Within neighborhood
67
th percentile
Elevated
Neighborhood · Ranked #24,859 of 84,120 nationally
Rolling Hill Eviction Risk: Moderate , Chatham
Tract 34027044000 · Morris County, NJ · pop 5,930 · neighborhood within 1.3 mi
Census tract 34027044000 covers part of the Rolling Hill area of Green Village, NJ, and scores 5.4/10 on landlord eviction risk. It is home to 5,930 residents. 44% are severely burdened past the 50% mark. That cohort absorbs no shock: one repair bill or one cut shift converts straight into arrears.
Risk score
5.4
Moderate
Confidence 100% · 1–10 scale
Household mix · 100 hh
Burdened renters 15%
Stable renters 6%
Owners 79%
Tract context
Occupied units2,022
Renter share20.3%
SVI overall0.15
Poverty rate1.2%
Median income$234,583
Percentile rank
Higher percentile = riskier than more peers.Within parent city
50
th percentile
Moderate
Within county
55
th percentile
Elevated
Within state
45
th percentile
Moderate
Geographic context
Risk heat across Chatham and the region
Centroid at 40.7305, -74.4348 · click any tract to drill in
Why Rolling Hill scores 5.4
9 axes · 1 = landlord-friendlyLocal political climate
Inherited from Chatham
5.7
Regional political climate
2024 county presidential margin
5.2
State political climate
New Jersey legislature & governorship
6.8
Economic stress
1.2% poverty · this tract
1.0
Supply constraint
$2,734 rent vs county FMR
7.8
Rent control risk
Inherited from Chatham
5.7
Eviction process difficulty
State law sets the calendar
6.1
Tenant organizing strength
Inherited from Chatham
3.9
Housing court bias
Inherited from Chatham
4.9
How Rolling Hill compares
Risk score vs. parent city, county, state.CDC Social Vulnerability Index
SVI percentile: 15
CDC/ATSDR 2022. Higher = more vulnerable. National percentile across 84k tracts.
- 6%Socioeconomic
- 25%Household composition
- 40%Racial/ethnic minority
- 37%Housing & transportation
Historical context · 1930s redlining
HOLC grade: B: Still Desirable
This tract sits within an area graded by the Home Owners' Loan Corporation in the 1930s. Grade B meant middle-class areas with mortgage access. These designations suppressed minority homeownership for generations and remain a documented predictor of present-day eviction filings and rent burden.
- 0%Grade A
- 0%Grade B
- 0%Grade C
- 0%Grade D · redlined
Source: Mapping Inequality (americanpanorama.org), 1935-1940 HOLC residential security maps, aggregated to 2020 census tracts by area share. CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.
Eviction filings
Court-record eviction history
Court-validated eviction filings collected from county clerks and consolidated by the Eviction Lab at Princeton University. Filing rate is filings per 100 renter households.1
Historic baseline (2000–2018)
- 21Total filings over 2 yrs
- 3.14%Avg annual filing rate
- 3.3%Peak (2018)
- 11Filings in 2018 (latest validated)
Comparable tracts
Census tracts with similar eviction risk
Within Rolling Hill. Closest by Eviction Risk Score.
CDC PLACES 2023 · health & economic stress
Eviction-adjacent indicators
Crude prevalence of conditions linked to housing loss. Source: CDC PLACES (cwsq-ngmh), 2023 model-based small-area estimates.
- 4.7%Housing insecurity
- 3.0%Utility-shutoff threat
- 4.7%Food insecurity
- 2.3%SNAP enrollment
- 3.3%Transit barriers
- 4.3%No health insurance
- 11.3%Frequent mental distress
- 16.1%Any disability
Analysis
What drives eviction risk in Rolling Hill
Cost burden runs 72% here against 40.8% across Morris County. Pulling hardest the other way is economic stress at 1/10.
The voucher gap is 27.8%: households holding assistance that local rents will not absorb, which surfaces as churn rather than arrears. On the high side, supply constraint reads 7.8/10.
Housing insecurity runs 4.7% against 14.2% nationally. Court records carry 21 eviction filings across 2 observed years.
Running hot, court filing pressure reads 7.1/10. Adults with no health insurance runs 4.3% against 11.3% nationally.
Filings peaked in 2018 at 3.3% of renter households. This ground was mapped B ("Still Desirable") on the 1930s HOLC security maps for Union Co. That grading determined who could get a mortgage, and its imprint on tenure and rent burden is still visible in the ACS data above. In a typical year about 3.1% of renter households face a filing.
All figures here are ACS 5-year estimates for this tract, refreshed as the underlying releases land.
Frequently asked
About tract 34027044000
Q1
What is the eviction-risk score for census tract 34027044000?
Census tract 34027044000 in the Rolling Hill neighborhood scores 5.4/10 (Moderate tier). The Eviction Risk Score blends state law, county filing rates, parent-city politics, and tract-specific rent-to-income ratios + poverty signals.
Q2
What is the average rent in tract 34027044000?
Median gross rent is $2,734/month (ACS 5-year 2023, table B25064). 72% of renter households are cost-burdened.
Q3
What is the poverty rate in tract 34027044000?
1.2% of residents in tract 34027044000 live below the federal poverty line (ACS B17001, 2023). Population: 5,930.
Q4
How socially vulnerable is tract 34027044000?
CDC Social Vulnerability Index ranks this tract in the 15th percentile nationally. Sub-themes: socioeconomic 6th, household 25th, minority 40th, housing 37th.
Q5
Is tract 34027044000 considered part of Rolling Hill?
Yes. Per Census Bureau 2020 Block Assignment Files, the plurality of blocks in tract 34027044000 fall within Rolling Hill (neighborhood centroid within 1.3 miles, OSM data).
Q6
How many evictions are filed each year in tract 34027044000?
Princeton eviction risk Eviction Lab recorded 21 eviction filings across 2 validated years in tract 34027044000 (2000-2018). The average annual filing rate is 3.14% of renter households, peaking at 3.3% in 2018. Source: Eviction Lab tract-validated 2024 release.
Q7
What share of households in tract 34027044000 struggle to pay rent?
About 4.7% of adults in this tract reported housing insecurity (could not pay rent or mortgage in the past 12 months), per the CDC PLACES 2023 model-based small-area estimate. 3.0% also reported utility shutoff threats, a frequent precursor to eviction filings.
Q8
How does tract 34027044000 compare to Chatham overall?
Tract 34027044000 scores 5.4/10, higher than the parent city of Chatham at 4.6/10. City-scale signals (state law, local rent controls, court bias) are inherited from Chatham; what makes this tract different are its tract-specific economic stress and supply-constraint sub-scores.
Q9
Was tract 34027044000 historically redlined?
Yes. This tract sits inside an area graded by the Home Owners' Loan Corporation in the 1930s, with a dominant grade of B. 0% of the tract's area was rated D ("Hazardous"), the redlined tier. HOLC redlining systematically denied mortgage credit to Black, immigrant, and working-class neighborhoods and remains a documented predictor of present-day eviction filings, rent burden, and homeownership gaps. Source: Mapping Inequality (americanpanorama.org), Robert K. Nelson et al.
Related