JPhurst wrote:
If you're going to go through the work of preserving the neighborhood, go for the real deal. The Conservancy is happy to support such efforts.

brewster wrote:
Yup, that's it EXACTLY!!

Too many times governments large and small act like nothing exists beyond their borders as examples of other approaches to problems.

brewster wrote:
Be careful what you wish for, in Hamilton Park Historic District there's plenty of disgruntled homeowners who believe some of the rules or their application are hurting more than helping. How does $2000 per new window sound to you?

As I also live outside a historic district, I wish there was some designation of "historic lite". Not the anal restrictive museum preservation of the current districts, but a design guideline like many cities have. Things like: historic color bricks (no white, etc), no chain link fences, flat roofs in a row of flat roof town houses, no dish antennas visible from the street and some review of teardowns. I'm sure anyone can come up with more.

There should be a middle ground between the absolutes of the Districts and the "anything goes" outside them. If Santa Barbara can require red tile roofs as a matter of design code, JC can surely have some aesthetic codes too.

FWIW, I said as much to Mariano Vega years ago and his only response was "extend the historic district". So don't look to the Council for vision.

ThorsHammer wrote:
My hope is that the Beacon serves as sort of a fortress to keep all the mugs, thugs and pugs to the south of Montgomery as the folk north of the towers can live in peace and splendor.

bixlo wrote:
...it's quite a hike through some rough blocks at that.

1djcview wrote:
Quote:

Roaring20s wrote:
St. Peter's is working in a collaborative effort called Bergen Communities United (BCU for short). They're working with several neighbourhood groups (WB/LPNC, APNA, ESBA, etc.) MCDC, McGinley Square Partnership, Fairmont Housing and others to come up with a viable community plan for this section of the city.

Hey, neighbor. Any idea how I can contact these entities?

jcarlo33y wrote:
I hear St. Peter's Univ is looking to help with fixing up the areas around McGinley. Especially the Armory, McGinley Square (adding a small island park), and Bergen Ave.

harsimus wrote:

I think you've succumbed to wishful thinking. Change is coming to that area but it will only affect the Med Center campus. The Beacon will be, probably for decades, an upper-middle class enclave surrounded by projects. They will be as much a part of the JC community as those who live in Port Liberte. They will drive and not walk. They will take shuttles to and from the PATH. And they most definitely will not mingle with the surrounding neighborhood. They will have their own retail amenities. I wonder how long it will be before it becomes a gated community?

The idea of "buying out" people who live in rent-subsidized government housing sounds like a rumor that would be started at the Metrovest marketing department. Don't believe it for a second.

Don't get me wrong. I think its a good project and it saves buildings that are worthy of being saved. I just don't believe that The Beacon will be a catalyst to bring change to that neighborhood.

glx wrote:

I think it's perfectly fair to have a discussion about the area around it. I find it odd that 70 people had no problem with paying over half a million dollars in "one week" to live next to the projects.

It's barely (20 minutes) within walking distance to the PATH and it's certainly not an area that I'd want to walk around at night (and I'm a big dude).

I'd like to buy around JC, but can't really justify taking a gamble of an area around projects that don't look like they're closing any time soon is going to magically reform itself. Even if you get rid of the multi-story projects there's still single-unit projects 2 blocks away.

jc_insomniac wrote:
... But what does it actually cover? I've no clue.

homeowner wrote:
...This type of behavior is so common, so accepted, so prevalent...that they dont even consider it inappropriate or unethical. Therefore, why wouldn't they talk about it openly in the local paper? It would never occur to them that there is anything wrong here...
...Listen, Ive been there when groups have tried to sway the city council. They come with their signs and crowds. The 111 artist packed the place. And, sadly, where are they now? If you want to be heard the numbers have to be great and the noise has to be loud. Forget your 'appropriateness' at the door. Yell. Chant. Clap. Get Mad. Really really mad...

"When he asked me, I said that I would definitely think about it, but there were certain conditions that we had to work out beforehand," said Richardson. One of those conditions was that Richardson's son-in-law, an employee of the city's Division of Commerce would be considered for the position of director when former director Lenny Grenier stepped down on Jan. 31. But the position ended up going to another person.

"We met, and he asked me if I would run with him," she said. "I agreed, but I wanted to make sure that the young people who worked on my campaign would be offered some kind of employment since they worked for no money." Flood said the employment would either be on a city or county administrative level.