MegaMansions in the Garden State

I stumbled across a website sponsored by Rowan and Rutgers universities that focuses on New Jersey sprawl from 1986 to 2007. The website was created as a companion to a 2010 study on land use over those two decades — possibly the climactic era for sprawl. Maps that allow you to click on years incrementally — 1986, 1995, 2002, and 2007 — illustrate growth during the period, which, according to the researchers, was dominated by large-lot sprawl. The website reports:

"During the years 2002-07, New Jersey’s development rate averaged 16,061 acres of urbanization each year, a 7-percent increase in acres developed per year compared with the earlier development rate experienced from 1995-2002. Altogether, the data show that, since 1986, a massive 324,256 acres of land (506 square miles) have been urbanized in the state.

"New Jersey’s total urban footprint now accounts for more than 30 percent of the state’s five million acres. Most of the state’s development—56.9 percent—is attributed to residential housing. However, New Jersey’s population grew only by 1.2 percent over the past five years. During that same period, urbanization occurred at over four times the growth rate of population.

What's most striking, says the website, is how much land has been gobbled up by houses on one or two or more acres. Large-lot homes are consuming a larger proportion of New Jersey’s remaining natural resources, including farmland, forest, and wetlands. "In spite of many mechanisms put in place in New Jersey to encourage more efficient compact development over the past two decades, two thirds of the acres developed into residential housing were the large-lot, land consumptive units that have encroached on rural landscapes throughout the state."

By default, the map shows a large-scale view —1 inch equals 22 miles on my computer. At this level, where the entire state fits on my screen, the development doesn’t look that excessive. It appears as little splotches all over the state.

But zoom in and the picture changes dramatically. I found it best to use the second-highest zoom level, with my screen showing about 3.5 miles of Garden State land from side to side. At that level, you can clearly see the dominant development patterns of recent decades. You can also click on any parcel and see an aerial photo, courtesy of Bing maps.

The randomness and wastefulness of the development are striking. With the exception of areas containing large tracts of state forests — for example the Pine Barrens — development is loosely scattered across much of the state. This, I guess, illustrates the true meaning of the term “exurb.” I had thought "exurbs" was a fancy new name for suburbs — but suburbs used to grow out incrementally from the center. In New Jersey, at least, the suburbs didn't grow outwardly so much as metastasize.

The aerial view of what has been built is just as disturbing as the overall pattern. For a surprising portion of the state, development goes beyond the now-familiar McMansion. What you see are buffet-style, all-you-can-eat MegaMansions — miles and miles of them. Maybe the residents are highly paid professionals, corporate executives, or hedge fund managers. Quite probably, many helped to bring down the US economy back in 2008. These are the chief beneficiaries of today’s finance/service/health/real estate economy. And if their houses don’t represent the most bloated, unsustainable lifestyles on Earth, they come fairly close. They don’t even outwardly demonstrate any taste — unlike, say, the classically inspired mansions of the Robber Barons of a century or so ago.

What’s the future for these houses? They must have lost substantial value over the last two or three years. How about in 10 or 20 years, after we have passed peak oil production? After the world has begun to seriously ratchet down its carbon emissions? My feeling is that many of them will be abandoned.

Changing Landscapes in the Garden State