|
Re: Future of Newport Mall
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
So, just to be clear. The owners should consider knocking down a 1.4 million square foot mall, which they've been renovating and increasingly going upscale, in order to improve pedestrian traffic to the Newport Station? I agree the current pedestrian path is a hack, and I'm sure it could be improved. But I can't imagine they would take the whole thing down, as long as it's profitable and in good shape.
Posted on: 2013/4/5 12:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Future of Newport Mall
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
OK, I'm a bit confused by something.
If you want to walk around the Mall, and really can't stand walking through the garage (which I understand), all you have to do is walk a few extra blocks to 6th. Is that really so hard? I agree it's not the most charming walk, that Newport is not a pedestrian paradise, and it's poorly integrated into the rest of JC. But the Mall is only a small part of that; it's ingrained in the design of Newport as a whole.
Posted on: 2013/4/5 3:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Orale Mexican Kitchen
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Orale is not a chain.
Posted on: 2013/3/25 23:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: In New Jersey, a Battle Over a Fluoridation Bill - fluoride will be added to Jersey City water
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yeah, too bad that's not what the study actually says. Basically, it just says that an infant who consumes water-based reconstituted formula, and use products like dentifrice, have a slightly elevated risk of mild fluorosis. (As in, very slight tooth discoloration.) The ADA has put out that paper to help dentists make recommendations to parents. It isn't significant enough for the ADA to change their recommendation that fluoridation is safe. Nor have the CDC or FDA spoken out against fluoridation. It's a good thing for new parents to know. It's not a cause for panic, or to stop fluoridation. Thanks for the hysteria.
Posted on: 2013/3/24 13:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: In New Jersey, a Battle Over a Fluoridation Bill - fluoride will be added to Jersey City water
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Fluoridation is fine.
As the American Dental Association says: "On January 25,1945 Grand Rapids, Michigan became the world's first city to adjust the level of fluoride in its water supply. Since that time, fluoridation has dramatically improved the oral health of tens of millions of Americans. Community water fluoridation is the single most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has proclaimed community water fluoridation as one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century. Approximately 72.4% of the U.S. population served by public water systems receive the benefit of optimally fluoridated water.... "Studies conducted throughout the past 65 years have consistently shown that fluoridation of community water supplies is safe and effective in preventing dental decay in both children and adults." ADA > crank with website It's not a toxin, it's not a poison. It's safe, and millions of people have consumed drinking water with a small amount of additional fluoride without keeling over.
Posted on: 2013/3/23 23:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Grove PATH Bike parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Unfortunately, it's very easy to hack or clip a lock without getting pinched. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7zb8YXrmIA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGttmR2DTY8 I'd guess that most people don't pay attention, and the rest don't assume the person is a thief.
Posted on: 2013/2/25 22:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
As far as I know, there's no indication of gas transmission lines giving children health problems. In fact, one of the major reasons for running the new pipelines (albeit not in a specific location) is to replace the oil burners in Manhattan, which are a major source of pollution and presumably asthma rates. If you've ever seen the columns of black smoke from a building in Manhattan, that's the type of oil burner they're trying to phase out and replace with NG. Quote: Do you see the fallacy of your argument? You are saying, "IF IT DOES LEAK" then saying "It's not a death trap." No, I'm openly saying "I don't know." It may be in the EIS or in FERC's documentation. Like I said, all I can do is guess. I don't know which method is more expensive (nor am I the one to ask). Laying pipe in water is probably faster, might require fewer workers, and has less legal opposition. What I do know is that Spectra re-routed sections of the pipeline off of land and into water for parts of northern Staten Island, and a stretch on the southern end of Bayonne. It apparently was done in response to community opposition and with input from FERC. (http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/ ... roved_to_run_natural.html) Quote: Let's just assume that it's an extremely safe pipeline with only 1 error in a million pipes built.... Unfortunately, that's not the right way to assess risks. We don't need to look at invented hypotheticals like this; we already have a good idea of the risks, based on decades of data. Your scenario also plays up the "unlikely but spectacular" nature of this risk, rather than looking at how often lines actually do have errors. It also presumes that this extremely rare event must happen in the spot where it will do substantial damage. More to the point is that we already live with similar risks every single day. We just don't think about them.
