End Nears for Unloved Housing


The New York Times
By ANTOINETTE MARTIN
October 10, 2008

MONTGOMERY GARDENS, a six-tower public housing project built 58 years ago next to what was then the Jersey City Medical Center, has a date with demise.

Like so many ?vertical concentrations of poverty,? as the old projects have been termed by the federal housing agency that built them, the project has been deemed ready for wrecking (within the next two years) and re-creation (four developers have submitted proposals).

With its old neighbor, the medical center, now morphing into a residential complex called the Beacon, the character of the area has already undergone a change. Two of the eight tall Art Deco buildings that once housed the hospital have been fully restored and are open as condominiums; the other six will be either condos or high-caliber rentals.

Meanwhile, Montgomery Gardens has survived all these years in a state of decay and distress.

?Pssst ? don?t go near Montgomery Gardens without your bulletproof vest,? a blogger calling himself JC Man wrote last month in an online real-estate forum addressing safety concerns in the Beacon?s neighborhood.

Others have posted ?crime maps? that show clusters of violent incidents in which the police intervened on surrounding streets. A drive down Cornelison Avenue, which runs along one side of the project, demonstrates why it has gained notoriety as a marketplace for prostitutes.

?Crime is always the top complaint of the residents,? said Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy in a recent telephone interview. He noted that the same had been true in the vicinity of two other big public housing projects before one was taken down about 10 years ago and another was partially demolished more recently.

Earlier this year, the Jersey City housing authority stopped renewing leases at the 549-unit Montgomery Street complex. Several weeks ago, a notice seeking demolition experts was sent out.

Right now, said Maria Maio, the housing authority director, various proposals for redeveloping the six-acre site are being reviewed. ?With the support and participation of residents? of the project, Ms. Maio said, ?a transformation will take place.? (Residents have first priority as occupants of the planned new mixed-income units, as long as they still meet income qualifications.)

Certainly, Jersey City as a whole is undergoing transformation. In each of the last four years, more construction permits for residential units were issued here than in any other community in the state, housing officials say. Thousands of Manhattan-style apartments have been created in the downtown area, attracting large numbers of young professionals; many decamped from Manhattan to take advantage of New Jersey prices.

Developers have continued to extend the limits of downtown, moving inland with their projects, surrounding new light rail and PATH train stops with shiny new commuter havens.

It was three years ago that the forces of change reached all the way into the area west of the Holland Tunnel, and the Manhattan-based developer MetroVest Equities began opening the first 300 condos at the Beacon.

Now, MetroVest has put itself forward as a possible redeveloper for the Montgomery Gardens site. ?We feel we have a real vested interest in the area,? said MetroVest?s president, George Filopoulos (who set up a Christmas present giveaway for local schoolchildren at the Beacon last year, donning an elf hat while Mayor Healy played Santa Claus).

Mr. Filopoulos said property values in the area had already been raised by his company?s commitment to the Beacon ? where a total of 1,200 residential units are planned, in addition to restaurant and retail space to create a ?city within a city.? That helps make it a ?real opportunity? to rebuild the six acres next door, he added.

According to Ms. Maio, three other companies have also made proposals for the Montgomery Gardens site, with different approaches involving a mix of lower-priced and market-rate housing and retailing.

Those applicants are Community Builders, a 40-year-old Boston-based firm, which describes itself as the largest nonprofit housing developer in the country; Community Investment Strategies of Bordentown, which has completed a number of age-restricted and affordable housing projects in New Jersey; and the Michaels Development Company of Marlton, a builder of both mixed-income and lower-cost housing. None of the three returned calls seeking comment.

Ms. Maio said that all four proposals were being studied now, and that she hoped a decision could be made by the end of the year.

Mr. Healy said in a separate interview that he was pleased to hear a deadline had been set, and was interested to learn that MetroVest was in the running.

Mr. Filopoulos said ? and the mayor later agreed ? that next to demolishing and replacing the Montgomery Gardens housing, the top priority for the entire neighborhood was bringing in a large grocery store.

