New Building On Springfield/Tuscan

From what I have read in various local media and seen posted both on MOL and Facebook, it has been studied and concluded more than once that the increase in children in the district is not much related to new apartment buildings, but rather to young families moving into single family homes after long-time residents have moved away.

That could change if rents go down, but they would have to go down a LOT, I think. Most of the apartments going up are too small for the amount of the rent to attract lots of families with children. 

One demographic that I understand is moving into the apartments with children are divorced parents who want to stay near their kids. But those kids are already in the district ... just now splitting time between a home with one parent and an apartment with the other.




sac said:

From what I have read in various local media and seen posted both on MOL and Facebook, it has been studied and concluded more than once that the increase in children in the district is not much related to new apartment buildings, but rather to young families moving into single family homes after long-time residents have moved away.

Some might argue that the abundance of these new apartments will hasten the empty nesters in vacating their homes because they will be able to stay in town.  My argument would center on pilots for properties like these.  If they can’t stand up on their own they shouldn’t happen. It’s as if these buildings have some intrinsic value  that makes them worthy of support by taxpayers.


I agree that part of the issue is families moving in only during the school age years, but that is not the only factor at play.  If you really think that all these new apartments going up won't contribute to the increase in student population, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.



spontaneous said:

I agree that part of the issue is families moving in only during the school age years, but that is not the only factor at play.  If you really think that all these new apartments going up won't contribute to the increase in student population, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Study after study have been shown in this forum showing exactly that. Perhaps you have some statistically relevant study to show the opposite. If so, put up or.....


A huge part of the problem is the number of empty nesters who have sent their children to schools in the district and are now moving out of their single family home.  Due to factors such as real property taxes, parents wanting to be closer to their grown children and grand children who have moved away, declining health, effort involved in maintaining a single family home, architecture of our single family homes that is not conducive to aging in place, etc.  These empty nesters would have moved from their one family home whether or not a senior-friendly alternative were available to them here in town.  A number of seniors I know have moved into apartments in Maplewood or South Orange, enabling them to remain in the community; but, these seniors would have sold their one family home anyway for the reasons mentioned above.  If we really want to do something about reducing the never-ending strain on our school system, we have to find ways to make it easier for these empty nesters to age in place in their single family homes.




spontaneous said:

I agree that part of the issue is families moving in only during the school age years, but that is not the only factor at play.  If you really think that all these new apartments going up won't contribute to the increase in student population, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

I think you’ll end up on the wrong end of the bridge deal.  By a pretty huge margin. 



joan_crystal said:

A huge part of the problem is the number of empty nesters who have sent their children to schools in the district and are now moving out of their single family home.  Due to factors such as real property taxes, parents wanting to be closer to their grown children and grand children who have moved away, declining health, effort involved in maintaining a single family home, architecture of our single family homes that is not conducive to aging in place, etc.  These empty nesters would have moved from their one family home whether or not a senior-friendly alternative were available to them here in town.  A number of seniors I know have moved into apartments in Maplewood or South Orange, enabling them to remain in the community; but, these seniors would have sold their one family home anyway for the reasons mentioned above.  If we really want to do something about reducing the never-ending strain on our school system, we have to find ways to make it easier for these empty nesters to age in place in their single family homes.

This!

I would like to stay in my home. But if I'm not able to do so, for whatever reason, it is highly likely that the next residents will have children in the schools.


@spontaneous - If there were large numbers of 2 and 3 bedroom units in those buildings and if the rents were a bit lower, then I would agree. But given the current situation, any family moving here that is able to pay those rents can probably afford to purchase a home, so why wouldn't they? 


Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.

sac said:

@spontaneous - If there were large numbers of 2 and 3 bedroom units in those buildings and if the rents were a bit lower, then I would agree. But given the current situation, any family moving here that is able to pay those rents can probably afford to purchase a home, so why wouldn't they? 



https://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/consultant-south-orange-maplewood-schools-need-more-than-redistricting/


yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.
sac said:

@spontaneous - If there were large numbers of 2 and 3 bedroom units in those buildings and if the rents were a bit lower, then I would agree. But given the current situation, any family moving here that is able to pay those rents can probably afford to purchase a home, so why wouldn't they? 



yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.
sac said:

@spontaneous - If there were large numbers of 2 and 3 bedroom units in those buildings and if the rents were a bit lower, then I would agree. But given the current situation, any family moving here that is able to pay those rents can probably afford to purchase a home, so why wouldn't they? 

The Board of Ed has hired a school consultant who studied the the school population over the past year

His conclusion was that currently we need 7 additional class rooms.

We need 23 if the portables are eliminated.

