Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
37 user(s) are online (26 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 37

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (bodhipooh)




Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#91
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

drifterx wrote:
What would the delay do? So the 'oppressed' downtowner can move to GV? GTFO. Time to face reality.


In practical terms, an additional delay would have achieved nothing more than give DTJC homeowners an opportunity to try and unload properties to which they no longer could, or wished to, afford the property taxes. In other words, all those people in denial about the reval, or who believed that the city administration would do something (anything!) to not let DTJC get slammed with the obvious, expected increase, would have been rewarded for their attitude/stance.

Time to rip the band-aid and deal with the pain once and for all.

Posted on: 5/27 19:37
Top


Re: Real Estate lawyer recommendation
#92
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

SRhia wrote:
Looking for good real estate lawyer recommendation - especially pertaining to deeded roof rights, and the right of other building owners to put compressors on roof (deeded to a different unit owner).

Thanks in advance.


You posted some time ago a similar thread in which you indicate you are the homeowner to whom the roof is deeded. If the roof is indeed deeded to you, and you do not wish to grant permission for the installation of A/C compressors, shouldn't that be the end of the story?

Personally, if I was in your situation, I definitely would not grant permission for the installation of compressors for anyone. Once you grant permission to someone, you have opened the proverbial floodgates to other neighbors making similar requests. And, notwithstanding any willingness to be accommodating, installing anything on the roof can invariably lead to complications down the road. Compressors vibrate, so if you are particularly sensitive to that sort of noise, you could be in for a very uncomfortable situation. Not to mention that all kinds of things can go wrong, including an outright malfunction that could require unit maintenance. Do you want those (potential) headaches in your hands?

Posted on: 5/27 19:28
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#93
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

thor800 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
The timing couldn't have been worse - most properties were reassessed at the height of the market


This argument shows a lack of understanding about the revaluation and property taxes. Whether it had been at the height of the market, or bottom, it doesn't matter. If the market had been lower, then the property tax rate would have been higher.

The city needed collect X amount of money.

X = (total value of market) * (tax rate)

If (total value of market) is lower, then (tax rate) has to go up, as X is constant in a revaluation.

The only thing that would make a difference is how different areas stack or compare against each other. The almost four year delay in the reval actually helped DTJC, as that period saw an accelerated increase in valuation in areas outside of DTJC, which translated into properties outside of DTJC getting relative higher levies than they would have 5 years ago.

In any case, the timing matters little. The reval was overdue, and DTJC was in for a HUGE increase regardless of when the reval had been completed. Those who claim the timing was terrible because it is a high market don't understand the issue clearly.



No I completely understand the market - DTJC assessed at the highest values ever with no regard for corresponding drop in market value after taxes double and no guidance moving forward.

Yes it was way overdue and definitely not fair for residents in other words to overpay for years, but also not fair to saddle downtown with absurdly high taxes with no clear plan to reassess more regularly in the future.


A couple of thoughts:
- if values are to drop because of a tax increase, wouldn't the same be true regardless of whether this is a high or low market?

- there IS guidance in place: a revaluation is legally mandated every 10 years. The citizenship should demand that is followed.

- Downtown is not being saddled with absurdly high taxes: they are being assessed the proper taxes, and they only seem high now because they were undertaxed for so long.

- agreed, there is no clear plan to reassess regularly, but there is a law that dictates that to be the case. Citizens can and should demand that future city administrations stick to the law.

- if DTJC loses value, whatever properties come on the market will likely be snapped up by other people. Local inventory is extremely low, although we are definitely seeing more properties being listed, presumably from homeowners who can't, or refuse to, pay the new taxes.

- one final thought: if a market correction takes place, areas outside of DTJC will suffer a much bigger impact. It is always that way. Areas like BeLa were experiencing good progress and gentrifying nicely when the market tanked in 2007/2008. It took over 7 years before it started to regain its footing, and valuation recovering to pre-recession levels. As such, DTJC will continue to retain its value vis-a-vis non-DTJC areas, so taxes wouldn't need to be adjusted.

Posted on: 5/23 16:56
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#94
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

thor800 wrote:
The timing couldn't have been worse - most properties were reassessed at the height of the market


This argument shows a lack of understanding about the revaluation and property taxes. Whether it had been at the height of the market, or bottom, it doesn't matter. If the market had been lower, then the property tax rate would have been higher.

The city needed collect X amount of money.

