BURLINGTON COUNTY: Towns proceed with COAH plans despite ruling

By Geoffrey Wertime, Staff Writer
   A recent ruling in the county by a state appellate court seemingly limits the reasons for a municipality to work with the Council on Affordable Housing.
   But two local officials said this week it is too early to tell if the ruling would have any impact on their towns, and that they will continue with their filed COAH plans for the foreseeable future.
   The Land-Use Board in Eastampton Township had denied a use variance application from a non-profit organization, Homes of Hope, to construct two buildings containing eight affordable units on a less than 1-acre parcel that already contained a four-unit brick building.
   The board had determined that, because the township had met its state-mandated affordable housing obligation, affordable housing did not qualify as an “inherently beneficial use” under state law, meaning Homes of Hope had a more stringent standard to meet to win the board’s approval.
   The state Superior Court in Burlington County ruled last year in favor of Homes of Hope, saying that the original Mount Laurel decision and the state’s Fair Housing Law, which created the state Council on Affordable Housing and the state-mandate, did not intend “for each municipality to meet only the needs of the homeless within strict boundaries of each town.” Affordable housing, the court said, was a statewide mandate and the individual obligations were just the mechanism used to meet overall need.
   The appellate panel endorsed the lower court’s finding on Aug. 24, saying that meeting COAH’s requirements “does not impact affordable housing’s inherently beneficial use status.”
   ”Affordable housing,” the court said, “continues to foster the general welfare and constitutes a special reason to support a use variance.”
   ”I think it does provide all the protections it formerly did,” said Springfield Mayor Denis McDaniel. “What it does not provide is immunity from zoning issues across the board.”
   While noting he is not a lawyer and the ruling is fairly recent, he said he believes the issue is different from Springfield’s involvement with COAH because the case in Eastampton involves a private builder — Homes of Hope — not housing paid for with taxpayer money.
   ”This is not a case where they’re saying the town has to build something. It’s a case where the court is telling a town they can’t prevent someone else from building something,” he said, adding Eastampton may well appeal the ruling.
   In June, Springfield received its third round substantive certification from COAH, which lasts until 2018. Mayor McDaniel said he has no expectation that will change anytime soon.
   ”We’re the same place we’ve been in terms of wanting to be in compliance with the long, strong hand of COAH in order to protect the town from a builder’s remedy lawsuit,” he said.
   Municipalities are not compelled to provide affordable housing, but meeting COAH requirements protects them from lawsuits predicated on the Fair Housing Act.
   In Florence, Township Administrator Richard Brook said it is “way too early to gauge what the impact might be on Florence Township.
   ”It’s an interesting decision to say the least, because I would imagine most municipalities are under the impression that if you’ve met your affordable housing obligation you’re in pretty good shape,” he said.
   But without details about the case, he said it was hard for him to speculate on the merits of each side’s argument.
   Florence received its COAH certification about a month ago, he added.
   ”There’s nothing we’re changing at the present time. It’s our goal to just continue to meet our affordable housing obligation in accordance with the COAH plan we submitted to the state.”
[email protected]