##VIDEO ID:fiTfWevlcX4## forming the prospective need obligation number for the township um and also just kind of share the components that make that up um and then finally I'll touch on um some of the compliance process um next steps that the township is going to be making uh you know to to move towards compliance um and opportunities for additional bonus crediting um to you know account for the this number um and satisfy the need um and please feel free to you know provide any questions um in the Q&A box as I go um I'm going to try and answer them as we go a little bit if I if I see something that's really pertinent to what I'm talking about um I don't want to force people to wait you know this is a small group we can you know kind of Move Along here all right so I'm going to go ahead and share my slides in my screen let's hope this works okay just give me a high sign if you can see okay very good all right so as I mentioned we'll be talking this evening about um the fourth round time lines allocations and then the planning next steps okay um so let's I'm going to get right into the timeline to really kind of talk concretely about you know what steps the township needs to effectuate and what this process is going to look like as we move into 2025 here we are at the end of 20124 um you know a lot has happened in the in recent months on the legislation um you know but really this is now where action starts to be taken um for municipalities to move into the compliance phase and start to follow the letter of of the new law um so the first deadline that is coming up is January 31st of 2025 um that is the deadline for the Township's governing body to adopt um a resolution containing what the obligation number um for uh the prospective need allocation uh will be um the uh following adoption of the number by resolution the municipality must transmit that to DCA um to the uh administrative entity uh there and um so then that number is recorded and kind of filed and cataloged with DCA that the township has taken their action and filed it um then there is a one- Monon period um through February 28th where any interested party um May file an objection or a challenge to the obligation number that the municipality has has uh adopted um so these uh challenges then are submitted within that one-month period um to the affordable housing dispute resolution program it's a new program that's being stood up um it's technically with the administrator of the courts uh it's kind of an interesting way that they've they've nested this uh in the legislation um and so challenges can be filed um essentially through the administrative of the court and then there is a a review process uh of the the challenge um and that review period is from March essentially from March 1st through the end of March 31st um so the end of March is the deadline for the affordable housing dispute resolution program to issue their final decision on the obligation number um whether they affirm the municipal municipality's adopted number um or if they propose an amendment to the MP municipalities adopted number or they could outright reject it and default to the DCA number um so what's really really important for planning purposes is that you know we could end the month of December here on the Milburn side of the table with saying this is our number we're going to move forward into a planning process with this number um if there is a challenge then a subsequent adjudication of the decision of what the number is we may not have affirmation of what the number will be until April so it's really really important for us to be dynamic uh on the township side um ready to kind of you know see what the number is and be prepared to respond to any inquiries or challenges um and also just be cognizant uh that the number may change um from there that's it's it's also important because um the timeline is going to get very very fast um because the um New housing element and fair share plan which will be the 10-year document that will plan uh the implementation of the prospective need allocation accommodation for the period between 2025 and 2035 that new plan document needs to be adopted by the township planning board um and endorsed by the governing body uh all by June 30th um and if we think about June it's typically a one month one meeting per month planning board meeting schedule um the governing body you know start summer vacations are starting so um it's the the window of time to act in that period gets a little bit tight um there's also a requirement that any housing element in Fair Share Plan be posted for public inspection 20 days prior to any action being taken at the planning board so we really really are going to need to have a housing element fair share plan complete a draft done for public inspection I would say by miday at the latest um so if you string together these dates April 1 you could get your your number um and then miday you have to have a plan available for public inspection we really are not going to have much time um if we wait until that point so that's why it's really really important it's great that we have this group um and the township is being proactive to sort to facilitate this conversation and advance steps to address uh identify strategies to address the prospective need obligation moving beyond uh the June 30th deadline to adopt the housing element and fair share plan um there is a deadline then for another challenge period um whereby any um interested party can entertain a challenge to the proposed mechanism that the township has identified to satisfi the prospective need um they could challenge a zoning designation or challenge that a property may not you know could be able to be developed in that capacity to to support uh accommodating the the number of units perhaps um other challenges you know could be identified in this process um so interested parties now have a second challenge period to the essentially the implementing mechanisms uh that the township identifies to comply with the prospective Med obligation satisfaction real quick because I think it would be a benefit to everyone um how do they Define who can be an intervenor object jeor do you need to um you know own land that you want to develop or can you be you know just a random developer that says I want to at some point in the next 10 years build something in Milburn and so I think you know their their number is not appropriate and then um how can organizations like fair share also intervene it's a great question um you know the legislation does uh contain the words interested party so you know really someone does need to have some level of standing um within the process what that will be and how that is clearly defined is still a little bit subject to interpretation as the affordable housing dispute resolution program still finalizes their rule process and their rule adoption we don't yet have those rules at this point um so my my assumption is that given the interested party terminology that someone has to have standing as far as a relationship in a property or um you know a history of development pattern within the municipality some kind of you know grounds upon which they can enter into the into the case however we don't really have clear definition on that at this point just yet um but I hope that we do get that fairly quickly um especially because we're approaching the first challenge period uh which will be the pendency of the month of uh February for us to you know hear who may be interested parties that are intervening as far as the number obligation adoption goes um but but that would