This Week in Land Use
Each Friday Garden State Smart Growth will post a collection of links to news articles pertaining to land use in New Jersey. We try our best to capture all relevant stories, but we’re not perfect. Let us know in the comments if we’ve missed anything.
- Sunday, 1/31/10- Millburn says it has solution to dispute over protected open space (Star-Ledger)
- Monday, 2/1/10- Chatham Environmental Commission to hear recommendations on developing open space (Independent Press)
- Monday, 2/1/10- Eminent domain bad word to tribal leader Mark Gould (The News of Cumberland County)
- Tuesday, 2/2/10- Affordable-housing changes pushed in New Jersey (Philadelphia Inquirer)
- Tuesday, 2/2/10- Real estate giant in talks to save Xanadu (Bergen Record)
- Tuesday, 2/2/10- Residents lose appeal to block Maplewood development (Star-Ledger)
- Tuesday, 2/2/10- North Brunswick moves along with transit village plans (Star-Ledger)
- Thursday, 2/4/10- Standing room-only crowd for Franklin Township truck transfer station hearing (The Express-Times)
- Thursday, 2/4/10- New hotel, office space could spur redevelopment at Harbor Station by Roseland and Fidelco companies (Jersey Journal)
- Thursday, 2/4/10- N.J. Senate committee approves proposal to allow builders to lock-in zoning (Star-Ledger)
- Friday, 2/5/10- Talks on Westmont site to continue (Courier Post)
- Friday, 2/5/10- Sayreville won’t remove age restrictions from development (Star-Ledger)
Downtown Salem, NJ
An article in the Sunbeam (Salem) describes how a transit program operated by Salem County was shut down recently after their grant funding ran out. The program transported workers from Salem County to jobs in local industrial parks, and was canceled when the County left their half of $400,000 matching grant from NJ Transit out of their most recent budget. Riders were given four days notice.
This cut in service comes as NJ Transit grapples with how to address a much larger deficit of some $200 million dollars in its upcoming budget. Assembly Minority Leader Alexander DeCroce, R-Morris suggests closing the gap by finding “operational efficiencies”, which would likely involve broader service cuts, while Governor Christie has given no indication that he is eager to raise any substantial new revenue for transportation.
As budget discussions continue in Trenton, New Jersey Future is working with Transportation for America to urge Congress to include more funding for transit operations in the “Jobs Bill” under discussion. When it comes to creating jobs, transit operating funds are among the most effective because of their immediacy relative to constructing a new infrastructure project, “shovel ready” or otherwise
Ironically, as leaders in both Trenton and Washington focus their attention on economic development and job creation, transit cuts like the one in Salem have the potential to lead to further job loses by making it harder for workers, especially low-income employees, to get to work.
Each Friday Garden State Smart Growth will post a collection of links to news articles pertaining to land use in New Jersey. We’ll capture many relevant stories, but please let us know if we’ve missed anything.
- Saturday, 1/23/10- ATV park may not roll in Monroe (Gloucester County Times)
- Sunday, 1/24/10- Ruling puts West Windsor development on new footing (Trenton Times)
- Monday, 1/25/10- Governor’s office backs PSE&G power line through Morris County (Daily Record)
- Monday, 1/25/10- Woodbridge mayor is determined to keep Colonia Country Club undeveloped (Star-Ledger)
- Monday, 1/25/10- East Brunswick loses bid to buy back Golden Triangle for $22.5M (Star-Ledger)
- Tuesday, 1/26/10- Newark Central Ward housing complex is scheduled to be demolished (Star-Ledger)
- Tuesday, 1/26/10- Opponents say zoning for Maplewood development doesn’t work (Star-Ledger)
- Wednesday, 1/27/10- Morris County OKs open space tax cut (Daily Record)
- Thursday, 1/28/10- Hunterdon freeholders set hearing on dividing the open space funds (Hunterdon County Democrat)
- Thursday, 1/28/10- Two developments in borough may bring storage, housing to borough (Bergen Record)
- Thursday, 1/28/10- Chester Township water line extension plan moving ahead (Star-Ledger)
- Friday, 1/29/10- N.J. preserved 332 acres of hiking, natural, agricultural lands in past year (Star-Ledger)
- Friday, 1/29/10- Passaic County to Spend $1Million to Fix Parks (Bergen Record)
- The State Planning Act requires the State Planning Commission to revise and re-adopt the State Development and Redevelopment Plan every three years. The act further requires that an Impact Assessment be prepared prior to each revision and re-adoption.
- Revision and re-adoption of the current State Plan, which was adopted in 2001, is now six years overdue. The commission approved a draft interim plan in 2009, and has now received and released the required Impact Assessment.
