Is density the answer?

From the Asbury Park Press:

More densely developed housing can address state’s ills

New Jersey has the nation’s highest population density, which at 1,134 people per square mile is 14 times the national average. New Jersey’s population density is higher than that of India (869 people per square mile) or Japan (876 people per square mile.)

Thus it is an irony that the solution to many of the problems plaguing our state — long commutes, inadequate mass transit, lack of affordable housing and the nation’s highest property taxes — is more density. How is this possible?

Many of our public woes are caused not by population density, but by the prevailing sprawl pattern of development.

Building on greenfields — the planners’ term for readily developable open land — has eaten up the state’s little remaining open space, contributed to congested highways and created a lack of affordable housing. Because developers are paying a premium for such lots, they can’t afford to build anything other than expensive McMansions.

As a result of the rate at which sprawl is eating up our land, New Jersey is expected to be the first state to be fully built out, meaning that no more developable land is left. This is expected to occur in 20 to 40 years, according to New Jersey

One answer is for New Jersey to embrace a new development trend called Traditional Neighborhood Development, or TND. Somerset Development, in conjunction with Centex Homes, is building the state’s first large-scale TND, the 737-home Wesmont Station, on the site of the former Curtiss Wright plant in Wood-Ridge, Bergen County. In addition, Somerset Development is building smaller TND communities at Pine River Village in Lakewood and at Hudson Point in Esopus, N.Y., north of Poughkeepsie.

The hallmark of Traditional Neighborhood Development is density. And density is the solution to many of New Jersey’s problems. Take commutes, for instance. The state’s residents have an average commute of 30 minutes, the nation’s third longest after New York and Maryland. TND helps solve the traffic problem by getting cars off the road.

By concentrating development, TNDs create walkable neighborhoods. Instead of getting in their cars, residents can walk to visit friends. They can also walk to the dry cleaner or the video store. Mixed-use development — retail, office and residential uses co-existing in one location — is another hallmark of traditional neighborhood design.

TNDs also get cars off the road by providing a market for mass transit. Because of the concentration of residents, Somerset Development will be able to build the Bergen Line’s first new station in decades at Wesmont Station. A Rutgers University study showed that the average transit village household owns only 1.35 cars instead of the usual two or more.

Density as the solution for New Jersey’s problems might sound counter-intuitive. But it is lack of density in the form of unbridled suburban sprawl that has contributed to many of the state’s problems – and it is with greater density that they will be solved.

The costs of suburban sprawl — to our physical and mental health, our wallets, our environment, our civic life and our economy — are simply unsustainable.

This entry was posted in New Development, New Jersey Real Estate. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Is density the answer?

  1. metroplexual says:

    Generally in NJ when these things are proposed there is resistance on the part of the public. They generally say this is what I was moving from. I am glad to see that they are getting a chance to build them.

    Generally when people visit them they come away saying “I would love to live in a place like this”. The main problem in NJ is that they are mostly located in cities and have the stigma of the city associated with them.

    I also hope they use good architects and avoid overly restrictive form based codes. Otherwise they will end up with West Palm Beach FL.

  2. metroplexual says:

    sorry to use “generally” too much I am not awake just yet.

  3. rhymingrealtor says:

    I generally agree with you. It is what I am looking for, I have it where I am at but it is in an apartment. I Like attached townhomes,without associations, where you actually own that little bit of land behind you.Your kids walk to their friends homes, we do have that here, they can walk to bowling alleys, movies, shopping etc. I beleive Riverpark in Harrison is going to be like that, I just hate harrison.

    KL

  4. syncmaster says:

    Although I haven’t seen the acronym “TND” mentioned, this sounds an awful like what the redevelopment plans for Middlesex borough and Dunellen boroughs have in mind.

    For info on Middlesex go here – http://www.middlesexboro.com/ and go to the links on the right under “What’s new?”, “Lincoln Blvd Redevelopment”.

    For info on Dunellen go here – http://www.dunellen.com/redevelopment.htm

  5. syncmaster says:

    JB, I have a comment awaiting moderation.

  6. Robert Coté says:

    “Many of our public woes are caused not by population density, but by the prevailing sprawl pattern of development.

    What’s this? A desperate conclusion in search of a scrap of substantiation? How about a list of “ills” and how they are associated with sprawl and not density.

    I’m embarrased that a state with a deer overpopulation problem is still characterized as running out of open space.

  7. metroplexual says:

    Robert,

    I don’t disagree with you on the open space issue. When the word sprawl is bandied about my hackles get raised. I know some people regard it like pornography in that when they see it they reckognize it. However, when you have absolutists like Jeff Tittel from NJ Sierra Club spouting nonsense sound bites like development is “Land Cancer” you just can’t have a rational discussion.

