728.1 F22 i Newarkp il.I L969
W"lthe ! NEWARK, NEW JERSEY HOUSING MARKET
as of February 1, 1969
(A s'uppl"mcnl to the Moy l, 1965 onolysis|
Ii' ir'.. F'i.i l.irJ, .i '.,, ,-'. 0Cl2I{il;!j
A Rcporl by rhc DEPARTIAENT OT HOUSING AND URBAN DEVETOPMENT FED E RA! HOUSING ADAAINISTRATION WASH|NGTON, D. C. 204t I
June 1969 ANALYSIS OF THE
NEWARK. NEW JERSEY. HOUSING MARKET AREA
AS 0F FEBRUARY i-__Lg!g (A supplement to the May 1, 1965 analysis)
Field Market Analysis Service Fecleral Ilousing Admi nistration Depart-men0 of Houslng and Urban Development l:riesgr]
As a public selv1ce to aeo.iiir; i.,;caj. housJ.ng actlvlties through I cLearer understairtl ing of J.rrr:al rror.rsing market condiLions, FHI lttlttated prrbtlcetlorr of I Es cornprehensl';e houslng rnarhet analyses early ln 1965. I,Ihl le eaeh reprrr:ir J.s des:t_gned i"*l1y for FHA uce ln admlr:lsterlng i.te rnr;rtgege insurance"pu"tf operatlr>ns, iE 1s expec te'l i:hat the f rrr: tuai I nf r: ruraE i on and the i j ncl ings and concluslon$ orf Ehese 'ii:eports wl l1 be general ly uselrri aiso to bullders, rilorugageee, :lld c,the+r-s concer.necl wJ.tfr Iocal housing probleme and to o[hers lr*vi.rrg err:[nteresf- in local economlc ion- d 1t ions an,l Eren,js .
s{nce markeL analysle ls nor: an e,.:act science, the juclgrnenEal factor ls lnrportant ttr the dt,veloprnent of findings and conclusions. There i.ri 11 be dif ferencegi of r.rp inLon , oi cc-,,urse , in the j.nEer- pretatioir of erruilabLe fir,ctus. I irrfornat-'ion in d.eterminirrg the currellt and future ;lbucr:pi:1,..rr: r_:&il,ncity oi; Ehe. markel_ ancl the re_ quirements f tlr malnteriance cf & rea$Llnable baLance in demand- supply re lat lonsli ipe .
The factual fru.megorli fl;r ir.'icir .r.r'raJ..vs-{.r: ls ilevaloped as Ehrolighly as pcs6ltrte orr Ihe lrcsl,:; of jn j:r:rrmnL i.cir avaiiab]e at the time (Ehe "as of " date) f rorn botJr i-ocai arrr! n,rticrns.l. sources, UnIess specif l- cal Ly ldentif 1ed b.v ac.:-rr'.Jc r--e{.!:):,"cnc.n, al- I .lsti;uri.tes nnr) jurJgments ln the ane,trysle,rr'3 rl:l-rciFr: cr l:li:-: {.ii.rth(rrinq arrr:lyst arrcj the FHR Market Analysls ['.ese,sirc]r ,::r-rurls.ie a-l:,j Seci: ion ,, 0f " eat jr.nates and judgments mede on the basls oi: Jl:forn,lc i.orr evi.ilili-:i.e oir tlre ,'ao of,, <]aIe may i:e mcldifled conslderably hy r.irr britqut:i,i: lirarket deveioprnents,
t Table of Contents
Page
Summary ancl Conclusions i
Houslng MarkeE Area 1
Map of the Area 2
Economy of the Area
Employment I UnemplclymenE 3 Future Employment Prospects 3 Income 4 Demographic Factors
Population 5 Househo lds 6 Houslng Market Factors
Houslng Supply 8 Residential Bullding Activity 8 Tenure of Occupancy 8 Vacancy 9 Sales Market 10 Rental Market 10 Urban Renewal 11 Subsldi zed Housing r3
Demand for Housing
Demand for Nonsubsldlzed Housing 15 Demand for Subsldized Houslng L6 ANALYSIS OF THE NEWARK NEW JERSEY HOUSING MARKET AREA AS OF FEBRUARY 1 t969 (A supplement to the May 1, 1965 anatysis)
Summarv and Conc lusions I Rapid c'conomlc growth characterized the Newark economy in the mid-l96ols, but- the raEe of growth has 1965- been cleclining since All of the lncrease in wage and salary emproyment since 1966 lras been 1n nonmanufacturing. The unemproyment rate in the HMA h*s trended downwarcr since the early tg6o'g and however, has bct-'n welr below 5.o percent since the rapid economic expansJ.n of the mld-1960's. The 4.1 percent unemployment rate in 1968 equaled the post-196O low. rL is judged that lncreases in nonagricurtural wage ancr salary employment in HMA the during 1969 and 197o may be limited Eo an average of II,OOO a year, well below the average gain of 16,900 a year beth/een 1964 and 196g. An increase ni of Ehis mag- Eude would be comparabre to the pace of economic g'owth dur- ing the late 195Ors and early 1960's.
Z rn February 1969, the median after-tax income of aIl famiries in the Ncwark area hras estimaterd at $9r35O, and the meclian for rent('r hrust:holds of two persons or more ptrrcr.L was $7r6oo. Abouc 21 of aII famrlles ancr 32 percent of the renter househords had afler-Lax annual lncomes of less than while c('nt.f alI fanrllres $6,ooo, 1g per- and seven pcrrcenL of tenanL housr.rholds had i ncrrnrcrs of $I5'OOO or more a year. By early Lg-ll, al t -famil_y inconrt: i s expected to increase, Ecl $9 r 1oo i"r tax, rentor houst:hcrlds anc.r that of is expectecl to reach $grO5O."f 3 T'hc populaLion of the Newark HMA was estimated r,gg5,ooo sons as at per- of F'trbruary 1, 1969, an increase averaging .,gr75O year si ncrr May a 1965. Thi s i s below the Apri I 19(;o-fia y- 1965 gain of 23,9'25 a year, reflecting the rapid decrine "ru..g" of rcsirlt:nt births in th.r number ln recent years. The most rapicl lv growing area ln Lhe IIMA, Morri s county, acc.ounEed for over popul.aLio. gr.wth thrc--e-f if ths of the between 1965 arrcl Lg6g. Ref lecting a Iower level o-f crc.n 5 Rcflccting a decllnlng rate of new residential construction and increased demoliEion activity, the housing supply in Ehe HMA in- creasecl by an average of 7 rO75 uniEs a year during the May 1965- February 1969 period, compared with a net of 81875 units yearly in the first half of the 196O decade. As measured by buiLding permits the volume of new construction in the HMA declined by about onc-half beEween 1964 and 1968. It is est.imated Ehat 5,1OO housing units were under construction in the HMA in February 1969, inclucling 4,OOO units in multifamily structures. There was a contjnued moderate increase in the proportion of renter occuPancy, frcrm 46.3 percent in 1965 to an estimated 46.J percent ln February t969. 6 I'he declining raEe of new residenEial construction in recent years has resultt:cl ln a comparatively tight housing sj.tuation in the IJMA. An estjnraled 5,50O housing units 1n the three-county area werc avai.table for sale or rent in February L969, an over-al1 vacancy raLcr of O.9 percent. 0f Lhese, IrTOO urrits were for sale rrnrl 3, U(X) r./r.rr(. for rcnE, equal 11ng respective vacancy ratios of O.5 pt'rct,nt ancl 1.4 percenE. Vacancy ratlos were O.9 percent in ihc strlt,s inventory and 2.5 percent in the rental inventory i n May 196.5. 