MetroVest?s proposal calls for a ?superduper supermarket,? Mr. Filopoulos said ? as large as possible, with plenty of parking so that all of Jersey City could potentially be served.

As Mr. Healy put it: ?We have a dearth of supermarkets. We have downtown, one in the east end of our city, but nothing in Journal Square,? and nothing near the site of the Beacon.

Montgomery Gardens is accessible to the New Jersey Turnpike and is also near the Grove Street PATH station, where the number of residents has increased sharply with the recent addition of thousands of new residential units, he noted.

?This area is going to have a great future,? he predicted, ?because the truth is, it has got a great location in a lot of ways.?

great news!

Quote:

The New York Times - ANTOINETTE MARTIN wrote:
?Pssst ? don?t go near Montgomery Gardens without your bulletproof vest,? a blogger calling himself JC Man wrote last month in an online real-estate forum addressing safety concerns in the Beacon?s neighborhood.

I'm not sure if sure which blog she is talking about but "JC Man" posts both here and here or even here.

Just curious I know their wont nearly be enough units in the new units so where will all the displaced go?

They are given section 8 when they leave so any place that accepts section 8 that they can find.

I agree with Councilwoman Viola Richardson who opposes more low-income housing in her Ward F -- No "more projects for poor people bunched together."

http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=9930

The trend seems to be for the poor to move out into the suburbs and beyond -- many poor people choose to move where crime is lower and their money goes further - and things can't get much cheaper than out in the mountains of central Pennsylvania:
===============================================

Pa. officials concerned about migration from N.J.


Robin Moore moved to Altoona, Pa., in March after packing up her family and leaving a housing project in Newark, N.J.

By Charisse Jones
USA TODAY

ALTOONA, Pa. ? Robin Moore had never heard of this city in the mountains of central Pennsylvania, so far in distance and feeling from her home in Newark.

Compelled by a desire to stretch her dollars and find space and safety, Moore dialed a phone number she spotted on a flier in a Newark welfare office. "I always liked Pennsylvania, so I kind of took a chance with Altoona," says Moore, 37.

In March, she moved with her husband, three daughters and grandson to a public housing development here.

"I wanted to protect my children," she says. "I wanted to protect my husband because in New Jersey, there's a lot going on. This town had more of what I wanted, a little more peace."

Moore's is one of at least 16 lower-income families who in recent months moved more than 200 miles across state lines from Newark and nearby urban enclaves to Altoona, population 47,000.

Home for Moore is a four-bedroom, two-story unit that has a back deck and mountain view, a marked change from the Newark public housing project, rife with drug dealing, where she once lived.

The arrival of Moore and others, along with inquiries by dozens of other New Jersey residents seeking subsidized housing here, has triggered concerns by Altoona housing officials that New Jersey is steering its poor to Pennsylvania, kindling tensions between longtime residents and the newcomers.

The migration is one reflection of the shortage of affordable housing in many metropolitan areas. Teachers, police officials and other middle-class workers often live far from where they work because they can't afford adequate housing in those communities.

The poor aren't much different, says Danilo Pelletiere, research director for the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

"More and more, it's not so much economic opportunity, but it's the lower housing costs" prompting poor people to move, Pelletiere says. "We have been losing low-cost rental units in most major metropolitan areas ? to condos in some cases, in others to neglect, and to even higher-priced rentals."

The Altoona phenomenon is popping up elsewhere:

?Lancaster, Calif. Communities in the Antelope Valley have seen an influx of families from Los Angeles, 70 miles away. Their public-housing vouchers enable them to afford nicer homes than they had in the city.

?Columbus, Ohio. Barbara Clark, head organizer for the local chapter of the affordable-housing advocacy group ACORN, says local families use their subsidies to find homes in the suburbs. "To find a nice home, you have to move way out," Clark says.

Then there's New Jersey, which has the nation's highest per capita property taxes and some of its most expensive housing.

