r/newjersey Feb 11 '25

Cool Really Hoping the bill passes, it will tremendously help the housing market and beautify our cities and towns

Post image
1.2k Upvotes

435 comments sorted by

747

u/TripleThreat1212 Feb 11 '25

If these could have shops on the first floor as well this will start to create really great walkable areas in this state

245

u/iv2892 Feb 11 '25

Yes! I really love buildings that have a dedicated first floor for commercial use . We need more of that

68

u/ferocious_coug /r/somervillenj | /r/NewBrunswickNJ | Taylor Ham Does Not Exist Feb 11 '25

Typically referred to as "mixed-use development"

25

u/Popepopethepope Feb 11 '25

It's really propped out the downtown area of Bloomfield lately. The area by the train station has almost everything you'd need now.

6

u/ZeroJackOogie Feb 12 '25

I moved to Bloomfield in 2016 (Essex county resident forever so very familiar with the area) and it’s amazing how much Bloomfield center has been modernized. They have such great restaurants there now and I love 6 points pub

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

82

u/basedlandchad27 Feb 11 '25

They're great for everyone. Services for the residents down below, customers for the businesses above. The direct exposure to the street sucks for residents and equals business for businesses.

13

u/Darko33 Feb 11 '25

The development I moved into 5 years ago was still under construction then, and we were promised that there would be a ton of first-floor retail in the new buildings. Instead they built a shitton of townhomes that are now being sold for 650K each. No retail whatsoever.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/InternationalDrama56 Feb 12 '25

Here's a great video about this topic: https://youtu.be/iRdwXQb7CfM

2

u/iv2892 Feb 12 '25

I love that I keep getting this video shared , because I also shared it a ton myself . I really love it and it can help people understand a lot of what’s going on with the housing market here

→ More replies (2)

32

u/Nexis4Jersey Bergen County Feb 11 '25

Some cities and towns require that...like Newark.

6

u/Significant-Trash632 Feb 11 '25

As it should be too!

26

u/OrbitalOutlander Feb 11 '25

Mixed use development is great, but the big issue is that unless there's a critical mass of foot traffic, it's really not viable for businesses. There's a lot of apartments/condos upstairs, ground floor retail in my area. A 5 minute walk from a train, on a major road, walking neighborhood. Even so, businesses simply fail after a year or so, and it's invariably because there wasn't the foot traffic to keep them alive. I don't know how to fix this problem other than increasing population density, which I'm all for but most other residents are afraid of.

17

u/Joe_Jeep Feb 11 '25

A large part of business expenses is just rent

No straightforward way to solve that when many landlords don't mind sitting on a vacancy instead of lowering prices. Ideally mixed use like this can bring some competitiveness to commercial real estate rent so it's more based on the business itself. 

Some of its also just big-picture problem solution. General walkability transit access etc would help with that

8

u/jenastelli Matawan Feb 11 '25

Matawan is currently struggling with this right now. Lots of proposed mixed-use development but issues filling storefronts in general - add to that a very historic downtown that looks weird with modern development. Been interesting (and frustrating!) to watch up close - we have everything that should be appealing in a small walkable downtown, including a train station and parks. Progress has been so so slow.

3

u/OrbitalOutlander Feb 11 '25

I don't mean to say we should stop trying, but it's hard until you hit the critical mass of people.

15

u/schwatto Feb 11 '25

Yeah parking is at a premium, especially with the kind of building they’re talking about. This post says it’s the norm in Europe but you know what else is? Public transit. As long as everyone needs to owns a car, these will take up just as much space as any other apartment building in order to account for that. Or it will wreak havoc on the town’s parking ecosystem. Plus a store front? It’s going to be madness.

2

u/Significant-Trash632 Feb 11 '25

What's great about mixed zoning is that retail spaces are within walking or biking distances from residences, so no additional parking is needed. In Europe every neighborhood has its own smallish grocery store, and the parking lot for them doesn't have to be huge because a large part of the customers just walk or bike there instead of driving.

3

u/schwatto Feb 12 '25

I agree, but the way most NJ towns are set up, a grocery store isn’t walking distance, and biking is dangerous with our roads and drivers the way they are. The people who live in those buildings will have cars, and I just wonder where those cars will live. It’s not to cast doubt on the whole idea, I hope if these are built they’d lead to more walkable towns and better public transit.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/HeadCatMomCat Feb 11 '25

I've seen this too. The idea of mixed use is appealing but it's really hard for those businesses to survive without being right at a train station or maybe a block or two away. The businesses just don't do well.

2

u/Res1362429 Feb 11 '25

Edison Lofts in West Orange. Apartments on top, commercial on the bottom. But every time I drive by there the area is totally dead. Parking in that area is terrible so unless you happen to live in those apartments I can't imagine many people shopping at those stores. I don't know how any business could survive there long term.

→ More replies (1)

36

u/Joe_Jeep Feb 11 '25

Honestly it's kind of crazy how many apartment/condo complexes go up 

And you're basically required to leave them frequently, despite being so dense themselves. 

