The ambitious redevelopment plan comes with many unanswered questions, and, given the way the plan was prepared, it looks as though the only ones gaining from the plan will be the developer.

A redevelopment plan should represent the vision of the community and city council for how Hoboken would like to see the area in question developed for the betterment of the city and the neighborhood surrounding it. While the requirements shouldn’t be unreasonable, they should emphasize what the community is looking to gain from new development. In typical scenarios, once a redevelopment plan is adopted by both the City Council and the Planning Board, the city negotiates with potential developers, and changes can and would likely be made based on the proposals received. However, it is important to be specific upfront about what the community and city council want in order that the final product will more likely represent Hoboken's views.  (Learn more about the Redevelopment process here.)

Land Usage, Jobs and Traffic

• Why doesn't the plan call for office space? Even the existing zoning allows that, but is being changed. The Hoboken City Master Plan (the community's guidelines for zoning)  from 2004 calls for this area to have a mixture of commercial, office and residential space. Office space provides jobs, tax dollars and causes less strain on infrastructure and city services including sanitation, fire and police protection. With a light rail stop bordering the area for development, why is the city not trying to get office space in this area?

• How will the new residential development effect traffic and commuting in a town with long bus lines, crowded PATH trains, and massive traffic during rush hour? There has been no discussion or traffic study of the impact of traffic is included in the plan.

Community Center

• Why is there only one paragraph in the plan on a community center (including pool) and why haven’t any public hearings been held to determine what the community is looking for in a community center?

  Here is the one paragraph from the Redevelopment Plan: A community center and outdoor public pool shall be provided on-site or at an off-site location that is within 500 feet of the boundaries of the Redevelopment Area. The minimum site area for the community center/public pool shall be 30,000 square feet. The facility shall provide for the following amenities: a minimum two-story, 25,000 square foot building with gymnasium space with basketball courts; men’s and women’s locker rooms; arts and crafts space; art and dance studios; a computer lab; offices; and an outdoor swimming pool and kiddie pool.

   

• Why would the community center be allowed to be located outside the boundaries of the redevelopment area? If it is allowed outside the redevelopment area, why doesn’t the community have any input on where it would be? The city and the likely developer want to put the community center on the same block as a large electrical substation that would be difficult to sell residential units next to. Why is it OK for our children to play next to such a structure?

• What guarantees the community center is going to actually be built and not be another broken promise like in the past?

• Who is going to pay to maintain the community center, which will likely cost over $1 million dollars a year? If operating and maintaining a community center is going to be the responsibility of the city, how is the city going to add this expense to an already unsustainable budget?

Affordable Housing

• Why does the plan only call for 100 affordable housing units, and not a percentage of total units? 100 affordable housing units is likely only 10% of the proposed number of units, which is below the NJ Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) legal requirements, which calls for 20%. Why aren’t we asking for the legal requirement? If the development doesn’t provide its legal share of the affordable units, it will become the obligation of the taxpayers to provide those units. 

Open Space

• The plan calls for 4.4 acres of open space, but why is there an allowance for 40% of that acreage to be as follows:

  From the Redevelopment Plan: The following features within the Redevelopment Area are permitted to count towards the 40 percent open space requirement: parks, tot lots, and dog runs; pathways, pedestrian-only mews, and other pedestrian circulation spaces; at-grade publicly-accessible plazas or court yards; the green circuit; and buffer planting areas along the light rail right-of-way.

  In other words, sidewalks and bushes  are going to count towards the 4.4 acres of open space. Why?

• New York City (NYC) provides its residents with 2.5 acres of open space per one thousand residents, and the national average is 6 acres per thousand residents. Hoboken is well-below the NYC average, let alone the national average. How does 2.8 acres (the 60% of requested open space that isn’t sidewalks) help the community when it won’t even cover the expected 3000 new residents from the new development? 

Taxes

• Will payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) payments be applied to his development, and if so, for how long and what benefits will the developer provide to the community due to such arrangement? (PILOTs replace traditional property taxes which generally go 40% to the city, 30% to the county and 30% to the school district. With PILOTs, 95% goes to the city, 5% to the county and none to school district. Properties that pay PILOTs are normally given an abatement so they pay less than normal taxes. Buildings with PILOTs are also shielded for up to 30 years  from tax increases such as the recent 47% hike.) How will the county and school district make up the money they lose from such an arrangement besides increasing taxes for existing tax payers? 

• Does the tax revenue generated from the new properties pay for the increased costs to service the new residents, including sewage, sanitation services, fire and police protection? The development in Hoboken in the last 10 years has contributed to a hugely increased budget (from $50M to $120M in 7 years) and just socked tax payers with a whopping 47% increase. Will this new development do the same?

Leah Healey, a Community Activist wrote a memo on the two versions of the redevelopment plan. Ms. Healey points out the strong legal flaws in the plan. Feel free to read her memo in the Documents section.

We ask that you urge the city council to table the current plan, worry about the budget and then go back to the drawing board on this redevelopment plan. The council should hold a special city council meeting to discuss the plan and the community center, get feedback from the public and other redevelopment experts from around the state and then request a revised plan.