be my initial take given the the use of the terminology of interested party uh yes Miss past yeah I just have a quick addition uh clarification what you just said what if there's a a Citizens group or residents group that forms that wants to object is that uh defined as an intervenor or interested party I again this is kind of getting its legal interpretation but based on my interpretation of a planner as far as what an interested party is defined in the municipal land use law um given that these would be residents of the municipality I would say that they do have standing as an interested party okay thank you it's not an official legal opin but just based on how I'm reading these te Lees I would say so okay any other questions before I okay just just to clarify on that though what we have seen uh over the past few years um is that the courts have not considered the residents to be an interested party because they seem to claim that the residents are represented by the township uh and so when residents have tried to intervene uh in these matters they've been denied the ability to do so um and I so far I believe that uh fair share housing is one of the few uh non-developer interested parties yeah I my my cavat clarification on that which is where this kind of changes in the process is that the third round you know was really because it was settled in the courts between you know Municipal entities and fair share which became an intervening party um I think that's where you know there was some kind of protection of that that engagement of the settlement um as far as others coming into the process now that this is more of a legislative process and you know set forth within um statute I I don't know how that changes it that you know again I'm not commenting from legal opinion but I do think that the Dynamics of this process in the fourth round are a little bit different um than how it was adjudicated in thir in the third round just to character yeah Mr KRA um yes can you hear me yes yeah just a question on on on it's actually technically one slide before the one we're on uh but that you know the deadline the March 31st deadline for affordable housing to dispute the what what what goes into that if you know so that's also what we're still kind of waiting for final rules as far as the process that um you know the affordable housing dispute resolution program will go through um we did I did receive earlier today some correspondents um from the courts um indic what some of the framework will be I'm still kind of going through that to ascertain exactly what that process will look like um but they do have some kind of iterative process where it explains you know the numbers come in and you know there may be a request for followup information from the municipality um as far as how they did the methodology calculation or what why their numbers different um so there will be a little bit of I I believe an iterative process um and I do recall that I did see that there was some language that they would potentially be a settlement where they would bring together the parties to discuss you know why the numbers are different and how they can you know come to some sense of agreement so it may be more of an ingrained process than what was initially thought at the outset that you know the numbers would just go in and we'd get an answer um you know but I think we'll get more clarity as as we go into the new year as to how that that process is going to work thank you sure um and I do see uh Frank that there are questions coming in I can't see them so if you could just help kind of if if any of those just because I'm sharing my screen I just don't want to make sure I want to make sure I don't miss anything um a resident asked if the township rejects the dca's uh October numbers when does the township not accept the d uh DCA number or must the township adopt a different number by January 31st so yes the township has to adopt a number by January 31st um the township uh it's important and I'll get into this when I get into the methodology section discussion the DCA numbers are non-binding those are advisory numbers um and you know DCA has characterized it as much that they have prepared these numbers um they did it one time they did you know a Statewide land analysis they did a Statewide you know income analysis they did all these analyses and put it together um and you know in presentations that we've heard from DCA they've admitted that you know there may be better more accurate local data that can supplement or support or you know adjust or amend um what's been done so they are um open and receptive at least staff have indicated that they are um open and receptive to seeing some of that feedback on things things I think particularly on the developable land piece um you know I'm a GIS analyst myself it is very hard to Aggregate and crunch uh spatial data in a Statewide format across 21 counties um you know when you're doing stream buffers steep slopes all these things so you know they have admitted that you know there may be issues or inconsistencies that need to be corrected so um you know I think it's important to to note two things one the numbers are not compulsory you're not required to adopt those numbers and two you know I think that there is willingness um at least to to see you know what issues there may be um as far as how those numbers can be addressed um now what cannot fundamentally change is the methodology which is clearly within the law as far as what you're supposed to count and how the process counts um but that I think that's where there may be some discrepancy in the numbers um and you know municipalities are free to adopt uh their own number um the DCA number is really just advisory at this point okay all right keep going um so again I I mentioned there's a second challenge period which really challenges the implementation mechanisms that are identified in the housing element repair share plan um so that challenge period uh concludes August 31st of 2025 um and then there's a much longer period of time between August between essentially September 1st through the end of uh 2025 uh within which uh the municipality um uh can work to settle um and challenge or to provide explanation related to the requested um changes to the plan element or modifications um essentially those items that have been challenged you know the municipality can prepare response or discuss uh say there's a property owner that said well I can actually develop more than what you've indicated in the plan um they can you know kind of negotiate those processes and come to some some term of settlement um by the end of the year and then moving into 20 2026 um March 15th of 2026 is the deadline for all municipalities to uh complete any amendments to the housing element fair share plan as a result of the challenge that was issued um and then also to adopt all of the implementing ordinances including overlay zones sight specific zones whatever whatever else has been identified um those mechanisms need to be effectuated by March 15 of 2026 uh in the municipal code uh Mr C yeah quick question on the August 31st deadline for interested parties and this is teeing off a little uh Jean Jean and and Frank's Jean's question Frank's comment or Frank's question too who who do we think the the likely interested parties are going to be is it going to be fair share for sure potentially could be fair share housing center um could be a property owner that you know is seeking to develop or you know effectuate a large development project um if they were not included in the process um as a