What&rsquo;s the Deal with the Powerhouse? Revitalization Plans Putter Along

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#146

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

i think we will both grow old before either of those happens.

Posted on: 2016/4/28 21:37

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#145

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

I just dont think option B is feasible unless they build more than 1 tower or significantly increase the height/density to get more units in. Why do you think developers are dragging their feet, when you got highrises going up all around in the last few years.

We are in full agreement on this point. Where we differ is I believe some preservation is better than no preservation. It's a respectable differences of opinion. If this new development makes a bastardization of the original powerhouse, you may have a point and the building may be better off with a dignified death. But I don't believe that will be the case.

What is your opinion on the six street embankment park?

same as everything in jc - great idea/vision, piss poor (or nonexistent) follow through. This is a no brainer to turn it into a mini highline - similar to what nyc did.

but of course nothing ever got done as far as i know - started in 2010 i remember, just politics and wasting tax payer money on legal battles that amounted to nothing. I stopped follow up on this after a few years when it's obvious this will remain as a strip of abandoned overgrown weed patch.

was there any progress at all recently by some miracle?

Meh... I'm cautiously optimistic, that progress, all be it very slow snails pace progress, is being made. But with all the troubles regarding the six street embankment, we'll probably see you enjoying a meal or shopping at the grand opening of the Powerhouse retail complex, signing its praises, before they sort the embankment legalize out. :)

Posted on: 2016/4/28 20:37

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#144

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

I just dont think option B is feasible unless they build more than 1 tower or significantly increase the height/density to get more units in. Why do you think developers are dragging their feet, when you got highrises going up all around in the last few years.

We are in full agreement on this point. Where we differ is I believe some preservation is better than no preservation. It's a respectable differences of opinion. If this new development makes a bastardization of the original powerhouse, you may have a point and the building may be better off with a dignified death. But I don't believe that will be the case.

What is your opinion on the six street embankment park?

same as everything in jc - great idea/vision, piss poor (or nonexistent) follow through. This is a no brainer to turn it into a mini highline - similar to what nyc did.

but of course nothing ever got done as far as i know - started in 2010 i remember, just politics and wasting tax payer money on legal battles that amounted to nothing. I stopped follow up on this after a few years when it's obvious this will remain as a strip of abandoned overgrown weed patch.

was there any progress at all recently by some miracle?

Posted on: 2016/4/28 18:24

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#143

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Quote:

I just dont think option B is feasible unless they build more than 1 tower or significantly increase the height/density to get more units in. Why do you think developers are dragging their feet, when you got highrises going up all around in the last few years.

We are in full agreement on this point. Where we differ is I believe some preservation is better than no preservation. It's a respectable differences of opinion. If this new development makes a bastardization of the original powerhouse, you may have a point and the building may be better off with a dignified death. But I don't believe that will be the case.

What is your opinion on the six street embankment park?

Posted on: 2016/4/28 16:28

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#142

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
You and I both know it will be some form of option B that prevails, preferably with most of the Powerhouse building in tact. JC must preserve some of its history.

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The fact that it's been this long of waiting and no firm plans in place tells me two things. The wrong redeveloper was picked and the 40 story tower doesn't provide enough funding for financers to immediately jump on the project.

My guess is they are going to have to go back out and select a redeveloper with the experience and financial backing to get the job done, as well as making it lucrative enough with development rights. Maybe the current one will get it done. Time will tell.

All you zealots calling for the outight demolition are going to be disappointed. Hahaha.

1) The developer selected - Cordish Companies, is the same developer responsible for successfully developing the baltimore inner harbor project you all are raving about.

2) You got the 2nd part right, the financials still not feasible for any private developers to invest in this.

So options:

A) demolish and put some trees/green space.

B) keep the shell of a building, and stick another trump III highrise on top of it to make it feasible for development.

I choose A).

you are not preserving any history - all the iconic features of the building are long gone. Baltimore's project as someone said, majority of the original structural remained intact. All you are doing is sticking another giant high rise in that tiny space. Whatever is left of the powerhouse will be a joke.

I am fine with both options actually, as long as something gets done. I just dont think option B is feasible unless they build more than 1 tower or significantly increase the height/density to get more units in. Why do you think developers are dragging their feet, when you got highrises going up all around in the last few years.