X = (total value of market) * (tax rate)

If (total value of market) is lower, then (tax rate) has to go up, as X is constant in a revaluation.

The only thing that would make a difference is how different areas stack or compare against each other. The almost four year delay in the reval actually helped DTJC, as that period saw an accelerated increase in valuation in areas outside of DTJC, which translated into properties outside of DTJC getting relative higher levies than they would have 5 years ago.

In any case, the timing matters little. The reval was overdue, and DTJC was in for a HUGE increase regardless of when the reval had been completed. Those who claim the timing was terrible because it is a high market don't understand the issue clearly.


Posted on: 5/23 5:26
Top


Re: JC Topless ban, sex toy restrictions may be history
#95
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Stringer wrote:

Council members uneasy about lifting topless ban on women

JERSEY CITY — An attempt to rewrite the city's 1980s-era obscenity law received a somewhat chilly reception by members of the City Council at its Monday caucus, with council members expressing specific concern over the plan to lift the ban on women appearing topless in public.

The measure, which deals specifically with sex toys, female breasts and body parts in intimate areas, led to an unusually uncomfortable and occasionally giggly conversation among council members. Ward D Councilman Michael Yun was unwilling to utter the word "breasts," referencing them as "those things" instead.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... omen_greeted_with_un.html



You would think we are living in a time warp from 100 years ago. Also, Boggiano reveals himself as being completely out of touch with these comments:

'... Rich Boggiano has said the new law would lead Jersey City to "become the Times Square of New Jersey."...'

'Boggiano said, "I was born and raised in New York City. I live here now. New York City went to hell."'

Has he actually been in NYC at all since the 90's??

Posted on: 5/23 5:18
Top


Re: Jersey City has big plans for 100 acres on West Side along Hackensack River
#96
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Quote:

neverleft wrote:
.
Jersey City pitches $180M plan to buy 100-acre riverfront site

Updated 5:29 PM; Posted 3:33 PM
By Terrence T. McDonald tmcdonald@jjournal.com

The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY — Jersey City is considering whether to buy the 100-acre Bayfront site on the Hackensack River waterfront, a potentially $180 million plan that Mayor Steve Fulop told council members would be an "aggressive" albeit expensive way to ensure a large amount of affordable housing on the city's west side.


http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... e.html#incart_river_index



"The city would act as the master developer, potentially divvying the land up among multiple developers."

#notoriety



What could possibly go wrong with the city acting as the master developer?

Serious question: isn't 105 MM for 100 acres a little too much? Or, is that the going rate for crap land located in the middle of nowhere? I truly don't have the slightest clue regarding valuation for this type of lot in such a location.

Posted on: 5/23 5:05
Top


Re: New Amazon HQ
#97
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

srs7191 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:

Actually.... my post was sarcastic in nature. I was hoping to get some of the left wing / progressive / communists on the site to respond? In typical fashion, they remain silent, because when one of their own (Bezos/WaPo) is caught in an issue wear facts challenge left wing agenda / dogma.


Ah, my bad, sarcasm doesn't travel well over text.


I was quite baffled by the post myself. The sarcasm may have been a little too cloaked. I missed it entirely.

The situation in Seattle and in Portland has gotten quite dire. Aggressive panhandling is quite common, drug addiction is rampant, and both cities have seemingly given up on a real solution to either problem. The previous mayor of Portland didn't even run for reelection. Both cities keep extending protections of the homeless population with policies and edicts that go against the best interests of businesses and other city residents. And, let's be clear, no one is arguing for either city to turn their back on the homeless population, just that it find better (and, effective) ways to address the issues.

Posted on: 5/17 10:21
Top


Re: New Amazon HQ
#98
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

srs7191 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Meanwhile back in Seattle....

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busines ... s-tax-20180515-story.html

I can't believe all the people that want to help Newark at the expense of Seattle... pretty obvious what is going on and its Jeff Bezos shirking his social responsibilities.


Jeff shirking his social responsibilities?

Seattle caused this chronic homeless situation with strict zoning laws and restrictions that stop anything other than luxury housing from being built (sounds familiar).

They created the problem, now they're trying to send the bill to others. Wish I could do that.


This. Plus, super liberal policies that encourage other young, homeless people to come live in Seattle among the same kind. My last trip to Seattle a year ago was a really sad one: the city is literally overrun with people drugged out of their minds and lots of homeless people who seem to have more rights and privileges than the average citizen. It is a sad state of affairs, and (understandably) the city residents have grown tired of their local government ineffectiveness.

