Garwood approves settlement with Garden Homes for Paperboard site; plan calls for 212 units, 88 age‑restricted

The Borough of Garwood on Monday approved a settlement with Garden Homes that will govern redevelopment of the Paperboard site, the borough’s affordable‑housing attorney told council members.

"There will be at the Paperboard site a grand total of 212 units of which at least 88 will be age restricted," the borough's affordable‑housing attorney said, summarizing the settlement terms the council placed on its consent agenda and adopted after a recusal.

Why it matters: The settlement resolves long‑running litigation and locks in a redevelopment scheme that the attorney said preserves the original design language and community spaces while increasing the borough’s secured affordable‑housing credits.

What the agreement includes: The attorney said the settlement keeps the negotiated community and shared parking spaces and maintains the architectural aesthetic from earlier plans. He described how credits from the third round and a new fourth‑round allocation figure into the total unit mix, and he noted some numeric clarifications during discussion: "there will be from the third round… 19 affordable units — actually I think it's 18," he said, reflecting details still being finalized in the paperwork.

Council procedure and recusal: The settlement resolution was placed in Consent Agenda Part C (Resolutions 26–42). Councilwoman Annarelli recused herself from the Part C vote, citing her prior work on affordable‑housing regulations; the remainder of the council voted to adopt the consent agenda that includes the settlement resolution.

Public questions on timing and design: During a short public Q&A, resident Russ Liberty Court asked when construction might begin. The attorney said the borough must adopt required ordinances and related redevelopment documents by March 15 and complete a redevelopment agreement and site‑plan review before construction activity advances: "one of the conditions… we have to get our ordinances and so forth adopted by March 15th," he told the meeting.

A resident who asked about density was told the current plan represents roughly "45" units per acre in the speakers’ calculation, compared with earlier proposals. On stormwater, the attorney said on‑site engineering and state stormwater rules will govern whether detention or subsurface measures (such as reservoirs) are required as part of the site‑plan review.

Next steps: Council and planning‑board actions remain. The borough still must adopt ordinances, complete a redevelopment agreement with Garden Homes and approve final site plans and related financial documents. The attorney said construction could begin only after those approvals are in place, though portions of work could start as final items are completed.

What was not specified: The public record at the meeting did not include a detailed vote tally for the Part C consent agenda beyond roll‑call confirmations, nor precise timing for construction milestones; the attorney acknowledged some unit counts in the paperwork required minor clarification.

The council’s action resolves a time‑sensitive state deadline and moves the Paperboard redevelopment from litigation toward implementation; council members and residents will see more detailed plan and ordinance filings in the months ahead.