ARCHIVES
 




 		  
Friday, July 27, 2007
Should Montville encourage age-restricted housing?
Posted by Ron Soussa at 1:09 PM
 
A reader sent in the following:

"I have lived in Montville for 31 years I HAVE ONE OF THE MCMANSIONS . Previously I had what was an 1960 small Mcmansion. I want to down size now and have no where to turn to in Montville. Is there anything in the future for new 55 plus construction? Something with a little class? Thanks for the help . I have supported Montville in all different ways since 1976 and feel a loyalty to her.. don't want to leave."
Aside from Campagna (Changebridge and Horse Neck Road) we're not aware of other age restricted complexes in town. Should Montville zone other properties to encourage 55 and over residential and, if so, which ones?


24 Comments    |    Post a comment
Home
 


 
24 Comments:

A number of Montville residents have moved to age-restricted complexes in Denville and Rockaway because they couldn't find what they are looking for in town.
Posted by Blogger Ron Soussa on July 27, 2007 12:28 PM
 
 
Some think age restricted housing takes the burden off the school system. It can be the exact opposite. When the empty-nester sells his 5 bedroom colonial to move into an age restricted unit, who do you think buys his home? You guessed it....the family with young children. Our schools are full and if we plan for additional residential units, regardless of age restrictions, we need to address this overcrowding.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 27, 2007 3:17 PM
 
 
Uh, doesn't that 5 bedroom colonial get sold to a young family with children whether there's age restricted housing in Montville or not?

When the empty nester is ready to sell, they're gonna sell. You think that not building new housing in town is gonna make them stay in that big house?

Better to let them move within Montville instead of Denville or Rockaway. Why should they have to leave the town they love?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 27, 2007 9:46 PM
 
 
It may be pure coincidence, but wasn't the original proposed mega residential condo development for the Towaco Village Concept age-restricted? And wasn't there another age-restricted condo development proposed and rejected by the town for the property adjacent to the Route 287 South ramp? Further, didn't K. Hovanian want to develop the GI Auto Salvage into age-restricted condo unitslike the ones currently under construction in Parsippany and the town rejected the zoning changes that would be necessary. Also, 55+ doesn't necessarily rule out school-aged children. You would think that most 55+ empty nesters would want to move out of Montville to escape the school taxes that represent a large portion of our tax bills.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 28, 2007 10:05 AM
 
 
We all keep going round and round the same territory. You can not outratable the property tax mess. Period !!!! Yes we have a large base of 4-5 bedroom homes that may turnover and the inclusion of age restricted housing may in fact hasten that turnover and ultimately increase taxes at a faster rate. The real problem as everyone in NJ understands is that the cost of education is born by property tax payers alone. A single student costs about $11,000 per year to educate. That issue can only be dealt with by Trenton. In addition we pay County Government also as much as we spend on Municpal Government. Any developement has to be considered first and foremost on the impact to the area in question and the value to the Community.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on July 28, 2007 1:51 PM
 
 
why would the planning board reject the age restricted housing from hovnanian? that is rediculous. go ahead build more houses that need the schools.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 29, 2007 3:30 PM
 
 
The planning board rejected the proposal because it would involve changing current zoning. The property in question is not zoned as residential. There was also concern about the environmental clean up and the cost involved.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 30, 2007 5:36 PM
 
 
All the Bloomfied Avenue residents want age restricted on the GI Site NOT another shooping center!! We do NOT want a LOWES!!

Are you listening Mayor Daughtery?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 30, 2007 5:43 PM
 
 
The GI property is being rezoned to something other than a junk yard. It seems the planning board rejected housing. They are moving forward with retail. Lowes with Linens and Things or another big box. we already have Home Depot Target Kohls etc nearby. Maybe a Walmart? Real classy for Montville (not).You can go to Boonton or Fairfied for these stores. Montville should hold out for something different, a cut above. Who is on the planning board anyway, can residents call them? I don't think the town pays for contamination cleanup. GI must do it.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 31, 2007 2:35 AM
 
 
What is so wrong with WalMart? They do have good discounts on all their paper products/cleaning items/shampoo/bath soap/medications/pet products and many other items.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 31, 2007 10:16 AM
 
 
Follow Old Bloomfield Ave to the end. Parsippany is building lovely age restricted condos. Right on rt 46 at Rt 80. ZOOOOOMMMM......
You'll never miss the sounds of 287 at all. Go there! It's nice!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on July 31, 2007 11:28 AM
 
 
I like WalMart and wish Montville had one.

