JERSEY CITY | Projects and Construction thread - Page 53

citybooster · #**1041** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 3:59 PM**

I love the big increase in mid rise developments, just wish there were affordable components. Almost NO developments have any affordable component other than upcoming Bayfront. 25% affordable apartments, mixed economic neighborhoods are needed, especially for bigger projects... don't segregate affordable housing projects in poor neighborhoods... that's a recipe for community failure.

That said, I really love this. The Journal Square area is going to be a truly bustling community in ten years or so. I just want to make it work for ALL residents...not displace people who won't be able to keep up with rents or home values.

bossabreezes · #**1042** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 4:04 PM**

^^That neighborhood between The Village and Journal Square (not sure what it's called..could it be considered part of Hilltop?) is really booming.

The prior building stock is shockingly bad in that area, extremely disfigured and badly renovated 60 years ago, but it seems that little by little the irrelevant structures are giving way to quality buildings, like the project posted above.

I find this neighborhood's success interesting (and great) because it's not exactly close to a PATH station. Not extremely far from Journal Square, but it seems like this part of the area is actually redeveloping faster than the immediate Journal Square station area.

C. · #**1043** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 5:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by citybooster

I love the big increase in mid rise developments, just wish there were affordable components. Almost NO developments have any affordable component other than upcoming Bayfront. 25% affordable apartments, mixed economic neighborhoods are needed, especially for bigger projects... don't segregate affordable housing projects in poor neighborhoods... that's a recipe for community failure.

That said, I really love this. The Journal Square area is going to be a truly bustling community in ten years or so. I just want to make it work for ALL residents...not displace people who won't be able to keep up with rents or home values.

In nearly all instances, the only reason why a developer provides affordable housing is when required to do so by zoning or as a condition of government funding. The reason why we don't see more affordable units being built in Journal Square is because the zoning code and redevelopment plans don't require it.

Personally, I would rather see greater use of a tenant-based voucher system, using a family's income, so they can afford market rate units. It's much less of an administrative burden for all involved and governments have an added incentive to ensure there is an adequate supply of affordable market rate housing.

C. · #**1044** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 5:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

^^That neighborhood between The Village and Journal Square (not sure what it's called..could it be considered part of Hilltop?) is really booming.

The prior building stock is shockingly bad in that area, extremely disfigured and badly renovated 60 years ago, but it seems that little by little the irrelevant structures are giving way to quality buildings, like the project posted above.

I find this neighborhood's success interesting (and great) because it's not exactly close to a PATH station. Not extremely far from Journal Square, but it seems like this part of the area is actually redeveloping faster than the immediate Journal Square station area.

I use to live a stone's throw away from this development and I agree - the Journal Square area is a big success story! The surrounding housing stock is in really bad shape. The area has seen huge quality of life improvements over the years due to all the redevelopment. It's attracting new retail opportunities and the area just generally feels safer (a la Jane Jacobs' eyes on the street).

It's been a year or two now since i left Jersey City, but I'm looking forward to going back to the old neighborhood to check out all the changes.

C. · #**1045** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 11:02 PM**

Six floor mixed-use building coming to 174 MLK Drive. There will be a total of 50 units, half of which are affordable.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/17...16!4d-74.08491

That corner really could use the development.

C. · #**1046** Posted **Feb 19, 2021, 11:09 PM**

I don't know if these are already posted or known but here there are:

From GRO Architects: http://www.groarc.com/

100 Tuers

78 Storms

253 Academy

Oron Zchut · #**1047** Posted **Feb 20, 2021, 1:10 AM**

That corner with 253 Academy, 100 Tuers (not quite the corner but close) and 250 Academy St (below via Jerseydigs) is going to be a little GRO area - all 3 projects by them, and 190 Academy is only a block away as well.

There's a block downtown that's pretty much all Fogarty Finger - Art House, Oakman, Dvora 175 and 144 1st St.

Just random observations. Hopefully all the buildings end up varied enough so they don't look like one copy paste job

citybooster · #**1048** Posted **Feb 20, 2021, 3:29 AM**

Love all the different kinds of development, from the microapartments to the small and mid rises and the big boys as well. Yeah, basically to me it's just as important to have as much affordable options as possible for the existing community, and any way to make it easier and less bureaucratic is good. Let the boom in Jersey City development be a positive for all communities, for all socio-economic groups.

