The largest redevelopment project in the history of Newark’s low-rise Ironbound neighborhood may have hit a snag in court, as a tenant-led group is claiming that the approval of the application violated state regulations.
On June 5, a lawsuit was filed in Essex County Superior Court by Newark-based New Jersey Appleseed Public Interest Law Center, a non-profit public interest law center. The case names the Newark Central Planning Board as defendant along with Iberia II Realty Urban Renewal LLC, the entity behind a four-tower, 1,408-unit development at 450 Market Street.
The plaintiffs in the case include three Newark residents and Homes For All Newark (HFAN), who describe themselves as “grassroots, tenant-led 501(c)(3) corporation organized to advance housing justice.” The group’s lawsuit highlights various alleged issues with the planning board’s approval of the project, which had been subject to considerable controversy when it was approved earlier this year.
The group says their issues with the plan go back to last September, when a 6th amendment was enacted to Newark’s Riverfront Redevelopment Plan. The changes included the parcels for the Iberia project in the plan for the first time ever, but the lawsuit claims “the City of Newark did not engage the Plaintiffs or the greater Ironbound community prior to adopting the 6th Amendment.”
The lawsuit claims that even Newark officials were aware of the issue, as a report from October last year from the city’s Equitable Growth Advisory Commission wrote that “the ordinance, particularly the Iberia upzoning, did violate equitable development in process and substance and will likely have deleterious effects.”
Besides the changes in the zoning being problematic, members of HFAN claim in the suit that “key documents, reports and drawings on which Iberia II relied were not available for public view until February 26,” or five days before the planning board hearing. Statute N.J.S.A. 40:55D-10(b) dictates that applications must be made public for 10 days in advance of being heard by local boards.
The lawsuit additionally claims that during a later March 5 virtual hearing on the application, HFAN was “not permitted to cross-examine any of Iberia II’s professionals who testified” during the meeting. They allege that “neither the Board’s Counsel nor any of its members inquired whether anyone who was present desired to cross-examine the three witnesses.”
The case says that officials also erred when approving the four-tower application by granting six “waivers” from current zoning. HFAN claims that “the Riverfront Redevelopment Plan does not authorize the Central Planning Board to grant deviations, exemptions or waivers,” but instead authorizes them to award variances.
The Iberia application did not list any variances on any of the Central Planning Board agendas where it appeared, nor did the approval resolution include any mention of them. Therefore, HFAN argues that “the decision of the Planning Board to approve the site plan as if it were an ‘as-of-right’ plan with waivers was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and in violation of the law.”
The lawsuit seeks to have the approvals voided and the application denied on procedural grounds, with specific deficiencies listed as failure to give notice of specific variances, failure to make key documents available on a timely basis, and failure to permit cross-examination.
A court date has not been set to hear arguments in the case, but the litigation could certainly lead to delays on the ambitious project. If constructed, the 30-story portions of the development would be the tallest structures in Newark’s entire East Ward.
