tbo wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

tbo wrote:

It was the developer that sued the City and took the project to court. He is the one who decided to waste taxpayer money instead of going to the zoning or planning board as every developer in the City has to do. Any "concessions" that he made with the City were never realistic or came with other unreasonable demands.

The developer went to court to enforce his legally granted rights. Clearly the community had issue with the process, but that is not the developer's problem. The fact that he was willing to make concessions at all was commendable; it certainly wasn't required. The argument that this development was out of character for the neighborhood really was a stretch when you consider directly across Varick is a building with a slightly larger number of apartments.

Also the fact the city decided to appeal a case that's sure to lose at the behest of the VVPA. And there were many arguments the VVPA made up to oppose this, but parking was the one that got the most publicity. VVPA also floated a classist and borderline discriminatory argument that the type of development would bring in young 20-somethings and they the neighborhood didn't need "those people". So thanks to the collective wisdom of the VVPA, tax money is being wasted on pointless lawsuits and the area is still a blighted damn parking lot - one that could have been paying taxes and at least.

Like I said before (although you edited my quote)

Wrong on all counts....you are misinformed...

So stop lying. No point in arguing with a Troll.

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Quote:

ceo3west wrote:
The proposal was approved unanimously.

Quote:

jc2000 wrote:
Was there any progress made last night or did it get moved to the next hearing?

Good. Maybe the NIMBYs should trot out better arguments than "Waahhhhh, we'll lose our free parking" and "Think of the children!" when they decide to oppose something. Unfortunately, they got their way with the R5 zoning.

jc2000 wrote:
Was there any progress made last night or did it get moved to the next hearing?

Tino wrote:
Not really the point I was going for, but sure I guess it does. The developer/lawyer's main points were that the building is practically in the Newark Ave. zone and should be zoned accordingly, the adjacent building heights are in line with what they're trying to build, adding a garage for parking would kill 2 permanent street parking spots and only net gain a couple spots.

The neighbors' main arguments were that they're not enough parking and that the building would cast too many shadows. It wasn't that they had bad arguments, but they were so rude and disrespectful that the VNA leaders eventually had to ask them to leave.

So yeah - are the fears valid? I guess, but they're just not people I could get behind.

JCActivist wrote:
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?

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ceo3west wrote:
Speaking of new path stations, I recently emailed Candice Osborne about discussing with the Port Authority a new station in between Grove and Journal Square (somewhere around Brunswick). These two stations are nearly 2 miles apart, and there are a ton of new developments that are going up or have gone up already in the Village neighborhood. Folks around the Enos Jones area have to walk 20-30 mins to get to a station, and there are ~200 new units going up there.

Candice said she would discuss it with the PA, and the PA did get back to me saying they would take a look at this as a long-term project.

You do realize the station would be on Columbus right? Columbus & Bruswick is only 2500' from Grove. And that's still 2200 ft from Pavonia & Brunswick. From P & B to Grove via Newark is 4000 ft, and if that takes you 20 minutes you've got to stop dragging your feet. Googlemaps clocks it at 16 min, seems about right. The same radius from the station in Hoboken would only be at 6th & Willow, not considered far there at all. Oh, and the stations only 1.5 miles apart, not 2.

I'd say Candace & the PA is humoring you. That's what they do.

La_Verdad wrote:
I live downtown. I'm not trying to pit anybody against anyone. Just a little tired of the entitled and/or NIMBY bitching. I agree that the city isn't going to fully turn the corner (and even become an "above-average Mid-sized city") until families can stay, but I don't see how subsidizing Pre-K for folks who can comfortably afford it has anything to do with that.

richieveal wrote:
I want them to start slashing the taxes but to give a perspective of what he is proposing....2.1% of $12,000 is only $252. We need 10-20% cut. What's even more funny about this is that the beginning of the year I got a notice that my taxes went $210 a month. It's such a joke.
I pay all this and send my kids to private school on top of this.
Then again I don't ever plan on leaving.

Tyler wrote:
Quote:

H-Parker wrote:
[quote]


I wish it were true that Fulop is winning hands down, but you underestimate the strength of the machine, the cost of apathy and the risks of overconfidence. The race is very tight and can still go either way.

.

Yes! I hear Fulop needs like 6,000 more voters from downtown to show up to the polls to pull this off. Greenville is on fire with Healy fever.

Bobblehead wrote:
Rochester has a good music scene (Eastman School of Music, jazz, and blues festivals). It has some good museums. In these respects, it kicks JC's ass.

It has great parks. It has a lot of good restaurants. It has colleges and universities.

It is a little quaint--it is has more of a midwestern culture than an east coast culture--but, if you have a job, it is a great place to live and raise a family.

Mathias wrote:
I don't believe pensions and healthcare are just for the super rich. If you work hard and play by the rules you deserve decent pay, vacation time, health benefits and a retirement.