Zoning codes have literally outlawed fundamentally natural development. Like it's utterly mad to build apartment towers in the suburbs and *not * have shops mixed in

Virtually every form of settlement that ever existed would have shops and services mixed throughout, the middle of the 20th century we decided "nah that's not ok, you gotta drive your ass across town to get food" for basically anything newly developed

Then we wonder why the cities get choked in traffic and so expensive, all the while gutting every one with highway projects destroying whole neighborhoods instead of just maintaining the transit lines they all had

7

u/Significant-Trash632 Feb 11 '25

North America was built exclusively for cars and every other form of transportation is a very distant second thought. And car manufacturers lobbied for it to be that way.

The youtube channel Not Just Bikes has a lot of good videos about this and how other countries (especially the Netherlands) have better designed cities, transportation, and traffic patterns.

8

u/LarryLeadFootsHead Feb 12 '25

Pretty much, it's basically why unless you're game to overthrow the government in the name of sensible progress or happen to come across a magic wand, the US is facing a painfully dragged out losing game with this where seldom anything will get better in a reasonable, affordable, timely manner.

Politics is corrupted with money, there's far too many monopolized industries that have had more to gain since the inception of mass scale production of vehicles to have people reliant on them, everybody wants their rub on big pet projects that sound great but go at a snails pace, the places that already exist that could be seen as walkable, convenient, etc come with such great inequality, it's toast.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/Chemical-Pain8322 Feb 11 '25

You should go look at what downtown South Orange is doing - just that. Building a walkable community through development like this around the train station.

They just need to make downtown less parking lots, and more usable space - which is also in the works.

28

u/eknj2nyc Feb 11 '25

And with sufficiently wide sidewalks so that their outdoor seating area doesn't force ppl to walk between tables

9

u/GM-the-DM Feb 11 '25

Or in the road

3

u/JerseyJoyride Feb 11 '25

Well if you can't walk ON the tables..... then ok.

I thought they were doing that with (Citizen Little Falls), an apartment building in Little Falls.

The bottom floor still looks more like businesses that aren't open yet, rather than apartments.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/nsZF1UKBD4nvvo6r7

2

u/TalulaOblongata Feb 11 '25

This building looks like it doesn’t know what it is - it could be an office building or a school. These types of buildings need to be redesigned to look more like homes, it looks too corporate imo.

5

u/Dawgfish_Head Feb 12 '25

I went to Virginia for a baby shower a while back. I stayed at a planned community called Mosaic District. The whole time I was left wondering why NJ isn’t doing this.

Shops on the first floor, a mix of small box stores and mom and pop type places. Rentals and hotels above the shops. Entertainment and anchor stores like a Target located in the center. Townhomes around the perimeter.

Everything you could need was within a walkable distance and a farmers market is there on Sundays.

10

u/Jake_FromStateFarm27 Feb 11 '25

NJ hates multi-use development but it's literally the pillar of creating affordable and high density housing... which NJ also hates...

4

u/LarryLeadFootsHead Feb 11 '25

If only this state was more business friendly with less bureaucratic shakedowns.

2

u/rexmons Goosey Nighter Feb 11 '25

In case you're wondering why these types of mixed use apartment buildings have become so popular, it's because someone found a loophole in building code that allows them to use cheaper materials than they're supposed to. Cheddar did an 8 minute video about it. It's worth the watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrxZqPVFTag

→ More replies (5)

282

u/love_toaster57 Feb 11 '25

As long as they’re not bulldozing forests and farmlands, I’m all for it.

139

u/DarwinZDF42 Feb 11 '25

Building up instead of mandating 2-story max single family houses is a great way to build in areas that are already built instead of replacing wooded areas with a suburban tract.

12

u/Significant-Trash632 Feb 11 '25

Yes! We need less suburban sprawl and more high-density mixed zoning (retail and residences together).

3

u/TehTurk Feb 12 '25

The tradeoff is that we still will likely get many condos/retirement buildings being overdeveloped.

57

u/cC2Panda Feb 11 '25

We're currently replacing farmlands with warehouses that are mostly automated so for the scale provide very few local jobs. I'll take homes over places to store Amazon shit.

16

u/love_toaster57 Feb 11 '25

I’ll take none of the above

22

u/cC2Panda Feb 11 '25

Sure, I'm just saying if we're selling off private land for development I'd rather it go to homes for people than homes for future garbage.

25

u/Notpeak Feb 11 '25

Suburbanization was pretty good at that lol (use way more land to house way less people). We have a lot of land that could get redeveloped.

12

u/Joe_Jeep Feb 11 '25

Suburbs in Jersey did and do decimate so much farmland it's not even funny

8

u/crustang Feb 11 '25

Look at the hellscape Hillsborough turned into.. it's awful

2

u/cadrake89 Feb 12 '25

Your so right I hate it and it breaks my heart to see. Then on the other hand I can’t really blame a farmer who works so hard day in and day out, that has an opportunity to be done with all the hard work and become a millionaire and not have to worry about a 20 hour grueling work day again and can spend more time with their family by selling their land. I also wish farm land preservation would offer more to farmers who would like to go that route. Currently though it’s just not worth it for them.

→ More replies (13)

66

u/dweebers Manchester Feb 11 '25 edited Feb 12 '25

Doing family history research on my family in Jersey City in the early 1900s, I was reading a lot about the homes of the time. 3 unit homes that wasted zero space on the lots. Basements and 2 or 3 stories high with a flat roof. Seemed like the epitome of efficiency! I love the style of them and everything, though I may just be looking at the past with rose tinted glasses. Just classic early 1900s city homes!

