New Jersey Is Running Out of Open Land It Can Build on

NY Times (non-fiction ed.) ^ | May 24, 2003 | LAURA MANSNERUS

[Pharmboy]

GREENWICH TOWNSHIP, N.J. — New Jersey, far more densely populated than any other state — more crowded than Japan or India, for that matter — is on course for another distinction: it will be the first state, land-use experts say, to exhaust its supply of land available for development.

The prospect of running out of open space to build on, a phenomenon that planners call buildout, is at the heart of Gov. James E. McGreevey's well-publicized campaign against sprawl. In poll after poll, voters in this most suburban of states say they hate what they see, and elected officials on all levels have taken note.

Roughly two million of New Jersey's five million acres are developed, and a little over one million are protected by various levels of government. The state has promised to acquire or preserve enough land, including farmland, to bring the number of protected acres to two million by 2009. Some of the rest is unsuitable for development, leaving less than a million acres to be fought over. Since those estimates were made a few years ago, some of those acres have surely been developed.

The pace of suburban development is a powerful issue in many other states after a 10-year onslaught of building, but the political and economic tensions are especially raw here, where more people are scrambling over less open space. Builders accuse the governor of thwarting the American dream, environmentalists say builders will kill agriculture, and many towns try to avoid the costs of growth, like developing infrastructure and building schools, by zoning out housing that would bring in children.

The pattern in New Jersey is the very definition of sprawl: land consumption is increasing faster than the population is growing. As in other parts of the country, land is consumed three to four times faster than the population grows. "We're taking bigger bites with each wave of development," said Barbara Lawrence, the director of New Jersey Future, a land-use planning organization.

Some project that buildout will occur within 20 years, while New Jersey's population of 8.4 million is expected to grow by 1 million in that period, but other estimates are that buildout could take many more decades. The timing depends on population and employment growth, which can swerve wildly with the economy. Government could hasten buildout by putting more land off limits to development through environmental controls.

The debate now under way will determine whether the population will continue to spread across the landscape or become more concentrated in the cities and older suburbs. It will determine, in short, what a built-out state looks like.

New Jersey officials do not know how much land has been consumed since the last statewide land surveys, taken in the mid-1990's. Estimates range from 16,000 acres to more than 40,000 acres a year. Mr. McGreevey says the state is losing 50 acres a day to development, a figure that other state officials describe as conservative.

But the rate of consumption may have increased in the late 1990's, many land-use experts say, in a pattern entrenched across the nation. American appetites for space have put ever-smaller families onto ever-larger lots.

"In the '50's and '60's, a quarter of an acre was a lot, and half an acre was huge," said James W. Hughes, the dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers. "Now it's one acre, three acres, five acres."

That change, Mr. Hughes said, portends self-perpetuating congestion. Each new resident, for example, adds 1.2 vehicles. "When you move into a McMansion you need three cars to fill your three-car garage," Mr. Hughes said, "and a big S.U.V. for the two snow days per year."

Each new resident spurs more commercial development, too. Since 1980, Mr. Hughes notes, retail space per capita has doubled and office space per capita has increased sixfold.

In northwestern New Jersey, Greenwich Township, bordering the Delaware River in the southern lobe of Warren County, was transformed by the completion of Interstate 78 and the office parks that came with it across the state from Newark. To look at the landscape here — say, from the road between the new Home Depot and the new Lowe's — is to see how New Jersey could quickly run out of real estate.

Splaying east and west on former farm fields are about 800 of the new houses that brought the population of Greenwich Township to 4,365 in 2000 from 1,899 in 1990, a 130 percent increase. A few miles north, off Route 57, big lumber skeletons are rising at the Grande at Scotts Mountain, a subdivision where the lots average 3.4 acres.

"This is supposed to be a scenic highway, but it's all for sale," said Mike King, the chairman of a civic group that is promoting development in the sagging town of Phillipsburg, near Greenwich Township, and is fighting it in the outlying townships.

Mr. McGreevey inherited a program that spends about $200 million a year to buy open space and preserve farmland, which he rolled into a bigger "smart growth" campaign to steer development to population centers, mostly by making it difficult elsewhere. He issued an edict last month to restrict building near 15 reservoirs, rivers and streams, halting several projects just days from construction, and state officials are working on what they call "the big map," delineating areas where they will impose restrictions on growth.

As for the governor, Mr. King said, "he's thinking all those right things, but it's later than he seems to realize."

Developers say they have been forced into rural areas as older suburbs, already built out, become prohibitively expensive. Even then, "we are not able to meet demand," said Joanne Harkins, the director of land use and planning for the New Jersey Builders Association. "When they open a new development we have waiting lists. Virtually everything is sold before it's built."

According to the United States Department of Agriculture, 39 percent of New Jersey's land area was developed as of 1997, while the next on the list were far behind: Massachusetts and Rhode Island at 30 percent and Connecticut at 29 percent.

The department found that about 42,500 acres a year were developed from 1992 to 1997, the latest year for which figures were available. A 1995 survey by the state Department of Environmental Protection found a much lower rate of development, 16,000 to 18,000 acres a year, largely because it did not count open space attached to new buildings, like a wooded campus surrounding an office cluster, as developed.

