Erobinsonh wrote:
It has been withdrawn from the Planning Board meeting.

As for the Village having so much influence - the Village is the neighborhood most affected. With the exception of a few blocks in the western section of Hamilton Park, virtually all of the current R1 in Downtown is in the Village.

Erobinsonh wrote:
The Planning Board meeting is tomorrow night (Tuesday, April 5, 5:30pm at City Hall) and the R1 to R5 is on the agenda, though significantly different than it was last month.

The Planning Department found a lot of resistance to the original proposed changes among the residents of the Village, and worked extensively with the Village Neighborhood Association to reach a compromise that allows for greater density, less parking and slightly more height.

The current R1s north of Newark Ave will be restricted to 41 feet (plus flood elevation) and 4 stories. The R1s south of Newark Avenue will be 31 feet (plus flood) and 3 stories.

Developers who have been using variances to bypass the R1 zoning over the last several years are apparently planning to fight this.

We need everyone to attend and have their voices heard! Whether you agree with the new zoning or not - this could hugely affect the future of the entire Village neighborhood.

Here is the proposed zoning:
http://data.jerseycitynj.gov/dataset/bb9...

Here is the Planning Board agenda: http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/uploaded...

Erobinsonh wrote:
They have postponed the hearing on the R5 zoning change - not going to be on March 22nd.

Now not sure when it will be brought before the Planning Board - or in what form.

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I would be interested in starting a group petitioning for the rezoning of sections of the heights from R1 to R5. The neighborhood is rapidly gentrifying and the only construction we see is the teardown of older, more affordable homes replaced by crap like that at prices pushing $750,000. That's not affordable!

A zoning change to R5 would promote diversity in the community, increase the supply of available housing, and help keep things affordable for new and existing residents. This would probably attract interest from developers to build more housing.

The Central Avenue Redevelopment Plan is a great start, but more needs to be done. Aside from Ogden Avenue, there isn't as many NIMBYs fighting against any kind of change so common sense could prevail.

I'll go in with you on this, but it won't be an easy job. Yun I think will be on board. Not sure about Boggiano though.

Based on a meeting I had about the Central Ave redevelopment: there are a number of NIMBYs here. They are generally of the type that want a street filled with stores like an independently own organic juice and coffee shop.. yet don't want the number of people moving into the area to make that even remotely possible.

I get the same sense with Yun. He gets a bad wrap sometimes, but he does listen to the community. You're also spot on regarding Central Avenue Redevelopment meetings. Everyone wants a grocery store with quality retail lining the street, but what's missing is the discussion is the need for people to make that happened. There needs to be a critical mass of people in order for a grocery store to make sense. There is significant analysis that goes into selecting a location for any kind of retail store, and no sane business owner is going to open a new business without first having a high degree of confidence that there is enough residents in the area that will be customers.

MDM, let's start here and see where this leads. The next step is to start a website to get the word out.

MDM wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I would be interested in starting a group petitioning for the rezoning of sections of the heights from R1 to R5. The neighborhood is rapidly gentrifying and the only construction we see is the teardown of older, more affordable homes replaced by crap like that at prices pushing $750,000. That's not affordable!

A zoning change to R5 would promote diversity in the community, increase the supply of available housing, and help keep things affordable for new and existing residents. This would probably attract interest from developers to build more housing.

The Central Avenue Redevelopment Plan is a great start, but more needs to be done. Aside from Ogden Avenue, there isn't as many NIMBYs fighting against any kind of change so common sense could prevail.

I'll go in with you on this, but it won't be an easy job. Yun I think will be on board. Not sure about Boggiano though.

Based on a meeting I had about the Central Ave redevelopment: there are a number of NIMBYs here. They are generally of the type that want a street filled with stores like an independently own organic juice and coffee shop.. yet don't want the number of people moving into the area to make that even remotely possible.

JCGuys wrote:
I would be interested in starting a group petitioning for the rezoning of sections of the heights from R1 to R5. The neighborhood is rapidly gentrifying and the only construction we see is the teardown of older, more affordable homes replaced by crap like that at prices pushing $750,000. That's not affordable!