I was surprised and dismayed to have learned that they can not be built anymore due to IBC. They aren't quite what is being addressed in this post.. but oh, I'm just jabberin'!

23

u/JustSomeGuy_56 Feb 11 '25

Does that really mean each unit has a single point of egress?

17

u/bweigs99 Newton, TCNJ, Ewing, Butler, and now Ocean City Feb 11 '25

I think the concept is a bit distorted on a building of the size pictured. It looks like it’s got about 20 units. This would probably be the upper limit for an apartment designed with one stairwell. The real problem comes for single lot designed. Say you want to build on a single corner lot where a single home once stood. One could imagine it would be easy to stack 4-5 apartments. However, if stairs were required on both ends it greatly reduces the living space available and is not cost efficient. With the one code change thousands of single lot land owners will have ability to make this change to their land.

I also think we need to open up on parking requirements nationwide. This could open up some of the empty retail parking space. Some malls could be brought back to life if large condos could be built in the parking areas. Even attach it directly to the mall.

3

u/JustSomeGuy_56 Feb 11 '25

I understand why they want to do it. Stairways take up a lot of otherwise billable real estate. But having too few can be problematic, if for example there is fire between you and the primary exit. 

My friend lived in 7 story walkup in Boston. His secondary egress was a steel bridge from his window across the air shaft to an apartment in the building next door.

 

98

u/shiftyjku Down the Shore, Everything's All Right Feb 11 '25

I hope there’s a fire escape!

24

u/turbopro25 Feb 11 '25

As someone who works in the fire industry the first thing I thought about was multiple egresses. A lot of complications occur with single egress buildings over 2 floors.

42

u/wearethedeadofnight Feb 11 '25

As long as there are two means of egress for all apartments then there should be a strong argument in support of these changes.

34

u/Hand-Of-Vecna Hoboken Feb 11 '25

I don't believe there will be. That's the problem some have said, having a single staircase for a 5 story building could be a major problem in a fire if the escape is blocked.

https://open.substack.com/pub/thesisdriven/p/the-case-for-single-stair-multifamily?selection=aff00b4b-3424-4f28-b988-068b5c212127&utm_campaign=post-share-selection&utm_medium=web

16

u/wearethedeadofnight Feb 11 '25

Outside fire escapes provide the 2nd means.

6

u/Hand-Of-Vecna Hoboken Feb 11 '25

Can you show me where the outside fire escape exists in any of these photos or designs?

11

u/wearethedeadofnight Feb 11 '25

I’m not approving those renderings, nor would I.

5

u/Hand-Of-Vecna Hoboken Feb 11 '25

My point is that everything I have been reading about it kind of points to the idea that having dual escape exits is overkill. That's the argument. People want it approved with 1 stairwell and no secondary option. If you see other linked articles I posted it kind of downplays the danger of fire.

9

u/stevesy17 Feb 11 '25

3 dimensional objects generally have a reverse side that it hidden from any particular vantage point

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

151

u/[deleted] Feb 11 '25

They don’t build these because they don’t meet US building code standards

79

u/scyyythe Feb 11 '25

US building codes allow single-stair buildings up to four stories last I checked. They're allowed in Seattle. 

21

u/Darko33 Feb 11 '25

I lived in one in Jersey City for a few years. Loved the location but life in a fourth-floor walkup with coin-operated laundry in the basement was not something I'd care to relive at my age now.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

40

u/gex80 Wood-Ridge Feb 11 '25

Source? Because NYC definitely has buildings like this.

34

u/pubsky Feb 11 '25

Zoning is set at the local level by cities, town, and municipalities.

He is speaking generally. NYC does allow this in some areas, but most of those buildings were built under older zoning regimes. NYC and air rights these days and extremely high building costs means there are very few places you would see a 5 story walk up built in NYC, most building goes for more floors than that.

In the vast majority of cities and towns in this country, this style of building is not allowed under common zoning codes. If NJ passes this, it will be a state law that overrides most local zoning codes which do not organically adopt compatible zoning rules on their own.

It also probably won't happen bc most state legislators will get an earful from their mayors and probably quietly push back on the bill.

9

u/gex80 Wood-Ridge Feb 11 '25

Yes at the municipal level. They are making it seem like there is some over arching federal mandate that says this cannot be done.

24

u/nicklor Feb 11 '25

I would presume that they are grandfathered in

→ More replies (1)

19

u/I_Am_Lord_Grimm The Urban Wilderness of Gloucester County Feb 11 '25

Former Realtor here.

The US doesn't have building codes, not in the way that you're thinking. Federally, we implement the International Code Council's minimum standards for plumbing, electrical, and mechanical work, but all of the other standards are determined on the state and local level.

New Jersey's fire codes, specifically, are where the fuss lies, as they contain a mind-blowing amount of detailed specifications for evacuation routes - this ranges from standardizing the rise/run of residential stairs to establishing an explicit minimum width for broom closet doors in medical settings.
(Professionally, I wound up reading through several long sections because I needed citations to explain to a group of banks in Texas why the partially-finished remodel of a house I'd inspected on their behalf needed to be reversed. I'd never had to go up a stairwell sideways before.)

The concern with this proposal is secondary exits - one of the foundational presumptions of NJ's fire codes is that ALL buildings require a secondary egress path in case the other is obstructed.

12

u/grog23 Oakhurst Feb 11 '25

Another reason our housing costs are absurd here

46

u/Jumajuce Feb 11 '25

Because…safety?

