More than 150 protestors, many with children in tow, marched in front of City Hall Wednesday night to denounce Mayor David Roberts’ plans to expand the northwest redevelopment zone along the light rail tracks. According to Roberts, the redevelopment plan can yield 5.5 acres of open space and a community center with a permanent swimming pool, basketball courts, and other amenities, paid for by the zone’s designated developer. But several groups of activists say the price is too high.
They argue that the plan could turn into a “sweetheart deal” for the primary zone developer, URSA Development, who is a generous campaign contributor to Roberts.
The activists are also concerned that the nine-block area near the Light Rail tracks extending from Ninth to 16th streets might become overloaded with high-density, high-rise residential housing.
Small portion
The proposal was part of a plan that Mayor David Roberts unveiled two weeks ago to expand park space in Hoboken before it is all gobbled up. But citizens concerned about open space say they don’t think it goes far enough.
Already, members of the Fund for a Better Waterfront, the Hudson County Alliance, the People for Open Government, the Riverview Neighborhood Association, the Quality of Life Coalition, and HobokenParks.org have been highly critical of the mayor’s plan.
Roberts responded that they aren’t looking at the big picture. He said that the redevelopment plans are only a small portion of his open space initiative.
Roberts that that between the city, the Board of Education school construction plans, and individual redevelopment plans, Hoboken can realize up to 17 acres of new open space in the next couple of years. This doesn’t count the 12.5 acres that are already under construction or already in the pipeline. (For more information on the mayor’s park plan, go to www.hobokennj.org.)
Roberts said that in addition to the proposed redevelopment plan, his park initiative includes buying several properties for parks, including 1600 Park Ave. and 4.2 acres of land north of the 14th Street Viaduct. He also wants to better utilize several pieces of property that the city already owns, such as building tennis courts on top of the municipal garage.
The swath in question
The center of conversation Wednesday night was the mayor’s proposal to extend the Northwest Redevelopment Area by about nine blocks, starting at Ninth Street and going north along the light rail tracks.
The entire area would encompass around 11.6 acres.
According to Roberts, the selected developer would have to dedicate 5.5 acres to open space. Roberts would like to see several elements in this area, including a “green belt” pedestrian park that would stretch along the back of the city.
The most ambitious part of the plan is a recreational facility with an in-ground swimming pool, a multi-purpose recreation room/ basketball court, and other recreational rooms.
But these parks don’t come for free. For the developers to be able to pay to build the park and community center, the land needs to generate income. So the city will re-zone the area, most likely to include a yet unknown number of high-rise mixed-use, mostly residential towers.
How do redevelopment areas work?
Redevelopment, according to state law, is a zoning term that means there is an area within the municipality that is not being used to its full potential. Designating a redevelopment site can mean special zoning. It can also mean allowing the developer to get tax abatements or make special in-lieu-of-tax payments.
Redevelopment is one of the most important and complicated development issues to hit Hoboken over the past two decades. Those who support the creation of new redevelopment areas say it can be an excellent tool to spur development in blighted locations where new construction might be undesirable to private developers or land owners.
But it also puts a significant amount of power in the purview of the city’s governing body, which in Hoboken’s case is the City Council. This means the City Council pools a large area of property together, even if the land is owned multiple owners, and then zones the property however they wish. If they want to buy some property, they can resort to eminent domain and force the owner to sell it to them.
The city can also place conditions on new developers, such as requiring them to include a certain amount of parks or affordable housing units.
Critics say that the powers of redevelopment are overused in Hoboken, where real estate values are through the roof and developers are salivating at the prospects of building.
They add that there is no longer a single blighted piece of property left in Hoboken, and tax abatements put an undue burden on the city’s other taxpayers.
Examples in Hoboken
The most visible example of a redevelopment area in Hoboken is the South Waterfront development. The city sent out proposals in the 1990s and found developers to construct office buildings, the residential building known as 333 River St., and a future W Hotel. The Port Authority and the city worked on Pier A and Pier C park.
Cart before the horse?
Before the City Council Wednesday was a resolution that called for a “memorandum of understanding,” which gives Hoboken-based developer URSA Development and New York-based Tarragon Realty Investors Inc. exclusive three-year rights to negotiate with the city for a possible redevelopment area.
Many of the activist protestors, as well as some members of the City Council minority, thought it was odd that the city would give a developer exclusive negotiating rights for three years before the property is even blighted and the redevelopment agency discusses in a public forum what it wants.
Normally, there are three steps in the redevelopment process. The first is a designation of a redevelopment area. The second is the establishment of a redevelopment plan. And the final step is the designation of a developer to build in the redevelopment area.
It is supposed to be a process that has substantial public input throughout, but by involving a developer at such an early stage, some believe the public is being left out of the process.
The activists are also worry that this is already a fait accompli that has been negotiated behind closed doors. From a legal standpoint, the “memorandum of understanding” does not officially designate Tarragon/URSA as the developers. The city must still commission a blight study and devise a redevelopment plan. But because of the exclusivity clause, argue the protestors, it’s a de facto designation, seeing that the city can’t talk to other developers.
