Who says Cranbury “wants this?” This is the state pushing these circumstances on suburban and rural towns. The towns are forced to find a solution. The towns are not looking to do this in their own. Meanwhile its tax abatement after tax abatement for the gentrifiers in the urban areas.
OT: Another NJ farm to be seized
- Thread starter Extra Point_rivals157299
- Start date
Builders are only happy due to the 4x market rate multiplier (i.e., for every 1 COAH unit, they get to build 4 market rate units with high rent). Take this away and replace it with a direct subsidy.
There is nothing wrong about Mount Laurel and mitigating exclusionary zoning, but like with everything in NJ, the problem is the remedy by the morons in Trenton.
Bingo! The state of NJ is forcing this issue on rural and suburban towns. It’s creating mass environmental destruction and towns can not do anything about.
1. I describe the gist of the current formula in one of my posts above. It has changed a number of times over the last few decades. It’s been the subject of litigation since the mount laurel decisions
2. New obligations come out every 10 years so, no, it never ends. Fully built out towns can have their obligations adjusted if they get an expert report proving they are built out but even that can be challenged by developers, the builders lobby or an affordable housing advocacy group. So, no, it never ends.
Found this online.
Amazing to see where and who has the most unfulfilled obligations. And the methodology used to fulfill what the state considers open space. Farmland seems to have no purpose other than to be paved over for condos.
Last edited:
Wait but we’ve been told that builders want to build less not more. People don’t realize that’s the incentive. It’s not I’m going to build 20 houses so I need 1 affordable. It’s the state says I “can build”20 affordable. So now I’m going to push for 120 regular units to force an additional affordable allotment.
+1
It's not the 200 affordable homes that is going to kill a town. It's the f'ing 800 market rate units on top that is going to crush communities.....flooding, traffic, overloaded schools, higher taxes.
All so Trenton pols can pay off developers for their massive campaign contributions.
Exactly what I’ve said from the get go. Have no problem with affordable housing. It’s the metrics that developers use to manipulate the system they’ve created with the politicians.
The situation stems from the fact that building homes in New Jersey is more difficult than in any other state, as I showed earlier in this thread.
New Jersey added more than 2 million people between 1950 and 1980 and homebuilders had little problem providing affordable homes, both single family houses and apartments.
Then, the local governments and local whiners took the decision to frustrate new housing construction. Often they believe they control the land the landowners bought and own.
Here we are.
Throw open state land, including the Pinelands to houses and Liberty State Park to apartments. Let property owners decide what to do with their land.
New Jersey's housing shortage quickly will be on the way to recovery without government interference.
New Jersey added more than 2 million people between 1950 and 1980 and homebuilders had little problem providing affordable homes, both single family houses and apartments.
Then, the local governments and local whiners took the decision to frustrate new housing construction. Often they believe they control the land the landowners bought and own.
Here we are.
Throw open state land, including the Pinelands to houses and Liberty State Park to apartments. Let property owners decide what to do with their land.
New Jersey's housing shortage quickly will be on the way to recovery without government interference.
This plan sounds like complete environmental destruction. Residents have a right to expect their town and state to govern with the goal of responsible growth. Responsible growth maintains quality of life and property values.
You didn't provide any stats, but did confuse you're versus your, claimed falsely I said you had a silver spoon and then provided no proof of that.
Oh and went on rant about how we don't need affordable housing while claiming you weren't against it, and then suggesting people live in Ocean County communities you called unlivable elsewhere.
I do expect people to have children at some point or we're going to have serious population problems.
Exactly what? Towns are proposing 1 bedroom units to deliberately bring in "lazy s bags" or what?
What the state said was and is they can't zone out affordable housing. How many bedrooms they have is a function of the market. The link I provided had 1-3 bedrooms.
LOL. Mount Laurel obligations apply to every town. They apply to Newark and Rumson the same way.
Who are the "groups pushing this out to rural areas"? The rural parts of NJ (eg Cumberland) don't have much of a problem, especially not relative to the very non-rural areas that do.
Also, many NJ schools in suburban areas are *losing* population. Old Bridge and Jackson have closed schools recently.
Sounds like a NJ 101.5 rant.
Well the poster who said they want to take the land for starters...
Also based on the way Cranbury has voted they don't seem too angry.
Also, every city whether 10 people or 300k has this obligation. Not sure which cities are doing tax abatements but any other place could do it the same way. Oh, and in Jersey City anyway, we have complexes with 80% affordable housing going up. The state mandates 20%. And no one is crying about it either.
So the database with all of the public employees salaries wasn't provided? The additional database with police salaries wasn’t provided? The guidelines and thresholds used to provide the assistance for the housing being discussed wasn’t provided. The your you’re happened but was an auto prompt. So congratulations you won the internet. You inferred silver spoon in the other thread. Again congratulations.