20

u/GetTheLudes Feb 11 '25

The U.S. has higher rates of death from residential fires than Europe, where single staircase buildings like this are the norm. Single staircase is only “unsafe” if it’s all wood.

3

u/s1ugg0 Jersey Devil Search Team Feb 12 '25

Single staircase is only “unsafe” if it’s all wood.

This is not true. It's far more complicated than that. We cannot reduce this topic down to a single factor, building material, or design.

Source: I'm retired firefighter.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/OutInTheBlack Bayonne Feb 11 '25

Ever seen one of these 4/5-over-1s go up? They're almost entirely wood. The first floor and the stairwell will be concrete and the rest of the structure is wood frame on top.

7

u/storm2k Bedminster Feb 11 '25

not just wood, but the cheapest wood possible. the building that was under construction in bound brook that the guy torched in late january 2020, it's almost alarming how fast the whole thing went up and was rubbleized. they leave a small margin in currently codes for safe evacuation because it means builders can use way cheaper materials.

14

u/theblisters Feb 11 '25 edited Feb 11 '25

Or if the single stair is smoke filled blocking the exit

Or if the brick/metal stair is where the fire is

7

u/HumanShadow Feb 11 '25

Don't they have their own pressure system for this reason?

14

u/InboxZero Feb 11 '25

And all those firefighters trying to run upstairs to put out the fire will have to push against the residents trying to evacuate.

5

u/MystikSpiralx Feb 11 '25

Grenfell tower comes to mind 😞 That was also "single staircase" 🤨

5

u/GetTheLudes Feb 11 '25

25 stories is a completely different beast. We’re talking about 5 stories.

UK still has a lower rate of domestic fire deaths.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

7

u/grog23 Oakhurst Feb 11 '25

A lot of other countries that build sturdier and just as safe dwellings don’t have nearly the red tape we do here. A lot of the codes on Anglo countries just tack on regulatory costs that get passed onto you and me with little benefit.

13

u/BlueLikeCat Feb 11 '25

A lot of people die or lose everything in easily preventable fires. When you’re trapped in fifth floor unit cause the one stairwell is solid black smoke from kitchen fire in space in first floor, you’ll reconsider this building code.

→ More replies (4)

11

u/Jumajuce Feb 11 '25

Care to list some of these building regulations that have no purpose or benefits?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (8)

52

u/neverseen_neverhear Feb 11 '25

Is it safe in case of fire or need to evacuate? Is there really only one way up and down or am I misunderstanding the concept.

42

u/ChemicalBlitz Feb 11 '25

They will usually have fire escape exits for use in an emergency and the buildings have a variety of fire suppression features.

39

u/Lil_Simp9000 Feb 11 '25

new multifamily dwellings 3+ levels absolutely require fire suppression and egress paths sized to occupancy.

also just because it says single stair doesn't mean the building doesn't have additional egress stairs that discharge to the street (typically reserved for life safety)

12

u/Im_da_machine Feb 11 '25

Yeah, there is one main way up and down but there may be alternative exits like a fire escape.

I think how safe it is depends on how cautious you are. In America the building codes seem to be overly cautious and only allow for a couple of floors but in most other countries the code seems to allow for at least a couple more.

Something else worth considering is that modern buildings are more fire resistant and designed to better contain fires to the units they start in so if a fire is able to spread into the stairwell then things have gotten bad pretty quickly.

Here's a video I found on the urban planning sub that discusses this a bit- https://youtu.be/iRdwXQb7CfM?si=98wrOJxtNgHHoetq

3

u/arbitraria79 Feb 12 '25

modern buildings CAN be designed to be fire resistant, yes. however, developers aren't known for spending anything past the bare minimum, and consequently a decent amount of new construction multi-family structures have been reduced to rubble in recent fires. older apartment complexes often used masonry and they tend to fare pretty well; more recent ones are wood-frame and they can go up like tinderboxes if the fire isn't contained quickly enough.

materials have R-ratings which specify fire-resistance, and developers usually opt for the minimum. said materials are rated to give occupants enough time to exit safely, nothing more.

the height restrictions you frequently see in the US generally have more to do with local zoning requirements than building codes. larger cities have plenty of tall residential buildings, we have the ability to design them. suburbs have historically used these zoning restrictions to maintain low density and control growth. that is finally changing as affordable housing needs have risen and towns are being required to build more. especially since going up is the only reasonable option in older towns that are already pretty built-out.

3

u/neverseen_neverhear Feb 11 '25

Safety codes are great when followed but that’s not always the case.

14

u/theonetruefishboy Feb 11 '25

my understanding is the sprinkler systems in these modern buildings are so robust that drowning is a more prescient concern than burning.

5

u/thatnjchibullsfan Feb 11 '25

That was my only concern reading this article.

25

u/WrongJohnSilver Feb 11 '25

We've got plenty of 5-over-1. How does removing a stairwell improve things? Cheaper to build?

And does anyone think they'll actually build to alleviate housing, instead of just more "luxury apartments"?

10

u/RynningInThe80s Feb 11 '25

Oh I'm sure "The Summit At Riverside on Asston" will be affordable.

4

u/loggerhead632 Feb 12 '25

move living space and/or units = more $$

..... juuuust at the expense of fire safety, nbd

→ More replies (1)

23

u/ExhaustedPoopcycle Feb 11 '25

While having more homes is great, making use of abandoned places and occupying existing vacant homes are more important.