“We’re pulling the cart before the horse,” said Councilman Tony Soares. He added that this deal is “not more than payback by this administration to his developer friends.”
Helen Manogue, a member of the Hoboken Quality of Life Coalition, said during the protest that, “this is about broken promises.” She explained that Roberts hasn’t fought hard enough to oppose several large projects on the west side, specifically high-rises proposed for 800 Jackson and 900 Monroe streets.
“It’s clear that he’s bending to pro-development forces, which for a great number of us is disconcerting and disheartening.”
The “memorandum of understanding” passed the council by a 6-2 vote, with Carol Marsh and Soares voting in the negative. Michael Russo was absent.
The Tarragon/URSA partnership
URSA is a local group headed by Hoboken developers Michael Sciarra and Mark Settembre, and has become a large player in the Hoboken residential real estate market.
Last year Tarragon and URSA broke ground on a new 118-unit condominium project at 1300 Grand St. That project is part of what will eventually be an eight-block development in Hoboken called Upper Grand, which will consist of about 1,160 for-sale condominiums and about 240 affordable rental units in nine buildings, as much as 14,400 square feet of retail, and enough parking in each building to allocate one space per unit. Also, URSA currently has an application before the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a 12-story, 125-unit project at 900 Monroe St. This project is located in the area where the mayor is proposing to create a redevelopment area.
The principals of URSA have been some of Roberts’ biggest campaign contributors over the past three years. According to state campaign financing reports, they have contributed over $38,000 since 2001. That’s almost 10 percent of what Roberts has raised through his organization Hoboken United and the Hoboken Democratic Organization.
Why negotiate exclusively?
Roberts denied that contributions from URSA factored into his motivation to create this redevelopment area. He added Thursday that by using redevelopment areas, the city can have the developer build and pay for projects, such as parks, that benefit the residents and the community as a whole.
“We all want parks; there’s no question about that,” said Roberts, “While [the activists] want six acres of open space, they have yet to say how they expect to pay for it. We have a plan that will provide 5.5 acres of parks and community center, all of which will be paid for by this developer through our use of redevelopment zones.”
The developer speaks
According to representatives for Tarragon and URSA, there are several reasons the city should enter into exclusive negotiations. First, argued the developers’ attorney, Jack Arseneault of the Chatham-based Arseneault, Fassett & Mariano, URSA owns or is in contract to buy 63 percent of the 11-acre proposed redevelopment area. In return for the exclusivity agreement, they will not develop an approximately 1-acre piece of property, which they own, that is directly adjacent, to the proposed redevelopment zone. They will donate that property to the city and pay for the multi-million dollar construction of the 25,000 square-foot community center.
If the council doesn’t give URSA exclusive negotiating rights, then the community center is off the table, said URSA’s lawyers.
“If there is no agreement, USRA would go forward with the development of that land for other uses,” said John Curley. “The opportunity for community center and pool for that [parcel] would be lost.”
Curley was asked several times about how many units of housing would have to go into the redevelopment area to make it feasible for them to pay for all of these community givebacks. While he presented detailed diagrams of the community center, he said it will be up to the City Council to decide how much housing goes in the area. But, if it’s not enough for Tarragon/URSA to turn a profit, according to the “memorandum of understanding,” they can walk away from the deal at any time.
Master plan compliant?
The activists also say that Roberts’ plan to use redevelopment zones does not jibe with the new Hoboken Master Plan that was adopted by the Planning Board.
In one map, called the “open space concept” map in the plan, there is a 6-acre area without any development. “How much density must the west side tolerate to get a recreational field out of a developer deal?” said HobokenParks.org founder Leah Healey on her web site. “Adding more residential towers is not the answer to funding the pool, and this is certainly not the park we thought we were getting under the master plan.” But Roberts says that his plans coincide with the master plan. Instead of putting all six acres in one spot, Roberts’ plan spreads 5.5 acres over an 11-acre area.
According to Paul Grygiel of Phillips Preiss Shapiro Associates, Inc, the firm that wrote the master plan, the locations on the map aren’t set in stone to be open space, but were seen as the only possible locations that the city could investigate for creating open space.
Roberts added that the main goal of the master plan, as it relates to open space, is to double the amount of open space in the city in the next 20 years.
“And we are well on the way to doing that,” said Roberts.
Councilman Ruben Ramos Jr. pointed out Wednesday that there are several parks that are in Roberts’ parks plan, such as the proposed 4.2 acre park that’s north of the 14th Street viaduct that’s tentatively being called the Upper Westside Park, that aren’t listed in the master plan’s “open space concept” map.
“Just because [the Upper Westside Park] isn’t on the master plan [open space concept] map,” Ramos said, “does that mean we shouldn’t go forward with planning that park?”
Ramos said that this administration is committed to adding the amount of open space recommended in the master plan, even if it’s not fiscally possible to place them in the exact locations as listed on the master plan’s “open space concept” map.