The city refuses to be held accountable and instead is trying to milk their large companies for more money to pay for their own mess.

I know two couples that prior to moving to Seattle were serious liberals and now think of themselves as anything but that. The failure of liberal policies to protect the interests and rights of residents other than homeless people has caused a lot of resentment and discord. After three days visiting last summer, I doubt I’ll be going back anytime soon.

Posted on: 5/16 19:09
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
#99
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

landshark wrote:
2018 assessments are posted on the NJ website. Vacant land was missing from the previous lists. As I expected look low from the ones I checked downtown.

239 Montgomery: Assessed at 375k but the neighboring property the same size has a land assessment of 765k

63 Mercer: Sold in 2016 for 3mm but assessed at 774k

208 Columbus: Sold in 2015 for 1.45mm but assessed at 727k

131 Morgan: Sold in 2016 for 1.98mm but assessed at 775k


I've been saying for a while the land valuations were going to be a mess. Clearly they don't use comps for empty land and they use an ass-backwards subtractive system for developed land.

I had thought that since abatements are not on the land, just on the improvements, that we would see tax increases from abated properties. Solomon said no that's not the way it works. Funny, huh?


I hate to ever entertain, or partake in, conspiracy theories, but given the history of shenanigans related to this reval, and the powerful vested interests, one can’t help wonder if this botched implementation is perhaps a way to further delay the implementation of the reval results.

Too Machiavellian??

Or, it just doesn't make sense.

The reval is done. Property tax changes are already getting rolled out. They won't roll everything back because of issues with vacant lots.


You seem to miss the point: lots of improved lots are seeing wildly different valuations, even when located immediately next to each other or within the same block. The point that some are making, including myself, is that assigning completely different values to the built upon lots opens the door for a legal challenge that could potentially delay, or stop, implementation of the reval results.

It's too late to stop the reval. It's over.

Also, think about what you're proposing:

1) The city loses in court and has to do the reval.
2) They pay a company to do the reval
3) They secretly order Appraisal Systems to use a formula that is completely screwy with land values, but the final values generally get within 15% of comp values for developed properties
4) They hope that enough people notice the issue with vacant land that they sue the city not to adjust those vacant properties, but to force another reval (even though Appraisal Systems could just rerun the numbers with a new set of formulas)
5) This happens months after the city has already published a lot of new valuations AND taken the heat from downtown residents AND seen property values in other parts of JC go up when taxes there go down AND discussed doing a follow-up reval in ~2 years.

Ever heard of Ockham's Razor? ;)


Quote:
How can the valuation company, or the city, justify that which defies logic or reason? That is, how can two lots (of similar size) in the same vicinity have totally different values?

I have no clue whatsoever. You'd have to ask Appraisal Systems. (201) 493-8530.


You keep bringing up empty lots, but I never brought those up, nor do I care about those in the least. As for the reval itself, I have always been for it (and have been open about that position for years now) and accurately predicted the overall results (massive increase in DT, some increases in JSQ, substantial decreases in BeLa and Greenville) but missed the mark on the final rate (originally, I had assumed/expected a rate of about 2%, and later something closer to 1.8%). I mention all of this to dispel any notion that I’m advocating against the reval, or the implementation of its results. It is precisely because I want to see the reval implemented that I worry (in the broad sense of the word) that they are botching some basic stuff. I don’t believe the city has engaged in some grand conspiracy to screw up the reval, but I do believe it is possible that there is little pressure to ensure the final step (implementation) is as clear and correct as possible, and that there are some powerful interests that would benefit from a further delay of the reval being implemented.

It simply doesn’t make sense for a professional appraisal company to come up with values out of thin air for a set of properties, and that the breakdown of those values (land and improvement) vary wildly between adjacent properties of similar lot size and conditions. This is the type of stuff that could be used for a legal challenge.

Posted on: 5/13 15:43
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

landshark wrote:
2018 assessments are posted on the NJ website. Vacant land was missing from the previous lists. As I expected look low from the ones I checked downtown.

239 Montgomery: Assessed at 375k but the neighboring property the same size has a land assessment of 765k

63 Mercer: Sold in 2016 for 3mm but assessed at 774k

208 Columbus: Sold in 2015 for 1.45mm but assessed at 727k

131 Morgan: Sold in 2016 for 1.98mm but assessed at 775k


I've been saying for a while the land valuations were going to be a mess. Clearly they don't use comps for empty land and they use an ass-backwards subtractive system for developed land.