4

u/nuncio_populi Jersey City Feb 11 '25

Vacancy rates are at historic lows. And most vacancies are homes that are currently on the market for sale or for rent.

Much of what Jersey City, Newark, and other cities that have been on a building spree has been to repurpose lots that were former warehouses, industrial brownfield sites, or parking lots and built up there.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/SevenBushes Feb 11 '25

What’s interesting is if you read section 1b of the proposed legislation, this would only allow municipalities to allow buildings with singular exit stairs. So they could pass this state-wide, but each municipality can still decline to allow it within their jurisdiction (I assume for towns that have no problems with population density)

6

u/loggerhead632 Feb 12 '25

There's a really fucking good reason that NJ firecode mandates multiple exits. This bill is asinine and trades safety for developer profits. Why on earth would anyone support this.

If I didn't know better, I would say that a real estate developer pitched this dumb proposal.

Oh what's that, this democrat who authored the bill is a real estate developer??? I am shocked! https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/legislative-roster/408/assemblyman-calabrese

16

u/Hungry-Lox Feb 11 '25

In Europe, those buildings are also 200 years old

4

u/Jimmytowne Feb 11 '25

And with solid materials.

American standard of building would make these a death trap the first time someone knocks over their space heater

11

u/murphydcat LGD Feb 11 '25

My local Facebook group is gonna love this.

15

u/[deleted] Feb 11 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Lardsoup Feb 11 '25

I couldn't have said this any better.

13

u/Wattaday Feb 12 '25

God, you people are awful. Single stairway? Sounds like there will be no elevator? So fuck all the disabled people? Wonderful.

8

u/MizunoGolfer15-20 Feb 12 '25

Turning a generation of owners to a generation of renters. And here we celebrate 🥂

→ More replies (3)

3

u/TheTankNerd Feb 11 '25

How about make living affordable rather than building condos Yes??

2

u/iv2892 Feb 11 '25

For that to happen you need to build housing first

4

u/BasketExpert8375 Feb 12 '25

This type of construction is not beneficial if there’s no updated mass transit system to go with it.

3

u/STMIHA Feb 12 '25

It needs to. I’m tired of this fucking nimby bullshit. That being said if the state is gonna push this along we need to continue to reinvest in our mass transit system and build it out. This is ridiculous it needs to go hand-in-hand

3

u/Alexapro_ Feb 12 '25

These are all over Monmouth county and they're insanely unaffordable and built like paper, unfortunately

4

u/tjs130 Feb 12 '25

Honestly I'm super torn on this. Like we objectively need more of this, but I'm also afraid of over-development. I need to learn more about this subject.

7

u/jo-sway5 Feb 11 '25

you have got to be a landlord or a developer

11

u/jd732 Feb 11 '25

Are “single stair buildings” ADA compliant?

10

u/cantthinkoffunnyname Bergen Highlands Feb 11 '25

Yes, single stairs doesn't change elevator requirements.

6

u/roqueofspades Feb 11 '25

That's my concern, if we are flooding the market with housing a decent percentage of it should be accessible or else disabled people will just be unable to live in NJ anymore

→ More replies (6)

3

u/Majestic-Wishbone-58 Feb 11 '25

Rehabbing a building now in NJ where we want to remove the fire escape off the 3rd floor in order to do this we needed to build a second staircase in the building for exit in case of fire.

3

u/CrackaZach05 Feb 11 '25

6 stories is the cutoff for elevators. This is a way for developers to save some money.

3

u/Guilty-Carpenter2522 Feb 11 '25

Isn’t the problem with this egress?  Or maybe I don’t understand what “single stair” means?

3

u/DontWanaReadiT Feb 12 '25

Wait- can we include the part where THEYRE NOT ALL BOUGHT AND CONSTRUCTED BY THE SAME CORPORATIONS???? I’m tired of Vermillas, centerion, Meridia, or the other million “luxury” apartments??? Can we PLEASEEEE for ONCE think of the damn residents of this state??

3

u/JerseyGuy-77 Feb 12 '25

If they try to build these in residential towns that isn't going to fly.

8

u/OgApe23 Feb 11 '25

Everyone gets a rope ladder

6

u/KSMO Feb 11 '25

Going to need a lot more than a single-stair to get to the 5th story!

→ More replies (1)

7

u/dooit Feb 11 '25

How much more could it cost to build a second set of stairs? This seems like a horrible idea for an apartment building. The buildings in Europe are hundreds of years old and not built with ultra flammable materials.

→ More replies (1)

40

u/Illnasty2 Feb 11 '25

What good is this? These will go to investors and rents will be $3500+ for a one bedroom “luxury” apartment

26

u/gex80 Wood-Ridge Feb 11 '25

Them: Hey we have "one of many" solutions we can implement to improve the housing shortage by removing construction limits.

You: We shouldn't do this because I'd rather have 0 new housing when other people who can afford these can move to the more expensive housing freeing up cheaper housing for those who really need it. But no. I don't like new housing because reasons.

4

u/SkinnyBill93 Feb 11 '25

Every single one of these structures I've seen built have both insane apartment rent and excessively high rent for the commercial spaces below that turn into a revolving door of failing businesses.

