Chester Boro Approves Affordable Housing on Three Lots
300 Main Street, the site of the old Municipal Building, misses the cut as the mayor and council attempt to reach the June 30 deadline.
With almost a million dollars hanging in the balance, Chester Borough Mayor Bob Davis vowed back in January that the borough would not miss the June 30 deadline.
At the May 16 meeting of the mayor and council, Davis and the council came one step closer after a long discussion on the impending, COAH-imposed construction of affordable housing units in the borough that resulted in the council voting to move forward on eleven potential housing units on three separate properties within the borough’s limits.
The motion passed by a 4-1 margin and includes the further exploration of the construction of a combination of 11 affordable housing units on properties located at 275 Main St., 235 U.S. 206 and 310 U.S. 206.
After months of studies by a committee summoned by David Banisch Associates, the Borough Council was presented with options to salvage the approximately $900,000 it has collected from developers and holds in reserve for COAH-related affordable housing projects. The borough had a deadline of June 30 to properly allocate the funds for affordable housing projects.
With the borough needing to reach a total of 37 additional units of affordable housing under the third round of COAH, another property that was discussed to be designated for affordable housing units, but was not approved for further exploration, was the property at 300 Main St. Chester Borough Mayor Robert L. Davis was particularly interested in a plan that would house anywhere from 16 to 24 of these units, which would have cost approximately $746,000 and would have greatly reduced the number of units that still needed to be constructed.
“Frankly, guys, I think that 300 Main Street ought to be a part of our game,” Davis said. “I think the idea of taking that property and being done with that property as far as borough’s concerend, and being able to move that money to our general ledger, is a positive.”
Some members of the council, like Gary Marshuetz, were hesitant to designate as much of that particular property to affordable housing, stating that perhaps some of the property could instead be designated for commercial or professional interests. This would take away the impact of such a dense population on a two-acre parcel of land while making an affordable housing development on the property less of an eyesore to those coming into the borough’s central business district.
“I like the idea of having a mixed use, and my concern is that 300 Main Street is right in the center of town and could be considered a corridor into the town,” Marshuetz said.
In light of this, Davis responded by saying that there would not be as much of a difference in the impact of an affordable housing project on the land as opposed to any other building project.
“We know in the future, probably there’s going to be three (buildings) on that site,” Davis said. “Do you want a front box that’s a restaurant? If you look behind a restaurant, you have garbage. Do you want dumpsters behind a restaurant where affordable housing is going to sit, behind that? The question that comes down the road is, ‘What do you vision for the site in total?’”
Another question brought up is how tenants for the new affordable housing units would be selected, and who comprises the pool of possible tenants. Anybody who meets certain low-income criteria and hears of the advertised developments is eligible for application before being selected at random.
“You can’t discriminate. Anybody can apply, and anybody who meets the criteria is selected from a hat,” said Councilwoman Jennifer Cooper Napolitano. “It’s not something where you can say who can apply; it’s open to anybody, anywhere who meets the criteria.”
Davis sees this as an opportunity for many of the college graduates returning to the area to gain independence while staying in the area for a lower than average cost.
“This actually gives our kids an opportunity to live in a place that is provided locally, as opposed to living in a lower-cost area,” Davis said.
Above all else, however, could be the fact that the borough has made progress on establishing more affordable housing units within its boundaries, eliminating the chance that the state will come through after the June 30 deadline and eliminate the affordable housing trust funds previously granted to the borough.
“I don’t know about you, but I’ve voiced and said that I don’t want our $900,000 to go back to the state,” Davis said.
Robert Davis
7:56 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Gerard, In the middle of your story for affordable housing you used the name "Lewis". I believe you meant to use the name "Davis" as in Mayor Davis.
Russ Crespolini
8:50 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Mr. Mayor I think you are trying to steal credit from poor Lewis who made some excellent points!
Seriously, thanks for pointing that out, I should have caught it last night when I was reading it over. It is fixed now.
Kat
9:08 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
There are a few apartments and rented single family homes scattered throughout the Borough - off and on Main Street. To me, these buildings appear messy and run-down. For example - dirt on the buildings in need of power washing, peeling paint, broken furniture in the yard(s), cars scattered about, etc.
While I don't know who would reside in the affordable housing units being discussed here, I can only hope that the buildings are maintained in a better fashion than what exists currently. However, what exists currently is likely to exist going forward.