Tory Gunsolley, spokesman for the Newark Housing Authority, says the agency did not direct local residents or applicants to Pennsylvania. But, he adds, "we certainly understand that if there are people desperate to find affordable housing, they will look beyond what Newark will provide."

A curious trend

It was about a year ago that the Altoona Housing Authority began getting six to eight calls a day from New Jersey residents seeking applications for subsidized housing, Executive Director Cheryl Johns says.

She found it curious that those seeking to move here had no idea where the city was.

When she finally asked an applicant why she was interested in Altoona, the caller said her welfare case worker had referred her. Johns decided to take action. "When I have almost half of the people on my waiting list from the New Jersey area, it's an issue," Johns says.

She contacted a state senator whose office tracked down two fliers, posted in a Newark welfare office, that gave the phone numbers of the Altoona Housing Authority and an apartment development in Williamsport, Pa., that accepted government rental vouchers.

Bruce Nigro, welfare director for Essex County, N.J., says that once he learned of the fliers, he banned them.

A person who qualifies by income for subsidized housing can apply for a unit anywhere, says Donna White, a spokeswoman for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, but most people stay in their local communities. Of the 1.8 million families in the rental subsidy program, 7%-10% get a voucher in one area, then use it in another, she says.

In Altoona, roughly 20% of the population qualifies for subsidized housing based on income, Johns says. Local residents get priority.Waiting lists range from 18 months to two years.

"We're not trying to discriminate against anyone," she says, but "I'm responsible for taking care of the residents of the city of Altoona."

More drug trafficking

Some Altoona residents and public officials blame an increase in drug crime on recent arrivals from New Jersey and other states.

John Grum, 48, says the city should not offer subsidized housing to out-of-towners "or at least get a good background check on them before they do." Those committing many of the crimes are "from Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New Jersey. They're not Altoona people."

Kevin Harley, spokesman for Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett, says that in the past five years, drug dealers from larger cities have moved into smaller cities such as Altoona "where they can essentially be a big fish in a small pond."

Since January 2005, he says, more than 600 street-level drug dealers have been arrested in Blair County, which includes Altoona.

Robin Moore says such statistics have nothing to do with her. "My daughter's a productive member of society," she says. "My husband is, and I am, so even if it's just us three, that proves right there that (not) everybody from Jersey is ? into drugs and crime."

Moore was paying $795 a month for a two-bedroom apartment in Newark when she called the Altoona authority in January 2006.

She won't say what she pays in Altoona, but her family lives in an apartment that's larger yet cheaper than their last home in Newark.

Her husband, Corey, is a groundskeeper. Moore, a former customer service representative for a computer services firm, is looking for work and heads the tenants council in the 170-unit complex.

She says she knows some Altoona residents resent her presence. But sitting with her front door open, her children playing outside near picnic tables, she pays it no mind.

"I didn't even allow my kids to go outside when we lived in (Newark public) housing, though we had a playground," she says. "The drug dealers had taken it over. ? I know what my purpose is for coming here."

http://www.topix.com/forum/us-house/bill-shuster/TFUEK0S07S87N77EM

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-15-altoona_N.htm


===============================================
And from last month's New York Times: "Under the Section 8 federal housing voucher program, thousands of poor, urban and often African-American residents have left hardscrabble neighborhoods in the nation?s largest cities and resettled in the suburbs."
=============================================

New York Times: As Program Moves Poor to Suburbs, Tensions Follow


Darrell Turner of the N.A.A.C.P. talked to a private security guard who had stopped black teenagers on the block.

The New York Times
By SOLOMON MOORE
August 8, 2008

ANTIOCH, Calif. ? From the tough streets of Oakland, where so many of Alice Payne?s relatives and friends had been shot to death, the newspaper advertisement for a federally assisted rental property in this Northern California suburb was like a bridge across the River Jordan.

Darrell Turner of the N.A.A.C.P. talked to a private security guard who had stopped black teenagers on the block.

Ms. Payne, a 42-year-old African-American mother of five, moved to Antioch in 2006. With the local real estate market slowing and a housing voucher covering two-thirds of the rent, she found she could afford a large, new home, with a pool, for $2,200 a month.

