The harbinger of the current rental surge may have been a modest Park Avenue project with eight apartments that was approved in 2008. Parking was a big issue then and was resolved by use of permits for nearby city parking lot. It is still a concern with almost every subsequent apartment proposal, despite developers' assertions that occupants will likely use public transportation to get around.
The city web site has a set of maps on development at the Planning Division link. Scroll down to see the maps dated March 2015.
Here is a list of apartments that are here or on the way in transit-oriented development:
North Avenue Historic District
8 units completed - The Courier News building on Park Avenue.
4 units completed -The Espinosa Building on Park Avenue.
6 units under construction - 177-185 North Ave.
8 units completed -138-144 North Ave.
6 units completed - 134-36 North Ave.
6 units under construction - 130-32 North Ave.
Netherwood
72 units proposed - 829-881 South Ave.
25 units completed - Netherwood Pointe, 921-926 South Ave.
34 units under construction - 1024-1034 South Ave.
212 units proposed - South Avenue Gateway, 11 lots by Plainwood Square Park
Downtown
8 units completed - 109 E. Fourth St.
20 units under construction - Art Lofts, Gavett & E. Second
9 units under construction - 400 W. Front St.
80 units under construction - Bella Vista Estates, 40 Roosevelt Ave.
12 units under construction - 326 W. Front St.
148 units proposed - 101-209 West Second St.
14 units proposed - 701 W. Seventh St.
158 units proposed - East Third/ Richmond
And lest we forget, the 63-condo development known as The Monarch began renting unsold condos several years ago. The building at 400 East Front Street currently has 40 or so rental units. By the way, I'm told one condo purchased for $205,000 in 2010 just sold for $120,000. From what I understand, other owners are displeased at the the way things have turned out.
Elmwood Gardens is being redeveloped and will have 60 units eventually, so add that to the rental roster as well.
Each one of these projects has a story. If you want to follow along with the biggest proposal so far, attend Thursday's Planning Board meeting where the South Avenue Gateway development will be on the agenda.The meeting will be 7:30 p.m. in City Hall Library, 515 Watchung Ave.
Finally, having covered development in Plainfield since the days of PEDCO and the PRA, I have seen a lot of projects come and go. You can read my insouciant take on the vagaries of development here.
--Bernice
Bernice, what do we think more rentals will do for this town? Is that what they mean by transit village...more like transient village? This town, sadly, will never improve. After 27 years here, I am thinking it's time to just give up and leave. I know I know, all the haters will say, "just go, who needs you." But you do need people who have a vested interest in the town, pay their taxes on time, and restore their homes. So, haters, just keep quiet. I've heard it all.
ReplyDeleteBernice - great post and very informative. I will be interested to see the comments from the "glass half empty crowd" who like to shoot from the hip and wallow in negativity versus getting a comprehensive understanding of the city, area and market trends locally and nationally. I think dah above is a pretty good representation of that group and I am sure there are more to come. This group's ancestors were the ones against paying for roads because the automobile would never replace the horse. They also are unrealistic about trends and insist that everything stays the same throughout eternity. It is easier to just make assumptions and go for the negative view than to take a moment and thoughtfully consider the situation:
ReplyDelete1) What are the trends in housing? Is the next generation interested in buying or renting?
2) Are people getting married at the same age, on average, historically that they used to?
3) Are they having children at the same age, historically on average, than they use to? And when they do have children are they having the same number on average?
4) Are younger generations interested in driving and purchasing automobiles at the same levels as American's have historically?
5) Do they like to live in a neighborhood or do they prefer to live in a commuter area with many local amenities they can walk or bike to?
6) What is the typical ratio of home ownership to rental property in the average city? What is a healthy ratio? And event better - what is the ratio locally versus these numbers?
7) Should I freak out and say that Renters don't pay property taxes or should I get past the semantics and understand that landlords pay property taxes?
8) When people mention trends in other cities should I take the negative approach and say that isn't possible here because "we have X issue and Y problem so it won't work here" - instead of thinking "this may be a good way to get some momentum and change "X issue and Y problem".
There are many ways to have a thoughtful, intelligent and reasonable conversation about developments and future landscape of a city. However, it is not possible to have such conversations with people that insist that everything remains the same throughout eternity and future generations will never think differently than we do now.