as a property able to support or accommodate affordable housing development that could be an interest a party that would you know come forward and you know say that they have property and that that that property was not included for example um but you know I think really it's it's kind of those those types of things on the implementation phase thanks sure okay um so that's kind of the the broad process that we have set forth over the next year as far as how we need to move forward so the most immediate thing um which I'm going to kind of shift into now is thinking about the number and how we need to um you know how we're thinking about the number and evaluating what the the prospective need obligation number is and how we got to what that number is and I think that that's important for this group to kind of understand for everybody to understand how the number is calculated so as I mentioned DCA has released their non-binding calculations um they were released it was not officially October 20th that was the statutory date it was actually released slightly before that um they issued their report on the fourth round uh Municipal fair share obligations they released the complete full methodology document um they also released um a report of their methodology that was by an independent peer review um which is very helpful uh complete workbook um and then also the JS data used to calculate the land capacity Factor um uh in comparison to the third round process this is much more of an open book and I'm happy to share that um I'm a member of the housing committee for the New Jersey Planning Association and you know we we wrote a letter to DCA asking them to Please Release all this information um so that it is not an opaque process and that we keep transparency and kind of assure everybody that there is you know numbers behind this and it's not just some stew being cooked up in some back room um so now we can all see how the numbers work and how this process is done um the complete methodology is available online I have the link here but if you just Google the fourth round numbers from DCA they have an entire dedicated web page and all the links to all the materials to download um and again as I mentioned municipalities may use the DCA numbers as guidance um and prepare updated calculations informed by more accurate local conditions or values or figures um but again as I note the calcul the calculation methodology is set within law so you can't deviate and calculate a different way but you can kind of change some of those data inputs if you may go ahead Mr K yeah just a a quick question on uh where is there are we able to access the map uh that they did on of of our town indicating what what uh parts of town they're saying are are developable versus not so they um the DCA published um what's known as a a GIS rest service which is just kind of like a a layer that you can see on a map that kind of sits on top of it um I have successfully extracted it out of that Sur and now have a local copy and I'm going through the process of looking at it with respect to Parcels in mbour to kind of do that confirmation process um so we do have that available we are going through a process to confirm that these identified developable areas are in fact or maybe not developable um and we're going to go through a process and we'll report back to this group um you know on our findings and let you know okay because that that might be something the group might want to look at because uh there might be in my mind at least there might be some citizen input about a particular piece of property that that without without sounding critical that we missed yeah um you know that somebody knows something about right you know and and you know not to I don't want to you know DCA at all you know they did a a Yan's job you know really kind of going through and doing this Statewide analysis but you know obviously there are going to be deficiencies or errors or omissions that happen through the process um you know so I can tell you though um and and you'll see this in the numbers that the land capacity factor is the smallest component of milburn's prospective need obligation allocation calculation so um I I believe it was only about 25 acres that have been identified as developable uh in line with the developable standards that are set with forth within the methodology so um it's really not a big piece but we're going to go through it and make sure that things are are okay go ahead Frank did you have a question uh yeah so um are you aware of any lawsuits that are currently on the books challenging the methodology the DCA use um well I mean I think that you know in some respects um the you know current monville case of which I believe now 30 municipalities have enjoined is essentially challenging some components of the methodology um you know I think that the the land piece is is not Paramount or critical in that that piece um you know I think that dca's um comments and statements that they've made you know in public you know at the the session that they held at the league of municipalities for example indicated that you know they that there would be opportunities for them to correct that and you know add address um some issues related to that so um I don't anticipate you know any arguments or lawsuits or challenges over the land piece specifically but I do know that of course the Modi case is challenging other components of methodology um not necessarily the data inputs for example and just so everyone is aware Milburn is a to that lawsuit and there be a hearing tomorrow but I'll run the link to that after that's right okay okay um so first kind of the Baseline number so how do we get to the total number of units that are allocated um across each of these regions so first of all the state is divided into six affordable housing regions um each of the regions is supposed to be anchored by um you know a more major Urban or uh you know key Center City uh type of location um you know so region one consists of Sussex pic Bergen and Hudson counties anchored by Jersey City um we uh Milbourne is located within region two um which consists of Essex Morris Union and Warren County is of course anchored by the city of Newark um and so what the the Baseline number the calculation of the total prospective need units for for the forthcoming period of 2025 to 2035 is calculated by measuring the change in total households between 2010 and 2020 um dividing that total change by two and a half um and to estimate the share of that household growth that is uh for low and moderate income households um and then that number essentially becomes the prospective need to be allocated across the region so here within region 2 S6 Forest Union Warren counties as I mentioned um between 2010 and 2020 there was growth of 51264 new households um within the region um when you divide that by 2 and a half you result in 2056 low and moderate income households and that equals the total perspective need to be allocated across all the municipalities in Region 2 yes Mr Bradford you're on yeah um I I'm struggling a bit with the arithmetic because um the typical formula is 8020 uh you know if you build 100 units 20 or affordable housing yet the um the calculation used in here is 40% that's right so we would have to build in in in a you know all other things being equal we'd have to build twice as much as we need uh under an 8020 formulation am I reading this correctly that is correct yes yeah that's the way that it's been this is the way that the the prospective need number has been calculated in all prior rounds too so