Walking through the long-empty village of Johnsonville in East Haddam, even on a bright and sunny spring day, can imbue you with a sense of forlorn.
The houses and buildings are deteriorating. The pretty white-picket fence that runs along one side of the narrow road that bisects the village has chipped and peeling paint. The place is so quiet you can hear, no matter where you are in the village, the sound of the waterfall from a small pond on the property.
Once a thriving mill village and later a tourist resort, Johnsonville has sat empty since about the early 1990s when its owner, Raymond Schmitt, got into a dispute with local zoning officials and closed the resort. After he died in 1998 his heirs auctioned off all Schmitt’s holdings, including Johnsonville.
A hotel developer, MJABC LLC, bought the 64-acre property with its odd collection of 19th century buildings in 2008 and soon after filed plans for a mixed-use development on the site that included 133 upscale, single-family houses and townhouses, all built in Victorian style and with an age restriction for owners. The plans also called for a health club, recreation center, meeting hall and post office, and for keeping and restoring most of the original dozen or so buildings.
That proposal fell apart, however, because the housing component was deemed too high-density.
While MJABC LLC still owns the property and continues to pay taxes on it, local officials say the company is trying to sell it. A Meriden-based soup kitchen has expressed an interest in it for an affordable housing project, but Melissa Ziobron, the town’s economic development coordinator, says the town will only support a project that represents the “best and highest use” of the village – mainly a project similar to what MJABC proposed, but with a scaled-back housing component.
And while the town waits for that “best and highest use” development, Johnsonville sits empty.
Show us some love! Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
ITS A WIN-WIN!!!!!!!!!!!
For those of you who actually believe the developer's plan would "...have a serious impact on the school system that would not be proportional to any increase in the grand list", you just haven't done your homework. These 2 links will get you started. (Unless you don't want to be confused by the facts.) http://www.ctpartnershiphousing.com/images/stories/PDF/rutgersctmultipliers.pdf and http://homeconnecticut.org/
Bob, Not sure on that one, 1- a school system needs to be checked for population, and what a development would do to that population--requiring a new school(s) to be built? 2- developments are losers for towns, generally a home may bring in 5-10k depending on the home and vehicles, BUT it costs 12K and up to put each kid in a public school, add the road maintenance and other issues and the debt to a town just grows and grows Lets say a home has 3 kids and pays 8k in property taxes 3 kids x 12k a year for school = 36k - 8k in property taxes = 28k the town has to make up, just for school, not for anything else associated with the development like plowing snow If the development had 20 homes (never mind the 200 Lehman wants to build in the "preserve", the town is $560,000 in the hole and the developer walks with a huge profit. I believe no development should ever occur in a town unless the schools have the room for it, it should be tied to the population because even with some state cash new schools cost hundreds of millions, its not sustainable. That is why the taxes in Lyme are so low. these are the facts
Lets say town B has a school system where the Elementary capacity is 650 with 602 current, Middle is 720 with 689 current, and High is 740 with 723 current. Town B allows developers to build 40 homes in one year or so, that could add 120 kids, without accounting for it they could find themselves needing new schools and they will be in debt for a long long time. Slow controlled growth is the key, especially if you want to remain a small town with low taxes and crime. The more you build the more everything goes up.