7 The, annuaI demand for an average of 6r5O0 privateIy-financed, non-subsidized hrru5in* uniEs in the Newark area (3r-lOO r-rnits of salr,rs trousing arrd 3rOOO units of renLal hotrsin6f during the February 1969-February 197 1 forc-cast perriod is shor,rn qualitativel y on pag(rs 15 and 16 . The occupancy poEential for subsidized hous- i.ng in Llre Ncwark area during 1969 and 197C Lrnder various federal [)r(.)grrl0rs aclml,rristered by FHA begins c,n page 16. ANALYSIS OF THE NEWARK NEW JERSEY HOUSING MARKET AREA AS 0F FEBRUARY 1, Lg69 (A supplement to the May 1, 1965 analysis) Housi rket. Area As in previous analyses, the Newark, New Jersey, Housing Market Area (HMA) is defined as being coterminous with the Newark Standard Mctrop,oljtan SLatistical Area (SMSA), which encompasses the New Jersey counLic's clf Essex, Morrj.s, and Union. Because of iLs loca- j L on i n norlheastern New .Je,rsery, the HMA j s i nc lucled in the New York-Northerastern New Jersey Standard Consolidated Area for statistical purposes. Dr-'splte 1ts proximlLy to the larger New york area, the HMA has iLs own distinct economy based, historicarry, on metal fabrlcating, heavy machinery, and oiI and chemlcal refineries. The populaLic'rn is concentrated ln EsseX and Union Counties in the eastern portion of the HMA. In 1969, the rural farm population constituted less than one percenL of the total population in the HMA. Econ 196tt Iist irnaLc and PasL 'l'rend. According to preliminary data compiled byL hr: Ntrw ,Jorsey Dcpartnrent of Labor and Industry, nonagricultural waBC' ancl strl ory (rrtlploym(,.nt avt: raged 76O,6O0 during 1968, an increase of2 ,2O0 ovt,r the averragc for ]1961 . As shown in the following table, Lho 1967 t,<> 1968 incrcase rrrflecLs the conLinualion of a cleclining rAt.() of ,'tnploymcrnt growlh Lhat bt:gan in Lhc HMA cluring the mid-1960's. 'r'hc 1967-l96u lncroase in wage and salary r:mpr.ymcnl likely wi ll be Lht, lr,wcsl- anrrual galn s:ince I960-1.961. 'I'rend <>f Nt-lnagricul Lural Llage and Sal ary limplo yment Ncwark New Jerrsey, Ilousinp Markt.t Area Annual Aver s r 1964-1968 (in thousands) Change in total Waqt: and salary employment from preceding year Manu- Nonmanu- Manu - Nonmanu- Ycar facturin facturi ng Total facturing fac !q1 i ng To tal 1964 237 .4 455.6 693. O 1965 247.5 476.t 7',23.6 rc.; 2(..; 30 ; 1966 256.O 488. 3 7 44.3 8.5 12.2 20 7 1961 256.8 501.6 7 58.4 o.8 13.3 t4 1 1s684! 253. O 5C.7.6 760.6 -3.8 6.O 2 2 rrl Prt'l i mi nar:y. Sorrrr:,,r : Nt.w .Icr:srry Dcpar:tment of Labor and Inclustry. 2 NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, HOUSING MARKET AREA / U t^ . MORRIS ,. COUNTY t ) I I l/ ( ( ESSEX t2 t5 ) a COUNTY 3 o o 6 J toa o l4 ll o2 oI ( o / a o\13( 84ao MORR I S, \ ESSEX r-\. 3 AND r \^..-/-\ roN . / ururon "*o COUNTY NEW I 22 JERSEY 'l o \-, I 25 a /, Ea f o KEY I. BELLEVILLE r4. MORRISTOWN 2. BLOOMFIELD t5. PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS TWP 5 6EDAR GROVE TWP. t6. CLARK 4. €AST ORANGE 17. HILLSIDE TWP. 5- IRVINGTON r8. LINDEN 6. MONTCLAIR t9. PLAINFIELO 7. NUTLEY N. RAHWAY 8. ORANGE 21 . ROSELLE 9. SOUTH ORANGE 22. ROSELLE PARK IO, VERONA 25. SCOTCH PLAINS TU/P. II. WEST ORANGE 24. UNION I2. DOVER ?5. WESTFIELD MAOTSON t3, NOR]'H o to Mr. J The major port,lon of employment growLh between 1964 and 1968 (70 percent) reflects lncreased emplolTnent in nonmanufacturing. Be- tween 1964 and 1968, employmenE ln nonmanufacturing activities in the HMA rose by 52,OOO workers (see table I). Three sectors- trade, government, and services. accounted for three-fourths of this grohrth reflecElngr ln part, increasing consumer expenditures for personal needs, personal services, and education. In the local manufacturlng lndustrles, pr1ncipally machinery, chemicals, and fabricaEed met.als, employment gains generated by the Vietnam con- flict vrere notable during the mid-196Ors, but have been negligible slnce 1966. The lack of growth during 1967 and 1968 suggests Ehat the local manufacLuring industries may be enEerlng a period of sta- bllfty like thaE which characEerized Ehe local economy in the late 1950ts and early 1960's" Unempl oyment There has been a generally downward trend in the raLe of unemploy- ment in'the Newark area since 1958, when 6515OO persons, or 8.5per- cent of the work force, were unemplr:yr:d. In 1968, there was an average of 35r4OO unemployed persons in the HMA, an unemployment rate of 4.1 percent. Thls equaled the lowest annual average rate of uncmployment in the HMA 1n any year since 196O. The unemploy- ment rate jn Ehe HMA has been well below 5.0 percent since the rapid economlc expanslon of the mid-196O's. Future Ern l) l<: L Prospect.s NonagriculEural wage and salary employment in the Nerrvark HlfA j s ex- pected to j.ncrease by an average of 11rOOO jobs anrrualLy during the February 1969-February 1971 forecast period, reflecting a continua- Elon of the declinlng raLe of economic growth that began in the mid- 1960ts. I'l're level of employmerrt growth expected during the nexE two years Is well below the 1964-1968 average (16,900), but is conrparable to the average level of employment growth in the I{MA dur- lng the late 1950rs and early 1960's. Manufacr-uring employment in the HMA has declined in recent years from the i966 peak and rnay continue to decline moderately durlng 1969 and .197O, barring a sig- nl.flcant change ln the naEional commltmenE in Southeast Asia. With few exccptions, increased spencling in support of the mill-tary com- mitment. in Vletnam has been the only factor in the last serveral years that has triggered significant employment growth in the manu- facturing sector of the economy. The nonmarrufacE,urring inclustries in the Newark area are expecEed to account for virtually all of the growth in wage and salary employ,rnenE in the near fuLure:;, principalIy in governmenL and in the service sector. 