NJ.com
By Steven Rodas
Eric Birchler has had his real estate license since 1989. So when he gets thrown by a frantic call, you know something’s up.
“This lady called me concerned that she was going to have to lift her house,” Birchler told NJ.com. He heard the uneasiness in her voice. “I calmed her down,” he said, but misinformation and confusion is circulating everywhere about New Jersey’s new flood elevation regulation.
And she’s far from alone. All across the shore, there’s been one reaction to the state’s new demands, he said: “panic.”
The Department of Environmental Protection’s new Resilient Environments and Landscapes, or R.E.A.L., rule hasn’t actually kicked in yet. It’s set to take effect July 20.
Once it does, new homes built in flood-risk areas will need to be raised 4 feet higher than the current standard. Homes now are raised based on FEMA-set base flood elevations. The state’s new elevation requirement will be in addition to the federal standard.
So, for example, after the rule kicks in, a new home constructed in a New Jersey floodplain where the federal base flood elevation is 1 foot (and the town has no specific elevation rules of its own), that structure would need to be elevated 5 feet instead.
The rule won’t impact already built homes or those in the hopper before it officially kicks in. But it will apply to houses undergoing renovations that add up to 50% or more of the home’s value.
“Certain structures, such as residential buildings, will be required to elevate to the FEMA base flood elevation plus 4 feet to account for future storm surge, plus 1 foot of freeboard,” Larry Hajna, a DEP spokesperson, said.
Critics call the new rule extreme, but state officials and supporters say the numbers are in line with the upper range of sea level rise projections by the year 2100 outlined by Rutgers University.
If it moves forward as planned, the rule would be the first regulation in the nation “to account for future sea-level rise based on the most recent climate science,” according to state DEP spokespeople.
“Moving forward — if implemented successfully — this will be a game changer for New Jersey,“ Anjuli Ramos-Busot, the state director of the Sierra Club, said on the phone.
“When you are at the epicenter of climate change — and that is not an exaggeration, we are at great, great risk due to our coast being eroded and because of sea level rise — you have to take proactive measures to protect your people,” Ramos-Busot said.
Rutgers University experts noted last year that the way current global emissions are going, New Jersey is likely to see 2.2 to 3.8 feet of sea-level rise by 2100 — or over 4 feet if ice-sheet melt revs up.
Ocean County, a heavily-built and idyllic shore destination brimming with businesses and beach spots, is perhaps the most poignant litmus test for how much a place is willing to change when the state says science calls for more aggressive construction limits.
“My biggest concern is it’s going to stop development and stop the market,” said Birchler, “where people aren’t going to do anything because they can’t get the approvals done.”
Because, he says, the new elevation rule will not only come with a bevy of clerical, design and architectural requirements — which come with costs of their own.
“They changed the permitting process,” Birchler added of the DEP’s steps, “you have to deal through the state now.”
Broader fears over how the rule will impact the shore have translated into a legal challenge (a notice of appeal filed in February) from Cape May, Ocean and Monmouth counties seeking to tweak or pull the rule entirely. Senate President Nick Scutari, D-Union, on Feb. 24 also introduced a resolution to withdraw or change the rule — saying it was “inconsistent with legislative intent.”
A lot of money, and the future of development at the shore, is on the line, Commissioner Frank Sadeghi told NJ.com in a statement.
“The R.E.A.L. rule could have a devastating impact,” he said.
A trip to the shore
The corner of Holly Street and Ocean Avenue in Lakewood is mostly sleepy in mid-February.
That’s until the construction noise kicks up, and an olive pick-up truck pulls up to a stretch of elevated homes in the final stages of construction.
Closer to the water in Mantoloking, a Jersey Shore gem, it’s hard to drive down Ocean Avenue and ignore the development. Months before the summer starts, the main thoroughfare is flanked by excavators, trucks and workers in hard hats.
New Jersey’s new elevation rule was adopted Jan. 20 as Gov. Phil Murphy passed the baton to Gov. Mikie Sherrill. And as development is surging at the shore.
In the most densely populated state in the nation rebuilding and new development have come back in full force in coastal areas hardest hit by Hurricane Sandy, including Mantoloking, Beach Haven, Little Egg Harbor, and Point Pleasant, according to a NJ.com review of building permit records between 2012 and 2022.
Ocean County, among the most developed counties statewide, approved more than 25,000 multi-family units just in 2024 (considered a “significant spike,” the county said).
Officials there and some business stakeholders (including the New Jersey Business & Industry Association) are not happy about a rule requiring stricter standards when it comes to elevating new homes.
“(It) would render many development and redevelopment projects financially untenable and effectively create ‘no build zones’ in some of our communities,” Ocean County Commissioner Sadeghi said.
The state DEP has denied that “no build zones” would be formed as part of the rule. It also noted some towns already have flood elevation ordinances (above FEMA regulations) of their own.
But Sadeghiis worried the rule will “reduce property values, starve shore communities of local tax revenue, and mandate expensive flood insurance, even in areas that have never flooded and likely will never flood.”
Since last fall, Monmouth County has “sounded the alarm” on the rule, the commissioner director there, Thomas Arnone, said in a statement.
“We know that we need more partners in this fight,” he said amid legal steps this month.