and this is just the way that it's been set up and of course the 8020 you know obviously that's an implementation mechanism for the inclusionary mix typical um that we do see um but it's a it's an implementation mechanism that theoretically Works economically for the developer that's correct as far as Financial feasibility yes yeah so it's just important to note that this that the methodology as far as calculating the number is really essentially a 40% um figure of the the household growth that was experienced in the prior 10 round to desial census period okay all right so moving forward so um so that is so 20,000 units are the total number of units to be allocated across all of Region 2 um the how the units get allocated um is the result of an averaging of three individual component factors um the first is the income capacity Factor the second is the non-residential valuation change factor and the third is the land capacity or developable land developable land Factor those terms can be used interchange by a lot of different folks um but I think that DCA is using more so the land capacity Factor um for their terminology and I'm going to walk through each of these uh in detail in just a moment um the allocation factor is used as a percentage so when you average that out and you get that resulting number it's considered a percentage um and that's applied to the total obligation and that results to the number of units so 20,000 uh units region wide times you know 2% you know that's the the number of the share of units for that municipality for example um so just a couple of things that I wanted to note also on this slide so Region 2 consists of 104 municipalities in Essex moris Union and Warren counties again that need to absorb that 2056 units um within region 2 there are 13 qualified Urban Aid municipalities which are exempt uh from the prospective need allocation um so be due to that exemption status only 91 municipalities are assigned the prospective need allocation so really that 20,000 figure is being applied to the 90 one municipalities that um are not exempt uh pursuant of the law okay so now oh yes Miss past go ahead you're on mute still sorry on the exempt municipalities is Monclair one of those yes Monclair is one wow how did they determine that Monclair should be exempt do you know so the so the exemption criteria is pretty detailed in that um the first municipality must be um an Urban Aid municipality which is a a policy listing um I'm not exactly sure which state entity does the listing for the Urban Aid municipalities it could be DCA um to qualify you know it's a a listing for Urban Aid status um however not all Urban Aid municipalities automatically qualify there are sub Urban Aid municipalities that are participating in the uh prospective Med allocation process from there um certain there's three sub criteria for Urban Aid municipalities to meet uh one is if they're you know of a of a certain size or certain density um they automatically are exempt so larger municipalities are automatically exempt if they're uh have a density between a certain range and then a a low share of vacant land they're largely built out then they um Also may be exempt in that in that place um and then there's I think one3 criteria about um ratio of like uh value of vacant land the there's some sub criteria so um Monclair does meet it on one of the density criterias I think they're in the middle tier category um for being uh an exempt municipality thank you I find that amazing thanks sure okay um so next the income capacity Factor um so this is the I'm going to talk through each of the three component factors um so this is determined by a ing the municipal share of the regional sum of differences between the median household incomes and the same calculation but weighted by the number of households of your municipality um so um if you think about a high income Community um with a small number of households is not going to have a a big income capacity Factor but a high income Community with a lot of households that will have a higher income capacity Factor so there's a waiting by size of the community um to kind of scale um that and the theory is that um uh you know the policy Theory you know I'm not not opining my personal Theory or anything but I believe when they were initially developing methodology the theory was that higher income communities had more capacity to absorb you know balance um of lower income uh households I guess is the theory that they were thinking of um so for uh the milburn's income capacity factor which I have listed here in the second bullet um the Township's income capacity factor is 3.06 um this is the highest among all Region 2 uh municipalities uh the non-residential valuation change Factor this is determined by calculating the changes and non-residential property valuations in the municipality since the beginning of the Gap period in 1999 through the most recent available uh tax year data which is in 2023 was published in February of this year the new data will not come out until February of 25 for this for the 2024 year um so we'll just miss it to incorporate into the methodology um so we have all the data now for the 2023 year um so it's the change in the mpali non-residential valuations divided by the regional total change in non-residential valuations uh to determine the municipality share of nonre non-residential valuation growth and for the purposes of this analysis the non-residential valuation is all commercial assessments and Industrial assessment properties um exclusive of any residential so mixed used properties are not counted um you know this is just for um uh uh commercial and Industrial uh assessments and the theory behind this is that growth in this is this is technically a proxy for employment growth um the theory is that you know if you see an increase in valuation of uh commercial or industrial assets um there must be an increase in employment or number of jobs within that Community um you know and housing should follow jobs so that's really kind of the the theory behind it you know how this this Factor was included into the formula yes Mr kro yeah do do you think there's a a a the ability for us to challenge that that aspect that Hey listen we have a you know a non-residential property that's worth X dollar and there now there's they're going to assign an assumption that that means so many X jobs is there a way for us to this is where it gets a little bit you know I I would have to explore kind of how we would think about that um the the as I mentioned you know the this is this first this first bu point this is Express language from the legislation so this says exactly like how to do the calculation so we would have to think about how we could think about characterizing that or addressing that or identifying any nuances to the data change that there that we may have experienced in Milburn um you know it's certainly a question that we could evaluate um but I think on the face it's a little bit difficult um to to to kind of deviate away too much from the data that that is required to be used as set forth within the bill um yes Frank so we had some questions come in um oh sure I don't know if you can see them now I did make you a co-host but um one of the questions is are the urban exempt municipalities excluded from these rankings so do how do they factor into the calculations um are the urban exempt municipalities excluded from the rankings as far as the highest income question is that I guess um well there wasn't more context than that I yeah so right so essentially in if you if anybody can