ProgressJC wrote:
Quote:

eggzbenedict wrote:
Just curious as to how you "lose" a parking spot from an inactive driveway?

The curb cut in front of the building is never used, so the block loses one parking space.

tern wrote:
Are there really plans for a soccer field there?

Robin.

Caller9 wrote:
Further, I doubt any politician would jeopardize their political status during a re-election year over a small time operation.

heights wrote:
Quote:

Chama wrote:
And beware, they also have a big Healy/Obama sign well displayed on their front window... don't think they will be getting my business...

Is this a left over sign from the 2012 election with Healy running as VP ?

brewster wrote:
To get a birds eye view without an aircraft you simply lower your POV of a map to a low angle. Voila! This is exactly what Google Earth does.

brewster wrote:
The charts of such an important waterway had long been quite accurate at that time.

tommyc_37 wrote:
Does anybody have any idea as to who this developer is? It seems strange to demolish a building without any plans to rebuild.

heights wrote:
I hate the fact that when you need a quick fix on the spot you still have to wait a week.

laurenfed6 wrote:
I heard that all of the pre-fab roadway stuff is now gone. Maybe they were just storing it there?

Is there an ETA on rebuilding the pedestrian bridge?

The lawn was once used for open air concerts, or simply lounging and provided a nice respite amidst the noise and chaos.

This is now long gone and it is now a struggle for every patch of earth, tree, and quiet.

And, while the footbridge is not technically within the boundaries of LSP, it is the gateway and the start of the urban 'oasis.' The idea of putting a highway right through here is just disturbing. But, hey, at this point we might as well give up and just make the whole of Liberty State Park one big parking lot.

tommyc_37 wrote:
Furthermore, the marina is built on the Morris Canal, which has a long and rich maritime history, so it seems only right to have that space occupied as an area in which the boating community can enjoy the park, too.

And finally, maybe I am biased, but in my opinion having the marina and boats there only adds to the park's ambience and charm instead of detracting from it.

Giovanna wrote:
I'm confused by their decision-making process. Isn't the River St. place just as far from the (Grove St.) PATH as 126 Dudley? And if they use Exchange Place, Dudley is even closer. Well, whatever, I guess the reasoning is simplified for the sake of the article's narrative structure.

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
Could be they are only repairing the coastline that was scoured away pretty heavily by the hurricane?

tommyc_37 wrote:
So what IS going on near the Colgate Clock?

jmiz wrote:
Construction connecting Washington St. and the Hudson River Walkway has been ongoing for about eight months. Likely that.

H-Parker wrote:
Or maybe they finally settled who has to pay for the park that is going there.

Mouse wrote:
I think those advocating the road extension are missing an important factor: quality of life.

Open space is being removed from Liberty State Park (LSP). Where we once had a "Great Lawn" now sits a marina. We have had the addition of a golf course. There is development impinging on LSP from all sides.

I really hope we get the footbridge re-built and keep LSP as-is ..... It is important that we retain what little of an oasis that still exists in LSP.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

jmiz wrote:
For every percentage of extra road, you get that much extra percentage of vehicles on the road. Now, what percentage would a 100 foot road extension be compared to the total amount of roads in Jersey City? What percentage of vehicles would this tiny extension add? If we go by the statistics in the article you quoted, that number is next to insignificant.

There's a huge difference between adding additional or widening existing roads and connecting existing roads.

Sorry, but I think you're being deliberately dense. The statement was illustrating a minimum, not a maximum. A bridge is in a different category. If you opened a new bridge from NJ to Manhattan, do you really believe the traffic would only increase as a proportion of that bridge's road surface to all of NYC's roads?

JCbiscuit wrote:
studies show that Brewster has a point, and more / wider roads actually increase traffic:

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/09/1377087 ... -pave-way-to-more-traffic

"What we found was that in cities where there was more roads, there was more driving," economist Matthew Turner, a co-author of the study, tells weekends on All Things Considered host Guy Raz. "In particular, if you had 1 percent more roads, you had 1 percent more driving in those cities."

Some 1,017 fountain and sinks were tested from October 2012 to January 2013. The worst fountains and sinks were found at Schools 5, 9, 23, 25, 27, 29 annex, 31 and Zero Tolerance, an alternative program at the Bright Street Academy, the report shows.

GrovePath wrote:
As Brewster pointed out.. this will just increase the number of NYC commuters who try getting off at Exit 14B

Quote:

brewster wrote:

...Anyone who pays attention to traffic issues knows this will never work. When you relieve pressure at one point in a system with vast demand, the demand will always fill the void as people choose to take a route that now offers less friction...

"The main thrust of this effort is to relieve the Bergen Lafayette neighborhood of 5000 vehicular trips made daily by motorists which must travel through local streets to reach their destinations."

brewster wrote:

...The explicit purpose of this bridge is to divert rush traffic to Downtown, as noted in the JCRA study "The main thrust of this effort is to relieve the Bergen Lafayette neighborhood of 5000 vehicular trips made daily by motorists which must travel through local streets to reach their destinations." So the idea is to get all the people who leave the tpk at exit 14B to get around the traffic at 14C to use Jersey instead of Pacific to get to Downtown and the Tunnel.