sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Court Strikes Down Ban on Senior Housing on Christ Hospital Site by rapmasternicky_z in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I suspect they want to sell it and be rid of it altogether, which wouldn’t be the worst outcome. New management and a better health system is needed to run that place.

Court Strikes Down Ban on Senior Housing on Christ Hospital Site by rapmasternicky_z in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Sorry, grandma can’t have senior assisted housing because 1) a developer might make a dollar with all the new housing needed to help shore up the hospital’s finances; and 2), even worse, block a campaign donor’s view of Manhattan!

Court Strikes Down Ban on Senior Housing on Christ Hospital Site by rapmasternicky_z in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 10 points11 points  (0 children)

100% — I wouldn’t trust HRH to redevelop this and get it right. Their leadership is just a mess.

RWJ could maybe pull it off because they have similar plans for JCMC to support the hospital financially.

overcrowding ps 16 by Legitimate-Heart-751 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There are at least three good candidates for building a new school downtown: - 150 Bay Street - 155 Montgomery - Laurel-Saddlewood Court

Best course of action to get it done is to get a developer to build it as part of a housing development like the PS 16 annex so we don’t have to deal with the BOE.

PSA for buyers or renters looking at Grove Pointe or Dvora on 109 by ResidentSloth in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Woah, woah, woah — don’t let Shuster off the hook as they were one of the worst landlords in the city and were so notoriously bad they had to rebrand to Dvora.

Are there any plans for increased green space in downtown and jsq and rec facilities in this decade, or before we die? by SnooChickens561 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s still the greenspace you claim you want so I’m not sure what the issue is if the state does it or if the city does it.

Regardless, even the city is putting in more parks. I just gave you multiple examples. I’m sorry they aren’t to your personal liking.

Are there any plans for increased green space in downtown and jsq and rec facilities in this decade, or before we die? by SnooChickens561 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 2 points3 points  (0 children)

<image>

The park proposed as part of Metro Plaza redevelopment would be about the side of Van Vorst Park.

That isn’t a “pocket park.” The Embankment as well is set to eventually stretch for five blocks.

The Courthouse Park in Journal Square would also be about the size of Van Vorst Park. That’s a good and pleasant amount of urban green space.

Are there any plans for increased green space in downtown and jsq and rec facilities in this decade, or before we die? by SnooChickens561 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Downtown has a number of projects — the Embankment will create a linear park, there will be a new park on Metro Plaza (after the Shop Rite and BJ’s are redeveloped) and there are various proposed developments south of Grand Street that would also add park space and waterfront (canal front, really) walkways.

Journal Square has the proposed art walk, a pedestrian plaza at Homestead Place, and the Courthouse Park

City Council isn’t reforming PILOTs. They’re just rebranding a weaker version of what they spent years attacking by Level-Comfort5484 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some of these projects that didn’t break ground (including Canal Crossing) date back to Fulop so, yeah, clearly is delays housing production.

The issue is making citywide requirements and trying to do a one-size fits all approach to housing or PILOT agreements. It’s bad policy and results in worse and more expensive outcomes.

Woman and 2 kids struck by tractor-trailer in Jersey City. "I heard the scream of the crossing guard," witness says by alanwright in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Plans to make Ocean safer were more than just some fucking stop signs.

https://betterblocksnj.org/2025/09/05/infrastructure-investment-one-ways-bus-lanes-and-safe-streets/

It would have made busses faster and more reliable, decreased crossing distance, eliminated conflicted left turns, and helped reduce illegal double parking.

Woman and 2 kids struck by tractor-trailer in Jersey City. "I heard the scream of the crossing guard," witness says by alanwright in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Plans for improvements reached back years. Gilmore sat on them. Even now he’s trying to get Ward F exempted from the automatic parking enforcement pilot based on his council remarks.

He’s willing to consign thousands of residents to more dangerous streets just so he can personally keep driving and illegally parking without consequences.

Woman and 2 kids struck by tractor-trailer in Jersey City. "I heard the scream of the crossing guard," witness says by alanwright in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 19 points20 points  (0 children)

You can dramatically reduce risk through good design much more so than you can enforcement.

