By Paul A. Agostini

In late April of this year, the City of Newark attempted to have its Central Planning Board adopt a complete revision of the Newark Zoning & Land Use Regulations (NZLUR) with little public knowledge or input that did not reflect the work completed in the 360 Master Plan. After this was made known to several members of community groups throughout Newark, the city subsequently acquiesced and held one Community Zoning Meeting in each of Newark’s five wards.

Without adequate public notice, these meetings were poorly attended. Although the attendees were not great in number, they were able to see through the ruse being put before them in the name of creating a greener, walkable city via added density that was guaranteed to result in lower rental and housing prices.  This added density would be accomplished by allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be built in the backyards of residential homes without any public notice or Planning Board hearing.

Again, the same fallacy was put forward in every ward as a panacea for the lack of affordable housing.  During the North Ward’s Community Zoning Meeting, I asked Allison Ladd, Director of Economic & Housing Development, about the status of shuttered public housing units (such as, Oriental Village and Victoria Houses) and why they weren’t being restored for either sale or rental to low-income families since they were already under the management of the City of Newark. She responded that the land was going to be sold.  

Since the government is pulling out of affordable housing, what would make anyone believe that the cited need of over 16,200 units can be created in the backyards of existing homes at a monthly rental price of $750 when the plan is not only non-compulsory it also offers no financial incentives for the would-be builders?

The promise that this increased density will lead to a greener walkable city is laughable to anyone who has passed by any existing business corridor in Newark where they can readily witness double-parked cars on both sides of the street at any given time of day during the week and triple-parked vehicles on weekends. The only result of more density will be an increase in noise, trash, and rodents and the dwindling of places to park. 

Over a half century ago, Newark was the beneficiary of wealthier localities in New Jersey that had public dollars to spend on public housing which the powers-that-be at that particular point in time gladly accepted and built the unmanageable drug-infested hi-rises everyone understandably loathed for decades. Newark had an inordinate amount of poor concentrated within its limits because these well-to-do areas in the Garden State did not want them in their neighborhood. Fortunately, these regional contribution agreements (RCA’s) were outlawed in July of 2008 by Governor JON Corzine.

Do we need to replicate the number of units cited by city officials in the 2021 Rutgers Center on Law Inequality and Metropolitan Equity study?  Or, does the rest of New Jersey need to do its fair share of supplying affordable housing and not let Newark have to bear the burden as it has done so in the past?

Another concern expressed by fellow neighbors regarding this proposed added density involves public safety. Adding density to the backyards of blocks would compromise the safety of all the original residences and its occupants by creating a connecting fire trail to adjacent fence lines, trees and garages with vehicles in them. Why would we want the safety of our own first responders to be compromised by purposely allowing a hazard to be created by our own design?  

Oddly enough, there has never been any mention on how these ADUs were going to be connected to water, sewer, electric, and gas lines during the Community Zoning Meetings that previously took place throughout the five wards. Will these be accessed through the existing home or are they going to be brought in through separate lines from the street?

There are also types of ADUs that are constructed and installed on trailers with wheels. How will those types of homes which are typically built to use propane tanks be treated?Since they are not theoretically stationary structures, what part of the building code will they be subject to, if at all?

During the Community Zoning Meetings, it was also maintained that ADUs would enable an elderly homeowner to remain on the premises by granting that person the option of living in either structure while renting out the other. The cost of constructing an ADU, the increase in homeowner’s insurance, and the increase in property taxes along with other expenses associated with its maintenance and repair will require a significant sum in monthly rent to offset that type of investment.

The recent passage of property tax relief by the state targeting homeowners aged 65 and over taking effect in 2026 has dramatically impacted these concerns. Why would any elderly homeowner in Newark go through the time, trouble, and expense of becoming a landlord at this point in their life when they will now receive a 50% reduction on their property tax bill up to $13,000?

The other aspect involving our seniors that was cited addressed the possible future need of a homeowner to take in an elderly parent. This is a very real concern for many families, but again, one that has been handled in the past without taking the path of constructing an ADU.  

Countless families throughout Newark have always made accommodations within their existing home to provide a living space for an elderly parent by renovating either the attic or basement into temporary living quarters for the remainder of that person’s life.  A more humane arrangement that leaves the one in need connected to his or her family and avoids isolating them in a separate building from everyone else.  This is also a more financially prudent option and enables that existing space to be occupied by an older child in the near future or an easy conversion of that space back to its original state.

Overall, I consider this to be a not well-thought-out plan by the City in response to a complex problem that not only disregards decades of public hearing decisions by various local entities it also is in conflict with past State decisions involving properties located in established historic districts involving either a public entity and/or public funding.  

This “throw everything up against the kitchen wall and see if it sticks” mentality when it comes to forming public policy regarding affordable housing clearly forgets about the adverse impact on the stakeholders who pay the bills and feeds into a false narrative that creates unrealistic expectations instead of addressing the real issue of government pulling out of providing affordable public housing for a core of its citizenry.

Paul Agostini has been a resident of Newark since August 2005. In the fall of that same year, he joined a small group of neighbors who brought the Forest Hill Community Association out of dormancy and has since served in every capacity on its Board of Trustees while playing an integral role in expanding the organization to its current level of nearly 300 households.

_{Featured photo by Pexels}