But old problems persisted. When her estranged husband was arrested, the local housing authority tried to cut off her subsidy, citing disturbances at her house. Then the police threatened to prosecute her landlord for any criminal activity or public nuisances caused by the family. The landlord forced the Paynes to leave when their lease was up.

Under the Section 8 federal housing voucher program, thousands of poor, urban and often African-American residents have left hardscrabble neighborhoods in the nation?s largest cities and resettled in the suburbs.

Law enforcement experts and housing researchers argue that rising crime rates follow Section 8 recipients to their new homes, while other experts discount any direct link. But there is little doubt that cultural shock waves have followed the migration. Social and racial tensions between newcomers and their neighbors have increased, forcing suburban communities like Antioch to re-evaluate their civic identities along with their methods of dealing with the new residents.

The foreclosure crisis gnawing away at overbuilt suburbs has accelerated that migration, and the problems. Antioch is one of many suburbs in the midst of a full-blown mortgage meltdown that has seen property owners seeking out low-income renters to fill vacant homes. The most recent Contra Costa County records available show that from 2003 to 2005, the number of Section 8 households in Antioch grew by 50 percent, to about 1,500 from 1,000. Many new residents are African-American; Antioch?s black population has grown to about 20 percent, from 3 percent in 1990.

Federally assisted tenants in Antioch brought a class action lawsuit against the police department last month, claiming racial discrimination, intimidation and illegal property searches. The lawsuit, which was filed in the Northern District of California, claims that the police routinely questioned Section 8 residents about their housing status and wrote letters to the county?s housing authority recommending termination of subsidies. They say the police also threatened Section 8 landlords for infractions by tenants. A December 2007 study of Antioch police records by Public Advocates, a law firm in San Francisco, counted 67 investigations of black households, compared with 59 of white families; black households, it found, are four times as likely to be searched based on noncriminal complaints and to be contacted by the police in the first place.

Chief James Hyde of the Antioch Police Department denied that his officers routinely asked whether tenants were Section 8 recipients and said that the police department did not have information about which homes were on federal assistance. But Chief Hyde also said that the local housing authority was not meeting its obligation to screen tenants properly, and that as his department focused on nuisance issues, the police had become a de facto enforcement arm of the federal government.

?Other cities have come asking us for guidance,? Chief Hyde said.

The Section 8 program is designed to encourage low-income tenants to settle in middle-income areas by subsidizing 60 percent of their rent. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development issued 50,000 more vouchers for suburban relocations in 2007 than in 2005, bringing the total number of renter families to 2.1 million.

Federal officials and housing experts say that the increase in vouchers was offset by people being forced out of federal housing projects that closed and by renters moving into foreclosed properties. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy and research group, 30 percent to 40 percent of residents in foreclosed properties were renters, many of whom have since sought federal assistance.

Linda Couch, the coalition?s deputy director, said families often waited a decade or more for housing vouchers.

Demand for subsidized suburban housing, meanwhile, is outstripping supply. In Salinas, Calif., applicants circled an entire block around a housing authority office earlier this month. Mobile, Ala., has 3,400 Section 8 families, and 2,000 more awaiting homes.

Sociologists have long claimed that leaving behind high-crime, low-employment neighborhoods for the middle-class suburbs buoys the fortunes of impoverished tenants. An article in the July/August edition of The Atlantic Monthly, however, cited findings by researchers at the University of Memphis that crime in Memphis appeared to migrate with voucher recipients. More broadly, a 2006 Georgia Institute of Technology study found that every time a neighborhood experienced three foreclosures per 100 owner-occupied properties in a year, violent crime increased by approximately 7 percent.

As Antioch?s population grew to 101,000 in 2005, from 73,386 in 1995, the city built about 4,000 housing units in the early years of this decade.

Now it has one of the highest foreclosure rates in the state, with about 23 of every 1,000 homeowners losing their homes as of June, according to DataQuick, a real estate information clearinghouse.