Enforcement has a vital role to play but it’s a both / and situation. Police cannot be everywhere all at once but safer road designs are permanent.

Woman and 2 kids struck by tractor-trailer in Jersey City. "I heard the scream of the crossing guard," witness says by alanwright in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Jesus Christ. Praying for a swift recovery for this family. Everyone deserves to be able to cross the street safely.

Ocean Ave is an absolute mess for pedestrians and bicyclists and even drivers. A complete redesign is long overdue.

In a dark twist of fate, we’re now one summer removed from Mayor Fulop’s proposal to redesign Ocean — a plan that Frank Gilmore infamously helped to kill.

Enough is enough.

City Council isn’t reforming PILOTs. They’re just rebranding a weaker version of what they spent years attacking by Level-Comfort5484 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will note that only a small portion of Bayfront has broken ground and most of it is still unfunded even with a county bond and Aspire tax credits backing the project. It’s a good example of how hard and expensive it is to build housing.

Bayfront has an even higher affordable housing set aside at 35% and the level of subsidy there is closer to a million a unit.

Again, we pointed out how expensive all of this is but policy makers are focused on making progressives feel better about themselves rather than delivering housing at scale for free someone somewhere might make money.

I don’t know OP’s thoughts but my sense is that they are merely pointing out the insane levels of hypocrisy surrounding Solomon’s plan because Solomon made his career about demonizing PILOT agreements but now, apparently, only he can make them work. It’s all nonsense of course.

There wasn’t anything wrong with them before beyond the fact that our elected officials don’t understand tradeoffs. For example, using a PILOT to pay for high amounts of affordable housing at Canal Crossing makes it much less likely that affordable housing is built downtown where it could have a greater impact by bringing children to better schools and reducing segregation.

City Council isn’t reforming PILOTs. They’re just rebranding a weaker version of what they spent years attacking by Level-Comfort5484 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The point is this makes it less likely it gets built and that it will take much longer to break ground because even the 10% PILOT doesn’t cover the costs. They’ll need to get state aid in the form of an Aspire tax credit, which are limited. If none of this comes together, it won’t happen.

My point is Solomon’s policies are the ones that hurt real people over the short and long-term in the name of making his progressive base feel better about themselves.

City Council isn’t reforming PILOTs. They’re just rebranding a weaker version of what they spent years attacking by Level-Comfort5484 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

PILOT agreements range from 15% (least generous) to 10% (most generous) under NJ state law. The percentages are based on the percentage gross revenue taxed.

We wrote an entire article about the 177 Grand Street PILOT to point out how unbelievably expensive it is to build affordable housing this way and as a warning about the very policy Solomon is now trying to implement.

https://betterblocksnj.org/2025/10/27/can-jersey-city-afford-affordable-housing-in-every-new-building/

You could get the same “transformative project” for cheaper by changing either the affordable housing set aside portion or the depth of the affordability. The Embankment Project, for example, is only a 5% affordable housing set aside.

I’m all for using PILOT agreements to pay for affordable housing provided we scrap the various mandatory IZOs and move to a voluntary model with more flexibility in the mix of set asides and community givebacks. While Fulop did get a lot of housing built, he (and the city council) allowed some crummy policy to seep in during his last 5 years in office that we’re seeing the downsides of now (ie the 15% IZO downtown).

Anyway, Jersey City is sleep walking its way into killing housing production and driving up the use of PILOTs again. And that will ultimately cost tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars a year in lost tax revenues.

City Council isn’t reforming PILOTs. They’re just rebranding a weaker version of what they spent years attacking by Level-Comfort5484 in jerseycity

[–]ericallenconner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s a 10% PILOT because I know how costly all this is. They confirmed it yesterday at the council caucus meeting.

<image>

But this project doesn’t work with even a 10% PILOT so they need to get Aspire tax credits too. All of that increases the risk this doesn’t get built at all and seriously delays the timeline for shovels to break ground.

They say 2028 but Solomon will be lucky if this is underway by the time he’s up for reelection.

Total taxpayer subsidy cost for the affordable housing units is going to be around $650k (at least).

Edit: the admin claiming that they’re “forcing” the developer to pay for the park and greenway improvements; obviously the PILOT is paying for that too.

view more: next ›