By Nicole M. Wells, Special Writer
CRANBURY — The New Jersey Council on Affordable Housing’s latest mandate on the number of affordable housing units the township must produce drew concern from members of the Township Committee, at a recent meeting.
During the meeting in June, township Affordable Housing Planning Consultant Mary Beth Lonergan discussed the latest obligation set forth by COAH with the committee and explained possible impact on the township.
According to Committeeman Jay Taylor, Cranbury is required to produce 557 new affordable housing units, as per the new COAH rules.
There are 107 units already existing within the township, according to Committeeman Taylor.
The Council on Affordable Housing was created by the state Legislature to administer the Fair Housing Act of 1985, which prohibits economic discrimination by the state and municipalities "in the exercise of their land use powers," according to the Fair Share Housing Center’s website.
According to Ms. Lonergan, there are 50 to 60 other municipalities in the state facing similarly large affordable housing obligations.
Regional Contribution Agreements (RCA’s) are also no longer allowed, according to the new round of rules, Committeeman Taylor said.
Previously, RCA’s permitted a town like Cranbury, with a limited number of jobs, to transfer its obligation to a town like Carteret, which has more employment opportunities, Committeeman Taylor said. Cranbury would fund the building of the affordable units in Carteret and receive credits toward its obligation.
The two municipalities had to be in the same housing region and the agreement had to be approved by COAH before the transfer of funds could take place.
In a township with a housing stock of about 1,371 homes, a little less than half of them would be affordable housing units, if built to COAH’s specifications, Committeeman Taylor said.
The affordable housing rules were not meant to dramatically alter the landscape of a community, Ms. Lonergan said, with a 20 percent cap put in place to ensure this would not happen. The cap is designed to guarantee that no more than 20 percent of a community’s housing stock would be affordable housing units.
The formula the state uses in determining a community’s Fair Share Housing Obligation is based on the amount of available land and employment numbers, according to Committeeman Taylor.
Ms. Lonergan said during the meeting that she’s unsure why Cranbury’s obligation numbers are so high but that it may have to do with preserved farmland being mistaken for developable land.
"It appears that COAH believes you have hundreds of acres of vacant, developable land," she said. "I printed out your 2001 state plan and I know that COAH, from 30,000 feet up, did not look at zoning. They should have looked at land use, but, from 30,000 feet up, they looked at just vacant parcels."
According to Committeeman Taylor, the township has been trying to determine why it is being assigned such a large number of units to build.
"We’ve filed OPRA (Open Public Records Act) requests, we’re not getting responses from COAH regarding their methodology," he said. "It doesn’t take into account towns like Cranbury."
According to Committeeman Taylor, Cranbury was trying to solve the problem of affordable housing long before COAH came into being in 1985.
According to its website, Cranbury Housing Associates (CHA) was organized in 1963 with the aim of improving and providing for "the housing needs of the low-income, disadvantaged and permanent residents of the area."
It is a volunteer, non-profit corporation consisting of mainly Cranbury residents.
"I think we’ve done a tremendous job providing affordable housing," Committeeman Taylor said, referring to the work of CHA. "It’s frustrating for towns like Cranbury that we’re being penalized for being proactive."
In addition to the possible overburdening of the township’s school, Committeeman Taylor said that Cranbury would run the risk of making those living in the new affordable units feel excluded from the rest of the community.
The existing affordable housing within the township is inclusionary, he said, because it is all located on the same side of Route 130. If the township is compelled to build another 557 units, it may be difficult to situate them near other residential zones, due to land constrictions.
The deadline for filing comments with COAH on housing obligation numbers was Aug. 1. COAH is required to address all comments, according to Ms. Lonergan.
"Our hope is that they (COAH) will accept our explanation," Committeeman Taylor said. "We’re the outlier."