C. · #**1049** Posted **Mar 5, 2021, 4:00 PM**

C. · #**1050** Posted **Mar 7, 2021, 10:18 PM**

Here is the deal on Urby @ 168 Sip

Quote:

Jersey City’s third Urby project might not be coming to fruition after all.

The Jersey City Redevelopment Agency published an informational item last month stating that Ironstate Development, LLC “advised the agency that it has elected not to pursue the proposed project” around 168 Sip Avenue by Tonnele Avenue.

A February 2 letter from David Barry of Ironstate Development, LLC sought to terminate the firm’s status as the conditional redeveloper of the premises.

https://jerseydigs.com/developer-cho...n-jersey-city/

Oron Zchut · #**1051** Posted **Mar 8, 2021, 5:33 AM**

C - 345 Baldwin isn't currently under construction, although supposedly it will be soon. Currently the site is empty.

144 1st St and 100 Colden St are in the same situation currently - no movement, but some equipment on site. In 144 1st St case, there's an excavator (that hasn't moved in a while), while 100 Colden seems to have a small excavator and some piles. Neither has had any activity in some time, so I don't know what you want to classify them as.

I can't tell exactly but I think you're missing a few of the Homestead Ave buildings. There should be 6, 1 under construction and 5 more, plus a separate building proposed for a nearby site (11-29 Cottage St, which I see you have):

28 Cottage St (I'm not sure why this is listed at 27, it seems to be 20-21 floors)
32-38 Cottage St (27s)
35 Cottage St (27s)
28-32 Van Reipen Ave (27s)
33-35 Van Reipen Ave (27s )
29 Van Reipen Ave (27s)

I can't say for sure, but it appears the Bates Street Redevelopment is dead in its larger form. 100 Colden is (somewhat) moving forward, plus there are other smaller buildings now proposed and approved for other sites that were supposed to be part of that plan, including one from Manhattan Building Co themselves. (You also have Bates Street in the proposed section for some reason, near the bottom).

I haven't seen anything official to signal that 688 Montgomery or the San Remo are "officially" dead other than the dearth of news (and the exclusion of San Remo from any of Mack Cali's future plans) so I'm not sure what differentiates them from "stalled".

Speaking of stalled, I wonder what the status of 619 Marin Blvd is.

Frankly I don't see a lot of larger buildings starting in the next year or so. The medium ones still seem to be moving though.

C. · #**1052** Posted **Mar 11, 2021, 5:51 PM**

C. · #**1053** Posted **Mar 11, 2021, 5:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oron Zchut

C - 345 Baldwin isn't currently under construction, although supposedly it will be soon. Currently the site is empty.

144 1st St and 100 Colden St are in the same situation currently - no movement, but some equipment on site. In 144 1st St case, there's an excavator (that hasn't moved in a while), while 100 Colden seems to have a small excavator and some piles. Neither has had any activity in some time, so I don't know what you want to classify them as.

I can't tell exactly but I think you're missing a few of the Homestead Ave buildings. There should be 6, 1 under construction and 5 more, plus a separate building proposed for a nearby site (11-29 Cottage St, which I see you have):

28 Cottage St (I'm not sure why this is listed at 27, it seems to be 20-21 floors)
32-38 Cottage St (27s)
35 Cottage St (27s)
28-32 Van Reipen Ave (27s)
33-35 Van Reipen Ave (27s )
29 Van Reipen Ave (27s)

I can't say for sure, but it appears the Bates Street Redevelopment is dead in its larger form. 100 Colden is (somewhat) moving forward, plus there are other smaller buildings now proposed and approved for other sites that were supposed to be part of that plan, including one from Manhattan Building Co themselves. (You also have Bates Street in the proposed section for some reason, near the bottom).

I haven't seen anything official to signal that 688 Montgomery or the San Remo are "officially" dead other than the dearth of news (and the exclusion of San Remo from any of Mack Cali's future plans) so I'm not sure what differentiates them from "stalled".

Speaking of stalled, I wonder what the status of 619 Marin Blvd is.