The state is awaiting results of a new aerial survey and has compiled information from local governments, but those will not show thousands of projects that are in the pipeline.

Bradley M. Campbell, the state commissioner of environmental protection, said that when the aerial photographs are analyzed, "there's every reason to believe the rate will be higher" than the governor's estimate of 50 acres a day lost to development.

First, Mr. Campbell said, the recent trend — "a very grim pattern" — has been accelerating land consumption. Second, he said, rapid economic expansion occurred in the late 1990's. "Third," he said, "there's been no real effort to strengthen regulatory controls on development" until recently.

"What's as troubling as the pace of loss is the location," he added. About 40 percent of new development, he said, is in areas the state classifies as rural or environmentally sensitive.

Mr. Hughes at Rutgers is doubtful that one million new residents will materialize by 2020. In a state that has no room left for new highways, he said, development is self-limiting. "As congestion gets worse, and it's going to get worse, and as it becomes expensive, these inhibitors to growth are going to kick in."

But Jeff Tittel, the director of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, estimates that "we'll hit buildout within 20 years" in all but Cumberland and Salem Counties, in the far south of the state.

"There could be some pieces left," Mr. Tittel said, "but they would be environmentally sensitive or just junk property."

Environmental regulation is the governor's main means of curbing development, since the guidelines in the State Development and Redevelopment Plan are voluntary. "The time you reach buildout depends on what kind of regulatory controls you have to protect water and wildlife," Mr. Campbell said. "If the right safeguards are in place, buildout may be sooner rather than later."

Developers, while not disputing that, say the administration's anti-growth measures threaten the housing that the state most needs. "When Mr. Campbell's done, there will be no place outside the ghettos for middle-income and low-income New Jerseyans," said Patrick J. O'Keefe, the chief executive of the builders association.

Joseph J. Maraziti Jr., a former chairman of the State Planning Commission, said that builders could see that as a new business model: redeveloping cities instead of expanding the suburbs. "The consensus is like none I've ever seen about revitalizing our cities."

But he added, "It's in our genes as a country that began as a colony. You don't get it out of your system fast — you should tame the land and expand. There's a lot of momentum behind the idea that goes back 300 years. It doesn't stop because of some speeches and legislation."

[BrookdalePark]

"What's as troubling as the pace of loss is the location."

What's more troubling than either of those is that it's Mr. McGreevey making sure that anything he can gobble up will be gobbled up for the benefit of him and his cronies. His audacity is without limit. He has no shame, and his greed is ... there is no adequate word.

[metesky]

There are plenty of outright lies in this little gem, but this is the egregious:

But the rate of consumption may have increased in the late 1990's, many land-use experts say, in a pattern entrenched across the nation. American appetites for space have put ever-smaller families onto ever-larger lots.

"In the '50's and '60's, a quarter of an acre was a lot, and half an acre was huge," said James W. Hughes, the dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers. "Now it's one acre, three acres, five acres."

In the sixties they got slapped down for "snob zoning" which is when they came up with zoning for "open space". These large lots are almost always the result of government zoning by unelected boards of experts who think they are so gd smart that they can fix the "mistakes" of the smart planners of the 50s and 60s.

It's all a shell game and the term "smart growth" is a good tip-off.

"Smart Growth" is "Agenda 21"

[Petronski]

You listed this article as "NY Times (non-fiction ed.)" but I have my doubts. The headline "...Is Running Out..." implies an immediacy not supported by the text of the article, which instead speaks of 20 years until 'buildout' or far longer until 'buildout.'

The New York Times is sick, and running an opinion piece like this as a news item is just another symptom.

[Petronski]

"In the '50's and '60's, a quarter of an acre was a lot, and half an acre was huge," said James W. Hughes, the dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers. "Now it's one acre, three acres, five acres."

Horror of horrors! The Peasants are Buying Land!

[metesky]

Bump

[Teacher317]

They're making the fear-mongering excuses so that government can control even private land use... then the other states, which are not enarly as densely populated, will follow suit.

[Leisler]

First the left didn't want people living in "ticky-tacky boxes.” Then they wanted everyone on 2 acres minimum. Now they are saying the land is being gobbled up. Naturally this is way since they knocked off the family farm or overtaxed unused open land, which if you are a enviro you can now get at no to low taxes.

Like most things in America, we are now in a spiral of the leftists own making.

[P.O.E.]

Funny how all the New Yorkers move out to the country, but don't realize they are the very people they're moving to get away from.

The friendliness and community-spirit of small semi-rural towns is soon ruined by strident, rude, "get-over on others before they get-over on you" knuckleheads. Soon followed by lawsuits, urbanized and discontented kids, and trouble.

Maybe it's just the few bad apples, but the odds rise the more the "bennies" move in.

[Churchjack]

That's silly. Build your streets bigger, or drive a smaller car as your conscience dictates. Leave my vehicle alone.

By the way, how many acres of land do you suppose NJ wastes on those ridiculous mug handles? JUST TURN LEFT!!