- The assessment found that following the State Plan would reduce water and sewer infrastructure costs to the state by $500 million, and save municipalities and school districts more than $100 million a year. It would also save 60,000 acres of land that would otherwise be developed from 2008 to 2028.
- The State Planning Commission awaits approval from the Christie administration to advance the draft State Plan. One of the administration’s key transition teams has recommended strengthening the authority of the Commission, allowing it to update the State Plan in a manner that coordinates the capital investment priorities and regulatory regimes of state agencies.
Assessment Builds Economic Case for Center-Based Development, Gives Christie Opportunity to Re-energize State Planning
The Impact Assessment quantifies the savings, in both land and money, that the state might derive from managing future growth according to the “center-based” strategies of the State Plan. The assessment identified 560 miles of local roadways and half a billion dollars’ worth of water and sewer infrastructure costs New Jersey would forgo over the next 20 years by following the principles of the State Plan. It would also reduce service costs to municipalities and school districts by an estimated $116 million annually.
Comparing the scenario of following the State Plan to past development trends, the assessment illustrates that infrastructure and many services are cheaper to provide, on a per-capita basis, in the more compact center-based development pattern envisioned by the State Plan. (For more on the benefits of compact development, see New Jersey Future’s report Race to the Middle.
The 60,000 acres of land saved by adhering to the State Plan would include 17,000 acres of the agricultural lands that help rank New Jersey as a leading producer of a surprisingly wide variety of fruits and vegetables. At the recent rate of 15,000 acres of new development per year, the total land savings translate to a 20 percent reduction in land consumption over the next 20 years.
Steering new growth into already-developed centers can also help revitalize cities and towns that have suffered from decades’ worth of neglect. Developing under the State Plan scenario is estimated to increase the number of jobs by more than 10 percent in urban and inner-suburban communities that presently find themselves on the losing end of a cycle of creeping distress, resulting from growth policies that favor greenfield development over redevelopment.
With the release of the Impact Assessment, the State Planning Commission is in a position to move ahead with the long-delayed revision and re-adoption of the State Plan. All that remains is the green light from the Christie administration. And Governor Christie is on record in support of a strengthened state planning process, pledging to improve interagency coordination, discourage suburban sprawl and provide incentives for redevelopment and urban revitalization.
In fact, the governor’s Economic Growth Transition Team recommended a bold step in this direction: “Reconstitute and elevate the State Planning Commission and appoint a cabinet-level Executive Director with the charge directly from the Governor to support the Lt. Governor in working with the Commissioners to update the State Plan in a manner that breaks down the ‘silos’ between their respective (and often contradictory) capital investment priorities and regulatory regimes.” This action would give the State Planning Commission and its staff the tools not only to revise and re-adopt the State Plan, but to see its principles reflected—and implemented—in state policy.
There are several great sponsorship opportunities left for the 2010 Redevelopment Forum next month. Registrations have been flowing in and we are in the process of finalizing our program book. If you would like to be included, please see the list of remaining sponsorships and let us know your commitment by the close of business this Friday, January 29.
Each Friday Monday Garden State Smart Growth will post a collection of links to news articles pertaining to land use in New Jersey. We’ll capture many relevant stories, but please let us know if we’ve missed anything.
- Monday, 1/18/10- Oakwood Park subdivision is denied (Independent News)
- Monday, 1/18/10- Weymouth land-use plan sent to Planning Board (Press of Atlantic City)
- Tuesday, 1/19/10- W. Windsor loses round on Princeton Junction redevelopment suit (Trenton Times)
- Wednesday, 1/20/10- In one of his final acts as governor, Corzine vetos controversial sewer bill (Herald News)
- Wednesday, 1/20/10- Somerville looks to bond ordinance for funding some early redevelopment costs (Messenger-Gazette)
- Wednesday, 1/20/10- Millville forms committee to review Motorsports Park rezoning request (Press of Atlantic City)
- Wednesday, 1/20/10- Hearing on bill to abolish N.J. Council on Affordable Housing set for Feb. 1 (New Jersey Newsroom)
- Wednesday, 1/20/10- Vineland to create special zone for medical school at Newcomb (Press of Atlantic City)
- Friday, 1/22/10 New Brunswick’s $150M Gateway project includes 38 affordable units (Star-Ledger)
light rail in Newark - photo from Federal Transit Administration
Streetsblog Capitol Hill takes a look at how to encourage less car ownership — and links to a Wikipedia page listing the cities with the greatest percentages of zero-car households. All of New Jersey’s cities of more than 100,000 population make the list: Newark and Jersey City appear in the #2 and #3 spots, respectively, behind only New York City, and Paterson and Elizabeth also make the top 25.