Posted on: 2013/2/25 22:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Thanks, I appreciate both your comments and your civil disagreement.
Posted on: 2013/2/25 21:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I feel no shame whatsoever for being rational about assessing risk or infrastructure requirements.
Posted on: 2013/2/22 22:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
That's a good question. I can only guess that if an underwater pipeline does leak, it's going to take a lot longer, and pollute a lot more, before it can be fixed. We've already used the Arthur Kill as a dumping ground for about a century, and the Hudson is also just getting clean. It might not be a bad idea to stop treating those waterways like big garbage cans. Just a thought. PCB's might not be present in large amounts near Manhattan. The only PCB-related dredging that I'm aware of is much further up the Hudson. But the more critical point for me is that I'm not regarding this as a long string of dynamite in the first place, so I don't see a pressing need to send it all underwater.
Posted on: 2013/2/22 22:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
No No and No.
Posted on: 2013/2/22 22:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
True, but the history indicates that residential gas lines -- which unquestionably will be running into those exact same areas when they're developed -- carry similar, if not the same, risks. The same logic can be applied to the gas stations located at the Holland Tunnel entrance. Obviously if a station did go up in flames, it would shut down the tunnel (probably in both directions) for a few days. Why is it not "inevitable" that over, say, a 100 year span, one of them will catch on fire? Or, gas tankers intermittently catch on fire; over 100 years, is it not "inevitable" that one will burst into flames on the Turnpike? Actually, the odds on that are pretty good. As in, it's already happened. In November 2011, a tanker caught on fire near Exit 18W on the Turnpike. (http://gothamist.com/2011/11/08/video ... reball_on_jersey_turn.php) And yet, we don't block tankers from driving in JC, on major highways or near critical infrastructure. Quote: This pipeline will most likely become an expensive hurdle standing in the way of improving our transit infrastructure over the next half century. How? Most of the areas near the rail lines are already slated for development. Or do you believe that in 50 years, NJ Transit will want to demolish a string of residential towers, and what is now the A&P and 18th Street, and whatever will be built next to Newport Green Park, to put in additional rail lines? Or that it is impossible to work around existing infrastructure? There is no doubt that the Light Rail goes right over numerous residential gas lines. They successfully constructed it without causing any ruptures or explosions. Speaking of which, keep in mind that local opposition to the Light Rail was fierce. We see this right now in Tenafly, whose residents insist they don't want it because of concerns over safety, the EIS, parking, disruption of the main shopping district... So maybe the real barrier won't be a pipe in the ground whose location will be marked, it'll be local opposition to *cough* added infrastructure. Quote: Unfortunately, the route seems to driven by Spectra?s profitability and their helpful industry colleagues in the FERC more than just the energy requirements of NYC. There's no question that Spectra is trying to make its lines profitable; that's what companies do. Putting in infrastructure is always going to be resisted, no matter what. Any citizen who loses the battle will insists that the government agencies involved are corrupt and/or the victim of regulatory capture. That said, sinking pipelines in the Arthur Kill (once one of the most polluted waterways on the planet, and now barely eking out a recovery) and the Hudson River has its own hazards. It also seems unwise to wait until Manhattan has completely maxed out its capacity before remotely considering allowing any improvements. Quote: Nuclear fission.... probably claims lives every day.... I won't say "nuclear power plants and weapons are 100% safe." The problem is that every type of fossil fuel or nuclear power has risks and costs lives. Coal mining is dangerous, and the tailings are a huge environmental problem. Oil production is also hazardous, and sparks lots of political conflict. Both harm the environment when used to generate electricity. Renewable energy is significantly safer, and better for the environment (although building the devices still has a carbon footprint). But generating enough energy for NYC via renewable sources is beyond our current abilities. For example, a pilot water turbine project in the East River installed 30 turbines at a cost of $7 million, and provided power to 10,000 Manhattan residents. At current usage rates, you'd need 5,000 turbines to meet Manhattan's electricity requirements, at a cost of $1.7 trillion. If the units become twice as effective at half the cost, you're still looking at 2500 units @ $450 million. Even the most optimistic forecasts suggest that water power will cover 15% of US energy needs. Anything we do right now carries a risk, and we constantly live with these risks. The risks of the transmission pipeline are being vastly overstated, and ultimately all that does is scare the residents, without really making their lives any safer.
