Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Nick Taylor -- 'If I had 20 inspectors, I couldn't inspect every house."
Yvonne, thanks for editing and posting.
Posted on: 2015/1/22 1:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Video of meeting, reduced to 28 minutes, originally 1:45 minutes
http://youtu.be/odsIS5S8-hQ
Posted on: 2015/1/22 0:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... y_planning_board_del.html
Thanks to those who made it to the meeting.
Posted on: 2015/1/21 16:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15 Last Login : 2019/2/27 14:41 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
500
 |
Quote:
I don't think Chico has the capability, so to speak, of coming up with something like this. It's clear that someone else from the city is pushing this through him.
Posted on: 2015/1/21 3:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This has been tabled until March
Posted on: 2015/1/21 2:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
"Ward B City Councilman Khemraj "Chico" Ramchal is pushing for the measure"
From the same guy who proposed front yard parking with more curb cuts. Enuff said.
Posted on: 2015/1/21 1:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Zoning Compliance Certificate or new City Sales Tax
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This item has been moved to the top of the agenda, so if you're planning to speak, be at Planning Board at 5:30
Posted on: 2015/1/20 21:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Buildings with 3+ units are already inspected every 5 years by the State and the City. So we are going to have to pay for another inspection?
There are already plenty of protections in the closing process. Years back I had a guy try to sell me a 2 family building as a legal 3 family. Normal course of reviewing the closing documentation caught that issue. Plus, for people who buy and renovate problem buildings, this will be just one more headache involved in getting the deal done. In the end, this may do the opposite of what the bill sponsors intend: Discourage the sale and renovation / replacement of distressed properties in the city. Having to rely on the Building / Zoning departments to get your place sold? How long before envelopes full of cash are exchanged to get your inspection done in a timely manner? The tax part is just dumb. No bank would write a mortgage on a property with tax liens. That is what the title search is for. Distressed properties are often ripe with liens and other issues. This bill will just make it even harder to get through a closing.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 14:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
While I fully appreciate the Catch-22 of the tax aspect of this ordinance for some people (how can you pay for property taxes if you are selling your property because you can not afford its taxes?) I believe that portion of the bill could be amended to allow for the payment of outstanding taxes during the sale/transfer. But the second part of the ordinance is WAY OVER DUE. And, in all honesty, I do not understand people who are against it. Yes, there is potential for this to cause additional delays in what it already a convoluted process. But, overall, this is GREAT NEWS for homeowners. If you own your property, your value is affected by the fact that people all around you are renting illegal departments that depress overall rents, and which keep neighborhoods from being able to properly plan for its true population.
If your concern is that the Buildings Department is currently a cesspool of corruption and bureaucracy, that is a separate issue and one that should be addressed and corrected. For far too long, this city has allowed certain people to get away with doing illegal things while turning a blind eye to blatant violations. Any savvy inspector could walk around a neighborhood and easily and quickly spot illegal boarding houses, and houses being used in violation of their zoning. Hire more inspectors, train them properly, and set them loose. Their salaries (and pensions) would be covered in no time by the fines dished out.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 13:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This is unbelievably stupid. Beyond a cash grab. Does the city have ZERO CLUE the unwritten rules of Jersey City? How many builders pay off the cronies and two bit inspectors at the Permit Offices to get a C of O before selling? And each inspector has different rules to the game to make things complicated for a builder, contractor, then the home owner, taking too long to inspect, changing the rules every time just to maintain their power of it being overly complex so that you have no options but to play the game of passing envelopes? And these will be the same people coming to advise if it will pass before being sold? The same offices who turned a blind eye for cash now will be back to make sure the building is to code only to turn a blind eye again for a second load of cash?
