The Express-Times reports today (read the article here) that Upper Nazareth Township, which currently has less than 4 acres of recreational land, will soon have a 33 acre park thanks to Tuskes Homes and a new Maintenance Facility (4 additional acres). The park will be located near Route 248.
Tuskes Homes Vice President Rick Krasley is quoted as saying, "We like to give back to the community. It is a give and take in development. It was a win-win situation for Upper Nazareth."
In addition to the land, the Township will get a concession stand, fields, and a maintenance building.
JD Malone's article closes by noting:
Tuskes donated the properties as part of a pre-trial settlement in December 2003. Tuskes plans to build 299 homes in the 170-acre subdivision. That number of homes is about twice the amount permitted under township zoning laws. Krasley said about 80 homes have been built so far.
And therein lies the rub. While Upper Nazareth gets a park, 299 homes, twice the number permitted by the townships zoning laws, were approved. If each home has 1.5 children, it would equal 448.5 new students for the NASD. Based on the proposed 2007-08 budget, where the cost per student will be about $13,000, the total cost to educate these students would be $5.8 million per year.
Now that is not going to happen immediately, but its hardly a win-win situation for the taxpayers, especially those outside Upper Nazareth.
8 comments:
What about the additional ~$1.5M/year tax revenue 299 homes would bring in ($5k/home estimate). NOC's being extremely negative to capitulate to the tightwads that make up a large % of its audience. Also the first 80 homes are on the smallest plots of land (.3 - .25 acre). There are many .6-1.0 acre lots that will have bigger homes and bring in perhaps even higher tax revenue. You make it sound like its the builders fault for wanting to run a successful businees, employing local tradesmen and giving to the community. How about the taxes they pay, the earned income generated. Should we tell them no more homes, go fold your business b/c we might have to build a school or two. It seems NOC has a myopic concern about expendatures. Do you really want to live in a community with no change? No growth? It's prediction time...this area is going to grow. With each area business, each additional home, each additional school there are going to be expenses to be paid. I really believe that there will be a majority in NASD who is okay with the expansion of schools, pools and fields. And shocker, even eminent domain as long as its NIMBY! So whether its 4 mills at a time or more its going to happen.
I like NOC's desire to see the right things done with these increases but there are alternate views to every article. And please stop buying the opinon (b/c that's what it is) of the ET and MC as fact. They will only highlight the popular response to appease their audience.
Trifster-
I don't speak for everyone, but I think most of us here accept the fact that Nazareth is a growing community. With that, comes the need to build more schools to handle increasing enrollments. I get that.
What I don't get, is that we are replacing our most current/newest building and duplicating everything in the process. The MS opened in 2000 and now we need to replace it? Apparently, it wasn't built with the "team teaching" concept in mind, so out it goes.
What is wrong with buidling another elementary and moving the 6th graders to the ES? This alleviates the crowding at the MS (which I might reiterate was only opened 7 years ago....didn't we "see" all the growth?). It also elminates the need to bus elementary aged children from all over the district to a central location. How are we going to handle the transportation of all the different school levels?
As to the comment about the additional tax revenue associated with new development... It has been mentioned here as well as by Dr. Lesky that the taxes collected by new houses does NOT equal the $ expended educating the new students that comes along with them.
Trifster,
Just a few points to clarify.
The tax revenue doesn't come close to the expense. If we get $5,000 for a home, next year it will cost $13,000 per student to educate them. Family moves in with three kids, pays $5000 in taxes, costs NASD $39,000. Seems to me we have mostly families moving in and I haven't yet seen any over 50 communities. SO while there is revenue from the homes, it remains a loss.
I recognize that most of our fields will be converted to developments and while I like having the farmland here, I respect the owners right to sell it if they no longer can or want to farm it.
My issue with this deal is not that homes were built, but that the zoning was disregarded in order to get a park, and as a result twice the number of homes get put in.
Had they not disregarded the zoning and put the number of homes in that were allowed and got the park and facility, no problem.
But the payoff for throwing out the zoning will be a burden for NASD taxpayers, and that is what I took exception to.
I also never said we shouldn't grow or expand the schools. I did say we should be thoughtful in how we do it.
If we aren't, we could have really nice buildings and facilities and no money to pay for the supplies the students need to learn in them or for the salaries of the people who work in them.
Brad,
You are 100% right: "...the taxes collected by new houses does NOT equal the $ expended educating the new students that comes along with them." I think I made that statement in a comment a few weeks ago too. NOC has also maintained the point that NASD doesn't have much if any industrial/business tax revenu adding to the problem.
Question...Is nazareth raceway in NASD? I saw they tore down the grand stands...Is that tack done? How about NASD go buy that? (Or better fix it and bring races back.)
NOC:
"My issue with this deal is not that homes were built, but that the zoning was disregarded in order to get a park, and as a result twice the number of homes get put in."
Take out "disregarded" and insert compromised and I think its a more accurate statement. Does two 150-home devlopments and no park help Upper Nazareth Township? UNT's obligation is to it's residence's and cannot be concerned with NASD's failures.
Regarding the race track I enjoyed going to the events there, but as I recall, when ISC sold the facility they included a clause that it couldn't be used as a racing facility.
And yes it is in the NASD and a part of Lower Nazareth Township.
I would love to find out from the developer just how many local tradesmen they employ.
I have gone through these developments, and most of the crews I see working come in in vans with NJ plates.
With that number of homes, I am curious as to where they are going to put all those students. LNES cannot take any more, and if there move them to Shaeffer, then that will put that school on the brink as well.
I see all the surrounding districts building smart with an eye to the future. Bethlehem built a new Northeast middle school, but kept the old one intact as a 9th grade campus for Liberty until they could finish the expansion of Liberty itself. Each project built on the prior project and worked with it. Norhtampton is on schedule to complete its new classrooms on schedule.
Why is it these other districts can plan and build in a logical manner while we sit back and study and do nothing? Where is the district's 5 year or 10 year plan for growth? The plans I have seen are just to build a bunch of things without much reason.
Two words-IMPACT FEES--actually three words---BIG IMPACT FEES!!!
Post a Comment