While total crime in Antioch declined by 15 percent in the first three months of this year, compared to the same period in 2007, violent crime increased by about 16 percent, according to city statistics. Robberies and assaults accounted for most of that rise.

In an incident report filed with the Antioch Police Department, Natalie and Darin Rouse complained of constant problems with gang members? blaring car stereos and under-age drinking on the street. In a written account, they blamed ?gross community overdevelopment, affirmative action loopholes and incompetent state government management of federal affordable housing programs? for the problems.

Several white women, all professionals who attend the same church and have lived in Antioch for 12 years or more, recently sat outside a Starbucks coffee shop and discussed how their declining home equity had trapped them in a city they no longer recognize.

?My father got held up at gunpoint while he was renting a car to a young African-American man,? said Rebecca Gustafson, 35, who owns a graphics and Web design company with her husband. Ms. Gustafson said her car had also been broken into three times before being stolen from her driveway.

Laura Reynolds, 36, an emergency room nurse, said that she often came home to her Country Hills development tract after working a late-shift to find young black teenagers strolling through her neighborhood.

?I know it sounds horrible, but they?re scary. I?m sorry,? said Ms. Reynolds, who like her two friends said she was conflicted about her newfound fear of black youths. ?Sometimes I question myself, and I think, Would I feel this way if they were Mexican or white??

Housing advocates argue that the impact of Section 8 in Antioch and other communities is exaggerated and that Section 8 houses make up only a small amount of the real estate market. Section 8 homes rarely exceed more than 2 percent of available housing in any metropolitan area; in Antioch the average is 8 percent, according to housing officials.

Brad Seligman, a lawyer with the Impact Fund, a nonprofit civil rights advocacy group based in San Francisco that is representing Section 8 tenants in Antioch, along with groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and Public Advocates, accused the city?s police department of racially profiling black subsidized tenants. The N.A.A.C.P. has made similar accusations.

?Instead of driving while black, it?s renting while black,? Mr. Seligman said.

Thomas and Karen Coleman and their three children were the only black family on their street when they moved to Antioch in 2003 with a housing voucher.

In June 2007, a neighbor told the police that Mr. Coleman had threatened him. Officers from the police community action team visited the house and demanded to be allowed in.

?I cracked the door open, but they pushed me out of the way,? Ms. Coleman said.

The officers searched the house even though they did not have a warrant, said the Colemans, who are now part of the class-action suit against the department. The police questioned Mr. Coleman, a parolee at the time, about his living arrangement. He explained that he and his wife were separated but in the process of reconciling. The police accused the family of violating a Section 8 rule that only listed tenants can live in a subsidized home.

After the raid, officers made repeated visits to the Coleman home and to Mr. Coleman?s job at a movie theater. They also sent a letter to the county housing department recommending that the Colemans be removed from federal housing assistance, a recommendation the authority rejected.

?They kept harassing me until I was off parole,? Mr. Coleman said.

Quote:

Good thing Montgomery Gardens is in Ward E. Neither you nor Ms. Richardson should mind.

No what councilwoman expresses is what a lot of us in Ward F are concerned about. Is that the people in low income or affordable housing in Ward E need to remain in WArd E. Somehow Ward E is dumping all their low income and affordables in Ward F and this is unacceptable. Ward F is on a mission to integrate and prosper not to hoard all people of the same income in one place. This topic we will follow very closely. WARD F SAY NO TO "OFFSITE AFFORDABLES!!" IF you don't know what this is then do your research because it will affect all of us!

Ahhh, I've been quoted by the New York Times... book tour begins next week!

Two things on all this. First, there will likely be a drop off in total affordable housing residents as a result of the demolition and construction phase when the housing is no longer available.

Second, project housing within in Ward E is the only way the machine will ever take back control of the ward, with the exception of dramatically redrawing the ward lines. I think then its probably safe to assume that the people making these decisions will be looking to keep those residents within the ward.

