Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
13 user(s) are online (10 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 13

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (JCActivist)




Re: Looking for Parking spot in/near Village Neighborhood
#1
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I would pay $300 if you get me an indoor parking spot. Once White Eagle Hall takes off, it should be practically impossible to find anything within the Village.

Posted on: 2017/3/31 21:35
Top


Re: Best Massage in downtown JC
#2
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Zahara Day Spa under my building is amazing. (pricy) Corner of Monmouth and 3rd St across Abbey's

Posted on: 2016/12/22 20:33
Top


The Village has Gone Crazy - R5 zoning but not in my backyard
#3
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I just got a petition today that I signed in a heartbeat. It sounds like an unelected community board is dictating property values. Here is the petition:

"To Mayor Steven Fulop, the City of Jersey City, the City Council,
Ward E Councilwoman Candice Osborne, the Division of City Planning, Senior Planner Tanya Marione, and Corporation Council
We, the undersigned, are homeowners, business owners and residents of the Village neighborhood who want to address the current concerns voiced by the City of Jersey City and our community regarding zoning variances granted in our neighborhood.
We believe that with numerous requests for variances being filed every month, it is clear that the City needs to make a change to its archaic R1 zoning laws which were passed in an era when we could not have envisioned the growth and progress the City has achieved over the years. Over the past two years, both the City and the Division of City Planning have been working to find a solution. Now, they’ve finally come up with a way to keep our buildings at the existing maximum height of 44 feet while allowing our communities to continue growing.
As passionate supporters of the growth of the Village neighborhood, we STRONGLY SUPPORT the City and Division of City Planning’s proposal to change the following existing limits for Zone R1, as we believe their recommendations carry the weight of years of outreach and professional planning:
Current R1 Zoning:
Maximum Height: 44 feet Maximum Stories: 3 Maximum Units: 2
And we STRONGLY SUPPORT re-zoning the area as Zone R-5, with the following limits:
Maximum Height: 44 feet Maximum Stories: 4 Maximum Units: 80/acre (4 total in standard lots)
We also STRONGLY OPPOSE a request from the Village Neighborhood Association (VNA), which has pushed back against the City’s recommendation, to divide the Village into two zones along Newark Avenue, with different zoning for the North and South sides.
We STRONGLY OPPOSE the VNA’s position that while the North side’s zoning should be consistent with the City’s recommendations, the South side’s height limit should be reduced to 31 feet, which is 13 feet less than the current allowable height of 44. We believe this arbitrary division is capricious, subjective, and unfairly discriminatory against the community that happens to own properties and businesses South of Newark Avenue in the Village. In our opinion, both the North and South sections of our neighborhood are equally subject to the same zoning issues and should not be treated separately.
Furthermore, with the imminent citywide re-evaluation, many of our neighbors will be hit with higher taxes and the VNA’s “downzoning” proposal will threaten to greatly reduce property values South of Newark Ave compared to those North of it. We foresee additional litigation between these property owners and the city should the VNA’s proposal be accepted.
Lastly, we STRONGLY OPPOSE the supposition that the VNA speaks for all the residents of the Village neighborhood inasmuch as their recommendations do not reflect a considerable number of residents’ and community members’ opinions in regards to this issue.
We ask that this matter either be settled in favor of the City and the Division of City Planning’s recommendation or that the issue be brought forward for public discourse."

Posted on: 2016/5/16 0:33
Top


Re: Curvaceous new building is planned for the corner of Newark Ave & Third Street
#4
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I think you got your corners wrong. the art deco (former police station) is right across the St.

Posted on: 2016/5/5 2:25
Top


Re: Curvaceous new building is planned for the corner of Newark Ave & Third Street
#5
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


WOW... WOW... WOW

This is a jaw dropping design. Now all we have to do is rebuild the other corner on Newark and Brunswick and this area will change for the better forever

Posted on: 2016/5/4 22:39
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#6
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I agree that profits should never be used for developing a property. After all, Bernie Sanders could become president. My understanding is that r1 is only 2 units though. The existing 6 family building is not even r1.

There is a 6 story that just got approved next to my building on Newark Ave and 3rd. My 16 unit condo (5 story) fully supported it as I was sick and tired of that sorry mural that looks like the Statue of Liberty in a jungle. I am all in favor of great design building replacing collapsing buildings in the Village. That's exactly what we need here. What's wrong with more height? I dont want newport but 375 5th is already next to a 5 story building!
surely there must be a compromise here that would make those balconies happy but let the developer still build too. That would be a GREAT reason to grant a variance.

