NOOO! Please Don't take away the KFC!! That new KFC bowl is fantastic! No wonder my A$$ is getting so fat!

NOOO! Please Don't take away the KFC!! That new KFC bowl is fantastic! No wonder my A$$ is getting so fat!

Quote:

Yes, but only for those living in HOBOKEN!

those buildings will have a lot of people in them. will PATH service be extended?

the new journal square looks much better than the existing journal square.

check out the link; http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3795&page=33

We need some eminent domain action at the mcdonalds by the grove path.

at least having a park there would give all the bums that hang out there a more absorbant place to pee.

I think that commercial is the way to go over there. It would be great if there were some ground floor cafe's/restaurants that took advantage of the flagstone pavers and had outdoor seating in the summer.

Quote:

A park in the midst of a bus terminal and a major PATH terminus makes no sense. Can't tell if i should read your post to be sarcastic, or just miguided. Putting a park there would be akin to only using the ground zero site for park purposes -- nice as the sentiment might be, the property is simply too valuable to become park space.

I think these things need to be judged on a case-by-case basis, and this is clearly the right solution for Journal Square. Go read up the history of this project and visit the site in person, and you'll agree. There is no need for those couple of absentee landlords to hold this up any longer.

And while the neighborhood needs a park, it would be stupid and negligent to place one at a major transportation hub like Journal Square. This should be largely commercial property, but not wasted on 99 cent stores and the like.

I think the whole block should be razed and turned into an open green park... that would revitalize the square. Maybe put in some basketball courts and a playground and a dog run. Right now, you have a windswept plaza, fountain and several falling down properties. The neighborhood needs a park.

http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/index ... 61153541279850.xml&coll=3

The 'new' Journal Square takes another step forward
City says two properties to be seized through eminent domain
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

Within 30 days, two buildings standing in the way of a two-tower development in the heart of Journal Square in Jersey City will be seized by the city through eminent domain and transferred to the developer, a city official said yesterday.

The acquisition of the third and final building is delayed because the property owner needs time to hire a lawyer, said Robert Antonicello, executive director of the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency.

The two buildings in the process of being condemned are 12 and 14 Journal Square, respectively the sites of a former Wendy's and a current Kentucky Fried Chicken.

The third building slated to be taken, 15-16 Journal Square, houses four businesses - a McDonald's, Song's Hallmark, HT Wireless and a dentist's office.

"We're losing customers because they're not sure if we're going to be around," said Mohamad Abushaar, the manager of HT Wireless. "It (relocation and redevelopment plans) has everybody so mixed up, so confused."

Collectively, the buildings represent the only properties on the block next to the Journal Square Transportation Center not already sold to or under contract to be sold to Harwood Properties, the Jersey City firm designated to build two mixed-use towers on the site.

"We have filed with the court to pursue the condemnation," Antonicello said yesterday. "The money (to purchase the building) has been posted in the courts. The agency would buy them and then convey them to the Harwoods."

The purchase prices are based on appraisals the agency had conducted. According to those assessments 12 Journal Square is worth $1.5 million, 14 Journal Square $1.2 million, and 15-16 Journal Square $2.5 million.

According to the development agreement Harwood Properties inked with the city in May, the company is on the hook to reimburse the city whatever money it shells out to buy the buildings.

The building owners, who couldn't be reached yesterday to comment, are free to contest these building appraisals in court, but that won't hold up the condemnations, Antonicello explained. The court cases can proceed even as the buildings are being demolished, he said.

Harwood Properties is under contract to buy the other properties still standing on that block before the year is out - 1-7 Journal Square, Antonicello said.

The two businesses still in operation there - Three Brothers Pizza and Daily Tortillas - either will have to be evicted by the current owner, New York investor Ralph Tawil Jr., or the future owner, Harwood Properties, officials said.

The problem is that "blighted" is a very vague standard, and also a very temporal one (a property can be blighted at one time but then fixed up). And the potential for abuse is just VAST. I mean what's to stop a city from neglecting an area, failing to enforce code, allowing crime to run rampant, and then declaring it "blighted" so certain friendly developers can take it over? Even barring outright corruption, this certainly would provide an easy way for a city to sweep away a poor or working class area, avoid having to deal with its issues, and increase its tax base. I mean I know it'd be extreme for a city to do this with an entire neighborhood, but it could easily happen to a few blocks.

It's a terrible, terrible standard, and I'm glad some State Supreme Courts are realizing that. I hope New Jersey's will too.

Almost certainly these houses were seized for non-payment of taxes, not by eminent domain (which would at least involve a designated use and "just compensation" rather then handing it over for nearly free). People usually stop paying taxes when they are so under water on their mortgage that selling would result in a big loss and/or the place is in such a hellhole that it's not worth even paying the taxes on it.

Years of rising real estate have made abandoning property a lot less common, but even 10 years ago it happened frequently. It has nothing to do with eminent domain abuse - the government taking one person's property, at a price they deem appropriate, and handing it over to someone else.

Quote:

When I lived in Baltimore, there used to be a program where if you qualified, you could buy a house that was seized by the city for a dollar. You then had a fixed amount of time to make it habitable and you had to live there yourself. This really helped turn around blighted neighborhoods with rowhouses of abandoned properties and it gave people, who might never be able to otherwise, the opportunity to own a home. I am guessing this would fall under what niceguyeddie was saying.