While your math is correct, your basic ASSUMPTION of 3 students in EVERY house ALL THE TIME is horribly flawed. As you may have guessed by now, I am a builder and have been so for over 55 years. My company built a community in Middletown of 363 two, three, and four bedroom single family homes on relatively small lots over a period of about 12 years. This is a market-rate community with selling prices around $200,000 to $300,000. When there were 350 homes occupied, I noticed that there were very few children lining up for the school buses in the mooring. We took the addresses of the 350 occupied homes add asked the school system how many students were in the school system from those specific homes. The answer was 48. (forty eight) NOT 1050 as your “Let’s say…..” would indicate. Those 48 students cost the city $332,000 annually ($6,922 per student at that time after deducting the State’s contribution). We then went to the tax assessor and were told that those 350 specific homes paid $1,834,000 in annual taxes. The city made $1,502,000 AFTER EDUCATION. After all of this compelling evidence, the skeptics were not convinced new single family homes “paid their way”. “Families with children do not want to live on small lots” they said. (More to come)
(Continued) Well, I had another community in Middletown that was the ideal place to bring up school age children. One acre lots, lots of open space, a carefully restored horse barn with full boarding and riding facilities, farm ponds, etc. This was an upscale community with 67 homes mostly in the $500,000 to over $1,000,000 price range. We conducted a study similar to the above when 61 of the homes were occupied. 14 students in the school system, $385,000 AFTER EDUCATION. The skeptics were still not convinced. “These are rich people who send their kids to private school” they said. We then retained a renowned economist and data analyst (He was the Chairman of the Governor’s Economic Council) to do two things 1, to review out study findings for correctness of the methodology and the accuracy of the data. He confirmed both. 2, to conduct a similar study on all new single family homes built and OCCUPIED in a recent 12 month period in Middletown. The results: 103 new homes with 8 (EIGHT) students in the school system contributing $572,000 AFTER EDUCATION (More to come)
(Continued) Similar studies conducted by others has found similar results in other municipalities such as Glastonbury, a so-call “bedroom” town, Newington, and a very rural northeastern town not unlike East Haddam. In a more personal example, I have been a taxpayer in Old Saybrook for 52 years. Between the 6th and the 23rd year I had at least 1 child in the public school system and probably did not “pay my way”. For the last 29 years I have been making up for the generosity of my predecessor. I am not unusual. That’s that way it works for everyone. The bottom-line is that when you research the real facts, you do not have to rely on hypotheticals such as “Let’s say….”. . “Let’s say” you do your homework worthy of the education you got when your family probably didn’t pay its way.
there aren't any kids at the bus stops anymore because most people drive their kids to school, buses are 1/3 full, its rediculous and they block traffic apparently I struck a nerve, but I write that way purposely to get people to think we can make numbers do whatever we want, budget crunchers do it all the time, I did not say this is how it is for all, but most developments are losers ,when they are new and full of kids without a doubt, then a you over develope a town, you end up adding more and more services because the people moving in are more and more demanding, next thing you know you have a full time police force and full time FD and you can't lower taxes and raise the quality of life, fewer people and fewer developments always leads to a higher quality of life I once met a woman, very nice lady, asking me about Chester and how she'd love to live there, but where is the S&S, the Dunkin, the Home Depo---------I stopped her mid sentence and told her "you do not want to live here, we don't mind driving a few miles to get stuff, we like the quiet and the space" thats one thing that I alwasy found odd about people, they want to move then they want everything they had where they were.......???????
You make a number of profound statements such as "most developments are losers ,when they are new and full of kids without a doubt" without a single fact to back it up. I challenge you to take the specific addresses of the last 100 new single family homes built and occupied in East Haddam, Find out how many children living in those specific houses are in the East Haddam school system, how much it costs East Haddam to educate those students and how much those homes pay East Haddam for both personal and real property taxes. You don't have to be an economist or data analyst to do this. Any middle school student should be capable. I do not know what the results will be. You might actually find 300 students and I will have to "eat crow". I am betting you will need the knife and fork. Good luck.
That aside, the real issue is that since after Eisenhower our federal govt transfered our taxes to defense contractors and then large corporations, as this went on funding to states was cut, so the states cut funding to towns and cities, and schools fell solely on the backs of local tax payers, which in turn led to higher property taxes. 2/3 or more of local budgets is the schools, so my point is, either local development needs to be throttled so schools can absorb any new entries without having to build new schools, OR, the federal govt has to cut "aid" to Halliburton, Bechtel, Brown&Root, big oil, defense contractors, etc and start spending on schools and infrastructure, because we can't afford to keep paying this tab with property taxes. I'm not against development, it just has to be thought out like in Planning & Zoning which never seems to plan, where I live in Chester they put a moratorium on building for a few months a couple of years back, then opened the doors wide, it made no sense, served no purpose.