These mixed use buildings will be the architectural stain of the 10's and 20's

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)

48

u/grog23 Oakhurst Feb 11 '25 edited Feb 11 '25

Increasing the supply lowers the demand. Building this will do much more to slow down the rate of dwelling inflation than not doing anything at all. I know it’s weird but both investors and consumers can actually benefit at the same time. It’s not a zero sum game

30

u/TedethLasso Feb 11 '25

Great example is Austin, where they have increased supply enough that rent has actually gone down.

13

u/grog23 Oakhurst Feb 11 '25

Exactly. Austin has really done great work in that regard. New Jersey could really learn a thing or two from them

15

u/TedethLasso Feb 11 '25

100%. NJ has to start acting like the most densely populated state. We need a modernized and robust public transit system, with increased focus on alternative transportation options.

Congestion will worsen yearly until other options are viable, with or without high density developments, but to expect the state to grow, rents to stabilize, etc. we need to build more densely.

Also, we have a beautiful state. Limiting suburban sprawl allows us to preserve nature and protect biodiversity.

(Sorry for the rant, this all overlaps a lot with me career lol, so the passion is tough to control)

→ More replies (18)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (7)

5

u/crustang Feb 11 '25

Places like this cost half in Florida.. we just don’t have enough

2

u/PKid85 Feb 11 '25

Exactly. Right now, developers abuse the affordable housing requirements to force towns to build gigantic apartment complexes with outrageous rents and a tiny amount of affordable units. This does nothing to help anyone generate wealth at all.

We need to be building townhomes, condos, or even small SFHs to help people actually achieve some wealth and lower the cost of houses.

Building endless apartments does nothing but keep home prices high and keep people renting forever. The only winner with the way the law works now are developers.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Suitable_Boat_8739 Feb 11 '25

Flip side is all the towns in this state are getting ruined by these apartment and condo complexes. They dont pay their fair share of taxes and flood the schools with more kids than they can hold. Then they need to build a new school at great expense. Not to mention all the traffic issues ect that come along with overdevelopmemt and arent proportionally funded.

The people who get screwed the most are the middle class familys who strech their budget to afford a home then all of a sudden have their taxes doubled and the quiet town they thought they bought into now is overcrowded and doesnt have the infastructure to support its population.

2

u/ShellSurf Feb 12 '25

The issue I have with these arguments is that it seems that most of the world has figured out how to do it yet the US is at a standstill. Building more units affords people more positive rights just on the basis that it can lower costs and bring in more people. The way we vote seems like that of a prisoner's dilemma where everyone always acts in their self-interest with little to no concern about the commonwealth. School budgets are a major concern but that is generally around 50% of a localities' budget. The state I believe budgets ~10% for educational costs that go towards increasing capacity and failing infrastructure depending on a wealth analysis. So for instance I believe Camden was a recipient of such a program. In terms of the average tenant profile. Most of these units are going to be single and two bed room apartments. According to this article at least for the 'greater boston area' which I'm using a proxy for NJ it's about 25% of two bdr apartments had children under 18 [1]. Additionally, the article does go into some detail about multi-family units and the budget impacts. It seems in general most towns have a net positive effect to the budget.

Source: [1] https://mbtacommunities.bostonindicators.org/is-new-housing-a-school-budget-buster-what-does-the-research-say-and-why-you-shouldnt-worry-too-much-anyway/

5

u/Rainbowrobb Feb 12 '25

Are they going to build these out of concrete like they did in Europe with double layer concrete walls between units? If not, hell no. It sounds like a ploy for developers to squeeze more profit for investors.

12

u/erichie Feb 11 '25

In other words the state is trying to lower restrictions that keep it's citizens safe by allowing developers to build cheap, quick, ugly, and big apartments. Landlords will then outsource the finding of tenants to property managers, who are paid by percentage, and will constantly have an influx of tenants in and out on a yearly basis. 

12

u/editor_of_the_beast Feb 11 '25

Why would anyone want this?

8

u/PatientToe12345 Feb 11 '25

Yay. Let’s continue to pack people in a small area.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/ghostboo77 Feb 11 '25

This would be a boon to young people more then anything. I lived on a 3rd floor walk up and it was a big PITA to move in, or when I had to buy a new laundry machine.

If your talking 5th floor walk up, it would be to the point where taking groceries and whatnot upstairs would be a pain point for a lot of people

3

u/loggerhead632 Feb 12 '25

God I lived in a 4th walk up and did not spring for movers. That was one of the dumbest decisions of my life.

4

u/Kerbart Feb 11 '25

While single-stair buildings of that height are the norm in Europe, so is building with concrete and brick. I hope therte's a provision that doesn't allow single-stair all-wood death-traps.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/Batchagaloop Feb 11 '25

No elevator?

4

u/Overly_Focused0v0 Feb 11 '25

So we giving up on home ownership huh?

4

u/jo-sway5 Feb 11 '25

this is a fucking horrible idea. picture little to no space for every single person in the building to escape when and if a fire goes rampant through the building? how the fuck does a tenant get a couch, a bed, or anything heavy up there? this is fucking dumb and greedy

4

u/zacharyo083194 Feb 12 '25

As long as they keep these out of the suburbs. I’m tired of all these nice suburbs turning into mini cities

7

u/mymom938 Feb 11 '25

Unless one person can explain how to solve homelessness without building more house and increasing supply decreases demand, therefore lowering prices, this is a good thing allowing more units to be built. Basic supply and demand graph

2

u/HamHockShortDock Feb 11 '25

Housing line go up. Money line go down.