I find it interesting that the people that go negative about developments are often the people who mention Plainfield of yesterday and how people walked downtown and went to local stores and had a more pedestrian lifestyle. The irony is that current younger generations are interested in just that type of community. I know that statement will get the "half empties" started on the "we don't have the stores that anyone wants to live near or walk to". While that is probably true, most cities didn't have them either, but they came into play when developers, business owners and investors saw that there was going to be an audience. If you break ground on a 100 Unit complex don't think for a second that 50 investors and business people don't start to hear the news and look for opportunities.
While I am sure dah does want the best for the city, I think he/she is conflating issues and not seeing the forest for the trees. There is no direct connection to having transit village developments and people paying property taxes and restoring their homes. Cities can do both, they are not mutually exclusive.
Downtown Jersey City and The Waterfront area of Paulus Hook and Newport were rundown, neglected and places to avoid at one time.. Then came "Newport"..all rentals except for 1 condo building near the waterfront. Were there homeowners in Paulus Hook and Downtown, yes, yes there were, but what remained was a desolate run down wasteland of crime and decaying buildings, docks, unused rail tracks....
ReplyDeleteWhen Newport opened it was STRICTLY RENTALS except for one daring entrepreneur who built a condo building..all the other buildings and complexes were rentals. That entire area eventually caught steam due to it's proximity to NYC, lower rents and larger square footage apts and access to public transit --- PATH, NJTransit Light Rail, buses and Ferrys. There was little in the way of "good retail" until the population began to build. Newport Centre ( the mall ) was built as part of the agreed timeline of development..the rest followed all on its own.
Now, Paulus Hook, Downtown Jersey City and Newport are thriving rental and home ownership communities. Small business investment is thriving, people are buying and renting, and area is flush with shoppers from other areas spending their money, eating in restaurants, DRINKING ( for your puritanical bible clutchers )and generally spending spending spending.
Do I believe a large scale apt complex like that proposed for the old hospital site should be done, of course not... it's not close to the trains, it doesn't fit in with an area meant and maintained as smaller single family homes ( for the most part ). Downtown Plainfield, pockets of buildings along some of the busier corridors within quick walking distance of our two train stations is ideal and will eventually help kick start AN ECONOMIC REVIVAL in Plainfield as a whole.
Parking is an issue and should be dealt with FIRMLY as well as holding all developers accountable to the promises put in writing ( not the way it was down with The Monach where the city council bent over faster than even the developer had hoped and didn't finish most of the promised work ).
This is possibly a great thing when managed by a forward thinking group of individuals.. however, I wouldn't give a group of people much credit for being able to comprehend this when in their mind they found a "GO-GO" bar a "plus" and an "ASSet" to the city and their election funds or future job opportunities.
Love the go go bar comment!!!!!
DeleteThe developers just want to make their money and run not giving a dam about what they leave behind. Look at all the empty units we have now,if you can't rent a 2 be for $1,100. Per month with parking who is going to pay $1,400. Per month with just one parking spot. The people who can afford to pay high are not going to move to Plainfield with no place to park 2 cars and parking for guest. It takes at least 2 incomes to support a home in Plainfield and not everyone is going to take a train to NYC to their job. Why does the Mayor want Plainfield to turn into Newark or Elizabeth ? We do not need a city with more low income housing,and that is what it is going to turn into.
ReplyDeleteSo so very tired of the Elizabeth and Newark references. They are different cities with their own unique circumstances, city council and mayor. And just so you are aware, Apartments DOES not equal Elizabeth or Newark.
DeleteAlso - developers wanting to make money isn't news and it isn't wrong. However, like so many others that comment on the blogs you make knee jerk comments without asking some questions or doing some listening - which means that you don't want to learn. The question you might want to ask is - "is this developer going to keep this property in his/her portfolio for a while and be an owner operator or are they going to develop and flip?" - if you took the time to ask such a question you would know that the developer interested in the South Avenue property typically builds and manages his properties. So that would make your first sentence a little less of an issue.
I am probably wasting my breath passing this along as you are really just interested in justifying your own "theory" versus having an honest dialogue.
Why do developers always want to cheat Tennants out of parking spaces? We need 2 spaces per unit and one for company I do not want my friends to have to walk 2 blocks to visit me especially in the dark it is just not safe. The Teppers and Monarch are both a sample of how developers left this city with a mess. The Park Madison developers also lied to Plainfied about parking.