I had thought that since abatements are not on the land, just on the improvements, that we would see tax increases from abated properties. Solomon said no that's not the way it works. Funny, huh?


I hate to ever entertain, or partake in, conspiracy theories, but given the history of shenanigans related to this reval, and the powerful vested interests, one can’t help wonder if this botched implementation is perhaps a way to further delay the implementation of the reval results.

Too Machiavellian??

Or, it just doesn't make sense.

The reval is done. Property tax changes are already getting rolled out. They won't roll everything back because of issues with vacant lots.


You seem to miss the point: lots of improved lots are seeing wildly different valuations, even when located immediately next to each other or within the same block. The point that some are making, including myself, is that assigning completely different values to the built upon lots opens the door for a legal challenge that could potentially delay, or stop, implementation of the reval results. How can the valuation company, or the city, justify that which defies logic or reason? That is, how can two lots (of similar size) in the same vicinity have totally different values?

Posted on: 5/13 14:25
Top


Re: New Tax Rate is Insane!
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

landshark wrote:
2018 assessments are posted on the NJ website. Vacant land was missing from the previous lists. As I expected look low from the ones I checked downtown.

239 Montgomery: Assessed at 375k but the neighboring property the same size has a land assessment of 765k

63 Mercer: Sold in 2016 for 3mm but assessed at 774k

208 Columbus: Sold in 2015 for 1.45mm but assessed at 727k

131 Morgan: Sold in 2016 for 1.98mm but assessed at 775k


I've been saying for a while the land valuations were going to be a mess. Clearly they don't use comps for empty land and they use an ass-backwards subtractive system for developed land.

I had thought that since abatements are not on the land, just on the improvements, that we would see tax increases from abated properties. Solomon said no that's not the way it works. Funny, huh?


I hate to ever entertain, or partake in, conspiracy theories, but given the history of shenanigans related to this reval, and the powerful vested interests, one can’t help wonder if this botched implementation is perhaps a way to further delay the implementation of the reval results.

Too Machiavellian??

Posted on: 5/12 3:34
Top


Re: Port Authority tests new security scanners at WTC PATH station
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

mpwJC wrote:
Quote:

srs7191 wrote:
Why would it take 200 units? Why not just integrate them into the ticket gates?

If the tech is good, let's replace the TSA with these machines.

The website claims 600 people per unit per hour, and no need to empty pockets. Would be nice to get comfort and speed at airport security.
I'm not following the math for 200 units either. At peak rush hour from 5-6 pm on weekdays, a little over 14k people enter the WTC PATH station. At 600 people per unit per hour, that would mean 24 units would be required to manage that volume. I'm not at all in favor of this kind of "security" measure being installed in the PATH system, but the math doesn't add up.


Your math is correct, but its application is completely off. While 24 units could, in theory, process 14K people in hour, that presumes that one can control the manner in which those 14K subjects are fed into the system.

If each machine can process 600 people every hour, that means it could theoretically process 10 individuals every minute, or one every six seconds. The reality is that, during rush hour, the same space may be occupied by 4, 5, or even 6, different people in a six second period. People at WTC move along in a manner similar to ants, following the person ahead almost immediately behind them. There is likely something like a one or two second separation. As such, if you take the 24 number you derived, and multiply it by 6, you end up at 144. 200 is not overkill, as such a system would need to have some redundancy built into it.

In any case, I hate the idea on principle alone. I find it unnerving to see so many policemen, and military personnel, stationed at WTC and 33rd street, and I rue the fact that we have allowed a police state mentality to take over our daily lives. I have spoken with friends who have told me, in no uncertain terms, that they actually don't feel safe at a station if they don't see police or military personnel deployed on site. Not too long ago, we used to thumb our nose at pretty much every other country in the world because of their use of national ID cards, and here in this region people seem to clamor for more police, more military, more random inspections, more of the security theater nonsense we have come to accept as normal and necessary.

Posted on: 5/10 19:43
Top


Re: White Eagle Hall *UPCOMING SHOWS*
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I beg of you, use a carriage return to make this legible. I actually care what it says but it's written in the least user-friendly way.


So true. I am SUPER excited about attending more shows at White Eagle, but this massive paragraph without breaks is almost impossible to read. :(

Posted on: 5/9 17:12
Top


Re: Okay, so who here thinks the Katyn monument needs to go?
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
It must be endtimes, when even Gerry McCann sounds sensible on a subject. But LSP is obviously state land, and JC cannot make that choice. I liked the idea of the tip of Morris Canal Park though. That's a dramatic setting for a dramatic statue.