If y'all need land in Jersey, I'd be happy to ship you some of mine....

[Princeliberty]

Well with the direction New Jersey's economy is headed
and don't think the governor need worry too much
about this problem. Empty unused buildings on the other
hand may be a problem that's going to come on strong.

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

Guys, Part of the reason might be U.N. control of close to 1/2 million acres called The New Jersey Pine Lands U.N. Biosphere. Henry lamb has links in his WND article on "U.N. influence in Alabama" today. And, along with the Nature Conservancy {and other bureaucratic "non-profit" enviralist "NGOs"} in collusion with local{?} and U.S. of A. government, they will control MORE "scarce" property. Ain't life wonderful?? Peace and love, George.

[Ditter]

Haven't I read articles about bears in NJ? Also I saw The Blair Witch Project (regretfully), wasn't that NJ? Don't tell me those weren't true. OH NO! I've been duped again!

[Pharmboy]

You listed this article as "NY Times (non-fiction ed.)" but I have my doubts.

You got me. At times my being a wise guy (or at least trying to) gets me in trouble. You are, of course, correct.

When it (Howell) Raines, it pours.

[Pharmboy]

Yep and nope. Last week there was a bear in a tree in my town (Rockaway) and yesterday a bear attacked a guy trying to save his dog (he's doing ok, the dog is critical). That happened a few towns over.

Blair Witch was in Maryland.

[Ditter]

OK Now tell me about the "Jersey devil". Doesn't he live in the woods?

[geege]

No I'm in Annandale......Yikes.....Phillipsburg.....no way!!!!! I heard about what happened so I took the back roads home....got home in 20 minutes from Bedminster....I like driving on Mountain Road by Road Valley.....

[B Knotts]

Government exists to solve crises. If none exist, they must be created.

[Pharmboy]

From here

One of the more interesting stories I heard , when I moved to New Jersey, was about the Jersey Devil. It seems that a frightening and gruesome creature haunts the very neighborhood we live in. The Jersey Devil has been terrorizing the Pineland area for over 250 years. He has been blamed for many horrifying deeds and his sightings have been numerous.

I know that I will think twice before walking the sandy trails in the Pinelands because "Where stunted pines of burned-over forest are revealed in darksome pools, The Jersey Devil Lurks."

It seems that there are several versions of the Story, but they all revolve around the birth of a child. That child then tranforms into- you guessed it-

The Devil of NJ

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

©Sandy Sandy

The most common folktale is that the Jersey Devil is the offspring of one Mrs. Leeds, who, in 1735, after hearing she was pregnant with her 13th child, was overheard saying "it might just as well be a devil as a child." Devil it was, and it flew directly from womb to the swamps, cursing it's mother on the way out the chimney.

The Devil eventually began to enjoy status of local legend, (and even became the state's "official demon" in the 1930's) tales of his beginnings filling the conversations of pubs and churches alike.

Descriptions of the Devil range from a "flying lion" to "an eagle with four legs" and everything in-between, but one attribute that does not change from report to report is the Devil's call, a combination howl and whistle. When harassing the good people of New Jersey, the Devil would eat livestock, attempt to steal children, and scare the bejezus out of everyone in the process, often leaving cloven footprints to corroborate the stories of startled victims.

Another Version-

The New Jersey Devil to some is a mythical being and to some a reality. The story begins centuries ago with a Quaker woman named Mother Leeds who was involved with a some sort of mysterious evil cult. She had 12 children during that time. However, when she was pregnant with the 13th child, she cursed it to be a devil. Her wish was granted as the newborn emerged normal at first, but then turned into a vile looking creature with horns, wings, and hooves. When it was born it immediately killed the entire family and laid waste to the small quaker town.

Yet Another Version-

According to one legend, the Jersey Devil was born during the American Revolution. The story goes that during the Battle of Chestnut Creek, a lovelorn Leeds Point girl fell for a British soldier. She was cursed by townsfolk for this act of treason and, as a result, later gave birth to the Leeds Devil.

One More Version-

A gypsy curse is also reputed to have brought the creature to the south Jersey woods. In this tale, a young girl, frightened by a vagabond, refused his request for food. All was forgotten until the girl gave birth to her first child, which became the fiendish creature.

Today it is said that this beast has been spotted in small towns near the deep forests in southern Jersey. References state that this short hairy demon lives in the huge preserved forest of the Pine Barrens.

[Future Snake Eater]

From my personal perception, it seems that there is plenty of room to develop. What I saw of Newark clearly showed that it needs to be torn down and rebuilt. Think the state gov't would go for it?

[headsonpikes]

"Sounds like a lie to either raise property values or some other underhanded move."

A winner on the first response!

Development restrictions are favored by developers with less desirable properties, and by existing property owners. Both of these groups seek to use the state to advance their economic interests.

This is the tragic flaw of all attempts to use the government for 'good' purposes, as contrasted with the necessary war-making and criminal justice functions of the state, which are unproductive economically of goods that consumers can use. The rhetoric of good purposes always disguises the reality of self-interest.

It's all about the money.