The city is supposed to pair a "fair" price for a property, but since the appraisers work for the city, there is a bit of a conflict there. Also, the city (or state) only pays for the value of the property, not the value of the business that may reside on it, or the transaction fees (real estate agents or loan fees) if the owner has to buy another property.

While I don't agree with the "public use" = "public benefit" ruling of the supreme court, most cities have a clause that allows them to use eminent domain if a neighborhood is considered "blighted". My guess is that this would be the case for JS.

Quote:

The problem I see here is that the constitution provides that private property can be taken for public use so long as there is just compensation. Over time the courts have read use to mean benefit, and in doing so have seriously compromised property owners rights. So long as the owner is using the land for it's allowed purpose, I don't feel it's the government is right to determine when they should have to sell it.

Um, like I said before in most cases I don't think that eminent domain is something that I wholeheartedly support, but I would like to hear a better way of dealing with negligant landlords who own condemned properties. The Tawil family who owned the hotel on the square racked up millions of dollars in fines and nothing was done about it for over ten years. Some of the properties mentioned in the article are riddled with violations, which is why many of them are not inhabited on the second and third floors.
Aside from that, I thought that eminent domain could only be considered if it was "beneficial to the community" , so I don't think that I was entirely missing the point, regardless if it's economical or otherwise.

Fight for your rights. If every town had their way they would throw us all out to grow their tax base so they can spend spend spend.
We have to draw the line, its so sad to see this become a reality in this country, its really a disgrace.....

Arguing about whether a particular property would be "nice" to redevelop or "beneficial to the community" is entirely missing the point.

The Supreme Court ruling effectively gave power to seize property for what they deem to be economically beneficial reasons. But this is such a vague standard that it leaves the door open for municipalities to take virtually any propery they deem "in need of redevelopment" and do whatever they want with it.

Though there will obviously be cases where this produces good results, the overall precedent is far too dangerous and gives municipalities way too much power to seize people's property. Potential for abuse is too great, especially with developers already doing so much backroom politicking with city governments.

It's sort of analogous to the way I feel about some of Bush's domestic spying programs -- of course I'm in favor of spying on terrorists, and if you could show me a program that didn't have such a high potential for abuse of power, I'd support it.

hey I would normally frown at the mention of eminent domain, but in this instance I am actually all for the change. Have you been to Journal Square? For years there was an abandoned hotel just sitting there, home for pigeons and crack heads. Outside of that, there was..... you guessed it.. a 99 cent store, a shitty fruit stand, a pizza place, a couple of fast food joints, a karate place, a dentist office and a few other low grade storefronts. If this was going to actually displace families I might be against it, but the developer is going to put in apartments, better stores ( they claim they will not allow for another 99 cent store) and maybe a hotel. This will ultimately be better for the community at large.

Eminem domain

I find the taking of land by eminent domain for "redevelopment purposes" quite sickening.

Some state Supreme Courts have already struck it down as against their state constitutions (in spite of the US Supreme Court's ruling that it's perfectly ok).

MOVE 'EM OUT
Saturday, September 23, 2006
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

There's now a price tag on the three buildings standing in the way of redeveloping a key block of Jersey City's Journal Square - and the city plans to seize the properties if the owners don't sell.

The buildings - one home to a KFC, one to a McDonald's and Song's Hallmark store and one vacant - are collectively worth $5.2 million, according to appraisers under contract with the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency, the entity overseeing the redevelopment of the block, next to the PATH Transportation Center.

The agency's board voted Tuesday night to formally accept the appraisals and begin negotiations to purchase the properties. If agreement can't be reached with the owners, the agency will seize the properties through its powers of eminent domain, said JCRA Executive Director Robert Antonicello.

In May, the agency signed a deal with Journal Square Development LLC - a limited partnership created by Jersey City-based Harwood Properties - to build a two-tower retail/residential complex on the block.

But in order to do so, these three buildings have to be removed. Harwood Properties is under contract to buy the other properties on this block.

Lowell Harwood, managing partner of Harwood Properties, attended Tuesday's meeting and said the board's vote allows the $350 million project to move forward.

"We're just getting started," Harwood said. "We're not done."

Harwood has said he hopes to break ground early next year and anticipates a two-year construction timetable.

Under the terms of the agreement inked in May, Harwood was supposed to first negotiate with the owners on his own before the agency stepped in. Harwood said he made offers to the owners but they never responded. Harwood Properties is also on the hook to reimburse the agency whatever money it has to shell out to buy the properties.

Robert Kang, who owns 15-16 Journal Square (McDonald's and Song's Hallmark) acknowledged that he was contacted by a broker representing Harwood but said the offer was so low he never responded.

He declined to say what the offer was, as did Harwood. Antonicello said the city is satisfied that a fair offer was made. Florham Park-based developer Fred Kruvant, who owns 12 and 14 Journal Square, didn't return phone calls seeking comment.

Including materials and equipment still inside the properties, the KFC building is worth $1.4 million and the vacant one, where there used to be a Wendy's, is valued at $1.2 million. The McDonald's/Song's Hallmark property is worth $2.4 million, according to the appraiser.

Former Planning Board member Jeffrey Kaplowitz, who is a commercial real estate broker in Jersey City, said the city's offer seems fair.

"I don't think those are unreasonable prices, give or take 10 percent," he said.