Council votes for Heights affordables

Friday, March 14, 2008
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

The Jersey City City Council adopted several resolutions Wednesday enabling a plan to build a 45-unit affordable housing development in the Heights to move forward.

The project, known as Summit Heights, is to be built on Summit Avenue between Hague Street and Secaucus Road.

One resolution unanimously adopted Wednesday allows the city to accept a $2.5 million contribution toward the project from New Gold Equities, the developer in the Powerhouse Arts District. This money is part of a legal settlement between the city and New Gold.

The other resolutions either allocate government money to the project or put the builder, West Paterson-based City Lines Properties, in a position to apply for low-interest government funding.

The total cost of the project is $16.5 million, said Robert Richardi, a development partner, of which $1 million is coming from the city's affordable housing trust fund and $1 million from federal HOME funds the city has to distribute.

The developers expect to corral another $2.9 million in low-interest loans from the state, along with the $2.5 million contribution from New Gold.

All the units will be two-bedrooms and will sell for between $60,000 and $250,000, the developers said.

Five of the units are for low-income families, 10 for moderate-income families, and 30 for so-called "emerging market" families. These are persons who can earn up to 120 percent of the city's median income. In Jersey City, emerging market buyers can earn up to $89,000 a year for a family of four.

The builders said they hope to break ground in the winter.

I believe some of this housing is offered to those that have been displaced by the demolition of the projects..they also are supposed to post them in the jersey journal. I would speak to Viola richardson about this if you are interested in knowing. For example, if you look in JJournal this week they got apts on bergen ave and are taking applications. It would be interesting what kind of screening process they have.

How does anyone apply to buy one of these units? I have a feeling that most of these units will be given away to family and friends of the politicians in the city.

I am glad that I am not the only one that is at least reading this thread ! Jhurst and the others have very good points. The fact is that there are too many underhanded deals here and most JC residents are letting it happen without ever questioning it.

the council meeting tonight should be very interesting.

It's a short walk to the park and 1 block from Central. Cut through Washington Park and you're right at the Light Rail. I'd estimate a 10 minute or less walk to it.

The other thing to look at regarding the Heights are the number of Sub-Prime loans. Downtown is less than 10% but west of Central ave in the Heights is 49%, East of Central Ave is 26% and East of Central & South of South Street it is 32%. Those are the numbers for 2006.

I don't have any problem figuring out the investors plan nor do I concern myself with them in that they are not working for me as the elected officials are. I do expect the elected officials have a plan or guidelines or advisors that arguably represent the best interests of the city and people of the city.

I would argue it's a hike from the Light Rail station and yes it is three or so blocks from the Park, four or five blocks from the beginning of the Business District. It is the border of Union City, "remote" is a word that could describe it's location to downtown or the original place these affordable units were intended.

Quote:

You could be right that THEY have no plan, but you can be sure all these developers that have invested millions do and to figure out their plan just look at what's been going on past few years. This thread just shows one example

In the 50's and 60's NYC began allowing a much higher ratio of low to middle income tenants for public housing in the Rockaways than previously thought sound. As a result we have an area that to this day is depressed and quite frankly very dangerous for most who live there. (Yes there is development going on, but this area through the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's was really dangerous.)

I have zero faith in the elected officials of this city to learn from any mistakes they or others have made. If Bill Gaughan has ever even asked a serious question regarding Housing or city planning I would be shocked. Healy, as well does not strike me as anything like a thoughtful man. I am not sure who advises the city on Housing.

Does anyone know if they are working of a plan or guidelines or who advises them?

Quote:

The area in question isn't in some remote part of the Heights. It is right at the edge of the main business corridor (central ave shopping district) and walking distance to the light rail and Washington Park.

The largest influx of new residents to the Heights have been people displaced by gentrification downtown.

This deal is interesting because it gives insight into what city planners are thinking and how they view different sections of Jersey City.

It's obvious what's happening in the Heights.

The "new" 123 bus service which will take Heights residents to NYC via a tour through Union City first (unlike the direct service 99s offered in the past) will run right past this development.

By the way i am all for affordable housing and as a Heights resident I don't mind it at all. I do think however that working people also deserve the right to live in other parts of the city and have nice views of Manhattan as well, the city shouldn't "economically" cleanse itself by concentrating socio-economic classes to certain parts.

Jimmy,

Thanks for shedding some light on what the area is like as I did not know.

What we are talking about here is a HUGE social issue and will only get worse as the gap between rich and poor grows. This growing gap will be especially evident as the population of JC grows and the city develops. New residents are coming in and for the most part poor, working class people def. get pushed out and replaced with people who can afford the higher prices.

This is in essence the city sending the affordable units to Union City. It is literally steps away from Union City in an area that one could argue is very poorly served by city services.


shakata wrote:
The reason I say the city should be commended is that many municipalities send thier affordable units to other municipalities. One popular example is Princeton being extremely reluctant to build affordable housing within its borders, instead they send them to muncipalities nearby..like Trenton. In fact, many of the muncipalities that surround Trenton, send their affordable units there..basically paying Trenton to take people they dont want in their neighborhood.