NotInRHouse said:
1) I think putting yourself into others' shoes financially is already a slippery slope 2) I offered a solution, you just didn't like it which is your right 3) I am trying to buy a second home in the area so I am unfortunately all too aware of the costs, but for me, it's leisurely and basically a fun project versus someone else for whom it's a day to day struggle and I can appreciate that coming from a background where money didn't grow on trees surrounded by a lot of people for whom it did.
How does that prove affordability exactly? Ok, here's a list of salaries. I provided the starting salary and pointed out that's not enough to afford. The midrange is barely there. And, I sent the apartment complex with the rents.
Also, where does that say that *YOU* had a silver spoon...it said that I can appreciate the struggle others had. I didn't say YOU personally had any issue. You're claiming your only issue is eminent domain and then are ranting and raving about affordable housing.
Seems like a YOU problem, honestly. I don't know or care what struggles you had or didn't, but you're spinning an eminent domain question (on which people can reasonably disagree) into a question of whether it's affordable to live in most of NJ, on which reasonable people really can't.
You replied directly to my post with that scenario. Who exactly was it directed at?
How does it define affordability? That has been your argument all along. We need to provide for public employees, teachers, nurses, cops etc…. When it’s shown those people do not qualify for the low income/moderate income classifications. you pivot to something else. Only way they could possibly qualify is if they have multiple children in a one/part time 2 income family. Even with the link you provided.
Ranting and raving? What? You really are a petulant child!! Not ranting or raving at all. And what exactly are they using eminent domain for in this case? Use logic it’s not that hard.
Last edited:
The smartest way to improve affordability is to open land to homebuilding. Look at counties like Bergen and Middlesex. Farmland and forests converted to affordable single family houses from 1950s to 1980s. Now, regulators are banning this housing opportunity. Result: Dumb regulations + activist court decisions = housing shortage.
No. They wanted one bedrooms to bring in young teachers etc. exactly the type of young people you said this was for and the state said no.
Not applied the same.
The folks gentrifying urban areas, particularly previous low income areas are pushing the urban sprawl. And supporting all this low income housing forced on rural towns because it makes them feel good. No recognition that it is destroying the environment.
A place like Jackson is directly suffering from low income housing push from Trenton. Mass environmental destruction. Acres and acres of clear cutting through state sponsored low income housing programs. Low income residents create more demand on schools. And the town is gaining school age children that cost the district money. Majority just don’t attend public schools. They aren’t “losing” students in the town.
So if the state said no 1 bedrooms, why did the link I shared show....1 bedrooms available as part of an affordable housing complex?
I mean ranting and raving I'd say includes claiming I said you had a silver spoon and then quoting a post from me where the words "silver spoon" don't appear nor anything like them? Where did I say you were wealthy or grew up wealthy?
You didn't show those people don't qualify. In fact, the lower end would qualify for the link I posted.
So you're for affordable housing...but let's limit people based on children or demand everyone work? Do you know how much child care costs?
Who qualifies then? The "lazy s bags"? Who are these people that are so damaging?
"I proved it" and "it's in the other thread" are not proof.
"You said I have a silver spoon!" and quoting a post where those words don't appear....not proof.
Go back and re read the limitations you posted and all of the questions will be answered you pose regarding who qualifies will be answered. Better yet I’ll do it for you again:
Would a cop qualify? Would a nurse qualify? A teacher may qualify in a very low paying district for moderate but not low income.
Keep moving the metrics. Keep attributing quotes to me that I didn’t say. And you inferred wealthy and silver spoo. With many of your comments.
Sure, OK. Please cite in the Mount Laurel decision where it says that some towns are exempt...
Then after dealing with that fiction, please provide proof that it's "gentrifiers" who support "low income housing in rural towns."
Your ability to completely ignore facts is honestly impressive. Let's go delusion by delusion.
1. The Mount Laurel decision and recent state law apply to literally every town in NJ.
2. Many, if not most, urban areas in NJ are not "pushing urban sprawl." First off, outside of Hudson County and maybe, on its best day, a very small part of Newark, the rest of urban NJ isn't gentrified- Camden, Paterson, Plainfield, etc- by anyone's definition.
3. Understanding you'll never, ever, produce a survey showing "gentrifiers" are supporting anything with their votes, if you pretended, as I'm sure you would, that it wasn't completely bipartisan court (as per NJ tradition it's Supreme Court is 3-3-1) upholding the policies, NJ suburbs overwhelmingly voted for Murphy, including Cranbury, the subject of the thread, as well as the major wealthy suburban counties like Somerset. If Cranbury is rural than what is Somerset...must be a giant farm.
The homes being built in Jackson are not mostly affordable. Jackson and the surrounding towns have an influx of people purchasing very expensive homes. What's going on there has nothing to do with affordable housing. And towns far from Lakewood like Old Bridge and others also have schools closing.