Posted on: 2013/2/22 18:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
OK then, why aren't you concerned about gasoline tanker trucks, which drive in and through Jersey City every day?   How about gas stations?  There are over 5000 fires at gas stations every year, which claim an average of two lives. 1 in 13 gas stations has a fire every year. Should we not locate gas stations near tunnels, schools, parks and highways? (http://www.nfpa.org/categoryList.asp? ... on%20safety&cookie_test=1) I will grant you that photos of big explosions are much more dramatic than deaths by food poisoning. I mean, look at this e.coli, it's kinda neat.   The point is: You can't determine the actual risk by looking at a scary photo. That's why we need to examine the facts and the statistics, not rely on emotional appeals.
Posted on: 2013/2/21 19:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Again, there is very little risk, as there are already residential gas lines running on every street and into every house. Dozens, if not hundreds, of other communities "take the risk" so that Jersey City can get what it needs. This includes the pipelines that run to the Linden, NJ facilities; trucks that carry 12,000 gallons of gas to our gas stations; ports in Newark that receive those gas and other hazardous material shipments; and others that receive all our garbage and sewage. Many of these offer no direct benefit to those communities. If everyone in Lambertville said "Screw Jersey City, the gas line that goes through here is dangerous for us and we don't get anything for it," where should the pipeline go? What community would not make the same calculation? Running lines in water is not risk-free. There are environmental concerns, and the lines still have to land somewhere. NYC is also, quite clearly, a big economic engine for JC. That should be rather obvious after Sandy disrupted PATH service. What benefits NYC indirectly benefits JC.
Posted on: 2013/2/21 18:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Your math is intellectually dishonest. Two people die per year in the whole country, the majority of which don't live anywhere near a gas pipeline. Again, look at the PG&E map I linked above. There are gas transmission lines running through residential neighborhoods in every major city in the Bay Area and beyond, including San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, Monterey, Sacramento, and so on. (Link: http://www.pge.com/myhome/edusafety/s ... as/transmissionpipelines/ ) The new line is only an extension from a huge storage facility in Linden, NJ -- which means the gas lines run through numerous dense suburban cities. Existing lines already come into NYC, which means they have to go through dense suburban areas. I believe one Con Ed facility is currently located in Hunts Point in the Bronx. And there are residential gas lines running to almost every apartment, house and business in the US. So, the number of people who eat every day in restaurants IS roughly equivalent to the number of people who are living right on top of gas lines.
Posted on: 2013/2/21 17:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm not an expert, and I have no more information than anyone else. I've stated the facts as I know them, and it's all from public sources. If you want to know about risk evaluation, Dan Gardner's book The Science of Fear is a decent place to start: http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Sh ... ves-Greater/dp/0525950621 A Psychology Today article also summarized some recent findings on the topic. Several items mentioned in the article likely apply here. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articl ... ays-we-get-the-odds-wrong
Posted on: 2013/2/21 1:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Oh, for cryin' out loud. I've lived in JC for over 10 years, I'm a homeowner. Heaven forbid I disagree with people on this topic... or point out that most people are terrible at evaluating risk.
Posted on: 2013/2/20 22:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yes. I am categorically stating that I am not any more concerned about a gas transmission pipeline than I am any other residential gas pipeline. I do not believe that you, or your child, or the students of the school, or myself or anyone else is facing a significantly elevated risk because of this pipeline. Quote: Do you think that this would be acceptable if it was being built through a densly populated Summit, NJ community? Gas pipelines already run through many densely populated communities on their way to the Linden, NJ storage facility. Big cities like Boston, NYC, Philly and DC all need transmission lines. Or, in California, transmission pipelines run through a variety of densely populated and affluent cities like San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Cruz, Monterey and Berkeley. (see http://www.pge.com/myhome/edusafety/s ... as/transmissionpipelines/) And those lines run right through dozens of residential neighborhoods.