4 Income 1r i Income. In the Newark HMA, the median annual income of all familles was esE imated at $91350 as of February 1969, after deduc- tion of federal income tax. The medlan after-tax income of renter households of two persons or more $ras $7rdoo. An estimated 21 per- cent of all famllles and 32 percenE of all renter households haa after-tax incomes of less than $6rooo while 18 percent of alI families and seven percent of all tenant households received annual after- tax lncomes of $15rooo or more. By tg7lr, the median annual income of all famllies In the HMA is expected to rise to $9r9oo, and that of rent.er households ls expected to increase to $gro5o. Appendix table lr, which shows a dlstribution of all fanilies and."r,l", households in Ehe HMA by estimated annual income, lndicates the wide disparlEy between incomes earned by Newark residents as compared to those persons residlng in Ehe suburban areas of the Hl,lA. 5 Demo a 1 Factors Popul at lon Februar 1969 EsEimate and E Trend The population of the Newark HMA was estimated at 1 ,885,OOO as of February 1, Lg6g, an increase OOO (l9 of 74 , ,7 50 a year) since May 1965, Ehe date of rhe ket sEudy. lasE FHA mar_ By comparJ son, the population of the HMA increased bv an average of 231925 persons a year beth,een April 196O ancl Ma y 1965. Aithough Ehe declinln g raEe of economic growth in rercent years has resulted in a sllght de cllne in Ehe number of in-migrants, rate of population the lower growth since 1965 can be attribu Eed largely to the dec I i n.i ng bi rth raEe in the HI4A. VirEuaIly growth all of the population in the HMA in recent years has occurred outsicle Newark, prin- cipally ln Morris Co un ty. Over-al I populatlon trends in rhe HMA since 1960 are suurmarized 1ow. Population be_ growth trends in major srrbmarkets in the HMA are slrown in table IlI . To tal Average annual Date change qgpulat"ion from eced i date ApriI 1, 1960 t,6g9 ,42o May 1, 1965 1rg11rOOO 23,925 February 1, 1969 gg5,OOO 1 r L9,7 50 February Lg71 1, 1r91g,OOO 16,5OO Sources 196O from U. S. Census of populati<-rn. 1965, 1969, and 1971 estimated by Housing Marker Anal.yst. NeE atural Tncrease and Ml aE lon In the Newark IIMA, of resi the nurnber clr-rnt blrths has deillned rather sharply in r Components of Po pulatlon Change Newark, New Jersey, Housing Market Area Aprit t, lg6O-FebMEf 1r L969 Average annual chang,es April 1, 1960- May 1, 1965- Components Ma 1 195 February 1, 1969 Total population change 231925 19 ,7 50 Net natural lncrease 18,OOO 13,25O Net migraEion 5 1925 6, 5OO Sources: U. S. Census of PopulaElon, New Jersey Department of Health, and est.lmates by Housing Market Analyst. Future Populatlon GrowEh. Duri ng the February 1969-February L97 1 period, the population of the Newark HMA is expecEed to increase by an average of 161500 persons a year. As shown ln table III, Lhis average is lower than Chat of earlier periods ln Ehe 1960's. It is assumed that birth raEes ln the HMA wtll continue to drop and that t,herg will be a con- t.i nued clc:c 1 i ne 1n the I eve I of net natural l ncrease duri ng 1969 and 1970. In addltion, the raEc. of ln-mlgraEion during the forecasE periocl is expectercl to be bel Househo lds Februarv 1969 Estimate and Past Trend. It is estimated that there were 588r2OO households in the Newark HMA as of February 1, 1969, lndicating an average lncrease of S'OOO each year since May 1965. With the erxceptlon of the city of Newark, increases were noted in mosE sectors of the houslng market, particularly in I'lorris County where over one-half of the 1965-L969 lncrease in the HMA occurred (see table III). Over-al1 household trends ln the Newark area are sunrmarized in t.he followlng tab1e. Number of Average annual change DaLe househo 1ds from preceding date Aprl I 1, 1960 511,157 May 1, 7965 558, 2OO 9,25O February 1, 1969 5B8,2OO 8,OOO February 1, L97I 602,2QO T rOOO Sources: 1960 from U. S. Census of Housing. 1965, 1969, and 1971 estimated by Housing Market AnaIyst. -7 Future seho Id wt On the basis of antlctpaEed changes in economlc acto16, expected populatlon growth, and a conEinued moderate decllne ln average househo Id size, the number of househotds in the HMA ls expccted to tncrease by an average ot.'7rooo annually to a Eotal of 60212oo by February t97L. The proJecEed annual increase in the number of households is below that oi borh the 1950-1965 and 1965-1969 perlods. Most of rhe household growth In the HMA during 1969 and 1970 le expecEed ln Morrls county, as shown in Eable rrr. 8 Ilousing Market Factors Housing Supply February 1969 EstimaEe and Past Trend. As shown in table IV , there I^Iere an esLinraEed 5OS,OOO houslng uniEs in the HMA i'n February 1969, a net increase of 7rO75 units a year on the average.'since May 1955. The 1965-1969 increase reflected the construction of 35r5OO units, less 9,OOO units lost through demolltlon and other causes. MosE of the unlts demollshed beEween 1955 and 1969 were in urban renewal areas in Newark. Based on building permit data and on the postal vacancy survey conducted in late 1958, 1t is esEimated that 511OO unlEs were under construcEion in Ehe HMA in February L969--11lCO slngle-family unlts and 4,OOO multifamily units. Reflecting a higher level of residentlal construction, an estimated 1r5OO single-family units and 6r7OO multlfamlly uniEs were under construction in May 1965. Residential Bulldine ActiviEy LasL Trend. As measured by building permits, Ehe volume of residen- tial construction in t.he Newark area decllned by well over one-half between 1965 and 1968. A total of nearly Llr750 new pri.vate housing units were authorlzed in 1965, compared with 5rL25 in 1968 (see table V). The decllne in both slngle-famlly and multlfamliy construction slnce the mid-196O's has occurred in all areas of the HMA. The de- cllnlng raee of new construcEien can be attrlbuted to a combinaEion of several f actors . credi t, tlghtness , f irst evldent. in the Hl,lA ln 1966, contlntred t.o s<,irne degree lhrough 1968 as avallable in- vestment funds were dlverEed lnto other forrns of lnvestment yielding htgher rates of- tet.urn. PrivaEe high-rise apartment construction decllned in the clty of Newark for several years because of high vacancy and lack of attr€(cLlve sites. rn addltlon, the generai avallabillty of land for apartment constructlon in nearby areas of Mlddleeex county attracted some builders who might otherwise be operrrting ln the Newark area. "lenure of Occupancy Thei trend from owner to renter occupancy continued in the HI,IA bethreen 1965 and 1969. An estinrated 46.7 percenE of the occupied housing inventory in the HMA was renter-occupied in February 1969 compared wiflr /+5.9 percent in April 1950 and 46.3 percenE in May Lg65. As shown ln table TV, the trend to renEer occupancy has been occurring in all three HMA counLies 6ince 196O. 9 Vacancv Ma 1965 As shovrn in tablr: Vr, the overal I lever of avai lable, vacant housing uni ts in the HMA declinecl berween April 1960 ancl May 1965. 