DeleteRob's analysis of Jersey City's development is accurate but Plainfield is no Jersey City. JCs proximity to NewYork provides plenty of well healed professionals that promote the kind of high density development that took place there. Plainfield's development challenges are quality of life based, particularly downtown Plainfield. The current strategy of simply increasing population density via building more apartment units is insufficient if we fail to attract the demographic of the (more affluent empty-nestors) needed for sustained growth. Moreover true transformation is impossible for the city without addressing the myriad of issues that plague downtown Plainfield and creating an environment that attracts investment from upscale vendors of goods and services. More apartment buildings WILL increase economic activity but it won't TRANSFORM Plainfield. True Economic Development would attract or develope a more educated workforce, focus on intelligent capital infrastructure investment and enforce high quality of life standards.
ReplyDeleteThe following link is how we can get there:
http://youtu.be/A0clAuZ2bdU
Interesting video and a great idea. Which is one reason everyone should support the idea of having grant writers on staff in city hall - something that has been challenged many times over the years by the city council.
DeleteI would add that this video is just one spoke in the economic development wheel for Portland. it isn't their only approach. Plainfield has has to push economic development from multiple angles - the south avenue property is just one of many. Also, you need to consider the fact that development is typically was resolves problems in areas (like those in downtown Plainfield) - its a standard chicken and egg question and in reality they have to be addressed at the same time and all efforts support each other.
I would agree with your idea of a multi-faceted approach. I think a major issue with Plainfield's development efforts is that they are fragmented. Based on its history, Plainfield's develpment shouldn't be driven by politicians or developers. The stakeholders and members of the community should be the most influential component of the process. I am not anti politician nor developer but their interests typically don't align with the long-term interest of vulnerable communities like Plainfield.
DeleteWell said Tony.
DeleteYou have to start somewhere. Crime goes down when quality of life starts improving. We may not have a huge influx of more affluent renters all at once, but there's always the pioneers who are willing to take chances, much like they've done in Williamsburg, Red Hook and now Bushwick, Bed-Stuy and Crown Heights.
ReplyDeleteWhat about all the development that's going on in Somerville, Cranford, Westfield, Garwood -- not so near the city, yet prospering and moving forward.
New renters bring new ideas, new interests and possibility for new businesses and community involvement. Why not?
Garwood is a wonderful example. I go there to hear jazz almost every week. The bars and restaurants are lovely, the atmosphere is safe and congenial, I think Plainfield has the ability and certainly the talent, why not use our diversity for a good purpose. I go to Montclair for Flamenco and tapas. I go to summit for Tango. Why not use our abandoned buildings for artist lofts...charge them a minimal rate me team up with the ducret school......arts make a difference, and we can do these positive things instead of what we usually end up with, hair and nail salons and dollar stores. We in Plainfield, all of us, deserve better,
DeleteBecause it would require an educated council who cares about Plainfield. Of which we have neither.
DeletePlainfield will change when people become smart enough to make it change. It starts with a strong mayor and and educated council. Not one that abstains or fails to show for votes or says she want told. You are the council. Get on board or get out of the way. Newport had many of the same problems that Plainfield has. That area was where the hookers and drug dealers peddled their wares. Sound familiar? It is now the most successful real estate development of its kind. Worth BILLIONS of dollars and millions of tax dollars and it started from nothing. The South Ave project and all the others before it, except for the Monarch, (feel sorry for the ones that actually drank the cool aid and bought one), are what is going to bring about change to Plainfield and its shady past. You have good housing, it brings good people, that brings good shops. And not just dollar stores and nail salons. But people like "dah" who, while being here for 27 years, may not be contributing to the community outside of paying taxes and is fed up with the status quo, cant see the future because of the past. It will happen, but not without the PILOTS. They are not getting out of paying taxes, they are paying a reduced rate that goes to the City, not everyone else.
ReplyDeleteJeff, I have held my breath for 27 years waiting for the big change to happen, I had complete faith in the town and all of its potential. You have no idea, and no right to say what I have or have not done within the community. I thought, like you, we had a future, a great vibrant future, but alas, how long does it take? I am not living in the past, far from it, but the past is a good indicator of the future unless there is a drastic change. And whether you like to hear it or not, it has not gotten better in the years I've lived here, and that is not the past, it is the present which we, like it or not, live in. But don't prejudge what I do or don't do. That is problem with sites. The constant attacks, the jumping to conclusions, it has made me very reluctant to ever say a word. Civil discourse is shouting people down and coming to conclusions that may not be so,
ReplyDelete