The Jersey City Independent"

First came the Journal Square Redevelopment Plan, then the Journal Square Core Redevelopment Plan. And now, the Journal Square 2060 Redevelopment Plan.

On Friday, the city’s planning division made public the latest of its long-range development blueprints for Journal Square and its surrounding area. The Journal Square 2060 Redevelopment Plan, which covers a little less ground than the original Journal Square Redevelopment Plan (211 acres as compared to 244), is the result of a long year-plus the city has spent reworking the plan since the original was tabled by the City Council.

When the initial proposal was revealed, there was quite a bit of consternation from local residents about how the vision would destroy the character of their neighborhoods. The introduction to the latest draft, which was developed in consultation with a number of neighborhood groups, takes that criticism head on.

“Journal Square and its surrounding neighborhoods are not a blank slate,” it reads. “Building types range from detached two-family homes with generous front yards, to 4 to 6 story apartment buildings, office buildings, and commercial uses. This variety of uses and building types are all interwoven at a fine scale. Some streets are quiet and narrow, while others have intensive retail uses. This diversity need not inhibit the city from drafting new development guidelines.”

The city planners argue that by tweaking the original plan, they’ve heeded the residents’ calls for caution and context.

“This redevelopment plan balances the need for new development at higher densities with the existing context of diverse and varied neighborhoods,” it reads.

The cornerstone of the latest offering is once again a call for higher-density development in the core of the Journal Square area — a zone bordered by JFK Boulevard and Sip, Summit and Pavonia Avenues. The concept driving the density is transit-oriented development, today’s prevailing planning ideology, which puts the most people, and the most amenities, closest to the public transportation hubs like Journal Square.

The development guidelines in this zone call for a minimum height of 65 feet — about six stories — and specifically looks for “mid and high-rise residential” development, with no living or office spaces allowed on the first floors of any new building.

In the other zones slated for development, the plan calls for height minimums and maximums based on lot size, with minimums as low as 22 feet — about two stories — and as high as 265 feet, or about 25 stories, depending on which zone the property falls in.

The proposed zoning for traditionally low-rise residential blocks calls for for a cap at 64 feet, or about six stories, but allows a density bonus for corner lots, to encourage larger buildings at street corners. Under the plan, the maximum height a corner development could rise is 130 feet, or about 12 stories. That designation is for 16 specific corner lots only.

New to this proposal is the idea of building a deck over the PATH tracks from Journal Square down to Baldwin Avenue to help increase open space in the area. The planners say they want to “incorporat[e] public open space to create landscaped pedestrian plazas that form a continuous link from the Journal Square PATH station to the surrounding neighborhoods from Baldwin Avenue to Garrison Avenue.”

What’s missing from this plan, so far at least, are some of the controversial financial instruments — RADs and DIBs — that were in last year’s proposal.

As originally revealed, the DIB — or District Improvement Bonus Fund — would have allowed developers to build beyond the density levels laid out in the plan if they pay into the Journal Square District Improvement Fund. The RAD — or Revenue Allocation District — known in other parts of the country as Tax Increment Financing (TIF), dedicates a certain amount of future increased tax revenues in a redevelopment district to finance the debt issued to pay for the project. Both were criticized by members of the public on the first go-round, and both are so far absent from the latest proposal.

The planning division intends to hold public hearings on the new plan, and eventually it would come to the City Council for a vote.

You can read the full 2060 plan here, and last year’s tabled plan here.