Upper Grand observations
08
August
8/8/2008:
As you might already know, there have been quite a few entries regarding URSA/Tarragon’s Upper Grand residential buildings on Hoboken411 this week. Mainly because I was bringing the real estate entries in the directory as current as I can possibly make it.
In the process, I observed a few things worth mentioning on their own.
Exaggerated and inaccurate graphics

The main Upper Grand website has this fancy graphic supposedly detailing where the various projects are located. As you can see in the image below, it’s not an accurate representation of Hoboken OR where the buildings are situated.
By looking at it, you might be led to believe that it’s SO CLOSE to being almost waterfront living! Oh, but they conveniently FORGOT to include 10 north/south streets! Are they psychic, and eventually Hoboken will be so flooded that Clinton Street will be the “new Washington Street?”
Future intentions and plans
I extrapolated the rendering below from the “e-brochure” for the 1000 Jefferson project.
This image includes many “proposed” or “potential” areas of development that haven’t even been approved or started yet. Such as:
- This great baseball field
- These great tennis courts
- This green area north of Hoboken on the Weehawken side
- The community pool!
- A building in the currently empty lot on 12th and Clinton Streets
- A development on 11th and Grand that was at one point subject to eminent domain (and never approved)
Do they know something we don’t? Have backroom deals already been made?
Hoboken, Real Estate, Upper Grand, URSA Tarragon









21. Friedupright | August 9th, 2008 at 6:51 am
hotchili wrote:
Can’t really agree witht the comment “should bring retail.” A coffee shop, dry cleaner, liquor store, nail salon and a realor - probably. Most of these developers don’t provide proper space for retail, and certainly no incentive, unless it is east of Washington. The bottom floor of most buildings are parking lots. “Lovely” to look at but nothing to buy. Hoboken needs to have a plan to create a “retail zone” in this area if you are actually going to have a reason to go back there and shop. If you put in an open-air market and 20-30 “affordable” retail spaces then you can possibly create an area where people might want to go but no one is going to go back there for a store here and a store there especially if they can find an identical store near their address. Imagine a year around farmer’s market. I would then think about going back there to buy fresh produce. Hey, if they can do it in NYC, we can do it here. Retail breeds retail, like Washington Street. There is a reason everyone who opens a business wants to be on Washington Street. That’s where the retail is. Fred Bado, director of Community Development, unfortunately, doesn’t really have a plan. It’s about development, development and more development but not about creating an area where people will actually want to live and open thriving businesses. You almost have to look at that area as another town and envision all of the things that make a person want to live in that town.
22. homeworld | August 11th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Katie_Scarlett wrote:
I paid $340/sf for ‘midtown.’
23. Tiger | August 11th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Price per Sq ft is very misleading in Hoboken. I’ve shopped for a condo for over 6 months and I’ve seen so many variations in $ / sq ft. Generally, the bigger the condo the lower the $ / sq ft. 1 Bedrooms seem to be the most expensive when it comes to that, and of course the building and condition of the unit makes all the difference.
24. hoboken hammer | August 11th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Actually I believe $530/sq ft is the average for the 2nd quarter ‘08 in Hoboken. You could search on the net for real estate statistics for Hoboken/Hudson county. As that is an average that is across 1beds, 2beds, etc… Maxwell Place and west side all in same bucket. So that being said - it pretty much depends on the building/area. I read that 1bedrooms on average dropped 9% from last year while 2beds prices were up like 9%. So its all relative.
There’s a recent article in the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/realestate/22njzo.html