Jersey City Planning Board votes 6–0 to recommend Scatter Site Area 6 as a condemnation redevelopment zone

JERSEY CITY, N.J. — The Jersey City Planning Board on Tuesday night, Sept. 29, 2026, voted 6–0 to send City Council a favorable recommendation that Scatter Site Study Area 6 be determined an area in need of redevelopment — and, more specifically, a condemnation redevelopment area — under the study authorized by Resolution 26-314.

The case is P2026-0117 (official agenda: Wards B, C, D and F), carried from the Sept. 8 regular meeting. Formal action was taken after staff presentation, public comment, and board counsel’s legal guidance on the record.

Video: Jersey City TV — Planning Board Meeting Sept. 29, 2026 · roll-call recommendation at ~1:51:18

What the board actually decided

Board counsel stressed on the record that the Planning Board does not itself designate the study area or decide condemnation. Its charge is to review the statutory criteria against the evidence and recommend yes or no to the governing body. City Council would decide whether to designate an area in need with condemnation authority.

Staff planner Joseph Pangilinan (agenda spelling; Principal Planner, Division of City Planning) presented the area-in-need study and preliminary investigative report. He told the board that earlier in May 2026, City Council authorized planning staff to determine whether seven vacant properties located across Jersey City in Scatter Site Study Area 6 qualify as an area in need of redevelopment and, more specifically, as a condemnation redevelopment area — “authorizing the municipality to use the power of eminent domain.”

Staff’s stated purpose, per the presentation: target vacant or blighted properties that create a blighting influence on surrounding communities, with the intent — if designated — to add the study-area properties to the Scatter Site Redevelopment Plan (also known as the vacant buildings redevelopment plan; last amended Sept. 25, 2024, per staff).

Staff recommendation on the record: determine the study area as an area in need of redevelopment and more specifically as a condemnation redevelopment area with authorization to utilize eminent domain, and add the included properties to the Scatter Site Redevelopment Plan.

Roll call (video)

Motion: favorable recommendation to City Council on P2026-0117 with the condition outlined in the staff report.

• Acting Vice Chair Patel — Aye
• Commissioner Conway — Aye
• Commissioner Stamato — Aye
• Commissioner Capers — Aye
• Commissioner Kaplan — Aye (noted the legal criteria appeared met and that these are not “new” properties / long history)
• Madam Chair Gangadin — Aye

Motion carries 6–0. Chair then called a short break (~7:45 return referenced on record).

Public pushback on the record (not a veto)

Property owners spoke in opposition during the public portion. Among them, Jimmy Guindi, identifying as owner of 358 Central Avenue (Block 2901, Lot 34), asked that his lot be removed from the study, saying he objected to a condemnation recommendation and describing ongoing demolition / redevelopment efforts after an engineer labeled the structure an imminent hazard. Other speakers, including a homeowner describing a mid-renovation project, asked the board not to sweep active work into a condemnation study.

Board counsel reminded commissioners they could recommend that Council omit a specific property — but that staff stood by the report. The adopted motion was a favorable recommendation with the staff-report condition, not a line-item removal announced on the roll call.

Counsel also told the board that designation is “the beginning of that process” and does not by itself mean an owner automatically loses the property.

What this is — and is not

Is: A Planning Board recommendation to Council under Res. 26-314 / P2026-0117, on video, 6–0.

Is not: A final Council designation; a filed declaration of taking; a guarantee every listed lot will be condemned; or approval of a specific redevelopment project on those lots.

Hudson TV will watch the City Council calendar for the designation vote and any floor amendments removing parcels.

—

Hudson TV asks: Should City Council keep all seven Scatter Site Area 6 lots in a condemnation-eligible designation — or remove properties where owners say they are already demolishing or renovating?

Share your take in the comments — and tell us which option you’d pick and why.

React: reply KEEP or REMOVE (or OTHER + your idea).