0f Lhe 9,3OO vacant housing unit.s avallable for sale or renE in i965, zrTao were for sa le and 6r600 were for renL, indicating vacancy ratios of O.9 percent and 2.5 percent, respectlvely" Despite the fact that a number of uni E,s in new high-rise apart.ments were noL being saLisfactorily ab- sorbed, the decl ine in ttre over-al I level of vacancy dtrring thr: f j rst half of rhe 1960 decade was most pronounced in the city of Newar-k. Postal v,acancy Survcry. , A postal vacancy survey was conducted in t.he Newark area ln late 19 68 (see lable VII). A11 of rhe posr offices .surveyed alI possible del iverii:s j n their service areas. Ovr:r-alI , the survey i nc ludc,d 564 r25O total possibte deliveries, nearly 93 percent of thc HMA housJ.ng supply, 0f this total , 4r2AO vacanr:ies were enu- meraEed, or O.7 percen t of the units surveyed. A vacancy rate of O.7 PercenE was found in 284r9OO deliveries to resiciences ancl O.8 percepL of the 279 r35O possibLe dellveries to aparturents ivr.:re vacarlt. .A total of nearly -5,9oo unlts were under construction in the survey area., of whlch 1r3OO we:re resiclences. A previous postal vacancy survey, condrrcted in Apri L 1965, included mosL of the post offices surveyed 1n 1968. The results of Ehe Ewo surveys, shown in the following table, suggest a definite downward t-rend in vacancies in alI major portlons of the HMA between 19tr5 and 1968 (see Appendix A, paragraph 7). Vacancy Rates Shown bt' Postar Vaca.ncy $qrveys Newark New Jerse I{ousi ne Markct Arca 1965 and 1968 Pe r:cen L vacant Re si d ences Apartments lo tal Pcrstal are&s 1965 1968 1965 L968 Ts5t--1e68 Total, al I ar('as .l.o o.7 r.8 o.8 t.4 0.7 L / Essex County o.8 o.5 1.6 o 6 1.4 o 7 Newark 1 0.9 1.6 r.4 i I .r .3 1 I Remainder of county o. rJ O. lr 2,O o 3 1.4 o 3 Morris Counry t,4 L.2 5.6 1.5 I.9 7.2 Union County o.8 o.5 2.O o.8 1.3 o.6 ll For thc 49 post offlces included in bofh surveys, t-tre percenL vacant was 1.4 in 1965 and O.U in 196U. Source Po s tal v&cancy srlrveys conducted by cooperating posLrnasE,ers i. n the Newark erea. 10 February 1969. 0n t.he basls of the postal vacancy surveys and on other vacancy data obtalned in Ehe Newark area, it ls esEimated that there were 5r5oo vacant, avallable houslng uniEs in the Ht"lA tn February L969, lncludlng l.'7oo for sale and 3r8oo for rent. The units available for sale or for rent represented vacancy rates of o.5 percenE and 1.4 per- centr respectivel.y. In general, vacancies in the HMA have declined slgnlflcanEly slnce 1965. The decllne has accelerated in recent years because of a declinlng rale of new residential construction and increased demo[ltion actlvlty. As shown ln table Vlr there was a decline in vacancles in all areas of the HMA beEween 1955 and L969; the decline was part.lcularly sharp 1n Essex County. The SaIes l'larket, General Market Condltlons. A comparativety low vacancy situation pre- valled throughout the Newark area ln early 1969. As shown in table VI, the home The RenEal Market Ceneral Market CondiEions A declining raEe of new rnultifamily construc- tlon resulted in a decLine in vacancy 1n most existi,ng apartment projects and the rapid absorpElon of units in newly-completed developments be- tween 1965 and 1969 in t,he rental ruarket in the Newark area. rt is 11 estJmatcrd thaL the over-aIl rental v{rcancy ratio in the HMA declined from 2.5 percenE in May 1965 r-o only 1./* per"e,.,E in 1969. rn Newark, Lhe decIIne 1n rent.al vacancles 1n recent years has paralleled the over-all IIMA trend. Desplte the lmprovemenE in the vacancy situat.ion, the nrarlce[ for expenslve hlgh-rise aitartments ln the city stiII requires speclaL conslderatjon. A few of the privately-fi.nanced t,igt-.ise projects bullt ln Nerwark ln Ehe early 1960' s stilt have noE attaine:d a satj sfac- tory Level of occuPancy. 0ther similar apartments have reached approxi- mately 90 percent occupancy, buE stiII experience a rapid rate of trurn- over in occupancy. A high-rise project completed in Newark in 1967 has not reached a satisfactory leveL of occupancy ancl may go into foreclosure unless occupancy lmproves markedly in the near future. rn view of Ehe difficuLties in Newark relal-ed Eo hlgh rates of turnover in occupancy and the slow absorpticn of units in other projecr:s, extreme cantion should be utilized in evaluatlng the neec.l for high-rise projects in the city financed at market interest rates. rn contrast, rental projecrs buil.t in Newark for low- and moderate-income famllies have been rJadil,y nrar:keted. In the suburban areas of the HMA, units ln garden apartments have been satlsfact.orl1y absorbed in recent years, as reflected in the lgw i:ental vacancy rat.es shown in Eable VI. In Morris County where the construc- tlon of garden apartments has been signlficant in recenr- years, ttre rcnLal vac&ncy ratlo declined to 2.3 percent in February'1969, indicat- lng thaL the large number of apartrnents built in the pais; ppany-Troy- Hl[ls area 1n the early and mid-1960rs now has been satisfactorily absorbed. Sevc:ral aparE.nrenE pro jects are currently uncl er construction in Randolph Iownshlp, just south of Dover in Morris county. These Projects are several mj-Ies further from the employment centers of New York and northern New Jersey than the newer projects i. pilrsippany- Troy Hills, and are not as werr located with."ipu.t to srropping fa- cilities. Thus, the absorptj.on experience of new units in Randolph Iownship should be carefully observed, especinlly in vlew of the fact that local author- lLic.s requlre that 9O percent of the units in an apartmitnt development be ef f tciency or one-bedr:oorn lrni ts. Urban Rtrnerwal Excluding [lrose pro jet:ts aI ready completed, there were 44 projecLs urban i:r:newal in Lhe HMA i. execrition or in planning as of February 1, Lg6g, of which 19 wr]rc lQC&[e<] ln Newark. Some of riie pro jects in Newark have involvecl exLensive relocation. A few of the larger projecLs in the HMA currr:'rrtly in e'xecutlon are described i. the ioli.wlig p^rugraphs. The 0 I Land acqu 1sltlon ln the Central Ward (R-32) project in Newark began 1n late 1968. A rotal of 1r525 f.antlles, 95 individuals, and 14O buslness<:s wIII eventually be relocated, and nearly 57O structures will be demollshed. Plans for the aree lnclude 8OO low-rent hous- 1ng uniLs and industrial actlvity compaElble with the area. The project area ls bounded by Bergen Street and by Avon, Belmont, and 17 Avenues. The Falrmont ProjecE (R'72) in