Make those balconies happy; sure they shouldnt have been there in the first place but make them happy and build something more than what zoning allows

Posted on: 2016/4/6 0:09
Top


Re: Ani Ramen
#7
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


you are right. it's 218 not 220 Newark AVe

Posted on: 2016/3/30 1:44
Top


Re: Ani Ramen
#8
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


It's opening up at 220 Newark Ave next to the American Homes Realty

Posted on: 2016/3/29 21:15
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#9
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


GENIUS Picture with labels. Hats off

375 5th St is tearing down the 3 Story building to build a 5 story building. The issue I believe is whether 375 5th St is leaving any set back or light wells for those balconies at 369 5th. At least that would be a logical concern.
377 5th St next door is brand new but seems to have a 10ish ft rear yard set back. It seems that if that was continued for 375 5th St, at least the back balconies will have light and air. The front balconies closer to 5th St should get a light well around them and that's it. That would be a logical argument by a developer. "let me build higher but I will accommodate these crappy designed balconies"

I would love to see the layouts for those front units too. Any realtor here should be able to pull that up.

Posted on: 2016/3/25 22:27
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#10
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


On Zillow, I see one unit on the market at 369 5th St (Yellow Building with weird balconies AKA Oak Condominiums) for 715K and another unit pending for $725K. I also see that these units were bought for $388K in 2012? A 2bd 2bath with parking for 388K for 1200 SQF is a STEAL even in 2012. Maybe that's why it was sold so cheap since they knew that at some point someone was building something next to it and blocking the light and air.

http://www.zillow.com/homes/369-5-TH- ... alse&fromHomePageTab=rent

you can also see the floor plan if you scroll to picture 14 and balconies so this must be the corner unit facing newark ave and 5th St.

respectfully, if you are buying for $380K and selling for $700K in 4 years, I call that a WIN.


Posted on: 2016/3/25 20:45
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#11
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


375 5th Street is the one seeking a variance not the old Texaco Gas Station which is on Newark Ave owned by BGT Enterprises. 375 5th Street is owned by the Gupta's who also own a lot of other sites in other parts of the City.
Oak Condominiums, yellow building with weird balconies was supporting the Gas Station development since I believe the developer left a sizable cut out for those balconies facing Newark Ave. The Village Neighborhood Association was also supporting the Gas Station BGT project. I am not sure if the Gupta's are accommodating those balconies. Is the Village supporting Gupta's project? Since this thread was started by the Oak Condominiums (yellow building with weird balconies), can you please share if the Gupta's are building next to 369 5th balconies or leaving any cut out for those balconies?

Posted on: 2016/3/25 20:31

Edited by JCActivist on 2016/3/25 21:00:26
Top


Re: Enos Jones Park Closed - Lead Contamination
#12
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Enos Jones and Merry Benson parks are both next to the Turnpike and there are no buildings to block any contaminants to blow into the park. My kid wont pick up dirt from the sidewalk and put it in his mouth bc I am holding his hand. The same can't be said for a public park playground. Are they dusty? Of course. but you don't expect to have chipped lead paint in the the park playgrounds. I was seriously considering the Hamilton House to rent at since I was actually thinking how easy it would be to have my kid play across the street.

Posted on: 2016/3/23 18:34
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#13
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


It's called implied setback as per Nick Taylor (head of zoning). My lot was 22 by 45 in the Village. Following existing guidelines would have meant a building that's 22 by 10 (45-35=10) or 220 SqF per floor not taking out for the staircases
The intent of the rear yard set back was 35% rear yard. That being said, these zoning rules were also really not intended for Jersey City today and R1 specifically has been in the books for well over 20 + years as it was explained to me.
That's really also why there are variances; some rules in the book just don't make any sense.

Posted on: 2016/3/23 14:41

Edited by JCActivist on 2016/3/23 15:05:45
Top


Re: We need your help in the village!
#14
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


The rear yard requirement in R1 is not 35 FT if the lot is not 100 FT deep. 375 5th is only 50-60 ft deep and following those guidelines, they should be leaving at least a 15 set back. the developer should be allowed to get more height and density if they are accommodating the neighbors. I am pretty sure the developer for the gas station site on Newark Ave (which is a different zoning altogether) gave those balconies a healthy size light well.
Property line windows are illegal and that's why the developer had to set those windows in from the property line knowing fully that a building can go up against it.
I don't have any issues with the height or the number of units proposed here. 375 5th is next to a new 5 story building now and going from 6 units on 3 stories to 12 on 5 is not a stretch for me. What would be a stretch is if they are not accommodating the balconies.
Not fair to compare a mid-block proposed building with 96% lot coverage to a corner building (Oak Condominiums 369 5th) which is 100% lot coverage. ALMOST ALL corner buildings are 100% lot coverage. The ones that are aren't look pretty terrible since that would mean that there is a gap in the street scape. Mid block buildings are RARELY 100% lot coverage (ground floors being an exception)
Oak should support more density, and height, for an exchange of accommodating balconies that should have never been built in the first place.