go and download the DCA workbook and see the Excel table all the urban municipalities the qualified Urban exempt municipalities have zero values or dash line values so they are not Quantified um you know as far as having an income capacity or you know any of these sub factors they were not calculated for those places um so the the value the rankings that I'm providing here are just for those that have um you know have have a number Quantified for those participating 91 municipalities um so we had another question uh which is can you explain the theory behind excluding some cities um there's another person that uh asked a similar question yeah I mean I think that you know I think what's a really ear important um foundationally in this process is um the you know the the the setup for this entire process was set forth back during the first round which was done in the 80s and first second round you know 80s and the early 90s um you know and I think at that time um you know our Urban places here in New Jersey and this is you know I'm I'm kind of speaking philosophically here this isn't necessarily you know the the intent but as a planner I you know I'm thinking this is probably what um why this was set up this way and that you know urban communities at that time in the you know late 80s or early 90s were viewed as um places where there weren't wasn't ample opportunity for residents to advance or you know gain access to Quality education or you know safe communities or other things and I think believe that the theory was that by creating opportunities outside those places um we would see an opportunity for um you know res new residents to thrive um I think on the other side of that is some of these uh Urban places at that time um were much more you know downtrodden and um you know divested um and you know putting the burden of having to you know repair their communities and then build new infra new residential units on top of that um was just not something that I think that was seen as as an appropriate policy solution at that point um you know so I think that that is kind of the root of it um you know I do think that um at this point you know obviously the state is in a much different place um Urban places are you know we've seen a big Renaissance throughout the 2000s of our Urban places here in New Jersey and across the country um you know I don't know you know this is just me wearing my planner policy hat I don't know if this is really the best policy solution but this is what um you know the state has moved forward with and uh codified within law at this point so you know just kind of advancing what's already been in place uh Miss pastoret you're on mute still I don't know okay um okay I'll move on to the next one oh uh just rounding this out so on the non-residential valuation Factor um Milburn um's non-residential valuation Factor you'll see is 4.6 um so this factor is actually higher than the income capacity factor which was just over three um and this is the sixth highest in region two there's actually five municipalities with a higher um non-residential valuation Factor um than this one um sorry I did figure out how unmute my question is that they're looking at real estate values nonresidential uh what about all these buildings that are sitting there empty or employees that don't turn up at those buildings but work from home is that being considered so I I just want to I just want to make sure we clarify that it's um it's not real estate values it is uh it is tax assessment value so it's the um it's the land improvements the um value improvements and you know obviously then the total improvements um for that property so it's it's um not necessarily Market based it's really the tax assessment based um and there is an equalizing Factor so that everybody is kind of equalized in that process um but that is a great point you know and and we've seen kind of a transition and change in a lot of different Dynamics um you know um I can also say that you know I did um Co-op or white paper as part of the housing committee work um to um you know talk about this non-residential valuation change issue and what we saw initially in a lot of communities is the biggest growth is in some of our warehouse communities where you know new Amazon warehouses were constructed which are actually low employment centers so we do have kind of a mismatch of you know using this as a proxy for employment um is it the best solution you know I think that there are ways to improve it but unfortunately you know the legislation did not um you know amend to how we we thought it would should be okay um Frank did you wanna yes we had another question um the question is sorry let me clarify a few slides earlier it was mentioned the DCA calculation showed the Three Counties had approximately 50,000 new households and that would calculate to 20,000 low to medium housing need do these numbers include the excluded municipalities if so I guess that means the other 91 towns have to cover the needs of the excluded municipalities that's correct mhm and um another question uh how does the mall affect uh our non-residential valuation Factor does that artificially drive that up um I I don't know about artificially but it certainly is a very large asset um that has obviously grown in value over time um you know so uh the the increase in value of the mall certainly is probably one of the main driving factors I would say um to this 4.6 factor that we experienced here Milburn um you know with it being you know the sixth highest of the 91 municipalities um across Region 2 okay who's the highest if we're sixth um you're getting me on the spot I believe it was somebody somebody with a lot of Warehouse development I think it was I want to say maybe Lyndon okay sorry like 10% they are not an exempt municipality I know so but I can certainly find that out and let you know okay all right and then moving on to the developable land Factor the land capacity Factor um so this is determined by estimating the area of developable land within the municipalities boundaries and Regional boundaries which may accommodate development um so you know DCA went through an exercise where they used 220 uh satellite imagery and assessed the land use land cover condition uh screening for predominantly Agricultural and grass and forested or grassland areas uh essentially native Landscapes to identify developable land areas um and then removed uh stream buffers environmental constrained areas steep slope areas um other areas that would be encumbered from development um and then the resulting and they also did screen those against uh Parcels or properties that were you know identified as vacant um or you know under Municipal ownership or you know a local government ownership um and uh you know that resulting value or number um is you know informing the amount of developable land within each of the municipalities then thereby across the region um so we are going through going to go through a process as I mentioned earlier to Screen through those properties the it's roughly I think it's about 24 25 acres here in Milburn um to confirm um you know what how those um you know overlay on the map and if if they are in fact developable or not um I see uh I I can see the question now Frank so I see Mr Feld I see your question um is the developable land numbers consistent with the D proposed uh rules and regulations um no uh the proposed rules have not yet been finalized or adopted I think at this point um the these uh developable areas are just with respect to um the existing uh regulations and rules in place at this point