A zoning change to R5 would promote diversity in the community, increase the supply of available housing, and help keep things affordable for new and existing residents. This would probably attract interest from developers to build more housing.

The Central Avenue Redevelopment Plan is a great start, but more needs to be done. Aside from Ogden Avenue, there isn't as many NIMBYs fighting against any kind of change so common sense could prevail.

brewster wrote:
Saw this lovely block in the Heights yesterday, brought to you by our friend R-1. Something attractive and beneficial to the neighborhood could have been built there, like a large complex of ground floor retail and apartments. But the cheapest possible structures won.

brewster wrote:

I think that's a very specific problem, in a lot of cases I've heard the spaces are too small! Several of those on my map like 116 Coles are quite small, I'd be those 2 aren't more than 500 ft each.

MDM wrote:
From a discussion I had with a landlord that owns a couple of buildings with store fronts:


The issue is that the area is too big for what the prospective tenant wants. The layout of the building makes it hard to subdivide the space and still give each space access (i.e. skinny but deep building layout).

To make it worth renting out, the landlord let say needs $1 per sqft. However, the prospective tenant, since he has double the space needed, is only willing to pay $0.50 per sqft. Below $1 it really isn't worth it to rent the space as the added costs (water, sewer, wear & tear, etc.) negate the income from the rent.

This situation could be resolved if the commercial space could be made smaller: Take the unused rear of the commercial space and add it to the existing residential rentals (i.e. make a duplex) or turn the unused space into say a residential studio apartment...

The problem is the zoning rules don't make this easy or sometimes even possible. If the zoning rules were made more flexible, you might see more store fronts on Central Ave rented out or some store fronts downtown off the main retail areas preserved.

brewster wrote:
All observation. 2 were an active bar & store when I got here.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Interesting...is this data just from your personal observation/memory or from another source? I'd be interested to know what street level retail got removed in my area (VVP).

brewster wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Thanks, although I need to really make an effort not to read/post here, it just winds up souring me on this area, which I just moved to.

I guess your explanation is why I see a shocking lack of local retail outside of Newark/Grove. I hope the city can amend zoning or incentivize buildings that originally had street front retail to convert.

Here's a map of the residential conversions I know of since 97 just within a few blocks of me.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Thanks, although I need to really make an effort not to read/post here, it just winds up souring me on this area, which I just moved to.

I guess your explanation is why I see a shocking lack of local retail outside of Newark/Grove. I hope the city can amend zoning or incentivize buildings that originally had street front retail to convert.

Here's a map of the residential conversions I know of since 97 just within a few blocks of me.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Thanks, although I need to really make an effort not to read/post here, it just winds up souring me on this area, which I just moved to.

I guess your explanation is why I see a shocking lack of local retail outside of Newark/Grove. I hope the city can amend zoning or incentivize buildings that originally had street front retail to convert.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
I'm not totally familiar with residential zoning, but would this allow for ground floor commercial space? It'd be nice to see more commercial space crop up in these infill projects.

In the 18 years I've been in HP I've seen many storefronts converted to residential. both corner and midblock. It's never been clear to me wether they couldn't be rented, or selling them as condos was SO much more lucrative and immediate. Likely the latter. I do recall some of the neighborhood "leaders" were opposed to local retail for some reason. Likely parking, as always.

And DNR, welcome, I like your posts. (I'm assuming you're not a sock puppet)

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
I'm not totally familiar with residential zoning, but would this allow for ground floor commercial space? It'd be nice to see more commercial space crop up in these infill projects.

MDM wrote:
R-5 sets the minimum floor to ceiling height at 9 ft. Someone likes high ceilings at planning. 8.5 ft probably would have been adequate.

elsquid wrote:
This sounds great! Increased density while following historical building patterns, attracting fewer new cars per capita.

NIMBY eruption in 3, 2, 1 ...