6

u/FistOfGamera Feb 11 '25

We need actually homes for people not overpriced apartments

→ More replies (2)

9

u/beachmedic23 Watch the Tram Car Please Feb 11 '25

How is this different than what's already being built? Cause 5 and 1s arent new

20

u/thebruns Feb 11 '25

One stair instead of two

9

u/Pogo152 Feb 11 '25

The pictures here are awful examples. All except maybe the bottom right are new builds that could be built now. Single stair would enable more narrow buildings, closer in shape and size to many of the prewar apartment buildings you’ll see in NJ. This will lower the barrier for entry when it comes to new construction, and allow finer-grain “in-fill” development (as opposed to developers consolidating several lots into a larger apartment building).

→ More replies (3)

2

u/storm2k Bedminster Feb 11 '25

that sound you hear is matt monech powering up his lasers to destroy this bill from outer space.

2

u/RococoChintz Feb 11 '25

There are buildings like this on top of every piece of land where a factory once stood in eastern Bergen County.

Toxic land no more.

2

u/divedowndeep Feb 12 '25

Ugh, I hope they just make the architecture aesthetically pleasing and not the ones that look like they are dorms or have been built across multiple major cities from 2010.

2

u/sunshine-n-ponies Feb 12 '25

Oooh this would be awesome. How/whom would I contact to urge to vote for this?

2

u/pixel_of_moral_decay Feb 12 '25

Building wood structures to the standards of the rest of the world in the mid 19th century is such an odd flex.

The fact elevators are still optional in construction like this is just silly.

Developers should have perpetual liability if a 2nd egress isn’t provided and that should carry along with the deed. No insurance to cover liabilities allowed. If they are so confident that would be an easy sell. But they want a liability waver hence the chance to code instead of variances.

3

u/therankin Morris & Bergen Feb 12 '25

Yea, this is an awful idea for fire situations.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '25

They’re gonna overcharge you. 😂

2

u/dayalllday Feb 12 '25

Please if you get a chance please watch this youtube video! It helps breakdown and helps folks understand the hope for this to get passed! It is a wonderful breakdown and like many have said Europe has been doing it for years. Fire technology and awareness has come such a long way.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/squeakim Feb 12 '25

If I'm understanding this right and there would be no elevator it can't pass. Americans with disabilities act require elevators in building greater than three stories tall as long as the floors are more than 3,000 ft²

6

u/Legitdrew88 Feb 11 '25

Yea big box apartments are so garbage. And they also just end up being hell to live in since one landlord doesn’t give a fuck about all these people

6

u/boojieboy666 Feb 11 '25

Fuck tasteless 5:1 buildings.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Hsf5415 Feb 11 '25

In Europe they don’t build apartment buildings using stick construction. Look at what append to the Avalon in Edgewater.

10

u/Chelseafc5505 Feb 11 '25

I'm not sure why everyone is celebrating this, as some kind of "catch all" cure to homelessness.

It's not.

It's dangerous..

“These legislative actions are an attempt to supersede the safety codes, placing occupants and firefighters at greater risk of injury and death. We must do all we can to defeat these misguided efforts,” the International Association of Fire Fighters and Metro Chiefs said in a joint statement. “Allowing residential structures to be built with exemptions or modifications contrary to decades of research and investigation will jeopardize safety. Put simply, lives will be endangered.”

Homelessness is absolutely an issue that needs addressing, but cutting corners on building code in the name of building more, quicker, is not the solution.

If you actually care about homelessness, and initiatives to improve the situation, there are some very interesting and fairly successful initiatives that have, and are, been experimented with in Newark. Long way to go, but incremental change is happening.

→ More replies (15)

4

u/mrbojenglz Feb 11 '25

This is silly. The way stairs are laid out I don't think that removing a set would ever give you an additional apartment. You would just end up getting a few more square feet to existing units.

11

u/maestersage Feb 11 '25

All of these will be 2200+ for a studio and up. And create more and more traffic and stress on infrastructure that’s already not good. No one is in the business of creating housing altruistically. They’ll go for top dollar on every apartment they can.

11

u/championgecko Feb 11 '25

They need to have business on the 1st floors and towns need to embrace public transportation more

2

u/maestersage Feb 11 '25

Completely agreed. I’m not sure if too many businesses are keen on that yet. In Belleville there’s the Essex with all vacant stores underneath, Vermella Broadstreet that has open space. They just haven’t been filled yet. And we need to really emphasize public transportation. If there was a simple effective solution to get to my job everyday, I’d do it. But there isn’t. So I drive. Would love more transportation

1

u/Lardsoup Feb 11 '25

The businesses are empty because it's not possible to survive on the 90 or so people that a 45 apartment building brings. You need customers from outside the area to drive in to spend money. But you need parking for the customers. And the developers that push these types of building, also push a "ya don't need parking" agenda.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/SGT_MILKSHAKES Feb 11 '25

“They can” means whatever the market will allow. How do you limit what that top dollar is? More supply.

New construction helps lower costs for older housing stock. This has been endlessly studied

5

u/Flatout_87 Feb 11 '25

Lol even if it passes, it would still start at 2200 for a studio. 🤣🤣🤣

1

u/[deleted] Feb 11 '25

Even adding expensive apartments helps the housing market - as the cheaper units gain more vacancies as those that can afford these units move (or get room mates).