Newark , already in execut.lon, will lnvolve Ehe relocatlon of an addftional 41O families, 40 indlviduals, and 3O businesses. Site clearance will involve t.he demolitlon of an additional 2OO strucLures. The project area is bounded by a number of roads lncludlng West MarkeE St.reet, Hartford Street, Norfolk SEreet,, 1lth and l.2rh Avenues, and Central Avenue. To date, a new offlce buildlng for the Motor Club of America and industrial facili- tles for Wiss and Company have been conpletecl. Future activiEy wtII lnvolve Lhe construction of temporary facilities for Ehe New Jersey College of l,ledicine and Denttstry and low- and rnoderate-rent housing. The Industrlal River (R-f21 project 1n Newark encornpasaes more than 1.1525 acres along Ehe Passaic RJver. The r:edevelopment plans call for thcr reclarnaLlon ancl lndustrlaL development of nearly IrOOO acres of unused and under-r.rtlllzed meadowland. Intensive industrial de- velopment with supportlng comnrercial facillEies is planned. Reloca- tlon, whlch 1s in the initial sterge, will involve over 17O familles, 1O lndlviduals, and 17O businesses. About 35O structures wiLl be demolished. The 54-acre Medical CenEer (R-196) urban renewal area in Newark is bounded by 1-2th Avt:nue, Bergen Street, South 0range Avenue, and Norfolk Street. This project will make available approximately 5O acres for the develop- ment of a state-supporEed Medical School. Use of Ehis site in con- junction wjth the adjacent R-72 projecE area will allow for the con- struction of a new campus for undergraduate and graduate medical, dental, and nursing educaEion. 'Ihe implemenEation of Ehe R-196 Project will lnclude the demolltion of over 5OO sEructures and the relocation of 580 families, 3O lndlvldunls, and nearly 12O businesses. ReloctrLion acLivi Ly in the HI,IA during 1969 and 1970 is expected to in- volvc tho rclocatton of over 413OO famlliesr prlncipally in Newark. l-loweverl t.hr:r rapidity with which this is implemented will depend, in part, on Ehe supply of standard housing available in the city. As was polnted out earlier in thls report, the level of vacancies in the HMA has declined in recent years, resulting in a comparatively tight hous- ing markeL si.tuation. Although vacancies in Newark are proportionately higher than in most oEher areas ln the HMA, many of these are. in areas 13- whlch contaln a large number of subst.andard houslng unlts. Thus, re- locaElon plans could bei adversely affected during the next year or so 1f prosptrctivt'r dlsplaces cannot be accommodated 1n standard exlsElng houslng or ln new moderaEe- and low-rent unlts. Subsldlz.ed Houslns. Sectlon 221(d)(3). As of February 1969, there were nine completed pro- jects of 1r829 units in the Newark area lnsured under Section 221(d) (3). 0f these, thr-ee projects of 998 units were in Newark and six projects of 831 unlts were located elsewhere ln the HMA. A total of five projects containlng 837 unlts were under construcEion, alI but 95 unit.s were in Newark. Of the units under construction, 526 are in projects in which funds have been reserved for rent,-supplement payments. The flrst project in the HMA was completed in mid-L964. on ttre average, occupancy ln sectlon 221(d)(3) projects in the Newqrk area exceeded 99 percent ln February 1969. sectlon 235. No subdivisions hrere being processed under Section 235 In February 1969. The comparatlvely high construction and lanci costs prevalllng in the Newark area at, thls ttme llkely wlII preclude the development of new sales houslng under Sectlon 235. SectloIr 236. There were no projects being bullt under the provisions of sr:ction 236 ln the FMA in February L969, and no applications had reached the feasiblllty stage of processlng. Publlc Houstne. As of February L969, there were 48 public low-renE houslng projects in the HI'IA compri.slng a total of 15,3g6 rrnits, in- cluding 19 projects of 11,765 units in Newark. The HMA Eotal includes 3,291 units deslgned for elderly occupancy, inclucling 1rg60 in Newark. A total of 1r374 units (a11 deslgned for the elderly) were under con- struction in February 1969. rn addition, nine projects of 2r1o1 unj.ts (675 eldrrrly) were in various stages of ptannlng. Stuclent Housing. As of Februar y 1969, a total of l9 dormitory projects completed since 1956 provlded accommodaE icrns for 3 1026 col lege students and studenE nurses. There were no stude nt faci lities undelr constnrction in Lhe HMA ln early L969, but a project to accommodate 5O0 students rrt I.Jpsala Col lege (East Orange) was being planned. 14 @TlrelNewJerseyFIousingFinanceAgencymakesmortga8e loans f.r up t.5o ycars Eo limited-diviclenJ 'I'ht' and non-piofiL program is f i nancecr through the sal e of revenue bonds to "pon"o.".private lnvestors, cnabling Eh. housing auLhority to rencr mortgag. *oney at interosL rat('s 2 Lo 2.5 percent below prevailing market rates. Admission Lo thr:sc pro jects i s linri terd to tami lies whose income ('xc(rss j tro"" is not in of s x Lirnes the annual gross rental , or to 7 times the annual gr()ss rt.ntalr -i-f Ltrrrrci ar(.) thrcrc ()r more clcpenclents in the fanily. AL prcst'nL, Ll: Antlci pated Houslng Dem44! Dr:rmancl ftlr Nr>n-Subsidized Houslng Bast,'d r>n the crcononric, denngraphic, and housing factors discussed prr:vious1y, iE is estimated that the demand for privat.ely-financed, non-subsldlzed housing in the Newark HMA wll1 average 615OO units alrnually during th+: February 1969-February 1971 forecast period. The annLlal Lotals include 3r5OO units supplied as sates housing and 3'OOC as units in rental housing. The estimated annual demand for non-sub-' sidtz.ed housing is somewhaE above Ehe volume of construction activity during 1967 and 1968, but ls below Ehe average number of new private units authorized annually between 1965 and 1968. A portion of the de- mancl for new housing in the HMA in recent years hlas saEisfied in the r'rxi sting i irverntory, as ref lected in the decline ln the number of vac&nL units avajlable: for sale and rent. Since vacancies in early 1969 were at an unusualty lclw level, it is evident that fhe increase jn clemancl for housing durlng 1969 and 197O must be satisfied primarily Lhrough new eonstruction. Qelq.g llqgslne. The fotlowing table Presents by price range the a;,:nual dlstrlbution of sales houslng expected to be absorbed in Ehe Newirk HMA during the Fcbruary 1969-February 1971 forecast period (see-Appendix A, paragraph 9). Estimaterd Annual Dermand for New Sales Housinp Nc:wark, New Jersey, Housing Market Area February 1, 1969 to Februarv 1. 