Development within a municipality is always a touchy subject. Sometimes residents feel their communities are just fine the way they are, but other times they may try to at least submit terms for a developer to follow.
Secaucus is now hoping that its plans for smart growth pay off. Currently, those plans are unfolding in the southeastern section of town – an area where a new train station stands, a “transit village” is beginning to rise, and a Turnpike interchange is under construction.
One of those developers, Fraternity Meadows, is erecting 1,700 units in the Transit Village Redevelopment Plan. They agreed last week to give the town a $5 million “impact fee.” The term “impact fee” is used by engineers and planners to describe the costs the town must bear because of a new development, like building roadways. At the same time, the developer also got, as part of its agreement with the town, permission to add 85 units, making the development a total of 1,785 units.
David Listokin, Ph.D., and do-director of the Center for Urban Policy Research of the Edward J. Blaustein School of Public Planning and Policy at Rutgers University, advised the town of Secaucus that the fiscal impact of the proposed redevelopment upon the town would not exceed $5 million, or $2,950 per market rate unit. These fiscal costs include basic infrastructure wear and tear as well as the additional maintenance or creation of roadways.
The town adopted a resolution to execute such an agreement at the Jan. 11 Town Council meeting. In addition to the $5 million check the town will receive, the developers will also have to pay an additional $6 million for sewage hook-ups and another $1 million towards affordable housing subsidies.
According to Town Administrator Anthony Iacono, the $5 million may be added to some revenue generated from a billboard on town property to build a new recreation center for Secaucus.
The resolution to authorize the agreement passed with a 5-1 vote. Councilman Fred Constantino was absent from the meeting and Councilman John Bueckner was the lone nay.
Bueckner stated that he had not previously supported the resolution that allowed for a 1,700-unit complex in the redevelopment zone, and because this new agreement allowed for an additional 85 units to be added, he would oppose the resolution.