the staff of the Ridgewood blog
In Hackensack, NJ, a proposal for a large apartment building at the corner of Anderson and Linden streets has been halted following significant community opposition. The city Planning Board recently denied an application for a six-story, 345-unit apartment building with retail space on the first floor at 123 Anderson Street.
Project Details and Revisions
The proposed development included 345 studio, one-, and two-bedroom apartments, along with 441 parking spaces (20 reserved for public use), retail space, and a variety of amenities such as a courtyard, business center, coworking space, music room, mindfulness room, speakeasy, fitness area, yoga and spin room, kids’ room, tasting kitchen, billiards room, and a rooftop deck.
In March, the City Council had amended a redevelopment plan for the 2.7-acre site, adding another 30 units to the mixed-use development. The amended plan also included 20 public parking spaces and required the developer to contribute 1.5% of the property’s value in development fees to the city’s affordable housing trust fund as part of Hackensack’s settlement with the Fair Share Housing Center.
Community Concerns
The project faced strong opposition from many residents who felt the building was too large and out of character with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Deborah Keeling-Geddis, a neighborhood resident and member of the Work Group, a Hackensack community organization, voiced her concerns:
“We are not against redevelopment of this property, but it has to make sense not only for the developer but for the community and the neighborhood this property encroaches upon,” she said. “We’ve asked that they come back with a different plan, downsizing the number of apartments, and creating a plaza of sorts. The sheer magnitude of this plan is not good for the neighborhood.”
Residents also expressed worries about increased traffic and a need for more parking in the area, particularly given the proximity to Hackensack Middle School and Fairmount Elementary School, where traffic is already an issue during school hours and when trains arrive.
Impact on Local Businesses
The proposed development would replace a Walgreens pharmacy, several other storefronts, two smaller buildings, and a parking lot across the street from the train station. Residents were particularly unhappy about the potential loss of the pharmacy, especially following the recent closure of Rite Aid on Essex Street.
Other Developments in the Area
Nearby, another six-story, 222-unit apartment building is under construction at the former site of the long-standing restaurant Rudy’s and the city’s former Building Department. Additionally, a smaller development is being proposed around the corner on Linden Street and Vanderbeck Place, which would replace several single and multi-family homes with a 35-unit multi-family residential development and parking garage. The planning board will review this application next month.
Community Response
Rev. Carolyn Davis, a member of the Work Group, highlighted the broader issue of development encroaching into residential neighborhoods:
“Now they are encroaching into neighborhoods,” she said. “This does nothing for the community. The parking and traffic here are already horrendous. When there are guests visiting this huge building they will be looking on my block.”
Davis also advocated for developers to include affordable housing units in their plans, rather than contributing to the city’s trust fund, to better serve the community’s needs.
Blanche “Candi” Stewart echoed these sentiments, stressing the importance of affordability:
“If we’re going to put buildings up, we should have required developers to put affordable housing in them so seniors and families are able to get apartments,” she said. “We’ve all lived here our entire lives. Our kids go to college and come back, and they can’t afford to live here.”
City Officials’ Perspective
At Monday’s council meeting, Deputy Mayor Kathy Canestrino, who also sits on the planning board and had voted in favor of the application, highlighted the financial benefits the development has brought to the city, enabling improvements to sewers, parks, and paving. She emphasized that development has been targeted to specific areas, primarily around train stations and downtown, rather than residential neighborhoods.
Next Steps
While the planning board’s decision was a victory for local residents, the future of the project remains uncertain. Matthew Gilson, an attorney representing the developer, declined to comment. City officials stated that it would be up to the developer to decide how to proceed from here, with Nick Bond, a city spokesman, adding, “At this time, it would be inappropriate to comment further.”
Follow the Ridgewood blog has a brand-new new X account, we tweet good sh$t
https://twitter.com/TRBNJNews
#news #follow #media #trending #viral #newsupdate #currentaffairs
#BergenCountyNews #NJBreakingNews #NJHeadlines #NJTopStories
Hackensack is a freight train of development driven by back-room tax breaks. All of the units are rentals.
They need low income housing!! Everything here starts at 2100 and up for these new places. And that’s for a Studio!!
Wow.
Even in the city of Hackensack they have more common sense (and backbone) than Ridgewood residents to stop out of control building.
Too bad we are too weak (or lazy) to do the same in Ridgewood.
They are even smart enough to include a 1.5% development fee as a contribution to the affordable housing trust.