housing need. Staff said the overlay approach is an option the borough can use to demonstrate realistic development potential and that the overlay could be rescinded once the borough meets its obligation over the statutory compliance period.

What council heard: At the workshop a council member raised concerns about notice and timing and said they were "personally a no go on this" because of what they called a lack of transparency. Christine Bell, the borough planner (introduced in the record), described the process: the borough adopted a housing element in June, challengers filed by the August deadline, and overlay zones were included during negotiations to resolve those challenges. She explained the borough has a 10-year compliance window for the fourth round (described in the record as 2025'2035) and said the overlay exists so the borough can meet part of its unmet need if property owners or developers opt to use the overlay.

Mayor Bill McCuskin (presiding) framed the vote as a choice between passing the overlay or risking court-ordered development: "If we don't pass the required resolutions and ordinances tonight ... we will lose control completely of our zoning," he said, warning that failing to adopt the ordinances could allow builders to seek remedies through the courts.

Public reaction: Dozens of residents spoke during the public session. Sean Kearns, who gave his address in the record, urged the council to approve the ordinances to avoid reopening builder's-remedy exposure that could allow taller redevelopment on Ocean Avenue. Anita Buckley, a resident who identified herself in the record, urged the council to follow the law and expressed frustration with prior administrations' handling of affordable housing, saying the overlay is an option residents may never need to use. Multiple residents asked about specific projects (including a Route 35 redevelopment approved earlier under the third round) and sought clarity about how many units in particular projects were designated affordable.

Votes at a glance: The council closed public hearings and adopted ordinance 2026-3 (zoning amendments/overlay) and later adopted ordinance 02/1964 (mixed-use overlay). The transcript records Councilman Donovan and Councilman McKinney voting "yes" on the mixed-use overlay, Councilman Bruni voting "no," and the mayor voting "yes." The transcript captures the passage but does not list a complete roll-call in the record provided.

What's next: Staff said the court must still issue a judgment of compliance; if the borough meets the conditions and filings required by the settlement, the court will confirm compliance. Staff also said the overlay is understood to be temporary and could be rescinded if the borough meets its unmet-need obligation during the compliance period. Several council members urged improved outreach and transparency going forward.

The council moved on to other agenda business after the public session, including introduction of a budget-related ordinance for first reading and routine community announcements.