Officials in Cape May County agreed.
In a summary of why it was opposed to the rule, Cape May officials said the DEP has exceeded its authority. Those actions will “result in significant economic burdens on residents and local governments,” officials in the state’s southern most county said.
Regulations laid out by R.E.A.L. may create “disincentives to renovation, redevelopment, and (impose) significant economic burdens on lower-valued properties in large areas of the state,” Scutari’s resolution notes.
“These regulations will drive up the cost of housing and go far beyond what FEMA has been recommending,” he told NJ.com on Monday.
He thinks the rule should be further studied.
Asked about analysis completed by Ocean County to determine how the local economy would be impacted by the rule, officials did not immediately provide more information.
New Jersey has studied what the rule will mean economically for the shore. It acknowledged short-term costs but deemed the regulations sensible in the long run.
“It is … worth noting that the housing sector and individual homes will experience greater harm from increasingly severe flooding and storms without the rule’s requirements,” the DEP responded to a commenter.
In response to other concerns, the state additionally said it does not require development to have flood insurance. FEMA oversees those steps.
Other types of structures, outside of homes owned by residents such as commercial properties, can instead flood-proof structures rather than elevate, regulators said.
But the rule will bring about other needed and innovative improvements — expanding the building of dunes and creating living shorelines where it makes sense, according to the state department.
Does it add up?
It’s easy to get lost in the weeds of flood policy.
And yet for supporters of building with resiliency in mind, the math can be simple.
Damages from 2012’s Sandy in New Jersey exceeded $30 billion. The storm killed 40 people from 13 counties. The remnants of Hurricane Ida from five years ago led to more than 25 deaths and brought its own heavy financial toll in the billions.
The rate of sea level rise in New Jersey is at least twice the global average rate, state scientists say.
Plug a Jersey Shore address into the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s interactive sea level rise tool, and your eyes are bound to widen when toggling to between 3 to 5 feet of increased water levels.
“One global study estimates that Newark and New York City had a combined population of 1,540,000 people exposed to coastal flooding in 2020 and projects that this number will increase to (more than 2.9 million) people in 2070 due to climate change,“ the Department of Environmental Protection said.
Gov. Sherrill could reverse course on New Jersey’s new R.E.A.L. flood rule entirely because it is not a law, it’s an administrative rule.
Her office did not respond to a request for comment.
The Sierra Club — citing Sherrill’s track record as a congresswoman on flood-related policy — hopes she will keep the rule in place.
Ramos-Busot is cautiously relieved R.E.A.L. has made progress.
Withdrawing from the rule would send the wrong message, she said.
If the state revokes it, for instance via Scutari’s resolution, she wondered: “What is the legislature doing to protect people from flooding?”
The DEP (which has a “Myths and Facts” page about the rule) cited the ongoing litigation when asked about the future of the new rule and concerns shared by Jersey Shore officials.
“Development, even in the expanded flood hazard area and inundation risk zone under REAL is still allowed,” state spokespeople emphasized. “The rules just require they be constructed so they will not be inundated or destroyed during the useful life of the structure.”
Allison McLeod directs the nonprofit New Jersey League of Conservation Voters (which the acting DEP Commissioner Ed Potosnak previously headed).
She welcomes the rule and said it should not be lost that being resilient in the face of climate impacts can be an economic boon too.
McLeod cited Stafford, an outlier of sorts in Ocean County because since 2021 it has required new homes and new home renovations in risky areas to be built two feet above the federal base flood elevation requirement. Local officials in Stafford said that year more than 3,000 properties had National Flood Insurance Program policies and via a voluntary FEMA program saw major savings. Policyholders across the township altogether saved on average north of $1 million each year by participating.
Homeowners have gained significantly from elevating, being part of the federal incentive program and preparing for a stark future given that more than 4,000 of the 16,000 properties in town are in a hazardous flood area, said Matthew von der Hayden, the administrator in Stafford.
“We try to do the extra thing on everything,” said von der Hayden of Stafford’s mindset on resiliency.
Still, the League of Conservation Voters highlighted the rule is by no means perfect.
My “largest concern with the adoption is that there is an exemption for affordable housing,” McLeod said, pointing to a waiver in specific circumstances given the state’s housing goals.
“Because what you are saying is you are going to allow construction potentially of affordable housing in places that you know are going to flood,” she said.
Some, like Nancy Oboyski, the worried homeowner who called her realtor to ask about the specifics of the new rule, was dubious about whether preparing now for projected sea levels in the year 2100 is really necessary.
“Sandy was what year, 2012? I don’t think anything like that has ever hit the Jersey Shore,” Oboyski said.
“So, I’m hoping in my lifetime nothing like that ever happens again.”
Randall Laing, a builder whose family business has 54 years at the shore, had his own curiosities, including how will project approvals in areas deemed at-risk be streamlined if the state is stepping in.
Laing — who can’t think of a state regulation ever having such sweeping implications — is worried for what the rule will mean for the Jersey Shore’s future.
He usually has up to three projects lined up for the fall by now. He has one so far.
The 51-year-old builder wondered if it was because of people getting wind of the new rule.
“My fear is a serious exit from New Jersey.”