Listen to this article

The basics:

• NJ faces a shortfall of over 200,000 affordable housing units
• Architects advocate for “Missing Middle” design as a viable fix
• Innovative zoning overlays and adaptive reuse drive progress
• Case studies in Princeton and Maplewood highlight successful projects

This article is the first in a planned three-part series on affordable housing.

According to data from the National Low Income Housing Coalition, New Jersey faces a shortfall of more than 200,000 affordable units. Viewed in this light, the Fourth-Round obligations under the Fair Housing Act recently upheld by a state court – totaling more than 84,000 units to be developed and built by 2035 – could be viewed as insufficient to meet the considerable need. Seen another way, building that number in 10 years is quite ambitious, practically a moon-shot. Since the passage of the Fair Housing Act in 1985, just 75,000 affordable units have been built for renters and homeowners, including family, senior and supportive housing.

While the will to develop and build certainly exists, along with the resources and talent, there is always resistance. Famously, state and local laws were used in the 20th century to create “exclusionary zones” that made development of affordable housing nearly impossible in many towns. One lawsuit against Mount Laurel Township made its way to the state’s Supreme Court, which ruled in 1975 that such exclusionary zoning laws are unconstitutional and that municipalities must allow their “fair share” of affordable housing — a ruling that was upheld and reinforced in 1983 in yet another case brought against the same town. Known as the Mount Laurel Doctrine, these rulings led the state Legislature to pass the Fair Housing Act in 1985, which established a process for determining a formula for each “round” of obligations.

In the contentious Third Round more than 300 cities and towns sought and received adjustments to their obligations under the law, ultimately delaying the round from 2004 to 2015. Now, as the rubber meets the road in the Fourth Round, so far two dozen municipalities challenged their Fourth-Round requirements in the courts but have so far been rebuffed. Meanwhile multiple others have filed for adjustments to their obligations – a matter that was ruled on by a panel of judges on or before March 31. After that, all municipalities will have until June 30 to create a proposal for meeting their obligations.

As architects, resistance to this development of affordable housing is familiar and unsurprising. We have a vital role to play in growing New Jersey’s available stock, by advocating for design innovation that addresses the “Missing Middle” and upending the way most residents think about affordable housing. “Architects have a responsibility to positively shape the communities where we live, work, and play,” says AIA New Jersey 2025 President-elect Jessica O’Donnell. “Creative Missing-Middle Housing solutions provide sustainable, high-quality, and safe neighborhoods.”

This is to say, municipalities whose residents don’t want to allow large-scale midrise multifamily projects can meet their obligations in other, smarter ways. Missing Middle Housing – a term coined by Daniel Parolek in his 2020 book “Missing Middle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today’s Housing Crisis” – is often misunderstood as a financial term when it is actually a planning concept referring to housing spanning the gap between single family houses and mid-rise multifamily structures. Zoning overlays can foster the insertion of affordable units with house-scale construction in, on, between and around existing residential properties, adding density and resulting in sustainable, affordable, walkable, diverse and thriving neighborhoods.

While helping achieve goals for numbers of affordable units, these overlay strategies often have the added benefit of reactivating a downtown area and capitalizing on existing density to foster economic activity and social vibrancy.

“Many municipalities have an inventory of available land that may be appropriate to help meet their fourth-round obligations, but often these parcels are too small for larger projects,” says Stephen Schoch, principal with Thriven Design. He notes that these parcels are often ideal for house-scale development and adds that the state’s Department of Community Affairs “has a subsidy funding source specifically targeted to assist the construction of projects of 25 units or less, which combined with local funds can often make these smaller buildings work well for developers and communities.”

Some examples of viable strategies include:

• Adaptive reuse, including historic structures, in downtowns, and along main streets
• Accessory dwelling units
• Adding height to existing structures
• Converting commercial space over retail in town centers
• Contextually-sensitive new development at residential scale
• Repacking older buildings with modern housing and more functional layouts

When these strategies work, municipalities enjoy increased economic activity and more close-knit communities, with dynamic social interaction taking place in and around town squares and public plazas. And when community linchpins such as teachers, nurses and firefighters can afford to live on the same block as more affluent residents, that closeness undergirds the social contract, benefiting everyone.

And yet, suggestions for added density are still greeted with suspicion, even in municipalities where failure to grow is likely to lead to economic stagnation. This is because the memory of development failures tends to linger, while successful attempts to fill the Missing Middle often escape notice entirely once they are complete, because they are seamlessly woven into the existing fabric and culture of that community.

According to J. Robert Hillier, principal with Princeton-based Studio Hillier, “The best way to overcome resistance from the neighbors and win them over is with an ongoing design review process focused on community engagement. The conversations reveal their concerns and provide direction for coming up with design solutions to address and alleviate those concerns. This is much better than having a public hearing where anyone can stand up and criticize your design, fairly or not, without any prior input from them.”

Case studies

30 Maclean St., Princeton. Our firm JZA+D successfully navigated zoning and historic approvals processes in a historically sensitive residential neighborhood to convert a locally iconic Masonic Lodge into a 10-unit, four-story mixed-income multifamily residence with a new elevator tower. To capture the potential while preserving the site’s legacy and beloved facade, key exterior architectural details were either preserved or recreated while the interior was gutted and completely transformed, with reclaimed materials from the original structure reused as trim and decorative elements. The resulting LEED Gold-certified development added eight market-rate and two affordable rental units within the original building envelope, each with a unique layout, and within walking distance of Downtown Princeton. To preserve the neighborhood character and feel, the modern elevator tower was built set back on the property so as not to create an imposing presence on the street and clearly identified as new so it would not create a false sense of history.

Witherspoon Street Redevelopment, Princeton. This project by Studio Hillier comprises 12 distinct buildings across four separate sites within the Witherspoon-Jackson neighborhood, Princeton’s 20th Historic District. The development strategy revitalizes and enhances historic structures while introducing much-needed residential density within walking distance of downtown. The original frontages of these historic buildings are preserved and integrated with more contemporary additions at the rear. The project offers diverse housing options, including single-family row houses; one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments; and high-density studio units. The redevelopment fosters a vibrant, inclusive community by balancing preservation with innovation while honoring the neighborhood’s historic character.

SunBlossom Alivia, Maplewood. A four-story, 24-unit multifamily building by Jarmel-Kizel Architects, this mixed-income residence is located across the street from Columbia High School, within walking distance of both the Maplewood and South Orange train stations, and around the corner from the South Mountain YMCA, which provides both child care and aftercare services. Four of the units are set aside as affordable, including a one-bedroom, a three-bedroom and two two-bedroom apartments. The site was previously a service station and mechanic’s shop, so soil remediation was required for residential use, but the redevelopment solution successfully retained the existing mechanical infrastructure, with upgrades for improved performance. From a structural standpoint the building is considered a podium style whereby the first floor is constructed out of noncombustible materials, in this case poured in place concrete and the upper floors are wood framed. The first floor includes the building’s lobby and parking garage. Building amenities include tenant self-storage lockers, a fitness room and a lounge. All of the units have outdoor balconies. The developer worked with the town to obtain redeveloper status, which allowed for an overlay zoning to allow the density.

This project is an excellent example of developers, architects and elected officials working together to create affordable Missing Middle Housing, while also being considered environmentally advantageous as existing infrastructure was utilized and a contaminated site cleaned up.

Joshua Zinder is founder and managing partner of JZA+D and a past-president of AIA-New Jersey. His portfolio, amassed over 30-plus years, includes office, hospitality, institutional, government and mixed-use environments.