197 L Nuurber Percentage Pri ce range of uni ts dist-ribution Under $20,0OO 210 6 $20, OOO - 22,499 350 10: 22 , _5O0 - 24,ggg 49o- r4 25 rOfJO _ 27,499 560 16 27,5OO - '29,999 67U- 19 30, OO0 - 32,499 520 15 32, 5()O - 34,999 390 11 35, Oot) and ovrrr 310 9 T'o Lal. 3r5OO 100 Rental llousing. 'l'h Eslimated Annual Demand for New RenEaI Housin Newark. New .Iersev. Housing Market Area Ferbruar I 1969 to Februa 1 I I Number of units by bedroom size MonLh1y 0ne Two Three a/ or more ss ront Effl ci ency bedroom hed rooms bedrooms $ r20 - $l2e 70 r30 - 139 40 140 - lt+9 30 42; I50 _ 159 20 280 160 - 169 15 170 4t5 J70 _ 179 150 315 1U0 - lu9 110 265 90 190 - L99 ,2 200 70 200 - '224 150 55 ') ') q. _ 249 40 250 and over 25 Ii: L al 77 5 1,200 1,345 280 ttl Cross rent is shelter rent plus the cost of al I r ti Ii E.ie{;. Strbsi d[.z<,d IJousi ng 1n 13t'ncrnL , for-rr types of subsirly r;ray be uti I i zt-r,l Lo provi(-le subsi - cllztrcl housir.rll . 'I'hcse inclurle: (1) fi:r-l eral firrancing assistance to lcrc:al housing nuthorltlers (pr"rbIic housi,ng); (D renC-suppIr.rmunt pa]- nt('nts I (:]) f c'clcrnl f inanci.ng assj st ancc througl: loru- j nt.ercr-tf. inc)rLgAge Ioan" 6., prlvaLc-r s1x)nsors and (4) irrue1.r.st-subsi !-/ 'l'[rt occul]ilrlcy potenEial s ref c.rred to in thls analysis are dependent rug.rn ther ca1>aci ty clf the market tn vir:w of exi sLj ng vacancy strength or wr'ilkrrr'ss. 'I'he succcssf ul attainment rii tire calct,Iated market for strbs jcl i z,r'd hrrrrriing may we:lI clr:pend up<-rn cor)struction in suitable ;tccossiblc 1or.'ati<;ns, as well as rrpon the di stribuLion of rents over tlre c:trnrpl t:l-e range attalnable for lrousi ng unci r.'r the speci,f iecl progralns. AbsorpLi on t>f each erdcl i Li<;n to the stock of subsidi zed l'rousing should bc ohscrvt,r.l cat't'fully; prclductton shourld be gearcd to market absorp- tion. 1'7 ?."\ ((t) ( 3) rJM l R . Unclr:r' thi s prograrn, rentaL housi ng i s provided throLtgh Llt,.' trs(r of a ferd<,ralIy-subs jdj zr:cl low-interest mertgaget loan of Lhrr'<' p('rc(,'nt-. An absorption of 5r335 units of Section 221(d) (3) - BMIR hotrsing during the next t\^,o years would appear feasibte.U Approxi- nratcly tlo per:ccnt of the Section 221-(d) (3) occupancy potential could be accr:nlrodaLr:d in housing provided under Sections 235 and 236 (to be di scussccl Iarler) . !tq4_:S_!Ulplflgt!r_ llnder t.he rent-suPplement progranr, tltere is a two- yeirr ()cc'uplrricy potentiaI for an esEimaterd 4r245 units. I'his potential probably woLrld ber br-'st absorbed if distributed as fol lorvs: Es L i nrat-r:d l't,ltr -Yt:ar 0ccupancy Pr:tentlal, 1969 and 1970 Re nt - Su ppl eme:nt Housinq bv Size of Unit Numbcrr Ntrmber []ni t si zt'. of uni ts Uni t size of units I,lIl- lc i cncy 1 ,690 'l'h rcre hcd rooms 685 Orrr, b<,tl rr.rort 59o Four bt'drooms 440 'l'w Al L fzurr il icl.; ,'l igiblt: for rr,:ttL-supplt'ntent Paylnents are eligl'bIt: for prrbl ic Irousing. 'l'he crcctrpancy pote:nEial sltown abovc has been adjr:sted trl rcflccL public housing ancl rent-supPIe:ment units under construction i rr ['r:brlrirry 1969. Sr'c L.Lon 2.J5 Sal r's Housi ng. Under Lhi s progranr, sal e:s hous j-rrg may br. prov iclrrr.l [or 1<-rw- arn(l ruoderate-i.ncome f ami ] ies ttrrough Lher use of. i nt.crrost rr:duc tion paynrcrnts by the f ecleral govcrnnlent Lo mort.gagees. A1 I 6f th*,r I4rnj lics r:l igi ble for Sectlon 235 housi n8, ar€r 4]5e r,rLi gible urrtlt:r Lh,' Sr:ct.i ]/ As oJ. t hr: claLcr of t-hj s rep.JrL, funds for al locaLion are avai lable t,rrly fr()fir r(,captur(rs rrlsulting from reducLions, withdrawals, and tht, crlrr<.'t,l lat.ions of allocations. 18- Estimated Truo-Year Occupanc y Potential, 1969 and l97O Scrction 236 llental Housing bv Size of Unit Number Nunrber Uni L si z:t of rrni ts Uni t si ze of units liLf i ci.trncy 790 Three bedroorus 1r3gO Oncr bnc] rooms 1,47 5 Four brrdrooms 500 'l'rnxr bc'cl r:oorns 2r620 To l-al 6,77 5 1n gencral familirrs , ancr indivlcluals e_ligible under this pr.gram are alscr cligible for Section 235, SecEion 2rLG) (3)BI,llR, and-1.uit-supple_ ment housing. seiction 236 leglslation arso provides that up to 2o perc(rnt of the allocaced funds may be used for families of in"o*" not exceeding 90 Percent of the secrion 22L(d) (3)BMrR income rimits. l'he occupancy pot,enEial for Sectipn 236 may be somewhat greater than indicared above if a slgn:i.ficant number of these higher-income are served. families lro,- rF rcAr roNS APPLICABI..E'BSERvAroNJ'T['J- TO ALL FHA HOUSING MARKET ANALYSES illtln tlrr ruLrtl l-.rrttr l)1'lrLr itl i.,l c()llbLi Lut(,s [!jss <) 'lht, clistribution of Lht, quatir-allvc. ()f clt,nran Nonac11cuIL ural Wace and Salarv Employrnent by Type of Industry Newark. New Jersev. Housing I'larkeE Area. Annual Averages, 1964-1968 (1n thousands) Industrv L964 t965 t966 L967 Ls68L/ Total wage and salary empl Manufacturlng 237.4 24,- .5 256.O 256,8 253. O Durable goods L29.8 137.7 744.?_ L44.O 140.3 Primary metal s 10. 9 11. 4 12.6 12. 8 t2.5 Fabri catLr.d metal product s 2L.L 22. o 23. 1 23.6 24.C NoneI ecErl cal machi nerry 24.2 26. 4 28.t 28.6 28. 1 Elect. rical rnachinery 39.8 40. J 42..4 42.7 41 .5 Transportrlc 1on equl pnent 10. O 10. 9 10. 8 10. 3 9.9 I ns L runren t s 4.4 4. 6 5.5 s.7 5.1 Mi sceI Ianeclus rnanufacEuring lL.6 1.3. 7 L2.3 10. 4 10. 3 0Lher clurablrr goods 7.8 8. 4 9.4 oo 8.8 Nondurerbl<,r goc.rds 107.6 109.8 I 11.8 1r-2. 8 1L2.7 Food and klndred products 22.3 7 2L.4 20,2 19. 5 Texti Ie mlll products 3.6 3. 7 2 3.8 3.5 Apparet 14. E:l 15. 4 15. 5 15. 1 15. B Paper and allied products 6.8 7. 1 7. o 7.'3 Printing and publishing 11. l. 11. 6 i1. 9 LL.L+ 12.4 Chemical s 34.0 34. -) 36. 2 38.2 38.7 , Petro leum rerf ini ng ') ') 1. 9 1. 9 1.7 L.7 Rubber and plastic producLs 9.1 o ()o 10 6 to. I ro. 5 1 Leather products 3.6 3 J 6 3.3 J. t'- Nonmanufacturi ng 455,6 476.1 4E8 3 501.6 507.6 Mi ni ng 0.9 0.e o.6 o 6 o 5 Contrac L consl-rrlcLion 30. 3 32.9 ')'.) 1 31 9 JZ J T'rans., comrn., pubiic utilltles 52.C) 54.3 5s.7 5U. 4 58 o Wlur I ersal r: ancl rcrtai I tracle 136"5 141.5 144,2 L45. 6 145 9 Fi nanccr , i ns. , relal estate 47 .9 40.0 49.8 51. 6 53 o St'rvJ.ces 106. 8 111_.7 I i.4. _5 tt7. I 118. 