Posted on: 2013/2/20 21:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually, the size and harm caused by incidents doesn't vary much based on the size of the pipeline. There are numerous transmission line incidents which result in no fires, or cause minimal harm; and numerous residential lines that someone broke with a backhoe that result in big explosions. Carbon monoxide poisoning kills around 500 people per year. In contrast, an average of 2 people per year die in gas pipeline explosions. And 5,700 Americans die from food poisoning every year. I'm 2,850 times more likely to be killed by eating in a neighborhood restaurant than I am to be blown up in a gas explosion. So which of these two should concern me? And what do you plan to do, rip out every residential gas line in JC? What about the gas lines that already run through Woodbridge and Carteret and Sayreville, to the massive storage facility in Linden? The point is that we've already decided as a society that natural gas lines are an acceptable risk. While the installation and placement should get input from affected citizens, it's also important to realize that much of the objection is good ol' NIMBYism. Quote: Congress does not have oversight of the FERC... Congress passed the laws which determine how FERC operates and who has oversight. So like I said: If Congress wants oversight, all they have to do is change the law.
Posted on: 2013/2/20 20:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The Federal Courts. If Congress does want oversight, they can always rewrite the laws. Quote: Great spot for the pipeline - right next to a park. The problem with your saying this is that to you, ANY spot is an unacceptable location. If it's near a building or a factory or a highway (like it is now) or a park or an abandoned lot, it doesn't matter. Kind of blunts the effectiveness of that rhetorical tactic. ;)
Posted on: 2013/2/20 14:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: HUGE GAS PIPELINE COMING - through Jersey City
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
As I always have to note: The natural gas line in that unfortunate explosion was a normal residential line -- the type that is already installed all over Hudson County. The Spectra pipeline doesn't result in a significantly higher risk.
Posted on: 2013/2/20 14:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Armed Robbery (shotgun) on block 100 Coles St.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Since we aren't talking about Wards, there is no official designation. As such, there is no "true definition." E.g. there was no traditional "Newport" neighborhood, it was invented by Lefrak in the 80s. Few people refer to the larger area as the "Waterfront" anymore. Informal neighborhood borders change over time, as do the neighborhoods themselves. Quote: How reliable is a site that can be edited by ANYONE? That horse has already left the barn. ;) Because anyone can contribute, anyone can correct the entries; spoofs only last as long as it isn't noticed. By now, it's about as reliable as Brittanica; it's more extensive (you won't find an entry for "Newport, Jersey City" in EB), it's more flexible, it's updated faster. On a side note, I don't think it matters if a criminal's commute is 5 minutes or 30 minutes. ;)
Posted on: 2013/2/17 14:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: How safe is this area? - Harrison Between Kennedy & Bergen
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I don't live up there, but checking on Spotcrime: On Bergen, between Fairview and Lexington alone, there were around 8 shootings last year. West of Bergen appears to be safer than blocks east of it. ( http://spotcrime.com/#40.721704%2C%20-74.07296 )
It's difficult to get that much granularity when it comes to data about home prices. Zillow's guess is that McGinely Square is following the same trend as other areas -- prices peaked in 2008, and started gradually climbing in early 2012. My rough guess is that the closer you are to Lincoln Park (and further west of Bergen Ave), the safer you are. I'd also remind you that the run-up in property values from 2000 to 2008 was the result of a real estate bubble and a once-in-a-lifetime event, so don't think of that as "normal."
Posted on: 2013/2/17 14:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Armed Robbery (shotgun) on block 100 Coles St.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I don't think any of the local news sources list every single event in dense urban environments. E.g. the NYC papers don't list every stick-up or drunken brawl. Quote: PS- I swear Comey and Healy said (at a ?Captains? meeting) that with the redesign of the JCPD website there would be a real-time crime blog. Did anyone else actually hear that? :D In the meantime, Spotcrime actually looks like it'll do the job. A cursory look, by the way, will show you how much safer downtown is than Bergen-Lafayette and Greenville. Quote: It would also be a good way to get witnesses (240K pairs of eyes)... As in, private citizens will take witness statements? Or do you really think that I'm going to read a Twitter account, and rush outside to spot a guy with a shotgun? ;) Quote: Instead of finding out weeks later that a neighbors house a block away was robbed, while you are looking at your broken front door lock. What would you do differently? I mean, really. The crime rate in Jersey City is not a state secret; if you live here or move here, it's up to you to figure out if the neighborhood is safe enough for your comfort level. And unlike CSI, you can't predict that your house will be hit next because an apartment down the street got robbed. I think it's good to be aware of what's happening. But if it makes you feel unsafe in a generally safe neighborhood, maybe that would be counter-productive.