As for what to replace it with, how about a fucking flagpole and Old Glory? A symbol of unity rather than the endless divisive identity politics we currently suffer from all sides. No factions or niche constituencies, just US, the USA.


100% agreed with this! I am always surprised, and dismayed, by the dearth of US flags in this area. I have lived in so many other parts of the country where the flag is proudly flown in common/public areas, as well as outside of private residences. The "identity politics" of this region are so provincial... and, as you indicate, also divisive.

Posted on: 5/9 4:02
Top


Re: suede dry cleaning?
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hard to beat the services and results from Leather Spa. They are pricey, but very, very good. They even have a Tribeca location.

https://leatherspa.com/repair-services#garments

Posted on: 5/8 6:56
Top


Re: Architect for measuring floorplans
Home away from home
Home away from home


Not quite an answer to the specified request, but measuring and sketching floorplans, or entire homes, can be done very easily with the freeware SketchUp, which was formerly owned by Google, but now is a stand alone company. It is not so hard to use and the results are impressive.

Check it out here: https://www.sketchup.com

Posted on: 5/8 6:52
Top


Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JSleeze wrote:
The one thing that keeps coming up in the various threads about property taxes is the fact that JC's rate (1.62%) is below state average. That has nothing to do with anything.

In a city, the advantages of density and efficiencies of scale would dictate a lower rate. Provision of services should be easier (think police, fire, trash pickup, etc.) given closer proximity, fuel costs should be lower, purchasing should be more effective since you are doing it in larger volumes, etc. Not saying it always works out that way, given politics, corruption and the like - but from a basic economics standpoint the math is pretty simple.

The state rate that gets tossed around is an average. Not everyone is average, for good reason.


In theory, your post should be correct. In practice/reality, it is completely off. Today's budget is the same (when accounting for inflation and value of dollar) as it was decades ago. This is despite technology advancements that should have made for more efficient processes and government services. Also, in terms of the breakdown of our tax levy, ours is only low because we are paying 1/6 of our local school budget. If we were paying half of our school budget (instead of just 17%) then that levy would triple, bringing our taxes up to just shy of 2.5%.

We don't have a low tax rate because of economy of scales, or efficient local government; we have a low tax rate because we have gotten other people to foot our bill.

Posted on: 4/27 12:32
Top


Re: Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza Expansion
Home away from home
Home away from home


Yvonne has never allowed facts to derail her narrative. She has been claiming that the pedestrian plaza causes backups in JSQ for 2+ years now. It is a plainly false claim, but she refuses to admit she is wrong. For anyone that spends ANY time on Newark Avenue, it is clear that there is no link between congestion in Little India and JSQ and the pedestrian plaza in DTJC.

The only thing causing delays, backups, and inconveniences in the vicinity of the pedestrian plaza are the illegally parked vehicles that choose to park and double park in the most inopportune places, like the assholes that double park to patronize Torico's, or the many badge displaying cars that park in clearly marked "No Parking Allowed" zones in the triangle area between Bay, Erie, and Newark, or the people that park in bus areas along Newark Avenue, forcing buses to stop in the travel lanes. If officers would patrol the vicinity of Newark Avenue to prevent those things, then traffic would flow much better.

Posted on: 4/26 8:08
Top


Re: JC Public Schools is short $70 million
Home away from home
Home away from home


It was only a matter of time before the fiscal house of cards built by the JC BOE would start to (predictably) collapse.

So, let's recap:
- BOE is facing a $71 MM budget shortfall
- BOE approves new contracts that will increase compensation by about 8.25% over two years.
- other towns wake up and realize that JC is getting extra funding to the tune of $174 MM and will undoubtedly start to clamor for this to be corrected.

Given that currently salaries amount to just shy of 300 MM, the new contracts will increase spending by about $25 MM. Add that to the projected shortfall and you are at 96 MM, and if we lose the overage in state funding we could be staring at a $270 MM hole. That's about 45% of the current BOE budget. If the BOE is allowed to pass that along to local taxpayers, the increase in local taxes would be just below 0.2%. Bringing total levy to about 1.82%. Not Earth shattering, but certainly another blow to local residents, particularly those who are still reeling from the results of the reval. Given that 1.82% is still well below state average, I can certainly see lots of municipalities pushing for JC to lose the additional state funding.