Can be referenced in the Village Green.......unable to cut and paste

What percentage of an entire school is 23 classrooms?


100%. 

23 classrooms is the equivalent of an entire elementary school.



yahooyahoo said:

100%. 

23 classrooms is the equivalent of an entire elementary school.

Some where there is a joke in all this.  I got it.  Did you hear about the Township that allowed a zillion apts. to be built and actually expected the school populace to increase by only 3 students at the same time the current schools were bursting at the seams.  I think those studies supporting the tiny numbers were done by a builder


Hey I did cut and paste that article


Tough crowd, I guess.


author said:

Some where there is a joke in all this.  I got it.  Did you hear about the Township that allowed a zillion apts. to be built and actually expected the school populace to increase by only 3 students at the same time the current schools were bursting at the seams.  I think those studies supporting the tiny numbers were done by a builder

IIRC, there was a study of actual enrollments, in the South Orange Maplewood schools.  That's where that position comes from.  The schools are "bursting at the seams" because of families living in houses, sending children to the schools.  By the way, at my abode it's just my spouse and me right now, and if we decide to "downsize" the new family could well add at least 3 new students as a result.  That's just another way to say that new students are arriving because of change in house ownership.



nohero said:


author said:

Some where there is a joke in all this.  I got it.  Did you hear about the Township that allowed a zillion apts. to be built and actually expected the school populace to increase by only 3 students at the same time the current schools were bursting at the seams.  I think those studies supporting the tiny numbers were done by a builder

IIRC, there was a study of actual enrollments, in the South Orange Maplewood schools.  That's where that position comes from.  The schools are "bursting at the seams" because of families living in houses, sending children to the schools.  By the way, at my abode it's just my spouse and me right now, and if we decide to "downsize" the new family could well add at least 3 new students as a result.  That's just another way to say that new students are arriving because of change in house ownership.

Yes and the several hundred apts being built will bring only three new students into town



Tall_Mocha said:

Does anyone know what they’re building on Springfield Ave across the street from the Hilton Branch library? More apartments?




Ramita4 said:



Tall_Mocha said:

Does anyone know what they’re building on Springfield Ave across the street from the Hilton Branch library? More apartments?

From the looks of the shell, it will be either more apartments or a horse stable for carriage rides around the gazebo.



yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.

--- and you don't think the apartment owners aren't going to raise the rents to pass off the loss of deduction?



Formerlyjerseyjack said:



yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.

--- and you don't think the apartment owners aren't going to raise the rents to pass off the loss of deduction?

How many of the new apartments being built have two or more bedrooms? And, of those, how many have three or more? And how many have rents affordable to families who would be inclined to squeeze into them? Of course there may be a few more children, but everything I’m reading indicates that the numbers are low and the big bump in the schools is (by far) related to turnover of single family homes. The tax law change is much more likely to send families to lower cost towns than to apartments here IMO. 

My suspicion (but I don’t have data to support this) is that the tax law change is more likely to mean fewer middle income and more higher income families in town, but I guess time will tell.


Most of our housing stock in Maplewood is for middle class families.  Based on your suspicion, the housing market in town will decline significantly.

sac said:



Formerlyjerseyjack said:



yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.

--- and you don't think the apartment owners aren't going to raise the rents to pass off the loss of deduction?

How many of the new apartments being built have two or more bedrooms? And, of those, how many have three or more? And how many have rents affordable to families who would be inclined to squeeze into them? Of course there may be a few more children, but everything I’m reading indicates that the numbers are low and the big bump in the schools is (by far) related to turnover of single family homes. The tax law change is much more likely to send families to lower cost towns than to apartments here IMO. 

My suspicion (but I don’t have data to support this) is that the tax law change is more likely to mean fewer middle income and more higher income families in town, but I guess time will tell.



Could anyone provide a link to any of the studies reporting that an increase in apartments does not increase the school age population?  The last study quoted to me that I was able to review was done in the 1970's. Thanks!


Ya gotta go to the website of ---  I think the trade association website is, Multipleunitbuildersassociationofamericareducingschoolpopulation.org

That will explain it all for ya. How many 2 and three bedroom units are included in these new constructions?


Too many buildings going up.  It's taking away from  the quiet life I've enjoyed in Maplewood for the past couple of decades.  Economic Development is great, but at what point do you draw the line.



Formerlyjerseyjack said:



yahooyahoo said:

Well, the Republicans are about to give us a lot of reasons not to own a home in this area.  Without the SALT deductions, renting an apartment is going to look a lot better even with kids.

--- and you don't think the apartment owners aren't going to raise the rents to pass off the loss of deduction?

Apartment owners don't lose the deduction. They can still deduct it as a business expense.  


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.