If those unwritten policies have cleaned up, bravo. Doubtful, but bravo. But then won't these same inspectors be nervous when someone sees their signature on the original 'pass' only to come back to some of these homes before closing to tell the homeowners/sellers/buyers/realtors it's not really to code? IF this is to happen, someone in city hall has to take ownership on the fact there's a lot more going on than what is on the books here.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 13:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Item 12 on tonight's agenda --
Review and discussion of proposed amendment to the LDO to require a Zoning Certificate of Compliance upon change of use or ownership of real property. Formal action may be taken.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 13:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Jersey City says new plan would crack down on code violators; real-estate agents aghast
By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal January 19, 2015 at 7:49 PM JERSEY CITY ? City officials are looking to embark on an aggressive new plan to ensure homes are compliant with local zoning rules. But the measure, up for initial approval at tomorrow night's Planning Board meeting, would be a "disaster" if implemented, according to critics who say it would bring the city's real-estate market to a standstill. The plan would require most property owners to obtain a zoning certificate of compliance before they can sell their properties, obtain building or demolition permits or perform any kind of site improvements. The certificate would be issued by a zoning officer who certifies that the property complies with city zoning codes. Ward B City Councilman Khemraj "Chico" Ramchal is pushing for the measure, saying it would help the city to locate illegal apartments and other code violations, as well as offer consumer protection for home buyers. Read more: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... d_crack_down_on_code.html Proposed Ordinance: http://media.nj.com/hudsoncountynow_i ... 0of%20%20Compliance-1.doc
Posted on: 2015/1/20 7:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
instead of devoting resources to this petty measure, why doesn't the city devote more resorces to hiring inspectors to get restaurants and other businesses open sooner.
no wonder most states are going republican. what a dumbass ordinance
Posted on: 2015/1/20 4:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
Joined:
2005/12/12 18:42 Last Login : 2018/6/1 15:46 From Departing Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
65
|
I think this measure intended to drive small homeowner people out their precious land. What a shameful proposition it is.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 3:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
what a waste of everyone's time. what is wrong with the current system some of tthese democrats are really starting to piss mme off. first, obama wants to raisemy taxes again and now fulop and crew want to do this. if i buy a house,i hoppe there aew issues so i can get a discount
Posted on: 2015/1/20 3:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
As long as the zoning classification is revealed in an inspection. Right now, I'm not sure if that is the case.
Quote:
Posted on: 2015/1/20 2:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Almost every buyer engages an RE lawyer, and has a home inspection already done as part of the existing sales process. Why isn't that enough? Licensing those inspectors might be a better way of approaching the zoning question instead of city red tape. I'd much rather see a sale/transfer trigger a reval on the property than this nonsense.
Posted on: 2015/1/20 1:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Sounds shady on both ends. The C.O. would be obtained before selling a property as you stated below so why not establish it before actually putting the home on the market? Selling a home with a wink and a nod and with prior knowledge that it contains an illegal apartment is possibly screwing the buyer in a big way. Is it really okay to sell a property that has a rental property that is illegal? After all that extra income is usually a big factor in a person's decision to buy. I see no problem in people knowing upfront how a property is zoned. To do so otherwise is deception IMO. As far as taxes? That is something that could be modified IMO.
"Prior to selling your property, an owner would have to obtain a Certificate of Compliance issued by a Zoning officer. The compliance process would include inspecting each property prior to sale, part of which would be to ascertain that the property is being used in accordance to its zoning requirements, (example- zoned for two families, used as three families)."
Posted on: 2015/1/20 0:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Posted on: 2015/1/20 0:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
http://reemails.com/jcordinanceweb.html
We are asking all REALTORS and property owners to call Mayor Fulop?s office to ask them to work with Liberty Board for an efficient solution and table this amendment. Mayor Fulop's Office 201-547-5200 The Jersey City Ordinance will change the following 1) A Zoning Compliance Certificate (CO) will be needed for every real estate transaction; this includes both sales and rentals. Before a CO can be issued an inspection is required 2) Property taxes need to be paid before a CO will be issued; this includes not only sales, but also rentals. This is problematic since often times the sellers are in a financial bind and the closing attorney pays the taxes from the proceeds of a sale. This proposal will prevent some property owners to be able to sell their home. 3) Since Jersey City?s public records have a history of being unreliable, a CO may not be issued quickly enough to prevent a mortgage commitment from expiring and can jeopardize the closing. 4) Anytime homeowners need a plumbing, electrical or a building permit, they need to schedule an inspection and pay $150 for a CO. This will delay most sales and rentals. This proposal contends that there is currently no public records to effectively track changes of use for real property and protecting buyers of real estate from misrepresentation by sellers. The Liberty Board?s leadership believes there is a lack of knowledge by the proponents of this proposal of the State of New Jersey?s Agency and Consumer Protection laws. The most cost effective way for Jersey City to reach the goals of their proposal is to efficiently maintain their public records and by doing so, making them easily available to the public.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 21:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/3/2 4:49 Last Login : 2018/6/12 15:20 From Downtown Ex Pat happy in McGinley Sq.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
844
|
This is Councilman Ramchal's idea and he's put it together with Nick Taylor, Director of Zoning. Note that this is a prelude ordinance to his still breathing Front Yard parking ordinance which is not yet dead.