And I don't think for one second that "our kids" will rent these apartments so they can stay local. We all know that most kids returning to their home towns (i.e. after college) choose to stay with their parents until they save enough money to move to another town that offers a younger lifestyle suitable for them.
Mayor Davis is quoted as saying "... I don’t want our $900,000 to go back to the state." Greed always clouds the ability to decide wisely.
CAR
11:00 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
One more reason to move, but then again this should lower my property taxes significantly! UGH
Robin
3:59 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Great comments Kat. Kat, maintaining a commercial building is not the town's responsibility, it is the owners. However, the town has a responsibility to enforce their own ordinances, which it clearly ignores.
I guess Mayor Davis doesn't live near Main Street, does he? Any of those COAH buildings would not even be on his radar. I agree with Gary Marshuetz, commercial properties integrated with COAH--and what's wrong with a restuarant? We need to bring people into town, not turn them away. As far as planning affordable housing for college students, Mr. Mayor, please look at your town's demographics. The sidewalks are rolled up at 8:00 pm. This is a family oriented community. Most young "professional" adults want to live in an urban area. Recent housing articles state there has been a shift away from the suburbs, and not just for young adults. Retirees are making the move as well. Maybe if the Mayor and Council looked at the big picture, something would happen. Seems like they only care about bldg. anything so their $900,000 isn't lost. How long has this been on their agenda, and still they're not finished debating this. Gee, seems like only yesterday (oh, it was), they were "working with the business owners" and trying to work with them to better the downtown and bring in more traffic. I have not seen many positives in Chester Boro for quite some time. The only ongoing correspondence I see from the Town revolves around the Mayor's "Save the Park" agenda.
Russ Crespolini
8:21 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Great great points, guys. But playing devil's advocate here...say the mayor and council decided against moving on this and they gave up the $900,000? How would that sit with you? This may be a "damned if you do damned if you don't" situation. Thanks for the discussion, its really interesting to hear everyone's thoughts.
Kat
6:14 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
Good question Russ, and my immediate response is this: if I were offered money with the stipulation that the money be used for something that I believe would cause eventual problems, I would refuse the money.
If I understand this situation correctly, Chester Boro is being offered $900,000 with the stipulation that the money be used for affordable housing only. Is this correct? If I'm wrong, I'd welcome a correction.
This is an interesting discussion. There are many people in situations who, for a variety of reasons, benefit from affordable housing. From what I have seen however, affordable housing generally falls into disrepair, negatively affects the surrounding area(s), and leaders are negligent in enforcing rules to maintain the properties.
Leaders need to take a step back and reassess this situation clearly. Just because someone offers you money doesn't mean you have to take it, especially when that money serves to influence or persuade. There's a word for that, you know.
TwinBoroMom
8:54 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
The Borough is mandated, just as is every other NJ community, to provide low income housing based on a state formula. The money to which you refer is collected from builders and homeowners and must be used for that purpose or be lost to the state. If the state takes the money, it does not release the borough from it's obligation under the law.
Russ Crespolini
1:02 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
Yup. TwinboroMom has it there. The obligation is still there, but the money would be gone. Now, there is a good argument to be made that Chester has too many mandated units due to the relatively small size.
Oldtimer
9:50 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
"From what I have seen however, affordable housing generally falls into disrepair, negatively affects the surrounding area"
Could you cite some specific examples. I have seen quite a few "affordable housing" projects in the area that are maintained better than neighboring.privately owned properties.
Barbie Jones
6:34 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
COAH Standstill Creating Havoc for New Jersey Businesses and Municipalities
http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=c901e0b3-3343-4ce3-9f64-4852a98559d4
Barbie Jones
8:46 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
The New Jersey State Leage of Municipalities "supports A-2717, sponsored by Assemblymen Bucco and DiMaio, which would extend for four years the requirement that a municipality commit to expend its trust fund dollars." "We would urge municipalities with a trust fund balance to reach out immediately to the Governor’s Office and to your State Legislators, and ask for an extension to the July 17 deadline. The loss of these dollars, based on an arbitrary deadline, may push these costs on to your taxpayers."
Maybe the Boro does not need to act so fast ?
http://www.njslom.org/letters/2012-0409-afford-housing.html