So what the city is allowing in this case is not as bad as it could be. It could be worse. JC could send all their affordable units to kearny, harrison, etc..Could it be better? Yes. But I highly doubt that JC government would force developers on the waterfront or in downtown to create affordable units within their luxury buildings.

end of quote

There was a recent article in the JJ that mentioned this change in the affordable housing part of the deal. If I remember correctly, the developer was required to put 70 units of "affordable housing" on site and now they are only putting 25 on site and 45 off site in the Heights.

This is to be a building with commercial tenants on the first floor.

By the way, the area of the Heights they are putting this is the very edge of the city, i.e. the border with Union City. At the moment it has a few small two story homes and businesses and a few empty lots. It is across the street from a shopping center. It happens to be a gathering site for day laborers. It is surrounded by blocks of half rented run down housing stock. The nearest school has no schoolyard because it is filed with trailer classrooms. The streets are very dirty and there are break-ins and muggings just about daily. It is in the neighborhood of the recent fire in an illegally subdivided three family home. There is a lot of unused housing here already.

Is this new building a good thing or will it add a burden to what already appears a neglected neighborhood?

I don't quite understand if this is well thought out or a dumping?

Lafayette,

you def. have a good point, but developers are afraid that if they chose to place affordable units in thier luxury buildings they will cease to be luxury buildings. I dont know whether this is true or not but the city should be commended for requiring that developers provide/build/create a certain number of affordable units as the create thier luxury units.

The reason I say the city should be commended is that many municipalities send thier affordable units to other municipalities. One popular example is Princeton being extremely reluctant to build affordable housing within its borders, instead they send them to muncipalities nearby..like Trenton. In fact, many of the muncipalities that surround Trenton, send their affordable units there..basically paying Trenton to take people they dont want in their neighborhood.


So what the city is allowing in this case is not as bad as it could be. It could be worse. JC could send all their affordable units to kearny, harrison, etc..Could it be better? Yes. But I highly doubt that JC government would force developers on the waterfront or in downtown to create affordable units within their luxury buildings.

I see your point about the same thing happening on a smaller scale in JC..where the developers create all their luxury units downtown and all their affordable units outside of downtown. Not sure if it is completely accurate but I would not be surprised.

Wish it were different. It scares me to think that downtown JC can easily become another Hoboken.

So to review....

1) Developer owns a warehouse building with virtually no revenue due to the decline in industry.

2) Developer realizes a revenue stream by renting out to artists.

3) The neighborhood starts to become more valuable, in part due to the contributions of artists and others who took a risk throughout downtown Jersey City when it was a hole.

4) Artists and other community members work to create a plan that would take nearly worthless buildings zoned for industrial use only and turn it into profitable mixed use housing. As a condition of the upzoning, the property owners would have to preserve the property and allow the artists to rent or purchase a fraction of the units at lower rates.

5) Developer decides that such a lucrative upzoning is not enough, brings multiple lawsuits claiming, among other things, that the whole process is a conspiracy to deprive him of his constitutional rights. Demands $100 million.

6) City officials decide that, rather than abide by plans agreed upon by the community, they should instead focus on allowing maximum density possible for anything east of Marin Blvd, creating tower after tower.

7) City then publicly says that the lawsuits are very, very difficult to defend, and in the interest of "compromise" will allow the developer to build higher than even he had originally proposed. Artists evicted, landmark building demolished, 10+ years of community planning used as toilet paper. The result, 50+ story towers, and a few dozen units set aside for affordable housing.

8) Developer builds a handful of units of affordable housing in a neighborhood on the opposite side of the city, obtaining city funding for the commitment that the city so bravely demanded as part of its "compromise." City officials and developer pat themselves on the back for their visionary plan.

I do not understand why the affordable housing has to be built elsewhere in the city. Why can't each developer keep some of their units in their own buildings? They keep dumping them all over the city with these cheap looking houses...they are splitting the city up....no one is speaking up about it. Then award it to more outside developers which in turn hire outside contractors...The pattern creates rising costs for the JC residents while everyone else cashes in. Its wrong.

To take up 45-unit plan for Heights

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The Jersey City City Council plans to vote tonight on several resolutions dealing with Summit Heights, a 45-unit affordable housing project made possible in large part by a $2.5 million contribution from the developer of the Powerhouse Arts District.

The contribution from New Gold Equities was negotiated last year in a settlement agreement between the city and the developer.

To be located on Summit Avenue between Hague Street and Secaucus Road, the four-story development is to consist of 45 two-bedroom units, with retail on the ground level.

The resolutions deal with investing city money into the project, going after state funding and officially accepting the developer's contribution.

The units will sell for between $60,000 and $250,000, representatives of West Paterson-based City Line Properties, the builder of the project, told City Council members at their caucus meeting Monday.

Five of the units will be for low-income families, 10 for moderate-income families and 30 for so-called "emerging market" families. These are persons who earn up to 120 percent of the city's median income. In Jersey City, emerging market buyers can earn up to roughly $89,000 a year for a family of four.

This project is also dipping into significant public funds.

Jersey City is pumping in $1 million from its affordable housing trust fund and the developers hope to snag another $2.9 million in low-interest mortgage money from the state.

Tonight's meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Frank R. Conwell Middle School 4, 107 Bright St.

KEN THORBOURNE