The primary purpose of the Streetsblog post is to examine the difficulty of building for zero-car households in cities that don’t start out with the same built-in advantages (thanks to having been built mostly before the age of the automobile) that NJ’s big cities do.
But the post also makes note of three factors that tend to characterize the cities with the most car-free households: age (i.e. how long ago the city experienced most of its growth), poverty (households too poor to own a car), and the presence of a large university (hence lots of students who walk or bike everywhere). New Jersey’s big cities all have the first two items in common, and Newark also hosts several universities. So which trait(s) can be credited for these cities’ high numbers of car-free households?
Just like with vehicle-miles traveled (VMT ), vehicle ownership can be an indicator of more than one thing. In measuring progress toward better land-use practices that allow people to perform more of their daily activities without needing a car, we have to remember to follow up and make sure that decreasing car ownership is actually the result of more pedestrian- and transit-friendly development patterns and not simply due to an influx of poor people.
If fewer households are owning cars, we want it to be not because they can’t afford to but because they’ve made the rational decision that their built environment allows them the option of spending that money on something else. New Jersey’s cities do host more than their share of poor households, but they also have a head start in the design department, compared to their car-dependent suburbs. We should be looking for ways to build on those attributes, so as to encourage more households to choose not to own cars.
Each Friday Tuesday, Garden State Smart Growth will post a collection of links to news articles pertaining to land use in New Jersey. We’ll capture many relevant stories, but please let us know if we’ve missed anything.
- Saturday, 1/9/10- Housing slump slams brakes on construction (Asbury Park Press)
- Sunday, 1/10/10- Mill One plan prompts fear of eminent domain, tax increases (Trenton Times)
- Sunday, 1/10/10- Affordable housing funding dries up (Asbury Park Press)
- Tuesday, 1/12/10- N.J. Legislature approves extending time limit on building, environmental permits (Star-Ledger)
- Tuesday, 1/12/10- Sayreville to revise DEP application for Main Street Bypass (Courier News)
- Wednesday, 1/13/10- EPA urges Corzine to veto delay in water-quality rules (Philadelphia Inquirer)
- Wednesday. 1/13/10- Recycling site foes champion new tactic (Trenton Times)
- Thursday, 1/14/10- North Brunswick rejects Pulda farm development (Star-Ledger)
- Thursday, 1/14/10- Wall homeowner’s wind turbine plan meets resistance (Asbury Park Press)
- Friday, 1/15/10- Cabela’s CEO says Xanadu store ‘highly unlikely’ (Bergen Record)
- Republican Christopher J. Christie will be sworn in as the 55th governor of New Jersey on Jan. 19, succeeding Democrat Jon Corzine, whom he defeated in the November 2009 election.
- As the new governor takes command of the executive branch, both houses of the Legislature continue to be controlled by Democrats. The budget gap for the fiscal year beginning July 1 is projected at $8 billion. The state’s bonded indebtedness, at $33.9 billion, is the third highest in the nation. The state’s unemployment rate, at 9.7 percent, is at a 32-year high.
- In the face of these economic challenges, charting New Jersey on a path toward sustained — and sustainable — economic growth will require, among other things, transportation policies that address infrastructure needs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and discourage suburban sprawl; an urban revitalization plan that capitalizes on our cities’ unique assets; an affordable housing system that is simple, rational, fair and productive; a comprehensive strategy for reducing reliance on property taxes; and a resurrected state planning process that helps guide, connect and coordinate all of these actions.
Five Policy Areas Where the New Administration Can Make Its Mark
New Jersey Future’s Smart Growth in Transition series has detailed many of the challenges — and opportunities — facing the Christie administration in the areas of state planning, transportation, urban revitalization, affordable housing and property taxes. (To read the full text of each installment of the five-part series, click on the corresponding link.)
State Planning: After years of neglect, the State Planning Commission must be restored to a position of leadership, and the commissioners of key agencies — notably the departments of Environmental Protection, Transportation and Community Affairs — must not only understand smart-growth issues, but be directed to work together to achieve the State Plan vision for strong communities and a healthy environment. A key first step to accomplish this will be moving the commission and its staff, the Office of Smart Growth, into a neutral agency, such as Treasury, or on an interim basis under the auspices of the new lieutenant governor.
Transportation: One of the most immediate priorities is to reauthorize and replenish the Transportation Trust Fund, which finances the state’s $1.6 billion annual capital program. After years of borrowing against revenues dedicated to the fund, the new governor and Legislature must agree on a dedicated revenue source to meet the state’s most fundamental transportation needs. As transportation funding is solidified, transportation policies must be linked to other important state goals, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable land use, by employing strategies to increase transit ridership and reduce vehicle miles traveled.