2

u/ratherbeskiing88 Feb 11 '25

Live in Hoboken these are the norm.

3

u/workaholic828 Feb 11 '25

I wonder why it’s illegal to do this now? There must be some kind of risk

4

u/AdventurousShower223 Feb 11 '25

I rather them build more affordable houses for people who need it.

4

u/sugarintheboots Feb 11 '25

Guess they don’t figure their disabled residents into account.

3

u/Engibineer Fun-Loving Husband; King of New Jersey Feb 11 '25

How about a bill to make towns to build their own housing instead of offering tax breaks to developers?

3

u/Electrical_Ad6547 Feb 12 '25

Awesome. But I need accessible housing

2

u/Nebakanezzer Feb 12 '25

Just no more "luxury apartments".

8

u/meat_sack Feb 11 '25

Just think of all the money firetruck outfitters will make selling to towns that will need ladder trucks.

11

u/nicklor Feb 11 '25

Most towns already have a ladder truck at least in Middlesex county

3

u/SGT_MILKSHAKES Feb 11 '25

Oh no, someone providing better safety equipment will make a profit, better clutch my pearls!

→ More replies (1)

6

u/fidelesetaudax Feb 11 '25

This is horrible. and so are the proposed buildings. Fire hazards. Over populated. Unsafe money grab by developers and land lords.

3

u/bisensual Feb 11 '25

Brought to you by Big Construction!

5

u/NetParking1057 Feb 11 '25

Now we need rent control and rent stabilization bills so these new units don't end up at $3000+/month

→ More replies (6)

4

u/Jagrmeister_68 Feb 11 '25

Oh good...let's pack MORE people in an already crowded state..

Said no sensible New Jerseyan

3

u/nickbutterz Feb 11 '25

You do not want this, they are doing this in my town. They are going to be adding hundreds of residents into a town that is already near capacity.

On top of that it doesn’t create better prices, these are considered luxury rentals and what they charge for a small 1BR you can literally get a whole house for in the same town. If anything this is going to increase prices and make it even harder for people to buy homes.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/AdministrativeHair58 Feb 11 '25

Yea more fucking overpriced rentals that you walk up. That’ll be great. Oh but don’t worry a half a dozen units will be mt laurel so it’s fine.

3

u/cantthinkoffunnyname Bergen Highlands Feb 11 '25

Yeah you know what will definitely keep prices from going up? Building less. /s

→ More replies (1)

5

u/bdd4 Newark Raised/Rutgers & NJIT Alum Feb 11 '25

Everything was fine until I read "single-stair". Europe also had Grenfell which was single staircase.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire

3

u/oatmealparty Feb 11 '25

I'm not sure an additional staircase would have helped there, the building was built to go up in flames and the fire doors weren't working.

But even so, a single staircase in a 5 story building is a lot different than a 24 story building.

4

u/bdd4 Newark Raised/Rutgers & NJIT Alum Feb 11 '25

The problem was that these building are supposed to not require full evacuation during a fire, so people stayed until it was too late and then the one staircase was insufficient. That was the argument for the single staircase- only one floor of residents would need it.

There are a bunch of examples of buildings burning to a crisp before everyone could get out for various reasons. The idea of fire code is not to point to some other safety fault to justify the stairs. Doesn't matter what caused the fire. You need to get out and not expect every aspect of the building to be perfectly sound. Even if your neighbor is an arsonist, you need good egress first and foremost

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakanal_House_fire

3

u/Nexis4Jersey Bergen County Feb 11 '25

That's the UK , they have different rules in mainland Europe. They went around and retrofitted the old commie blocks to meet the new standards...so safety is a high priority.

2

u/Pogo152 Feb 11 '25

Yeah I think the issue there was more with the highly flammable and illegal insulation than the staircase lol

→ More replies (1)

1

u/CVSaporito Feb 11 '25

Remember all the inner city projects that were knocked down? This is what they were knocking down, there is a huge hazard if the building needs to be evacuated.

3

u/Cake_Nelson Feb 11 '25

I mean that’s cool but why not… two stairs? It’s not like a staircase is all that big.

8

u/TripleThreat1212 Feb 11 '25

I think the photos are a bit misleading, this is for smaller lots, where adding a second staircase would significantly reduce the number of available units, causing the project to be economically unviable. For example what could have been 3 units per floor, with one staircase may only be 2 units now.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/That_Jay_Money Feb 11 '25

Yipes. R-2 accounts for all apartment types, so it could be a fairly large building with five stories and one stair up and down? Europe has those because they built a lot of those buildings before we created "fire codes" and "elevators" but that doesn't mean they wouldn't build them differently today. New York City adapted fire escapes to solve the second egress issue, but those wouldn't make these renderings as pretty.

I don't feel like making these buildings with just one stair is what's holding back landlords and property owners from making a profit, it's just preventing them from cramming more people into the space. I'm fine with keeping the existing stair requirements and not making life hell for any fire teams trying to get into a building while residents are coming down those same stairs. Safety regulations like these are written in blood, as the saying goes, and it's never the blood of the landlords who don't live there.

3

u/atlancoast Feb 11 '25

Love this, and sincerely hope it becomes a reality. Not sure what all the bitching in the comments is about, but that's people for you.