um and second to that uh just wanted to supplement and say that um the state plan has also gone through an update process and their uh the state plan draft has been released um and um is now going into the cross acceptance phase um there is a waiting factor for the developable land categories however that is not on the prospective state plan that is on the The Waiting Factor now within the analysis that DCA did is based on the 2001 state plan so we're still kind of using that older version at this point um so um so I see the next question how how to how to land uses like Al coures tennis course pools count as developable lands those lands do not um the DCA analysis is pretty sophisticated with respect to um analyzing the aerial imagery um they have other other uh other open lands or other um recreational land categories that typically encumber golf courses tennis courts uh you know those other types of recreational uses um however I will say that there are we what we've seen in some cases preliminarily and looking at this is you'll see kind of like forested areas along the edge of a golf course for example as being identified as developable but given the shape or configuration like those are not developable so there will be an opportunity for us to do that screening here in milour to to identify those areas yes Frank um so you know we have certain areas of town that flood um or prone flooding flood maps have changed over the years so the CMO zone for instance is that included or excluded or is that something that you have to analyze the G data to determine so um the DCA has indicated that they did use Flood information um you know but again I just want to note that it is um the the root base of it is for large swats of forested and agricultural areas so um you know we typically we're not seeing a lot within the CMO zone for example of those types of things um you know but the the DC has indicated that they did screen for flood flood prone areas um as well so we'll have to take a look and you know see exactly what what was resulted from that process okay um yes so and I just wanted to note so milburn's land capacity Factor as I mentioned is the smallest um component you know contributing to the calculation um at 0.46 um that factor and that ranks 42nd out of the 91 uh Region 2 municipalities um so uh then this slide kind of summarizes the the preceding slides around um the three different component factors and how we get to kind of the number that uh DCA has calculated for the township um so as I mentioned in the income capacity factor is 3.06% uh the non-residential valuation change factor is 4.6% the developable land factor is 0.46% which uh results in an averaging of these uh three values to 2.71% um so essentially thereby Milbourne is responsible for 2.71% of region 2's 2056 unit allocation and that gives us the 555 unit number that DCA has identified um as the prospective need obligation for the township any other questions about what uh I'm sorry what would be the if it's 555 using the 8020 the total number just you know as an ex the example even if that number goes down uh it would be how many total units then 80% Market 20% affordable yeah right right um sorry you're catching me on this but I'm like divide by 02 2700 units that's how many based on that number we would have to build that yeah OB at if that was all at um 8020 of course so and you know and I think what's important to note is that this is just the obligation number um that you know is the initial phase once we then move into the housing El fair share plan that's where we will do a vacant land adjustment for the municipality to um you know go through and screen that identify properties that can support this to lessen that number um and then there is also just a requirement um as set forth in the legislation um that just a share of that resulting number after the vacant land adjustment needs to be um satisfied through a realistic development potential um or actually you know yielded so you once we move into that process and I won't get into too many details on that that component phase uh this evening but that's really where um this group The Citizen Advisory Group and you know as we start to move into the housing element adoption drafting process um you know that's where we're going to have to start to think about those compliant compliance mechanisms and how we can draw down the number to more accurately reflect the conditions on the ground within the township okay just so the audience is clear that um that's a lengthy conversation uh the you know the various mechanisms that are available bonus credits Etc so we'll do another session uh in the future on just that particular aspect uh too much to do in one I do have a slide on bonus CR just so people can start to think about those so um I only have a couple more things to share so not too much more um uh so again as I mentioned the DCA report obligations are non-binding municipalities may consider these obligations and again this needs to be adopted um um by January 31st of 2025 um so really the next steps and this is kind of alluding to what we just talked about the the next steps following the obligation adoption are really to start moving into the phase of preparing the housing element and fair share plan after adoption of the numbers so starting to look at that vacant land adjustment opportunity um doing an analysis of the existing housing element and fair share plan identification of new sites opportunities to accommodate the obligation um what other compliance mechanisms we can identify or talk about such as overlays realistic sites for development um and then also expanding crediting opportunities and planning to maximize the credits available um under the crediting modifications uh that are available in the fourth round and my last slide here talks about some of those new crediting opportunities that the fourth round legislation has um so these are what what are called bonus credits um so up to 25% of your prospective need obligation can be satisfied through bonus credits so not units you can you know uh you know take 25% of the 555 number and you know essentially double count or one and a half count um units towards these so uh special needs housing opportunities essentially count as two units um anything that's municipally sponsored either through a land donation or a cost share mechanism um can count as uh two units so you know if you develop uh 75 units municipally sponsored that really counts as 150 units potentially 75 additional credits towards that um Market to Affordable conversion so that would be you know converting a market rate unit or purchasing a market rate unit converting to an affordable um and then of course 100% affordable housing developments um other new bonus credits that are that yield to half credit are Partnerships with nonprofits um sites within a half mile of Transit that includes bus or train service um senior units up to 10% of available senior units Redevelopment of a commercial sit so office conversion uh can yield a half bonus credit um incorporation of of additional very low income units or additional above and beyond the minimum required three-bedroom units uh and then also extending affordability control for units that may be expiring um in some municipalities that um you know did uh second round um rent controlled units or you know deed restricted units um some of those 30-year terms are coming up on expiration so now is a nice time to renew those uh for a new term uh you know and those can count as credits yes Mr cros yeah on the renewal or extension of the