Frankly I don't see a lot of larger buildings starting in the next year or so. The medium ones still seem to be moving though.

Thanks - yes, there is no real line between stalled and dead. Maybe if we see something in the media that the project is dead or by consensus of the forum after an extended period of time elapsing with no news or news contrary to the development proposal. (building a burger king instead of a 50 storey tower)

C. · #**1054** Posted **Apr 14, 2021, 3:17 PM**

It's a beauty!

2958 JFK or the Pep Boys lot in Journal Sq.

C. · #**1055** Posted **Apr 14, 2021, 3:31 PM**

Boom

The Cove
A joint venture between Argent Ventures and the Canadian-based H&H Real Estate Investments Trust

https://www.constructionequipmentgui...sey-city/51867

$3 billion
18 acres
1.4 million of lab space (Holy Moly!!)
2840 residential units (Wow!!)

This is the biggest development so far this year!!

C. · #**1056** Posted **Apr 14, 2021, 6:29 PM**

So the city has posted new development maps located here:

https://data.jerseycitynj.gov/explor...1/information/

What stood out to me is the city has done it's part in creating the redevelopment plans to allow for the creation of housing and more vibrant communities. There is literally tens of thousands of units that are fully entitled and ready to build. What's missing is the actual construction.

No doubt a lot of firms are cautious building now due to COVID-19 and the related spike in vacancy rates. But when things start returning to normal, we should start seeing one of the biggest construction booms this city has ever seen.

The amount these new rentals are going for are crazy. Journal Squared was something like $2,200 a month for a 600sqft one bedroom on the bottom floors. Even if rents fell by 20%, a developer is still got to be making major profit, right?!? So get to building!

bossabreezes · #**1057** Posted **Apr 14, 2021, 9:14 PM**

23,000 units downtown either under construction, approved or planned.....that's absolutely insane.

chris08876 · #**1058** Posted **Apr 14, 2021, 9:33 PM**

C. · #**1059** Posted **Apr 15, 2021, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

23,000 units downtown either under construction, approved or planned.....that's absolutely insane.

And that's just downtown!!

Downtown

22,835 units
3,574,281‬ sqft of office
835,597‬ sqft of retail

Journal Square
15,913‬ units
426,458‬ sqft of office
517,202‬ sqft of retail

Too lazy to do Bergen-Lafayette and Westside but the numbers are also very impressive!

C. · #**1060** Posted **Apr 21, 2021, 7:19 PM**

A few more details about the cove

Quote:

Upon completion, the mixed-use campus will encompass more than 13 acres, comprising 1.4 million square feet of lab/tech office space and 1.6 million square feet of residences, with ample room for parking.

The Cove JC is being billed as a global hub for life science, tech and medicine offering an unrivalled ecosystem for discovery that will become the premier flagship destination for academic and commercial life science, tech and medical entities in New Jersey and the greater New York City area.

The Cove also will include a waterfront park that brings the outdoors in and the indoors out — for tenants, residents and the Jersey City community, according to Clay McPhail, vice president of acquisitions and asset management at Argent Ventures.

Groundbreaking is slated for 2022 and the campus will be developed in multiple phases.

The first phase encompasses two academic/laboratory/teaching facilities and a commercial life science building totaling up to 833,899 square feet of space.

The commercial building will include laboratory and office space, as well as street-level retail. The plan also calls for a publicly accessible 3.5-acre waterfront park linked to the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway.

The project’s second phase calls for two commercial laboratory/office buildings totaling 596,000 square feet just north and east of Phase I. Residential construction will be a multiphase development as well.

Full article can be found here - I copied the highlights but a lot of other details is contained within the article: https://www.roi-nj.com/2021/04/21/re...-life-science/

$3 billion development
18 acres (13 acres of development, 3.5 acres of parkland and 1.5 acres of rounding errors? haha)
1.4 million sqft of of science lab/office space
1.6 million sqft of residential for 2840 residential units
ample parking (the one bad thing about this plan - traffic is gonna be a b as a result - need to encourage greater use of the light rail stop if going to be building that kind of density. By providing ample parking, they're just encouraging people to drive, which will further flood already congested streets with more cars.)

A FAR density of 5.3, excluding the parkland or 3.8 if considering the whole 18 acres.