Posted on: 2013/2/15 1:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: FYI: Laws Concerning When and How to Shovel Snow
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
It's after the end of the snowfall, not the start.
I.e. we have until around 2pm before it's a problem/violation.
Posted on: 2013/2/9 15:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: "Kitchen Cousins" duo to redevelop Jersey City police headquarters
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Probably 5 stories. I don't know the zoning limits offhand, but I seriously doubt you can go any higher in that neighborhood.
Posted on: 2013/2/6 22:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Australians investors buying up Jersey City housing
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Real estate agents are paid no matter who buys the properties. Contractors will get hired either way. Healy also needs people to vote for him, and there's no reason to believe new homeowners will vote for a specific candidate. Quote: Losers: Neighborhoods (owner occupied units always better for immediate neighborhood), Buyers (mortgage approval very tough still and people can't compete against a flush REIT), Fulop, Schools (most JC renters are young without kids)... Neighborhoods will do fine. Again, 70% of JC (including downtown) are rentals. If you genuinely believe that a city full of rentals is a bad thing, you might want to move to the suburbs. The idea that rentals are bad for a neighborhood is a myth. Rental units don't have any effect on property values. If you walk down 4th Street, can you actually tell by looking at the buildings which ones are owner-occupied and which ones are for rent? When you bought your home, did you do an extensive search to find out if any nearby buildings were rentals? Buyers aren't losing out. It's not like there were no competitors prior to Dixon showing up. Nor is Dixon going to swoop in on every property for sale in JC. Again, there's no reason to presume new homeowners will vote for a specific candidate. Schools won't be affected by the minute fluctuations in owners vs renters.
Posted on: 2013/1/26 15:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Australians investors buying up Jersey City housing
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There are, roughly speaking, 80,000 housing units in Jersey City. About 56,000 units are rentals. 70% of all the housing in Jersey City are already rentals.
Dixon owns around 230 units. That's about 0.3%. This also is not a one-way process; Dixon Mills went from rent to own, and that alone is 450 units. And obviously, a lot of new construction is owned rather than rented. Rental units don't suppress real estate values, erode civic virtues or curve your spine. So while it's good to know what's going on, there is no need to be stricken with fear because an investment group is buying properties in JC.
Posted on: 2013/1/26 15:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Australians investors buying up Jersey City housing
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually it's 70%. :D But I agree, fears of renters are completely unfounded. I believe 70% is fairly typical of a dense urban environment. We don't live in the suburbs. The real question is whether this company are, or will be, decent landlords. However, the fact that it's a company does not in any way guarantee they will be any better or worse than, say, 500 individual landlords.
Posted on: 2013/1/24 19:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Home values in JC up 9% last year?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Ultimately, your home is only worth what someone is actually willing to pay for it. Comparable home sales are about as good a measure as you'll get. An appraiser might be a little more accurate, but will also set you back $350 and is no guarantee. Quote: Unless you are commuting in to midtown for work exclusively, transit is a bust It's not as good as living right next to a PATH station, but try living in the suburbs. ;) NJ Transit is very expensive; driving is expensive and aggravating; buses often get stuck at the tunnels. Quote: the Heights has no amenities or attractions to cause people to want to live with the general squalor and ghetto-ness of the nabe. I don't live up there, but I do go through there regularly. Some of the blocks are really nice, like Sherman Place. Homes are (afaik) relatively cheap and spacious compared to downtown. And obviously, the slice of homes right on the Palisades have stellar views. Journal Square is also in for a rude gentrification shock -- since some developer wants to put in a bunch of massive towers. That could be a big boost to property values in that neighborhood. And, of course, as Manhattan and downtown JC and Hoboken get more dense and more expensive, people have to live somewhere. JSQ, Harrison and the Heights are much more likely to gentrify before Newark. The Heights aren't great these days, but people were saying the same thing about downtown JC 20 years ago.
Posted on: 2013/1/24 17:26
|
|||
|
||||