affordability controls What mechanisms are you see in that are being used by the towns to to to compel that or yes so that that's a great question um I know um and some some municipalities are leveraging their affordable housing trust funds through kind of a a loan program or a funding program um to give 10 to 15,000 for HVAC upgrades for um you know bathroom upgrades kitchen upgrades and an an exchange for the funds to improve the unit um you know there is a requirement that you know in order to encumber the funds or you know Avail yourself of the funds you have to sign on to extend the deed restriction um for a new period to keep the unit as an affordable unit for example so that's that's some things that some municipalities are doing do you think on going forward on new projects that that happen we can uh we can assist on a 40 year instead of a 30 and then have to pay them money down the road to get them to Extended um so I believe that the the new legislation I think requires in the fourth round that rental units have a 40-year um deed restriction period so I think that that has already been extended by default that it needs to be that 40-year period thank you sure I see Mr feld's Question in the Q&A just regarding um uh back backdating or you know applying backwards credits um there is ability to apply credits uh to uh round three projects that are coming online um you so that is that is an option to you know apply credits uh in those locations um the the one thing that that remains true though is that the the number of caps or the amount of the amount of credit is capped at 25% of the fourth round perspective need obligation so um you know just something that you have to kind of just think about globally where do you get your best bang for the buck kind of thing you know um do you do you want to put them on the third round ones or do you want to try and put on the fourth round ones to reduce the units you kind of have to to do a little bit of Numbers Game and that's part of what we'll do as we get into the housing element and fair share plan process yes this past your NE yeah gram are you aware how do we have an inventory of um our um Market current market rate units that could potentially be converted did that ever get done I know there was a request to have it done but to to look to see what our capacity within the township is currently for unit as far as number of existing market rate units I'm saying units that are in our Township that based on the rents and so forth um could be considered for conversion to Affordable if approached you know by the township to the to the property owners there was some U request for that over years now I I just never saw it I never saw it you know shared with the public or anything like that it's a it's a good question and certainly something I think that this group should you know leverage that information as we move into the housing element fair share plan process may be an opportunity for you know a willing uh property owner to engage in a conversation okay uh I see a question regarding double dipping of credits so um credits you can only apply one credit type per unit um so you know whatever the maximum credit um type would be um that's what what you would put towards it so if you um do a um you know special needs housing unit and you know it's also a three-bedroom unit um you would take the one credit not the half credit so it's you can't double count credits on on a unit [Music] um that was the end of the presentation I do have um I have an interactive map that I prepared that I would like to just wanted to share with everybody this shows the obligations for every town across the state if people are interested I can drop a link to the map or you know you can circulate it around um but I can click and open this and I'll I'll show everybody um kind of how it works a little bit um just if folks were interested just give me one second [Music] okay so this is um shortly after DCA adopted the or not adopted but released their um report um we went I went through and um as a g person mapping person I mapped um all of the U Municipal obligations um for every municipal across the state um what's and you could see the yellow lines uh Mark the regional boundaries um for each of the sub regions so we have region one here's region two within which where Milburn is located um and the municipalities colored in the orange color are those that are exempt Urban Aid municipalities so you can see which of those um within our region are those exempt uh urban communities Montclair Bloomfield Nutley Belleville Newark Irvington East Orange and orange and Essex County Hillside Elizabeth Rosel raway and planfield inion County are the region to exempt qualified everyday municipalities and if you click on any Town um a little box down here will appear and it'll tell you kind of um some of the basic counts and you know some some information but it'll give you the perspective need obligation um and it's important to note that the prospective unit obligation is subject to either a thousand unit cap so you can either have a maximum of thousand units or 20% of the existing households within um the community so um so but I'll share this link around in case anybody wants to take a look at what's happening in other communities across the state that'd be great okay yes Jean Grim you just said 20% of existing households is that just applicable to this round or the total cumulative uh so no that is just applicable to this round each round is a unique time period if you will uh you know within which each town has to satisfy the obligation within that period is there any way we can know from Milburn though what the cumulative percent is um I mean I guess we'd have to go back and look at what the prior obligations were I mean it's a good question we being asked to not double the size but what percent of where we started have we been asked to add yeah I I don't know the number off the top of your head but I understand conceptually what you're asking yeah good question have more questions sorry bur what is a market R rant and what is an affordable Market Ray rant um the um those are St forth um the the question is related to um what the rent structures are those are set forth by the affordable housing Professionals of New Jersey Network um it used to be set forth by COA but obviously that entity doesn't exist anymore um you know and then there are Market thresholds um I can also I'll grab a link to that so you can have the table um that that shows the income it's it's a sliding scale of income and then by number of H number of persons within the household um so obviously larger households have a different um income scale so um what town has the highest obligation in our region I believe it it's either so the the colors here on the map are it's a gradation that shows um uh the darker greens are the higher number towns um I believe it's either West Orange or Roxbury uh yeah West Orange was 660 and Roxbury yeah Roxbury was 9 189 yes uh and then oh yeah here's Lyndon which is super high 787 so yeah I think it's rockbury at 989 and when do you anticipate we're bring back uh so uh just as far as adjustments to the number you know our findings we are working on that now um you know um so you know I will hopefully have a report back um I would say you know either over the holiday break you know just for um you know to advise uh folks Graham would you say that um in terms of murns number that we were I mean I'm just throwing this out as a were we hit hard sort of Fairly or light with this latest round well I think I think that um that kind