6 (ioverrrrment 8r.2 85. I 9'L 96. la oo 3 J "2 Fed e ra I 19. 6 20. 3 21.9 2:3.O '23.r StaL.e and Iocal 6L.6 65.5 69.3 7 3.4 76.2 ql Prelimlnary Source: New .Jersey DeparLmenr of Labor and Industry Table II Percent e Dlstrlbu ion of All Famllles Renter Households by Estlmatcrd Annual Income. After Ded ucLion o Federal Income Tax Newark. New Jersey. Houslnn Market Area 1969 and L97L A1 1 faml lies Clty of Remainder Annual Newark of HMA HMA Eotal after-Lax lncome t969 t97L t969 t97 | 1969 L97 | Under $3,OO0 13 I2 5 4 6 6 $3'OOO - 3,999 6 6 3 2 4 3 4,OOO - 4,ggg 9 8 3 4 4 4 5,OOO - 5, 999 10 9 5 4 7 5 5'OOO - 6,ggg 13 t2 6 7 8 7 7,OOO - 7 ,999 10 10 10 7 9 9 I, OOO - Srggg 8 9 10 10 10 9 9 rOOO - g,ggg 7 7 9 8 7 8 10,OOO - L2 r4gg 11 L2 17 18 L7 16 12 r 5OO - 14,ggg 6 7 11 11 10 t2 15,OOO - 1gr9g9 5 6 13 15 1I 13 20,ooo and over 2 2 8 10 7 I To tal 100 100 100 100 100 100 Med i an $6,975 $7,3OO $9,875 $10,525 $9,35O $9,9O0 Renter Irouseho ldsa/ ClEy of Remainder Annual Newark of HMA Hl,lA total after-Eax inconle 1969 197 L 19 69 t2L r969 L97 1 U nd er $ 3, OOO 15 !lt 8 6 10 9 $s ooo 3,999 7 7 4 4 5 5 4 ooo 4,ggg 9 9 6 6 7 7 5 ooo 5,999 t'2 10 7 7 10 8 6 ooo 6 rggc) 13 t2 11 9 12 lo 7 ooo 7 ,999 10 1I 10 10 11 10 I,0oo - g,ggg 8 8 8 7 9 L2 I 9,OOO - oooo,rr-r 6 7 L4 13 8 6 10,0OO - Lzr4gg 1 1 1 1 15 16 1 4 15 1 2,5OO - )4,999 5 6 o 10 7 9 1 5, OO0 - 19 r.999 3 4 7 ro 5 6 20,OOO an(l over 1 1 1 2 2 3 1l'o tal 100 100 100 100 100 100 Med:i an $6, 5O0 $6 , 87 5 $8, 47 5 $9 , O5O $7 ,600 $8,O5O ()ne-person households a/ Ilxclucle's renter " Source: Estinrated by Houslng Market AnaLyst. TabIe III Po lation and useho ld Newark, New Jersey. Housinp Market Area iI I 196O-Feb 1 1 1 Average annual changes Aprii 1, lvlay 1, February 1, February 1, 1960- 1965 - r 969- Area 1960 L965 t969 r97 L 1965 L969 197 L Po pulat. ion HMA total l, 6gg ,42o 1.81r.OOO 1,885,OOO 1.g18.OOO 23,g25_. 1g,750 16,5OO Essex County 923,54L 948, OOO 958,OOO 962,OOO 4 Newark r925 2,675 2,OOO 4O5,22O 4o3, 8OO OOO 395, 39O,OOO - 275 -2,35O - 2, 5OO Remainder of county 518, 32 1 544,2OO 563 , OOO 57 2,OOO 5, 1OO 5,O25 4,5OO I'lorris County 26t,52O 32O,OCO 66 500 387 ,300 l-l,4j 5 12,4OO 10, /rOO L]nion County 5O4,255 543, OOO 5 60 500 568,7616 7 ,625 4,67 5 4,1OO Households HI'IA to Eal 511.157 558, 2OO 588. 200 5O2.2OO 9,250 8.OOO 7.OOO Essex Ccunty 289 , OO8 303, 6.00 3 10, 2OO 3 13, 1OO 2,97 5 L,7 60 1,45O Nerr'ark L27 ,77 2 130, 3OO 128, lOO 126, gOO 500 - 590 650 RemainCer cf countv !61,236 - 173, 300 182,1OO 186, 3OO 2,375 2,35O 2, roo Morris County 7l,g-7o 89, goo io5, 5oo 112,gOO 3,525 4, Union County L5O,l7g t6c 3,650 164,700 t72,5OO 176,300 2,850 2 ,08O 1,9OO Sourci:s: 1960 f rom LI . S. Censuses of Population and Housing. 1965, 1959, and 1971 estimared by Hcusing Market AnaIysts. Tab1e IV Trend of Household Tenure N New Jerse Housi Market Area Apri I 1 t9 -Febru ary I t969 Essex CoLn Ey City of Reuainder Morri s Union HMA 0ccu and tenure Newark of county TotaI County Countv To tal Apri I I 19 60 Total housing invenrory L34.gj2 g60 164, 229,832 82,327 154,18O 536,339 Total occupied units t27,772 L67.236 289,OO8 0r+ner-occupied 7 t,g7o 15O,179 511,157 28,829 92,398 L2L,226 55,777 PercenE 99,377 27 6,38O 22.67" 57 .37" 4t.97. 77.s7" 66.27" Renter-occupi ed 54.t7" 98,944 58, 839 L67 ,7 82 16, 193 50,8O2 234,777 Percent 77 .47" 42.77" 58.L2 Total vacant units 22.57" 33. 87. 45.97" 7,1OO 3,7 24 LO,g24 10,357 4,OO1 25,t92 Mav 1, 1965 Total housing inventory 134.500 177,5OO 312,OOO lOO,gOO i68,600 581,5OO Tota1 occupied unit5 13O, 3OO 173,3OO 3O3,600 89,9OO L64,7@ 558,2OO 0wner -occupi ed 28, 35O 96,550 L24,g@ 66,8OO 1O8,3OO 3OO,OOO Percent 27.97" s5.77" 4L.17" 7 4.37" 65.87" s3.72 Renter-occupi ed 101, g50 7 6,7 50 L78,7N 23, 1OO 56,4OO 258,2OO Percent 8.27" 7 44.37" 58.97" 25.77. 34.27" 46.37" Total vacanE units 4,2OO 4,2OO g,4oo 1 1, OOO 3,9OO 23, 3OO Februa 1 1969 Total housing inventory 13 1. 400 r85. 100 316.500 116.000 175.500 608.000 To t.al occupi ed uni Es 128, rOO 182, lOO 3 10, 2OO 1O5, 5OO L72,5@ 588, 2OO 0wner-occupi ed 27 ,qO 98'7oO 126, lOO 7 6 ,4OO 111,3OO 3 13,8OO Percent 2L.47" s4.2% 40.77" 7 2.47. 64. s% s3.32 Renter-occupied 1OO,7OO /rOO 83, I84,1OO 29, lOO 6 I ,2OO 274,4O Percent 7 8.67" 45.97" 59 .37" 27 Total vacant units .67" 35.57. 46.1Y" 3,3OO 3,OOO 6, 3OO 10, 5OO 3,OOO 19,8OO Sources: 196O from U. S. Census of Housing. 1965 and 1969 estiurated by Housing MarkeE AnalysEs. a Table V New Housins Unics AuEhoriz ed by Euildi ng Perui Es Newark. New Jersey. Housine l'larket, Area An I to t,al s 1965- 1968 - --- EEal .authorizations January 196 S-December 1968 Private units Private PubI ic Area r965 L966 L967 1 968 uni t.s units To tal IIMA toEa[ 11 8, '738 583 6.7 98 5, 133 32,252 3,9O3 36, 155 Single-famiiy 5, 506 3, 965 3,986 3rO28 16,495 16,485 Multifamil-v- 6,232 41619 21872 2, 105 15,7 6l 3,9O3 tg,67C- Essex County 3.865 3,086 2,128 L.7 22 10, 801 3,L28 L3,929 Single-family l rOOg 861 773 558 3r210 3, 210 MuItifamiIy 2,957 2,225 1, 355 7 rL54 7 ,59L 3 rL28 1O,7 t9 Newark 557 502 337 621 2 rOL7 4,5O3 Single-family 4 2 2 2 10 ry 10 MuIti.famiIy 553 500 335 6L9 2 rOO7 2,496 4,493 Remainder of county 3, 308 2 r584 L1797 1, 1O1 8,7 84 642 9,426 Single-fami ly l-,oo4 859 77t 566 3, 2OO 3,2OO Multifamily 2 r3O4 L,7 25 1,O20 535 5, 584 642 6 r226 Morris County 417 LL 3,7 6l 3,326 2 1406 14,234 150 t4,384 Single-family 3, 588 2,457 2 r!+9 t' rm- 14,522 LO ,522 Multifamily 1, 153 1,304 829 426 3,7 L2 150 3 r862 Union County 3,132 L,736 1,344 1,005 7,2I7 625 7,842 Single-fe-.ni1y 91O 647 7 L6 48O 2 ,7 53 2,7 53 Mulclfamily 2,222 1,089 628 525 4,464 625 5,089 Sources: IJ. S. Bureau of the Census and liew Jersey Depart.ment of Labor and indus t ry. Table VI Trends 1n Vacancy Newark, New JerseV, Houslnc Market Area i 1 1950-Febru I 7969 Essex Countv CiEy of Remalnder Mo rri s Union HMA Vacanc c terl stic Newark of county Total County County To Eal Aprl I 1 t_960 ) Total vacant units 7,1O0 3,7 24 10, 924 10,357 4,OO1 25 rt82 Avallable vacant. unlts 5, 585 2,155 7,740 1r710 2,269 1L ,719 For sale r46 537 783 9L4 8 53 2 r55O Homeowner vacancy ra.te o.57. o.7% o.67" 1.67" o .97" o.97. For rent 5 r439 1,518 6,957 796 1 4 15 9 1769 RenEal vacancy rate 5.27. 2.27, 4.O% 1.1/" L 3.97. 0ther vacs.nt uni tsl/ 1,515 7. r559 3,O84 8,647 I 7 32 13,463 May 1 ,1965 Total vacant unlts 4r2OO 4r2OO 8 r 4OO 1 1 ,OOO 3, gOO 23 r 3OO Avallable vacant unlts 2r575 2.425 5, OOO 2,25O 2,O5O 9. 