Posted on: 2016/3/23 12:39
Top


Re: Enos Jones Park Closed - Lead Contamination
#15
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I think you are right. I remember something about daycares and being close to a park. I think if they are within certain number of feet, they don't need their own private outdoor playground otherwise MUST have an outdoor playground as mandated by the State.

Posted on: 2016/3/21 16:28
Top


Re: Enos Jones Park Closed - Lead Contamination
#16
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


I wonder how this impacts Kiddie Academy daycare (10th and Brunswick) which is planning on using the park as their outdoor play area.

Posted on: 2016/3/21 15:22
Top


Re: Fitness Classes Downtown JC
#17
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


BrunswickCenter.com - 189 Brunswick St (@7th St)
They have a community room they rent out hourly; totally hooked up and 11 FT high ceilings with mirrors

info@bgtenterprises.com

Posted on: 2016/1/29 23:31
Top


Re: Fulop proposes 2014 budget with 2.1% tax cut, investment in Jersey City parks
#18
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Didn't he increase taxes by 8% when he took office? So now we are slashing taxes by 2% from his 8% increase? Maybe we could get 2% decreases every year he'll be in office before we start being grateful.

Posted on: 2014/3/11 16:43
Top


Re: Union Republic -- Impressive New Place on Newark Ave @ Third Street
#19
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


This place has the BEST burger I have had in life and they make it so easy to choose. Only one KIND
Ramens are great; I would like to see a bit more option for breakfast menu though if they plan on staying open for breakfast.

Posted on: 2013/12/8 20:49
Top


Re: Union Republic -- Impressive New Place on Newark Ave @ Third Street
#20
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Give these guys a break. They just opened up and just like any other new business, need to tweak a few things. This is by far the MOST impressive spot on Newark Ave. If you go to any established business with 50 people at once and order, I assure you you will wait an hour too. I wished people were a lot more welcoming to new businesses in Jersey City. I have been there twice already for lunch and all I can say is that their noodles are exceptional.

Posted on: 2013/11/27 13:19
Top


Re: Happy Ending in the Making
#21
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


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

Jersey City police closed a Downtown massage parlor and charged two New York women Friday evening with promoting prostitution, the city spokeswoman said today.

Residents in the area had complained to police about the high frequency of men entering and leaving the parlor, as well as other quality of life complaints emanating from the establishment, located in a residential neighborhood on Third Street off of Newark Avenue, city spokeswoman Jennifer Morrill said today.

An undercover detective who was sent into the massage parlor around 5 p.m. Friday was offered sexual services in exchange for money, at which time police entered the business and arrested the two women on prostitution charges, Morrill said.

Gerarda Reyes, 31, of Corona, New York, was charged with prostitution and promoting prostitution, while Evelyn Baradas-Olvera, 22, of Brooklyn, New York, was charged with promoting prostitution.

The investigation was led by the police department's Special Investigations Unit.

Posted on: 2013/8/4 22:59
Top


Re: Working with an architect?
#22
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


This Guy is truly amazing and reasonable.

Scott Mahaffey RA AIA
www.scottmahaffeyarchitect.com
917 822 4567

Posted on: 2012/10/19 0:45
Top


Re: A non-vegan's experience at Subia's... (from yelp)
#23
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


PathH8Tr... Let's really define "slow service"... Sandwiches take anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes. You can walk down the isles 20 times, memorized every ingredient in each bottle, plan your entire week, and you would still have time to spare

Posted on: 2012/8/29 0:35
Top


Re: Stop the Planning Board from making Peter Mocco's Liberty Harbor North into skyscraperville
#24
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


What difference does it make anyway? He is not building it in his life-time. He should have been up to 5,000 units by now but he prefers to play accounting games and screw his contractors out of money.

Posted on: 2012/8/18 15:41
Top


Re: New Building with A name??
#25
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


It's called the Aria.

www.JCARIA.com - 349 Third St.

Posted on: 2012/7/27 23:29
Top


Happy Ending in the Making
#26
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


351 Third Street - Green & White Spa

This placed opened up a few months back in a residential neighborhood in Downtown. I have called the police a few times but nothing has happened yet

I am not anti-sex; in fact, having been raised in Europe, I think this country needs a little more sex ... I just have a fundamental problem with a place like this in the middle of a residential neighborhood 2 houses over from a day care and across law offices.

How do I know it's Full Service? The girls working there flat out told me. It was later verified by my friend.

Am I a disgruntled customer?
A competitor?
A concerned citizen worried about the spread STDs?

You just have to figure that shit out on your own

Posted on: 2012/5/29 19:25
Top



TopTop






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