Just out of curiosity: has anyone in this thread ever spent much time in the Montgomery projects?

If they're the projects I'm thinking of (on the south side of Montgomery, between downtown and the Armory???), to me, they look as if they're well-run and under a decent level of control. The playgrounds, for example, are in way, way better shape than the Hamilton Park playgrounds, and the grounds seem to be well-maintained.

I've passed what I think are medium-rise projects near the Martin Luther King Drive light rail that seem to look a lot more grim and seem to be home to a lot of guys who sit around drinking on the sidewalk all day. Walking by those projects really creeps me out.

So, anyhow, I think it's fair to ask why the city is closing the Montgomery projects first when the projects in Bergen Lafayette look so much creepier?

The building are not nearly as decrepit as some in NY, BUT the crime is out of control over there. As in NY they need to hire their own small police force dedicated to those buildings, there are too many people and not enough police to patrol, of course... you know the old adage.. When the cats away the mice will play.

But that's neither here nor there. They have decided to demolish them and out they go. Over to Greenville, which I'm sure eventually will be subject to demoltions and oustings.

Like Kanye West said george Bush does not care about black people, JC does not care about poor people.

Just my POV don't shoot the messenger.

Well the people by the beacon are probably partying like there's no tomorrow right now. Have these people started moving out? I Hope Healy makes sure to beef up the police force so these people wont think it's business as usual when they move.

Quote:

It's easy to keep the playground in good shape when the kids are too scared to play on it.

Mark.

Jersey City's Montgomery Gardens public housing complex to be torn down

The Jersey Journal
Monday October 13, 2008



The Montgomery Gardens public housing complex in Jersey City will be torn down

The Montgomery Gardens public housing complex is coming down, and the developer of the Beacon luxury residential complex next door may have a hand in what comes next.

According to the New York Times, plans are already under way to knock down the complex.

Earlier this year, the Jersey City housing authority stopped renewing leases at the 549-unit Montgomery Street complex. Several weeks ago, a notice seeking demolition experts was sent out.

Ideas floated for the site include mixed-income housing and a "superduper supermarket."

Quote:

http://www.thebeaconjc.com/

I have to say it:

"I told you so."

This is in response to all those people on various Beacon threads here who consistantly brought up Montgomery Gardens as a reason not to live there, as a reason it was a bad investment, etc, etc. It was very obvious that Metrovest would not put $500M+ into the Beacon knowing the projects next door would remain. No surprise here that they're coming down.

I'm also going to predict that Metrovest gets the project. It's in their best interest to make it as nice as possible, so I see them willing to spend more than the other 3 potential developers.

Quote:

It just wouldn't be Jersey City without a paseo.

A supermarket?

Unbelievable....
You ever see the movie Slow Burn?
it's about this whole secret real-estate plot to blow up the projects to make room for bigger more expensive condos... this is what this reminds me of... There is a lot of greasing going on im sure.

I mean, replace the projects with buildings that will meet the need for both low-income and middle income people... Fine. Downtown has already become unlivable by normal blue collar workers as it is why keep stretching it out? And to replace it with a da** supermarket?

I love JC I really do but is this really the best decision for the city?

I agree the projects over on Montgomery aren't exactly glamarous, but more police presence, tighter security etc could have alleviated all of that, but they didnt want to do that.. and maybe on purpose, maybe they wanted it to get so bad that they wouldn't have been met with resistance in tearing it down. Something to think about.

I don't think supermarkets discriminate. I also think a supermarket would cater to people of all economic classes. They are not building more condos so I don't get your point.

What exactly are you complaining about?

I think any type of project is a bad thing. Clustering subsidized people together in one area is always bad. If you are pro low-income you should understand this. Spreading subsidized tenants across the city would serve them better.

Quote:

Two words, Whole Foods!

Well speaking financially.... You tell me where the people in projects can be "spread" to that they could afford? You think they will move to Portside on Washington, do you think section 8 will cover all of that.?