300 For sale 175 7 25 900 800 2 1,O0O '7OO Homeowner vac&ncy rate o.6% o 77" o,77" 1 .5 /" o o.97. For rent 2,4OO 1 7 oo 41 1OO 1 2 50 L1250 6,600 ., aol Rental vacancv rate 2 27" 2.27" 5 t7 2 2.57" 0Eher vacant unftss/ Lr625 1 7 75 3,4O0 8 l 50 1,85O 14,OOO br r 1 1969 ToEaI vacanL units 3, 3OO 3,OOO 6,3OO 10,5OO 3,OOO 19,8OO Aval lable vacant uni t,s 1.800 1, 1OO 2,9OO 1 ,5OO 1., 1oo 5. 500 t'or 1 50 sale 350 500 800 400 I ,7OO Homeowner vacancv ra.te o )!" O.Lt% o.4% 1.O7" o.47" o.57" For rent 1r6 50 75(0 2r4OO 700 700 3r8OO 6 Rental vacancy raEe 1. o,9z 1.37" 2,37" 1.17" L.47" 0 ther va(:ra nt urrl t sq/ 1, 500 lrgoo 3,4OO 9,OOO 1,goo 14,3OO al Includes vac:ant seasonal unitsl units held off the market, dilapidated units, ancl units rented or sold and awaiting occupancy. \ Sonrces: 1960 from ti. S. Census of Housing. 1965 and 1969 esrimaEed by Housing MarkeE Ana1yst,s. t Table VII t{esark. tes Je!9ev. Area Pcttal Veceofr Suruet IroveEber 2C-Dccaber 3- l96a Tarl rtridccccs sd rl@ou Hoo* TqrJ pocrrbic Lro Tbe Srve, Ares totel 4.211 0.7 3 5*.250 .321 890 5.892 284.903 i.914 qz 1.50o t 74 7.307 279 -747 2.237 0,8 1.821 4t6 4.585 222 t2 Ester Co@ty 302.941 2.067 0.7 I. €45 422 87,915 450 '4 -a -296 0,5 197 53 315 2L4.966 1.617 C.8 1.24E 369 2.9E1 ! o.0 NeErk 129.916 l.{65 !. r 1-I50 335 2.403 8.205 L28 1.6 128. -l L2t_7ti 1-357 t.t l-022 335 2.t O0 1 o.0 HaiE Office 3,685 2r6 5.9 85 1ro 6*i 16I 13 8.1 ll 3,525 203 5.8 73 130 590 Statioo6: Cliutoo Eill lE ,47I 0,4 72 232 1,719 t5 0.9 16 L6,752 56 0.3 56 232 Iroobound 13,32 6 39 0.3 39 I 790 0.0 ; 12,536 39 0.3 39 o.o ilortb 2L,582 544 205 339 5 I ,078 15 1.4 I5 20,5(h 529 2.6 ,24 2A5 3 nosevi l le Ls,256 88 0.6 88 IJ 345 11 3.2 11 : 14,911 77 0.5 77 13 South 5,2M 0.0 l,ooo 207 o.0 4,9.t7 0.0 t'oT C.iIrbrg 12,0O3 6; 0.5 55 2,32L t o.2 ; 9,682 51 0.6 6; LeeqEhic l5,093 187 t.2 r87 330 1,0E7 2E 2.6 28 14,006 159 1,1 159 330 LeEt 25,295 274 1.1 274 L12 497 4l 8.2 4L 24,198 233 o.9 233 132 Othcr Areaa r73.025 5q2 0.3 495 67 E93 79.770 322 O.4 269 51 312 93.255 260 0.3 226 y 561 !ellevllle! (I1-18-68) 12,5O1 0.4 53 51 t23 6,3v 42 0.7 42 114 6,L73 0,2 1l 9 Bloofield 18,32r It 34 0.2 8 25 27 7,653 4 0.1 4 1 10,668 30 0.3 4 26 26 Cedlr Grove (f1-f4-6E) 3,683 7 0.2 7 5 3,082 7 0.2 7 5 601 o.0 Ea!t Or.lge (1f-18-68) 2E,4& - E4 0.3 E4 241 4,544 25 0.5 25 I 21,*O 59 0.2 59 240 Ertex Fells 692 - 0.0 692 0.0 Glen Eldge_ (1I-G68) 2,&7 t1 0,4 11 ; 537 l1 0.4 1l 11; - 0.0 : IwtEBtoE !/ 27,951 19 0.1 19 (ff-f4-68) 839 2 0.1 2 2L,rl2 r] o': ,] Llvlog.tm 7,7?7 49 0.6 27 22 56 777 49 0.6 21 22 56 lLplercod (lf-12-6E) 7 799 7 0. I 5 3 904 5 6 1 4 3 1 ,895 r c.l I l{11lburo (11-lE-68) 2 760 ? 0. 3 7 1 606 5 3 5 954 2 0.2 2 lbotch_lr (f1-15-68) 9 683 66 c. 3 56 t2 ll0 L2 146 46 4 34 t2 10 7,537 22 0.3 22 to; Nutley !/ 9,532 32 0. 3 20 L2 93 5 724 15 3 ll 4 I 3,80t 17 0.4 9 6 92 Lt BEaEchcs 8eryed by :he Neserl posr Offtce The survev corers thao one possible dclirerr. Sourcc: FH.{ polral vac.ncv suvcr conducrcd bv collabaating pclmsrcr(s). Table VII (cont'd) X4ark. Ney Je.sey. Are! Poetll vacmcy Sur€v (c@tloued) ' Nweber 2e-Dacober f . t968 Tuai rrsi&accs ud o*tr.orr L rder .. \a.aat uorrs \ Tarai pas:1,ie t- ad.. r nr: nn<.,!re t .4-. Trul pos:rble atar {li 1 Ls.d \e* dcrr.cries r.!! :-" fscd \el' cods!. deliicrics {tl ! L sed \c- coost. 0EnBe (:.1-8-58) 24,858 t54 6 i16 8 158 9,552 55 0.7 57 8 15,3C6 89 0.6 89 114 Roselaod (11-3-5€) t,i54 1 I 1 51 1,O54 1 0.1 1 51 Sher! qi1 Ls J ?9r 23 5 i8 '16 j,331 23 4.6 18 5 16 15; Scuth O:arB€ (11-7-68) 5 33 9 L,295 2t 0.5 2l 9 992 t2 1.2 t2 l{ctri s CounE; 38.352 -L919 r.2 825 ?;L 1.5C2 76.011 918 t.2 656 262 A2 L2,3!t r8r 1.5 169 12 860 125 3 1.5 BooD Loo 4,457 32 8 75 7 4t 188 64 1.5 5t 7 35 269 18 6.7 I8 6 Budd Lake L,7i0 63 27 36 112 @7 63 3.9 27 36 u2 103 0.0 ; o.; But 1e r 5,536 ) 61 22 37 5,414 73 t.3 5.1 20 33 122 IO 8.2 I 2 4 10 0.0 Cedar l(nolls (11- 15- 68) 60i 6 0 4 510 4 0.8 2 4 91 2.2 2 CheEhe (II-14-58) 5 245 t7 3 162 4,470 12 0-3 t2 : 30 775 5 0.6 5 B; Deoville (11-5-68) 1 RCl 202 5.2 142 60 zo 3,699 191 5.2 131 60 20 194 l1 7 It Dover (11-8-68) i0,28c 214 71 182 32 569 9.44L 171 1.8 139 32 51 839 43 508 @ 2 1a Plorhm Park (Il-8-68) 1, 998 10 0.5 5 5 37 r, 998 l0 0,5 5 5 37 : clllette (10-23-68) 710 0.0 710 0.0 Hanover (11-5-68) 1,736 15 0.9 9 5 t,733 t5 0.9 6 52 : 0.0 Lake Eiasatha 3,424 9 0.3 9 2 ,090 9 0.4 9 ,,r1 0.0 Landing (ll-19-68) I ,550 33 2-l^ 8 2; l; I,550 33 2.L 8 2; t; UadisoD (1I-t-66) 4,536 46 1.0 36 10 3,738 24 0.5 Itl 10 798 22 2.A 22 Yorrls Plaln6 (1I-8-68) 4,362 18 0.4 IO 8 l.l 3,481 l8 0.5 l0 8 l3 881 0.0 Morristoe (11-8-68) L2,650 54 0.4 43 1l 184 10, 881 29 0.3 28 1 6 t,7 69 25 1.4 15 10 178 lfountalE Laket (1-25-6E) t,?93 6 0.5 3 3 3 1,293 0.5 3 3 / Netcoog (I1-5-68) 158 0.0 71a 0.0 1; : 0.0 PerEippady 9,090 116 I.3 99 t1 40 4,469 77 t-7 @ l7 40 4 527 39 0.8 39 Pequaonock (11-6-68) t,316 17 L.2 l5 1 3 t,36! 1.2 16 I 3 L2 0.0 Pmpton Fla.i.ns 2 ,480 2t 0.8 20 1 34 2,466 20 0.8 I9 1 30 l4 I 7.L 4 Riverdale (11-4-68) 944 10 t.i 9 1 2 913 91.0 8 I 2 3l 3. 2 1 Rockaway 4,5t9 21 0.5 18 3 I35 4,308 2L 0.5 18 3 107 211 c. 0 2a 37 0.0 Stirling (1-3-58) 544 6 L.1 6 444 20.3 2 - 100 4 4- 0 4 WhartoE (11-7-58) 2, ;82 20 2 15 2 ,613 22 0.8, 20 2 t5 o. L7 0.0 l,Ih ipp any t,878 28 I.5 6 24 1,8 78 28 1.5 6 22 24 't : ,r dormitories: nor does it corer boaried-up resrdeuces or iparnnents that dre nct intcaded lq ocruDaic! than one possrbie deliveir. to I 966 The comtrned totals, howerer. are as recorded in official ruure records. I:ll\ posrai .acan.\ sur\.v conducted br collaboratrng postmaster(s) , tl lr ror il ;l q r@t !l d el I -t t 6 tFt 6. -rol 3 F os r $l 90 r s Fl N N t BI I *t 3 69d+@ @soio E .11 OOOFF ooooo ts $l G * c 6E 9.8."' NFSo 5 .',. c il F 3 ht EI El EI olJ 6l mtsO€ | {o@66 ON I SN v ,:l EI l.) sl El tr or o ll'ol "'l 3t N o rl 3l !t fl E"l :l ioooo ooood aoooo H 3l e [l & o HI 1floI ol p =l d fl?l H 0r lil jl dooo9 "J *l $ F 8l I ot YI @oF6 t 6tstsNi oo6r +d iO\1 6ts i6 ! El fl 6FH{ | {@o6 j oo I €N il it ';l A jl1l ail t.'lI i .:l ooooo =l-l 3 t t- t 3jl 6 _d ; E Ev )1.-. + L -1r!oEoo 9" a Ee d d l6! E u!,!/d6 :.isoitd E: .; cr u!rrO 2;) ,l ' tib.1 tJ08 F22 trteturk, l,l.J. tg6g ,'.-J I U.S. Federal Housing Administra_ I tion i _ Analysis of the Newsrk, i'igw Jersey housing martcet ! I I ) NATF