What's wrong with Lowe's? Is Montville so darn snooty that we can't have a great hardware store?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 1, 2007 6:02 PM
 
 
It's not just about taxes Dan. We'd like to be able to sell our homes but also stay in Montville. Right now there is nothing for us.

Why should we have to move out of town?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 1, 2007 7:01 PM
 
 
To anon above. Lowes? There is already a Home Depot in Montville. Walmart is in Boonton. Target and Kohls are near. Variety in shopping and housing is needed. And what's wrong with Montille having an upscale image?? A great opportunity to be unique. Hope our community leaders do the right thing and what's in best interest for the town long term.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 2, 2007 12:51 PM
 
 
All of the age restricted housing that has been proposed so far is at a price level that wouldn't benefit any current homeowner in Montville Township unless they wanted pay the same price as they would get for less space. Some may want to do that just to live in Montville Township amd make life easier but the reality is that most aren't going to do that and put money in the bank. It is all market driven no matter what our preferance may be. No one is going to develope an affordable age restricted housing complex and leave profit on the table. They are going to price it at what the market will bring. With the question of the Lowes, The Township Committee should be meeting with the residents in that area to discuss it. The Planning Board is a formal hearing Board and shouldn't meet privately but there is nothing to stop the Township Committee Members from meeting with the citizens and hearing what they have to say.
Posted by Anonymous Dan Grant on August 2, 2007 2:38 PM
 
 
Another thing about age-restricted housing...I've read in several places that many towns are reconsidering it and many developers backing away from it because, although the market will now bear many thousands of units, the future does not hold as plentiful a supply of 55+-aged people. Once the current older population is no longer with us, there will not be enough population to take their places. Thus, many 55+ housing developments will go wanting for residents...which means that the 55+ age restriction has the potential to be dropped in the future, which--ta da!--will most likely result in gobs of young families with children moving in, thus exacerbating the school situation.
Posted by Anonymous D Ambriano on August 2, 2007 2:59 PM
 
 
We would love to be able to sell our now too big home and move to a new community with other people like us. I don't care if it costs the same as the home we are selling. and I would like to stay in Montville.

It's a shame that after supporting this town for so long the town doesn't let us stay here.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 2, 2007 7:13 PM
 
 
Donna, if the town didn't let those vacant buildings (that Berlex eventually bought) get turned into housing what makes you think they'll change the zoning on age restricted housing in the future?

simple demographics says that there will be plenty of over 55 people in the future.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 2, 2007 7:16 PM
 
 
What do you want Montville to "hold out" for, Sachs Fifth Avenue? And have you ever been to a Lowes?

More Montville people will use a Lowes than "upscale" stores.

Or do you own Home Depot stock and are afraid of the competition?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 2, 2007 11:13 PM
 
 
Why not something different here - say Sports & Games, miniature golfing, amusement rides and games for all the family. A fun place.
Movie theaters...etc.

Think "out of the box" for a change.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 7, 2007 3:12 PM
 
 
I like the suggestions by previous poster. My taxes r climbing. I am for the highest ratable (as long as its safe, etc) I was told housing (age restricted too) will bring in the highest tax $$ by FAR.... triple what Loews, WalMart or other retail will. We r talking $2m range. THAT type moneymaker is what we r interested in. If movies, golf, games brings in $$, bring it to Montville!
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 7, 2007 8:05 PM
 
 
While housing may bring in the most $ (and I'm not the person to say it does or doesn't), but it needs to be maintained as age restricted only. All other housing brings in families and then the need to expand schools and the need to raise taxes.
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 9, 2007 11:56 AM
 
 
Age restricted housing sounds good on the surface, however, when the current baby boomers start to die off the next generation will not be able to fill the vacancies simply because the "numbers" are not there.

Also not sure how this works, but recently visiting a friend in another state, her over 55 community went from 55 to 45...thereby bringing in families with children that I am sure wasn't anticipated. Like I said, not sure how that was possible, but it did happen. So I guess it can be tricky if not properly put in place and there are certainly plenty of nice age restricted communities in southern Jersey that appear to be doing OK. The decision makers would have to be aware of all the ramifications involved in fixing a current situation in regard to what could happen down the road. Does the "fix" warrant the price that will have to be paid in the future?
Posted by Anonymous Anonymous on August 12, 2007 2:46 PM
 
 
Age-restricted housing = automatic "no" voting block for school budgets. Let's stick with what we have.
Posted by Blogger jared on September 25, 2007 9:48 PM
 
 
Post a comment    |    


 























OurMontville.com
Copyright © 2007 OurMontville.com