Rutgers-Newark's Expansion Proposal Meets Opposition

Some time ago back in 2002, the Rutgers-Newark administration outlined a proposal that would transform much of the James Street Historic District in order to facilitate a 24/7 "urban village" in University Heights. The proposal includes ideas like dividing the area west of Washington Park, between Lackawanna Avenue and Bleeker Street, into eight development areas complete with retail, restaurant, and residence buildings. But one of the ideas - namely, the one suggesting that the Rutgers-owned lot on Essex Street be made into a mixed-use facility with street-level retail stores, parking, and market rate housing - has fallen under intense scrutiny from the Historic James Street Commons Neighborhood Association.

In a July 5 letter to RU-N Provost Steven Diner, HJSCNA president John Samon wrote that "we appreciate an honest discourse on the status of your parking deck plan, which you have apparently been talking about to everyone, but not to your neighbors who will be directly affected by it."

It would seem that if the idea for the Essex Street lot was green-lighted, the pollution and noise from the resulting increase in motorists and traffic in the area would give the HJSCNA cause for concern.

"It is almost a planning truism that, if you plan for cars and traffic, you will get cars and traffic," said long-time Newark residents and HJSCNA members Anne Marbry and Zemin Zhang in another letter to Diner.

In addition to being concerned for the possible impact of the Essex Street lot's impact on the community, the HJSCNA has stressed its belief that new parking lots are unnecessary.

"As we pointed out, and as Rutgers' own parking director confirmed and reported by your paper on August 13, Rutgers does not currently have a parking shortage. To devote millions of dollars and valuable land assets for a parking structure is not only irresponsible, but counterproductive, as study after study have indicated" (sic), said Zhang to the Targum.

However, Diner - while insisting that their building ideas are just that: ideas - begs to differ.

"Traffic in downtown Newark, including the campus, is heavy. This is the case in every downtown of every major city in the country," he told the Targum, "for this reason, we have had an aggressive program to promote the use of mass transit by our students and staff. Rutgers-Newark has roughly 6.7 students for every parking space. NJIT has roughly 3 students for every parking space, [and] Rutgers-New Brunswick has 1.5 students for every space." Diner has summarily rejected a request from the HJSCNA to dramatically increase student and staff parking fees so as to further encourage the use of mass transit.

The Provost's statement should come as no surprise, as it is common to see student drivers waiting in lines, or driving around University Avenue, looking for parking space. In fact, many students can be heard groaning that Rutgers is synonymous with "bad parking."

But what is surprising is the recent fallout between the two groups. Up until recently, the University and the Association were in the habit of keeping open correspondences. It was when the HJSCNA handed out flyers at the University Square dedication, accusing RU-N of forging an "ethically questionable and fiscally irresponsible relationship with corporate powers to take advantage of the struggling city" that the relationship became tense. No known attempts have been made to cut the newfound tension.