I am not against supermarkets, I am against supermarkets in place of housing... especially low-income housing that JC so desperately needs. Come on let's be real here, do we really need another supermarket? They have choice of Shop-Rite and Pathmark in that area within a 1 mile radius. I didn't say they were building condos, I was likening it to a movie that reminded me of that.
Again I ask people before they attack the previous poster read the posting, digest it , become it.

Then respond accordingly.

You're totally missing the point. A supermarket would just be a piece of it -- the commericial tenant on the ground floor.

This is all part of a national program called Hope VI housing, which acknowledges that the high-rise, high-density projects of the mid-20th century have been a failure, and replaces them with low density mixed-use developments. This is a national movement with federal funding -- nothing specific to Jersey City. Read all about it here:

http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/ph/hope6/

If you know Lafayette Village on Grand St, near Fairmont, that's a Hope VI project:

http://www.jcha.us/lafayette_village.htm

Or the very nice looking low-rise housing that's going up where half of the Duncan projects were knocked down (corner of Truck Rt 1/9), that's Hope VI.

More about Hope VI projects in Jersey City here:

http://www.jcha.us/hope_vi.htm

This is a good thing.

Quote:

oh ok
It just sounds like your plopping a big supermarket there with an equally big parking lot. I have stated I had NO PROBLEM with it being replaced with mixed housing.
But not happy with just a "sprinkling" of low income units... but it's all about that all mighty dollar... well not so mighty anymore tho.

And I take that back... you didn't say it but the way it was written made it seem like those were two ideas rather then one.

If you don't have a car and happen to live in the Beacon, McGinley or Journal Square area, it is challenging to get to Pathmark or ShopRite and even more challenging to bring your groceries home, especially since the way back is all uphill. This is a large, densely populated area of JC that has no access to a supermarket. Part of the Beacon plan was always to have a grocery store. Perhaps with the redevelopment of the Montgomery Gardens site, a larger supermarket with parking could better serve the area.

What do the present residents of Montgomery Gardens think of all of this development?

Councilman Fulop what have your constituents in Montgomery Gardens told you about this?

Planning transformation for Montgomery Gardens
Mixed income low-rise seen as solution to public housing
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

Crime-ridden and too expensive to maintain, the Montgomery Gardens public housing complex in Jersey City is going the way of the dodo bird, according to city officials.

Meanwhile, its rich neighbor to the west - the Beacon condo complex at the old Jersey City Medical Center - could have a big say in how the six-acre site is transformed.

Before the year's out, the city's Housing Authority hopes to select a developer to replace the six-tower, 549-unit complex along Montgomery Street with a low-rise, mixed-income development, said JCHA Executive Director Maria Maio.

The developer would be part of a team that would also include tenants. A fully developed plan would be ready six to nine months after the developer is picked, she said.

Four developers have tossed their hats into the ring for the job, including Manhattan-based Metrovest Equities, the developer that's renovating the 1,200-unit market-rate complex at the old medical center, Maio said.

Asked if proximity and obvious self-interest gives Metrovest a leg up on the competition, Maio insisted, "Absolutely not."

Maio and Metrovest president George Filopoulos batted down rumors Metrovest was told radical changes at Montgomery Gardens were in the offing before the developer decided more than six years ago to sink $400 million into the nation's largest historic renovation effort.

The decision to adopt a new course at Montgomery Gardens came in June, Maio said, when the authority's board voted to seek a developer, offer vouchers to families who want to leave, and agreed not to refill emptied units.

No one is being asked to move and leases are being renewed, she said. So far, 100 families have requested Section 8 vouchers and about 50 apartments are empty.

Filopoulos, whose proposal for the site includes a large supermarket, added, "The success of the Beacon has allowed this process to be undertaken."

Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy said the old model of high-rise, low-income public housing, bred "social ills, with crime being the big complaint," adding: "Our Jersey City Housing Authority has . done this successfully in Curries Woods, at Lafayette Gardens, and are in the process at the A. Harry Moore Housing Complex."

The goal of the new development is an even split between market-rate, public housing, and moderate-income housing, Maio said.