You seem to be an expert at accusing others of "see(ing) what your eyes desire" while choosing to ignore your own slanted interpretation of hearsay and anecdotal observations. I have backed up my claim that new single family homes MORE THAN PAY THEIR WAY with cold hard facts. You have not produced a single fact to support any of your claims. When one cannot support their claims with facts, it is called an opinion, something you are certainly entitled to. However, you have a responsibility to make it clear to the reader that it is only an opinion or a limited observation. Strangely, I tend to agree with your "opinion" about big government. However, I have not done my homework thoroughly enough to make claims I cannot support. Let's leave that debate for another day. I wish you the best
Average cost to school 1 child in CT = $12,000--$16,000 depending on the locale. Average is $14,000 Average taxes paid per home in CT = $5,0000- $7,000 You need two homes in a development without kids to break even on one kid, homes with multiple kids require more offset, not counting road maintence, snow removal, etc. Remember every new road gets handed to the town and now has to be maintenanced, many towns have to hire subs to plow and that cost depends on the weather, this year I'm sure it escalated. I'm sory but it's as simple as that. That is why towns are trying to lure companies and senior housing instead of homes. http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66 http://www.localschooldirectory.com/state-schools/CT http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/17.html
If people don't have the opportunity to get a big brand new McMansion they might stay and rebuild the cities, currently CT and other states are awash in used homes, that is where I'd like to see the market move, buying older existing homes and refurbishing them. The days of a developer buying 80 acres and building 65 homes with no buyers lined up in advance are thankfully over. It will hopefuly mean better quality all around. As to the schools I'd like to see the parents hammer the federal and state govt's for more money instead of pushing for higher property taxes locally.
We all love our rural communities in Eastern CT. The fact is that many school systems are having difficulty controlling budgets due to declining enrollment and increased costs. More students actually reduces the cost per pupil. Hmmm Our young people are leaving the state because they can't afford to buy a home and live here. Even small communities need housing that people can afford. I bet Mr Fusari knows how to build just that with a high level of quality and aesthetic value too. Gene, you work on minimizing the the amount of $ the federal government is wasting and don't get yourself caught up in the facts that surround smart growth and affordable development.
Ties the whole thing in, the federal govt has to start sending more funding to the states, this would cut property taxes IF Ct wasn't so corrupt. I do hear people saying their kids can't afford CT, well very few can thanks to the corruption and waste of an over taxed state. People are leaving Ct so maybe things will even out, at least the traffic may improve ; ) What is it these people think will magically make Ct affordable for their kids??? Although I do not believe in smart growth, growth is never good if you are trying to keep a small town quality of life, the term is just used by developers and real estate agents to convey a mindset, it is open to interpretation so when towns people get upset or ask questions the response is "don't worry, this is "smart growth" and then they go "ohhhh" and go away. Like with the "Preserve", the name itself is insulting, just what are we "preserving"? But that's what we live on now, catch phrases like "Death Panels"', "Obamacare", "Smart Growth", Shock and Awe" none of which exist, but gives us something to identify with and each means something different to each interpretor. To a developer smart growth could be how he can fit as many houses as possible while leaving a "green zone" of a few acres, to others it could be something completely different.
Get smart http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/whtissg4v2.pdf I don't think corruption is the issue. It is a lack of factual knowledge. You must understand the situation, then speak. It seems that now that you live in town, no additional people are welcome. I am glad I am not your neighbor.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43222187 There is currently a glut of used homes on the market, every town should survey this and until the inventory starts to move, NO BUILDING PERMITS, I understand the situation, and I'm not a developer, real estate agent or the like, those people see it a different way because it affects their living, but we are living with the proof that if you do not control growth you end up with problems. And just how many dunkins do you need per mile??? If no builder was allowed to build homes without a buyer lined up we would be much better off now and so would the builders--they'd still be working, and people are suckers sometimes, those huge 800k homes are a joke, yeah they're big, but most of the mechanics and quality is horrible and low grade, low eff standard boilers and electric water heaters, more of a ego thing than a quality product. I did not say no additional people are welcome, but consider the mentality of the people who move to the country, have to have the big mcmansion, then demand all the services they had where they were, would it not make sense to stay where you are?? People should try to meld with the town they move to, not change it, to me that is rude and arrogant. Currently all towns are trying everything and anything to lure new commercial property and business to their locales....why??? because homes cost them money...end of story.
Source: http://www.myrecordjournal.com/wallingford/article_e9d872fe-6afc-11e0-be96-001cc4c002e0.html
I am building a website that will act as a repository for all Johnsonville-related memories and memorabilia. Here's a peek at the website and collections: http://johnsonville.omeka.net If you have any stories or stuff you would like to add, please email me at luke.boyd@gmail.com