    Zoning in NW Jersey may make buildout occur even faster large lots are the norm (5-10 acres). When developers come into NW Jersey from central NJ they don’t understand why they can’t just have a subdivision. In many cases the topography of the region makes driveway locations critical. I have seen many proposed subdivisions go nowhere because the road/driveway had poor sight distance. Development standards have tightened up over the last decade and will limit developability in the region as all the good land has been develooped.

    I myself have done buildout analyses in two of the NW counties and I can say that with the Highlands Preservation and Planning areas that it might even come sooner.

    But haphazard development in the remaining developable areas will just make commutes even worse, which will ultimately strangle business in the state. I-80 and I-78 will never get widened (NJDOT says so)and only three rail lines could get extended in the NW Jersey areas.

    Robert as always, I advocate allowing people choices in what and where they want to live in. High density for some people is a desirable thing and from a transportation point of view is more desirable. As per the ITE trip generation manual, residential landuses that are higher in density generate less automobile trips.

    It should be noted that the writer of the article is a developer and that with the limited developable land left in NJ, redevelopment will be the way developers will stay in business without moving out of state.

    BTW, I did not know you came to this blog, welcome!

  8. metroplexual says:

    Sync,

    That is what it is. I have heard of both plans being proposed. Now for the execution part.

  9. syncmaster says:

    metroplexual,

    Yeah, execution is key. I’m not sure I’m too happy with either of these plans. They’re talking about building thousands of new units similar to the one I live in and that can’t be good for the value of my home during a time of decreasing population growth. OTOH they’re also talking about more bus/train options in closer proximity to where I live so maybe it won’t matter?

    Anyway time will tell. We live here because it’s convenient for us (neither of us have more than 10 min commute) and we have family closeby. The other stuff is well… other stuff.

  10. metroplexual says:

    Anytime train service is increased in NJ towns the RE values go up. So it is a good thing if this is walking distance from where you live. I am not sure the Lincoln Blvd site has much access to a train unless it is going to get its own station. IIRC there is a rail line paralleling it right? Is it the Raritan Valley line?

    Is the site in Dunellen next to the train station?

  11. syncmaster says:

    Middlesex – the site used to have a train station and the boro wants it reactivated. Alternatively, they want an NJ Transit bus stop there which connects to the Bound Brook train station (on the Raritan Valley line).

    Dunellen – the redevlopment will be all around the train station. They plan to use the station as the ‘centerpiece’. There will be condos and TH’s all around the station.

    My place wouldn’t exactly be within ‘walking distance’ from the proposed site of the Middlesex train station – about 1 mile. Whether 1 mile is walking distance or not depends entirely on how much snow there is on the ground :P

  12. syncmaster says:

    Oh and yes, the line that passes through Middlesex is the Raritan Valley line. If they reactivated the station there, it would be a new stop between the existing stops of Bound Brook and Dunellen.

  13. metroplexual says:

    The reactivation of a station is expensive, especially with ADA requirements. I agree on the walkability, up here in NW Jersey we usually have snow on the ground for 1 1/2 months in the winter. I grew up fairly close to where you live, and I miss the winter weather there. Alot less shoveling!

    BTW my wife’s cousin used to live on Cap lane next to the creek/river park.

  14. StephenS says:

    In response to Robert Cote, development and deforestation has created more food for deer. In large dense forest, shrubs are shaded out by taller trees making less food for deer. This land is replaced with landscaped single family homes with shrubs and plants that deer can reach.

    I think TNDs are fantastic, and they are NJ’s only hope of remaining a great place to live and work. I could write several pages to support this, but I don’t have the time right now.

  15. syncmaster says:

    … development and deforestation has created more food for deer. In large dense forest, shrubs are shaded out by taller trees making less food for deer. This land is replaced with landscaped single family homes with shrubs and plants that deer can reach.

    Not to mention the fact that most of their natural predators are either gone (wolf, for example) or don’t hunt them as much (human beings).

    I’m waiting for some genius environmentalist on crack to suggest the massive reintroduction of the wolf and the cougar into New Jersey.

  16. metroplexual says:

    Sync,

    The mountain lion is back. At least up here. Heck the development I live in is named for them.

  17. metroplexual says:

    Oh forgot, there was a mountain lion road kill reported on I-78 in Greenwich.

  18. syncmaster says:

    Interesting, I had no idea. The only ‘wildlife’ I see in my parts are squirrels and those goddamn geese.

    How come there hasn’t been more of a media ruckus over the introduction of a dangerous predator in New Jersey? Or has there been, and I just haven’t noticed?

  19. syncmaster says:

    Oh and of course, deer too. They’re everywhere.

  20. metroplexual says:

    ABC news did the report on the mountain lion. NJ.com’s forums under Warren Cty reported the road kill.

  21. syncmaster says:

    I have a comment awaiting moderation.

Comments are closed.