Urban Revitalization: In the gubernatorial campaign, Christie unveiled his “Bringing Back Our Cities” plan for improving the quality of urban schools and expanding educational opportunities; providing affordable, quality housing for those who need it most; making cities attractive to business and job growth; and improving public safety and cutting violent crime. Employing a variety of incentives, rather than direct state appropriations, the plan envisions tying resources to benchmarks for progress. How this campaign plan will translate into administration policy remains to be seen; its success, however, in whatever form it takes, will rest in its recognition that New Jersey’s urban areas contain unique assets that should be built upon, as opposed to problems that need to be fixed.
Affordable housing: Despite widespread dissatisfaction with the Council on Affordable Housing and its formula for determining each municipality’s fair share of low- and moderate-income housing, most New Jerseyans agree that the state’s long-term prosperity depends on providing housing opportunities for hard-working people of modest means; that it is better for people to live near where they work; that developing housing opportunities should not damage the environment; and that concentrated poverty is a social and economic drain. A comprehensive state housing policy must go beyond providing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, and must be closely correlated with the land-use policies embodied in the State Plan.
Property Taxes: New Jersey households pay the highest property taxes in the country, with school funding representing the largest expense item on the local property tax bill. The heavy reliance on local property taxes to finance public education drives intense competition for tax ratables among municipalities for commercial or age-restricted residential development — but not for housing that might attract more schoolchildren. The result is a housing shortage that drives up prices, and drives families seeking affordable housing to neighboring states. This structural problem ultimately requires a structural solution. Possibilities include regional school districts (as in Pennsylvania); county-run school systems (as in Maryland); regional tax-base sharing; municipal consolidation; shared services; increased state funding for education; or some combination of some or all of these.
As the Christie administration takes office and begins to tackle these and other pressing issues, New Jersey Future remains committed to serving as a practical resource. In 2010, we will continue to highlight timely research and offer reasonable solutions.
photo by author
A couple of news items over the last few days have combined to serve as a good reminder that owning and driving a car is a means to an end, not an end in itself. Driving (at least non-recreational travel) is what economists call a “derived good” – something people consume not because it produces any direct benefit in and of itself but because it is a necessary step in obtaining access to desired goods or services. Most of the time, people are driving because they have to, not because they necessarily want to. And the amount that they drive depends on several factors.
One of the most common driving destinations is the workplace. Most people drive to work. So when the economy takes a nosedive and fewer people are working, this usually results in fewer people driving. Most people use their cars to go shopping, too. In a poor economy when people are not spending as much money, they’re not going shopping as often and aren’t driving as much. Thus VMT (vehicle-miles traveled) can be viewed as an indicator of the health of the overall economy – when more people are working and spending money, more miles are being driven. This is why we have the AAA cheering the fact that New Jerseyans drove more miles in the second half of 2009 than in the first half – they see it as an early sign of economic recovery. Which it might be.
On the other hand, we have New Jersey Future and other smart-growth groups encouraging the NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection to include strategies aimed at reducing VMT among its recommendations for meeting the greenhouse-gas reduction goals of the Global Warming Response Act. And in a similar vein, we have Streetsblog Capitol Hill approvingly citing data showing the American auto fleet shrinking in 2009 – that is, more old cars were junked than new cars were purchased. The decrease in car ownership is very likely also a symptom of the economic downturn.
So why do smart-growth groups like New Jersey Future want to see VMT decrease? And why might we describe a lower vehicle ownership rate as a good thing? Does this mean we want to see New Jersey’s economy remain in the doldrums?
No, of course not. What we want is better development practices that reduce the need to drive. Right now, most new development separates housing from jobs, shopping, and recreational opportunities, usually resulting in a need to get in the car for just about any activity outside the home. Instead, we would like to see improved community design that puts destinations closer together, creating safe, convenient alternatives to driving (including walking, biking and public transit) while at the same time reducing travel distances for those trips that are still taken by car. To cite an extreme example, New York City has very low per-capita VMT compared to the rest of the country, but nobody is going to argue that it’s because NYC is economically depressed – it’s because New Yorkers have plenty of other ways to get around and conduct business. The same principles that make a car unnecessary in New York can be employed on a smaller scale just about anywhere else. Decreasing vehicle ownership and decreasing VMT would both be indicators of a reduced need to drive.
So should VMT be going up or down? Who’s right, New Jersey Future or AAA? The answer is really “neither”; VMT is a pretty good proxy for both better land-use practices and overall economic health (albeit in opposite directions), but it’s not a perfect proxy for either one. This doesn’t mean we can’t use VMT as an indicator, it just means we have to be mindful of its limitations. We want to identify the reasons that VMT is decreasing before we automatically assume the decrease is good or bad.
Jay Corbalis
Dan Fatton
Tim Evans