If the goal is to turn much of suburban NJ into a giant retirement community- which frankly seems like the goal of some- just say that. No need to pretend there's some urban plot, or whine about "lazy s bags" or what have you. Just say change is upsetting.
So all employees in Wall earn over 120k? The teachers would love that raise.
You didn't say I said you had a silver spoon?
You know the response to making a mistake or lying should be "Sorry, you never said I had a silver spoon." Everyone can read I never said that or "inferred" it. I made no inference at all about your upbringing or income. All anyone can "infer" is that you're extremely opposed to someone making the amounts from the apartment link (45-120k) having an opportunity to be your neighbor. Why, you'd have to explain. I won't put words in your mouth.
Reread the metrics. The only way that said cop would qualify would be if they had 5 dependents living in a 3 BR apartment. Your whole argument was young single teachers cops nurses with nowhere to go.
I didn't realize only married people have children.
I thought it was 2025, not Leave it to Beaver.
Admit that you don’t know how to read the chart.
| Number in Household | Very Low Income | Low Income | Moderate Income |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $28,290 | $47,150 | $75,440 |
| 2 | $32,310 | $53,850 | $86,160 |
| 3 | $36,360 | $60,600 | $96,960 |
| 4 | $40,380 | $67,300 | $107,680 |
| 5 | $43,620 | $72,700 | $116,320 |
| 6 | $46,860 | $78,100 | $124,960 |
The complexes have 1 BR units. My town wanted all of the low income to be the 1 BR units and the state said no.
Thanks for posting that graph. I thought most cops teachers etc wouldn’t qualify. My wife has only been a teacher for 4 years and if she had 6 kids she still wouldn’t qualify.
Posted it multiple times. But the metrics he applies keep changing. Was young single teachers cops nurses and Jimmy and Johnny coming home from college not being able to afford a house. Now it’s anyone that ever heard of leave it to beaver and has 5 dependents living in a 3br apt.
That’s what he does in every thread. It’s his MO. It’s very easy to say the state needs more affordable housing but this isn’t helping the young working class.
With a dose of "you are wrong and I am right" in every response and you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.
With a dose of "you are wrong and I am right" in every response and you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.
Like playing a game of Whack-A-Mole.
Or Whack-A-Kitty:
1) Never said exempt. It’s not applied the same and has a much different impact.
2) It’s the limo liberals who have been gentrifying urban areas. To make themselves feel better they back politicians who push affordable housing…..as long as it is a different neighborhood or town. They will say they care about the environment but the affordable housing push destroys habitats and environments. The folks buying multi million dollar houses in Montclair aren’t supporting high density housing in their open space. It’s someone else’s open space that can be used. Same for the gentrifiers in places like Hoboken and Jersey city.
3) Cranbury is not rural but it is being used in this conversation to spotlight what is happening in Monmouth, Ocean, Burlington, Atlantic counties because of the state pushing this on rural/suburban towns.
4) Old Bridge is in Middlesex county and is much different circumstances. To be polite as best as possible - you clearly have no clue what is happening in northern ocean county right now. Including a place like Jackson. I’ve been here 50 years. You’re not going to tell me you know more. There has been mass destruction to provide significant amounts of affordable housing over the last two decades. Especially the last 5-10 years. Not to mention the hundreds of acres cleared for “affordable housing” that will then sit and is sold, only to become a new project.
5) The goal should be to take steps to maintain NJ’s open space and contain urban sprawl. Towns have a right to set local zoning regulations to protect the urban character of that town. That’s why people live there. It’s not unreasonable to set minimum acreage standards for building. But the state will push high density affordable housing on these towns who have the space. Destroying the character of the town and the environment. The people pushing for this and voting for it make sure it doesn’t happen by them. I can admit change is upsetting when it’s ruining the environment. Who would support that?
There is plenty of ignorance in many of his posts. Lots of grandstanding without substance. Every once in a while there is a valid point that he brings to the discussion.
Base on previous thread, I thought New Jersey was going to be empty in a few years with everybody moving out, the same with New York City and San Francisco. I recently read articles that San Francisco and NYC are back and desirable places to live. AI brought SF back according to Nvidia CEO, Jensen Huang. There are so many new apartment complexes build the last few years in north Jersey especially Newark and Bloomfield I always wonder who’s moving into these apartments. They are renting for 3,000-4,000 month. In the past, that type of monthly payment would get you a very decent house but I guess the younger generation can’t afford the down payment and are struck in an apartment.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report Football
Behind Enemy Lines: An inside look at the USC Trojans
-
02
The Knight Report
Join The Knight Report TODAY for $1 and get 50% off!
-
03
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football Wednesday Injury Report: Latest Updates ahead of the USC game
-
04
The Knight Report
Greg Schiano previews Rutgers Football versus USC + Recruiting Tidbits - TKR Pod
-
05
The Knight Report
2026-27 Rutgers Basketball Schedule: Dates, Opponents, & TV