About 40 percent of displaced tenants would return to the new development, Maio said. Others would receive Section 8 vouchers.

The other developers vying to build the new Montgomery Gardens are: Boston-based Community Builders; Community Investment Strategies of Bordentown, and the Michaels Development Company of Marlton.

Mixed reaction
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Montgomery Gardens resident Geneva Jenkins thinks knocking down her home is a great idea.

"Hurry up, so I can get my money and move," said Jenkins when told of plans to replace the complex with low-rise, mixed-income buildings.

Jenkins said she's had mold in her apartment and her ceiling collapsed. "Too long," she huffed about her three years at the complex.

But resident Chimere Bell, 25, isn't convinced there's greener grass elsewhere. She blames her well-to-do next-door neighbors for shoving her out.

"There's violence everywhere. They're doing it (the new plan) because of the Beacon," Bell said, adding that the housing vouchers residents are to receive will not last forever.

KEN THORBOURNE

Mixed reaction Montgomery Gardens resident Geneva Jenkins thinks knocking down her home is a great idea.

Tuesday, October 14
Jersey Journal

"Hurry up, so I can get my money and move," said Jenkins when told of plans to replace the complex with low-rise, mixed-income buildings.

Jenkins said she's had mold in her apartment and her ceiling collapsed. "Too long," she huffed about her three years at the complex.

But resident Chimere Bell, 25, isn't convinced there's greener grass elsewhere. She blames her well-to-do next-door neighbors for shoving her out.

"There's violence everywhere. They're doing it (the new plan) because of the Beacon," Bell said, adding that the housing vouchers residents are to receive will not last forever.

KEN THORBOURNE

==============================

Planning transformation for Montgomery Gardens
Mixed income low-rise seen as solution to public housing
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
By KEN THORBOURNE
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

Crime-ridden and too expensive to maintain, the Montgomery Gardens public housing complex in Jersey City is going the way of the dodo bird, according to city officials.

Meanwhile, its rich neighbor to the west - the Beacon condo complex at the old Jersey City Medical Center - could have a big say in how the six-acre site is transformed.
Advertisement





Before the year's out, the city's Housing Authority hopes to select a developer to replace the six-tower, 549-unit complex along Montgomery Street with a low-rise, mixed-income development, said JCHA Executive Director Maria Maio.

The developer would be part of a team that would also include tenants. A fully developed plan would be ready six to nine months after the developer is picked, she said.

Four developers have tossed their hats into the ring for the job, including Manhattan-based Metrovest Equities, the developer that's renovating the 1,200-unit market-rate complex at the old medical center, Maio said.

Asked if proximity and obvious self-interest gives Metrovest a leg up on the competition, Maio insisted, "Absolutely not."

Maio and Metrovest president George Filopoulos batted down rumors Metrovest was told radical changes at Montgomery Gardens were in the offing before the developer decided more than six years ago to sink $400 million into the nation's largest historic renovation effort.

The decision to adopt a new course at Montgomery Gardens came in June, Maio said, when the authority's board voted to seek a developer, offer vouchers to families who want to leave, and agreed not to refill emptied units.

No one is being asked to move and leases are being renewed, she said. So far, 100 families have requested Section 8 vouchers and about 50 apartments are empty.

Filopoulos, whose proposal for the site includes a large supermarket, added, "The success of the Beacon has allowed this process to be undertaken."

Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy said the old model of high-rise, low-income public housing, bred "social ills, with crime being the big complaint," adding: "Our Jersey City Housing Authority has . done this successfully in Curries Woods, at Lafayette Gardens, and are in the process at the A. Harry Moore Housing Complex."

The goal of the new development is an even split between market-rate, public housing, and moderate-income housing, Maio said.

About 40 percent of displaced tenants would return to the new development, Maio said. Others would receive Section 8 vouchers.

The other developers vying to build the new Montgomery Gardens are: Boston-based Community Builders; Community Investment Strategies of Bordentown, and the Michaels Development Company of Marlton.