of goes back to um my discussion as far as looking at the three individual components that make up the the average allocation Factor so if we look at it um the income capacity you know Milburn is the highest of all the 91 municipalities in the region um the non-residential valuation factor is sixth of 91 municipalities uh in the region um and then that land capacity piece is about 42 of 91 so I think that um on the whole obviously Milburn uh bore you know a higher share um given you know how high those two two of the three allocation factors um came out in the process and it's really just a number extra at this point yep thank you sure okay um that's all I have for this evening I hope this kind of helped provide at least some insight for folks very helpful thank you sure yeah gram I had one last question sure sure looking at the the three factors there doesn't seem to be much you can do about the income Factor the non-residential valuation and the only place that's got any give feels like the land capacity yeah I think that I think that's a correct characterization yes um I will cave out that though and say that um the um the income capacity factors informed by the American Community survey data uh prepared by the US sensus Bureau um and the date of that data used by uh DCA for their calculation is uh the 20 18 to 2022 data set the five-year data set um I can tell you that the 2019 to 2023 data set the newer version of that was just released last Thursday um so we are also looking at that new data um to see if that has any impact um on communities um as well Graham I have one more um when you professionals get together do you raise the topic that many people have raised about the regional impact of all this development and how that is being looked at by anybody is it I mean you know conceptually it is it is an issue you know and I think that um you know as a planner you know and and somebody you know we we like plans in place um you know I think that the timing of the state development plan is very curious in this process and that you know the state development plan is to really you know guide us regionally and Statewide you know as we move forward and having that plan kind of come out um after this process has already kind of started feels a little disjointed um but I do think that you know it is is a a big con big topic of discussion and consideration that um municipalities kind of need to be aware of and you know start to raise raise uh concerns you know that that infrastructure and you know capacity needs to be something that's thought about um as we move into this yeah I see the the question um it's expected that Milburn will need to build more than 2,000 units um you know I think you know obviously yes there is you know concern about the the amount of development um that will need to be planned um to accommodate or satisfy uh you know the the obligations I think what's important to note is that um while the the 555 number is the initial number um you know we will go through a vacant land adjustment process to um identify what is actually realistically buildable within the township um so that number probably will be uh different than what we're looking at today um so you know that does not change the concern certainly around increased population or you know other infrastructure impacts um but I do just want to kind of temper this scale that you know we don't necessarily know exactly what that number will be until we complete the vacant land adjustment process um for the municipality which will further scale down the number the Thousand unit cap still does apply in this round yes but thousand unit cap is um on the prospective need obligation calculation and um at 555 uh you know obviously the township does not hit the Thousand unit Cap all right so um I'm mindful of the time right now we're just slightly past 8:30 um so you know we'll take maybe one or two more questions uh and then we'll wrap up um we are going to be be having more of these meetings um we are going to be having more public meetings as well um and we'll put out a schedule in January the vacant land adjustment proc so um excuse me the vacant land adjustment process um is a process where um we will go through and identify sites that may be available for um programming or development opportun um or you know to where um we can identify realistic development opportunities uh to accommodate some of the fourth round um prospective need obligation um is an exercise that um will look at and the the new law also requires us to um look at Redevelopment opportunities too as far as to accommodate a small portion of the um adjusted value um so it is a much more forensic process in going through uh specific properties looking at you know where may be properties that can accommodate development um it is not the same as the the land capacity factor I want to just caveat that because the land capacity Factor looks solely at those as I mentioned the first screened uh forested or grassland areas you know more native Landscapes um you know the the vacant land adjustment process is to look at um potentially underdeveloped or open properties that may be available for effectuating or accommodating some of the AFF uh affordable housing development or Housing Development um so I think that's that's that that's the characterization for the vacant land adjustment process and essentially what we do is we say well you know we have 5505 units that we have that we want to that we're required to plan for but really we only have land that can accommodate this amount um so we'll we'll satisfy this amount and then the rest of it can just be um through overlays or other mechanisms more passive mechanisms um rather than more active approaches to accommodate the [Music] need get credit for years and and gr a quick question on that what the township what we in the township will be doing Township at the end of the day will be identifying areas that can meet the need and then put the appropriate zoning in in place that's yeah that that's part rather than actually doing any building they're saying this is someplace you could do if you were to do it here's where you do it that's right and yeah making this a planning process exactly um get credit for 100 units by building 50 that are 100% affordable um yeah I mean as far as the crediting goes yeah I mean if you can you know leverage credits um but again you have to be mindful of the 25% cap on the number of credits um but yeah I mean as far as the math goes um that's that's essentially correct um senior Workforce housing yeah I think that th those are important considerations for us to think about um with respect to moving forward into the next period um yeah and and to miss Steinberg's Point yeah obviously you know given that the V the vacant land number um you know is 046 you know there really isn't a lot um of room to to pull the the average allocation Factor down um but you know I think that um what's important is for um you know the uh calculated prospective need obligation to be accurate for the township um I think that that's really what's what's important in this process all right well seeing that there's no more questions um it is starting to get uh late uh I'd like to thank uh you Graham for coming and doing this presentation um and I really would like to thank uh everyone in the audience that came to listen uh and learn and we are certainly going to have more opportunities to um you know participate in this process uh in the coming year so we will keep you post okay thank you all thanks everybody bye bye thank you gr thank you thank you gr