This has so many flaws, as others have stated already.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 20:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/7/4 16:37 Last Login : 2021/11/4 21:55 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
586
|
+++1. It is ill-advised at best and the city does not have the bandwidth. Looks like some compliance officer talking with a councilman without checking legal and resources first.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 17:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Is a specific councilperson behind this ordinance? What is the justification behind it? It does seem like a duplication of effort since the city will receive any outstanding tax burden either through a lien or at the closing sale.
This will create a huge work burden for an already over-burdened building department. Anyone who has ever dealt with this city department already knows the layers of inefficiency (and long wait times) that already exist. This ordinance will certainly penalize middle class and seniors the most - a highly vulnerable home-owning population already pushed to the edge by city taxes. Are they supposed to bring their property up to code if it is out-of-code? This ordinance does not seem very well thought out for the city that exists today.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 16:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Well put. Can't see why the City is going after unpaid taxes this way - when they've gotten their money already through tax liens - that only does the work of the lien holder. (Though to be honest I'd prefer to see the city defer taxes until sale/transfer in hardship cases, than issue tax liens.) Whatever is introduced should be simple and streamlined.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 16:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The zoning department and buildings department already can't do all the things they're supposed to do, I can't imagine how they're going to handle all of this new work without hiring several more people. It really does just seem like a money grab.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 16:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This is the way for the city to add fines that must be satisfied at closing or placed new burdens on the new owner. As it is, we pay the real estate transfer tax to the state. You are also required to removed old oil tanks, (Christie is using that money for his budget, it takes 4 years to be re-reimbursed.) The 7 city councilmembers that Fulop's has in his pocket will vote on anything he says.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 15:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
the title of this thread needs be changed to what it is about. and it is a serious issue. one has to try to read into what the city his trying (hoping to achieve).
and this could have serious negative implications and would be very difficult to implement. my comments on this issue - even if the ordinance was vetted and worthy, the resources and records are not there to apply it. it should be tabled and and a working committee charged to develop and recommend solutions (and a plan to implement.)
Posted on: 2015/1/19 15:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Valid questions amc. The push should be for the new rules to operate within the existing house sale process and not add red tape.
It would make more sense for evidence of zoning compliance from a standard home inspection - and payment of taxes in arrears - to be made as part of the transfer of ownership. The City should get advice from an RE lawyer on how to keep this process as simple as possible, while safeguarding the City's interests.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 13:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
All I see is another corrupt money grab. "Inspectors" taking too long to get to your property, raising the stakes when you're trying to sell in a timely manner and then the white envelopes get passed around whether it be the realtors having to do this or the homeowners.... Let's not kid ourselves, this is a time tested way our city employees in these positions have paid for their new decks and BBQ's at their vacations homes....
And if we want to assume it would be legitimate thanks to those offices being cleaned up - just imagine the nightmare's of depending on a city run office to help facilitate closing a real estate deal in a timely manner.
Posted on: 2015/1/19 13:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Amendment to an ordinance
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2014/12/21 14:43 Last Login : 2015/11/15 0:07 From Harsimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
399
|
[quote]
amc wrote: While we understand and agree for the need to have properties remain within their zoning restrictions and the importance of the City to collect its due revenue, the trajectory of this ordinance is anti working-class/family, anti fixed-income/senior and discourages new comers from planting roots in our City. It would help me evaluate the merits of your concerns if I knew who is "we".
Posted on: 2015/1/19 12:55
|
|||
|
||||