Posted on: 4/26 8:00
Top


Newark Avenue Pedestrian Plaza Expansion
Home away from home
Home away from home


I am surprised this hasn't been posted yet...
https://twitter.com/stevenfulop/status/988399597709086722?s=12

I hope to see it become reality. The pedestrian plaza has been a commendable effort by the mayor and his administration. Of course, lots of NIMBYs and old timers averse to change are already complaining about any expansion of the plaza.

Also, if the LSP bridge becomes a reality, a pedestrian plaza would be a good way to counterbalance the increase in traffic and its implications for pedestrian safety.

Posted on: 4/25 6:54
Top


Re: Kushner in New Jersey unraveling
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

stillinjc wrote:
I would not be surprised if Kushner were 100% correct. It would look bad on Fulop's Democratic resume going forward that he struck a deal with Kushner. In these Twitter-driven times it could be a kiss of death.


Be that as it may, the mayor (and, the city administration) can not, on a whim, renege on a deal for no good reason which could in turn lead to costly litigation. Exhibit 1: the suspension/delay of the real estate reval.

That is, quite simply, an irresponsible and cavalier attitude about their fiduciary duty to be conscientious and judicious stewards of the people's money. Costly legal battles can and will zap a good chunk of the taxes the city collects from all of us.

It's always a lot easier to make certain stands and bets when gambling with other people's money. I hope the mayor and the city have valid grounds to renege on a deal. If they don't, stop the games and hold up your end of the bargain.

Posted on: 4/24 17:07
Top


Re: Costco comes to Hudson County
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
As an aside, I’m really surprised that people continue to patronize the Clifton location when Teterboro is just three minutes farther out but so much easier to get in and out of it, and much larger, making it more comfortable to shop.
\

Plus Teterboro has a kosher bakery and stocks kosher meat. I haven't been to Edison, is the booze that much cheaper than Buy-Rite? I should check out the one on rt 1 in North Brunswick on the way to visit mom. I sometimes buy booze in the TJ's down that way.

The retail laws in our local counties are pretty absurd. Lets shake out the liquor laws while we're doing the weed reform. The notion that a supermarket can't sell booze but a concession located in the market can is just nonsense.


Buy Rite is definitely much better for beer selection (Costco selection is very limited) but wine selection at Costco is very good. They are the #1 wine retailer in the US, and with that comes purchasing power and ability to carefully choose what they stock and at lower price points than anyone.

I have never visited the North Brunswick location (is a little too far for my needs) so I can't speak to their selection, or layout. The Edison and Teterboro locations are newer than Clifton, so their sizes, layouts, and parking lots are much better.

Posted on: 4/23 10:31
Top


Re: The real deal or another Xanadu ?
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
This started out as a shopping destination. Like Topsy it just grew:

https://www.facebook.com/ExperienceRiverton/


I fail to see any similarities with Xanadu... this is more like Newport: a city (or, large scale development area) within a city, facing a waterfront, and intended to act as retail/commercial/residential enclave. Locally, there is a similar proposed project: Bayfront, over by 440/Communipaw.

Posted on: 4/23 10:23
Top


Re: Costco comes to Hudson County
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

stillinjc wrote:
I also heard good things about Costco fish and seafood quality. Do you guys concur? If so I'd be very happy.


As Brewster said, the thing about Costco is that pretty much everything they sell is top quality, particularly their fruits, vegetables, meats, and fish/seafood. Their lobster tails are huge and just perfect. Their supply of fresh, wild caught fish is rather limited most times, but whatever they have on hand is always good.

As an aside, I’m really surprised that people continue to patronize the Clifton location when Teterboro is just three minutes farther out but so much easier to get in and out of it, and much larger, making it more comfortable to shop.

For that matter, the Edison location is the best within a 30 minute drive, as it also sells alcohol, which is another huge perk of a Costco membership.

Posted on: 4/20 22:33
Top


Re: Group wants new highway leading to Jersey City Waterfront
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

stillinjc wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

stillinjc wrote:
BeLa folks will get better access to the emergency services of Jersey City Medical Center. That is sorely needed, even more so with all the development going on there by the Light Rail Station.

Jersey Avenue extension connecting BeLa to DT is a no-brainer, no matter what DT nimbys say.


What? How so?? The distance to the JCMC ER via a theoretical LSP vehicular bridge is the same distance, or longer, from ANY point in BeLa.

