Who Lives in New Jersey Housing? Rutgers Groundbreaking Update of Decades-old Study can Help Determine Impacts of Residential Development

Jan. 11, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

EDITORS NOTE: ATTENTION ASSIGNMENT EDITORS, to interview Professor David Listokin, call 732-932-3133, ext. 550. View the report at http://www.policy.rutgers.edu/news/reports.html.

WHO LIVES IN NEW JERSEY HOUSING?

Rutgers groundbreaking update of decades-old study can help determine

impacts of residential development

-->

NEW BRUNSWICK/PISCATAWAY, N.J. A groundbreaking revision of research first conducted in the 1970s and 1980s at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, has the potential to change the way municipal and local school officials, as well as developers, view the impacts of future residential projects in their communities.

The Center for Urban Policy Research (CUPR) at Rutgers Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy has updated, Who Lives in New Jersey Housing? A Guide to New Jersey Residential Demographic Multipliers, a demographic study that can be utilized to measure the impacts of residential development in host municipalities.

Demographic multipliers are data used to determine the average number of people, school-age (grades K-12) children and public school children found in newly built housing units of different types and sizes. The update covers housing stock built from 1990 through 2000 and uses data from the most recent federal census in 2000.

The two-year study cost about $90,000, with funding support from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs Office of Smart Growth, the New Jersey Chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties, and the Northern New Jersey District Counsel of the Urban Land Institute.

When published during the 1970s and 1980s, these studies were applied in New Jersey and widely throughout the United States, said David Listokin, co-director of CUPR and the revised studys lead author, who noted the revision is specific to New Jersey. Invariably, the studies have become dated and do not reflect the current demographic reality of a noticeable decline in New Jerseys average household size and the average number of pupils per housing unit brought to light by the latest census data.

The revised study also incorporates the experience of such recent development categories as transit-oriented development (TOD) as well as Mount Laurel or affordable housing, he added. With these revisions, we are providing basic data that is important for such fundamentally significant areas as a communitys size of its general and school populations, attendant operating and capital budgets, and enrollment projections.

The new analysis covers a variety of housing types and sizes single-family detached with three and four bedrooms; single-family attached (townhouses) with two and three bedrooms; and multifamily (five-plus unit) structures with one and two bedrooms or studio apartments.

As an example, Listokin cited data indicating the number of public school children in the average (price) two-bedroom townhouse in New Jersey has dropped from 0.20 in 1980 to 0.13 in 2000, a decline of more than one-third. The introduction of 100 two-bedroom townhouses in 2000 would generate only 13 public school children as compared to 20 in 1980, Listokin observed. Additionally, there is strong evidence of a particularly low multiplier for transit-oriented developments.

The new study concludes that the practice of using 1980 demographic data produces an overstatement of the population and public school children generated by new development in New Jersey, especially projects with a strong transit orientation and infrastructure in place.

Listokin cautions, however, against misinterpretation of the findings. It is important that the data not be abused to exclude certain categories of housing, such as homes with more bedrooms, or for that matter, housing in general because of the apprehension that development will generate too many new residents and public school children, he said. The exclusionary perspective does not acknowledge that current data the decline in size of demographic multipliers subverts good planning because smart growth calls for a range of housing and a mix of land uses, and violates the Mount Laurel principle of New Jersey communities obligation to meet the spectrum of the states housing needs.

CUPRs William Dolphin; NYU economist Ioan Voicu; and Matthew Camp, a Rutgers masters degree student in public policy, assisted with the report

Contact: Steve Manas
732-932-7084, ext. 612
E-mail: smanas@ur.rutgers.edu