And, the Communipaw (or , Johnston) to Pacific to Grand to JCMC route is all right turns, while any route via LSP would include two rail crossings in addition to multiple extra traffic lights and some left turns.


My bad, I thought BeLa extends east of Pacific Ave, where all the development is happening around the Light Rail station. I looked at the map and it seems this area (between Pacific and Turnpike) is not BeLa. Still, whatever the name, very soon this area will be densely developed.


That area IS part of BeLa, but it is a common misconception that the route via LSP would be shorter. It just *seems* that way, but it isn't. At best, it is the same distance point to point.

See below:

300 Communipaw -> JCMC (via Pacific / Grand)
Resized Image


300 Communipaw -> JCMC (via LSP)
Resized Image

Posted on: 4/11 11:30
Top


Re: Citi Bike
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
So they are removing racks from LightRail Stations? Isn't connecting the community (wards) to public transit points one of the reasons for the program's existence?

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
CitiBike JC is withdrawing from Wards A, B, and F. If you live in these wards, or ride CitiBike there, they'll offer you a prorated refund.

Some combination of high annual membership cost, low density of stations, and who knows what other factors, mean that bike share is not going to be part of residents', workers', students' and visitors' transportation solutions in half of the city.

Quote:
Dear riders,

At Citi Bike Jersey City, we are always seeking to provide the best service for as many riders as possible. After evaluating our 2017 ridership data (also recently analyzed by our friends at Bike JC), and coordinating with the City of Jersey City, we will be relocating 9 of the least utilized stations in the network to boost capacity in high demand areas.

The stations that will be relocated are:

NJCU
Union Street
Columbia Park
Danforth Light Rail
Bayview Park
MLK Light Rail
West Side Light Rail
Garfield Avenue
Bethune Center

We understand these changes may mean a loss of service to some current members. If you think you are one of them, just give us a call at 1-855-BIKE-311 and we are happy to provide a prorated refund. If you’ve used any of these stations in the past three months, we will send you an email notifying you when we plan to relocate it. We will also be sure to update our app as these stations are moved and new ones join the system. We believe that these adjustments will provide improved service and build a strong foundation for future growth.

Thank you for your understanding.

Sincerely,

Citi Bike Jersey City


The opening assertion is not entirely accurate. CitiBike is not withdrawing entirely from Wards B or F. In Ward F, they will still have several other stations, and the same is true of Ward B. What they have done is make a decision to relocate all the stations SOUTH of Communipaw Avenue.

If some stations are not being used, it makes sense to relocate them to better support ridership in areas where additional service is needed/desired.

Regardless, the CitiBike model needs to be re-examined. In other cities around the world where bike shares do much better, there is usually a different model in place. In London, the bike share system (Santander Cycle) is part of the metropolitan transport system (Transport for London) and Santander pays a fee to be the sole sponsor and their fares (particularly the daily fares) are much lower, which encourages residents and visitors alike to use the bikes. CitiBike would be wise to lower the daily rate to something that would encourage people to use them more often. At $12/day, the cost is ridiculously high. Contrast that to London's 24-hr pass of less than $3.

Regardless, this post is a bit alarmist: some racks are getting relocated. We still don't know where they will end up. Heck, some may end up right in the same wards. Or, maybe they end up in other wards. But, even if they move all of them to other wards, neither wards B nor F are being deprived of CitiBike racks entirely.


They are relocating nice racks, three of which are located close to light rail stations. Logistically, keeping random racks by light rail stations makes little sense if there are no other racks in the vicinity or neighborhood. Since they are removing all the racks south of Communipaw, also removing the ones from the light rail stations south of Communipaw makes sense.

Posted on: 4/11 11:19
Top


Re: Group wants new highway leading to Jersey City Waterfront
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

stillinjc wrote:
BeLa folks will get better access to the emergency services of Jersey City Medical Center. That is sorely needed, even more so with all the development going on there by the Light Rail Station.

Jersey Avenue extension connecting BeLa to DT is a no-brainer, no matter what DT nimbys say.


What? How so?? The distance to the JCMC ER via a theoretical LSP vehicular bridge is the same distance, or longer, from ANY point in BeLa.

And, the Communipaw (or , Johnston) to Pacific to Grand to JCMC route is all right turns, while any route via LSP would include two rail crossings in addition to multiple extra traffic lights and some left turns.

Posted on: 4/11 10:09
Top


Re: Group wants new highway leading to Jersey City Waterfront
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Won't this shift the Park n Ride exit vehicular traffic to Phillips/Jersey Ave instead of Communipaw/Johnston/Pacific/Grand, as well as having more take LSP exit to Burma/Phillips directly to Jersey? It'll obviously mean a traffic light at the Phillips/Johnston corner, but that's been needed anyway.


A traffic light at the intersection of Phillips/Johnston is DEFINITELY sorely needed. I have had way too many close calls there due to traffic ignoring the STOP sign. Happens all the time, and I have witnessed many close calls.

As for the local traffic and what a new bridge will bring in terms of results, I believe that traffic in BeLa will remain just as bad, but perhaps for a shorter amount of time. In other words, instead of 30 minutes of gridlock, there might be 20 minutes of gridlock. But, traffic conditions will be bad regardless even after the bridge is built.

Traffic is like water in a pool: adding an extra drain does not lessen flow in the original drain. At best, the water (cars) will drain out of the pool (highway) faster, but the drains (the bridges and surface roads) will fill to their max capacity until all water is drained. At best, traffic congestion in local roads is shortened in terms of time. At worst, given increased capacity for traffic flow (more ways to get through JC to the Holland Tunnel) what could end up happening is more people choosing to get off at 14C, and then you end up with traffic just as bad as before, for just as long.

Posted on: 4/11 9:26
Top


Re: Group wants new highway leading to Jersey City Waterfront
Home away from home
Home away from home


This is terrible news for the neighborhood immediately to the west of LSP. As it is, traffic in local streets (particularly Johnston, Communipaw, Pacific, and a few others) is already horrendous in the morning.

Surprisingly (and, sadly) many local residents have advocated for (or, supported) the LSP vehicular bridge under the misguided belief that it will alleviate traffic on local streets.

Posted on: 4/11 7:50
Top


Re: Citi Bike
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
CitiBike JC is withdrawing from Wards A, B, and F. If you live in these wards, or ride CitiBike there, they'll offer you a prorated refund.

Some combination of high annual membership cost, low density of stations, and who knows what other factors, mean that bike share is not going to be part of residents', workers', students' and visitors' transportation solutions in half of the city.

Quote:
Dear riders,

At Citi Bike Jersey City, we are always seeking to provide the best service for as many riders as possible. After evaluating our 2017 ridership data (also recently analyzed by our friends at Bike JC), and coordinating with the City of Jersey City, we will be relocating 9 of the least utilized stations in the network to boost capacity in high demand areas.

The stations that will be relocated are:

NJCU
Union Street
Columbia Park
Danforth Light Rail
Bayview Park
MLK Light Rail
West Side Light Rail
Garfield Avenue
Bethune Center

We understand these changes may mean a loss of service to some current members. If you think you are one of them, just give us a call at 1-855-BIKE-311 and we are happy to provide a prorated refund. If you’ve used any of these stations in the past three months, we will send you an email notifying you when we plan to relocate it. We will also be sure to update our app as these stations are moved and new ones join the system. We believe that these adjustments will provide improved service and build a strong foundation for future growth.

Thank you for your understanding.

Sincerely,

Citi Bike Jersey City


The opening assertion is not entirely accurate. CitiBike is not withdrawing entirely from Wards B or F. In Ward F, they will still have several other stations, and the same is true of Ward B. What they have done is make a decision to relocate all the stations SOUTH of Communipaw Avenue.

If some stations are not being used, it makes sense to relocate them to better support ridership in areas where additional service is needed/desired.

Regardless, the CitiBike model needs to be re-examined. In other cities around the world where bike shares do much better, there is usually a different model in place. In London, the bike share system (Santander Cycle) is part of the metropolitan transport system (Transport for London) and Santander pays a fee to be the sole sponsor and their fares (particularly the daily fares) are much lower, which encourages residents and visitors alike to use the bikes. CitiBike would be wise to lower the daily rate to something that would encourage people to use them more often. At $12/day, the cost is ridiculously high. Contrast that to London's 24-hr pass of less than $3.

Regardless, this post is a bit alarmist: some racks are getting relocated. We still don't know where they will end up. Heck, some may end up right in the same wards. Or, maybe they end up in other wards. But, even if they move all of them to other wards, neither wards B nor F are being deprived of CitiBike racks entirely.

Posted on: 4/11 7:45
Top



TopTop
« 1 2 3 (4) 5 6 7 ... 116 »






Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017