Posted on: 2016/4/28 15:41

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#141

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

You and I both know it will be some form of option B that prevails, preferably with most of the Powerhouse building in tact. JC must preserve some of its history.

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The fact that it's been this long of waiting and no firm plans in place tells me two things. The wrong redeveloper was picked and the 40 story tower doesn't provide enough funding for financers to immediately jump on the project.

My guess is they are going to have to go back out and select a redeveloper with the experience and financial backing to get the job done, as well as making it lucrative enough with development rights. Maybe the current one will get it done. Time will tell.

All you zealots calling for the outight demolition are going to be disappointed. Hahaha.

1) The developer selected - Cordish Companies, is the same developer responsible for successfully developing the baltimore inner harbor project you all are raving about.

2) You got the 2nd part right, the financials still not feasible for any private developers to invest in this.

So options:

A) demolish and put some trees/green space.

B) keep the shell of a building, and stick another trump III highrise on top of it to make it feasible for development.

I choose A).

Posted on: 2016/4/28 0:01

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#140

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

The fact that it's been this long of waiting and no firm plans in place tells me two things. The wrong redeveloper was picked and the 40 story tower doesn't provide enough funding for financers to immediately jump on the project.

My guess is they are going to have to go back out and select a redeveloper with the experience and financial backing to get the job done, as well as making it lucrative enough with development rights. Maybe the current one will get it done. Time will tell.

All you zealots calling for the outight demolition are going to be disappointed. Hahaha.

1) The developer selected - Cordish Companies, is the same developer responsible for successfully developing the baltimore inner harbor project you all are raving about.

2) You got the 2nd part right, the financials still not feasible for any private developers to invest in this.

So options:

A) demolish and put some trees/green space.

B) keep the shell of a building, and stick another trump III highrise on top of it to make it feasible for development.

I choose A).

Posted on: 2016/4/27 22:25

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#139

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Issue an RFP for a company to repurpose the Powerhouse for retail or some other purpose along with a sizable residential/commercial/mixed-use component to fund it, and let the proposals and private dollars flow in.

So firggin' easy. If they can do it in Baltimore, why not here with our market is much stronger thanks to proximity to the city. Current plans call for a 40-story tower to help fund the preservation, shit... make it a hundred stories with no height limit and watch how many developers are jumping over each other to save the Powerhouse. Already four 70 story towers planned for the area, why not a 100 if it gets the job done.

I can't believe I'm hearing all these calls on her to demolish Powerhouse all for a park? Seriously?? 6th Street Embankment is the next logical location for the park.

yes so "firggin easy" - just to show how out of touch and clueless you are.

No point to even continue this discussion, it's just a waste of time.

Can't wait for the day when this is underway.

Preservation has to be scaled to what funding will allow. At a minimum, the outside facade can be preserved and maintained while a new structure is built within. Not my prefered plan, but better than outright demolition or just having it sit there decaying.

The fact that it's been this long of waiting and no firm plans in place tells me two things. The wrong redeveloper was picked and the 40 story tower doesn't provide enough funding for financers to immediately jump on the project.

My guess is they are going to have to go back out and select a redeveloper with the experience and financial backing to get the job done, as well as making it lucrative enough with development rights. Maybe the current one will get it done. Time will tell.

All you zealots calling for the outight demolition are going to be disappointed. Hahaha.

Posted on: 2016/4/26 23:11

tommyc_37

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#138

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12
Last Login :
2020/9/30 18:46

From Van Vorst Park

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 2391

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Issue an RFP for a company to repurpose the Powerhouse for retail or some other purpose along with a sizable residential/commercial/mixed-use component to fund it, and let the proposals and private dollars flow in.

So firggin' easy. If they can do it in Baltimore, why not here with our market is much stronger thanks to proximity to the city. Current plans call for a 40-story tower to help fund the preservation, shit... make it a hundred stories with no height limit and watch how many developers are jumping over each other to save the Powerhouse. Already four 70 story towers planned for the area, why not a 100 if it gets the job done.

I can't believe I'm hearing all these calls on her to demolish Powerhouse all for a park? Seriously?? 6th Street Embankment is the next logical location for the park.

Talk about false equivalences....You can't compare the Powerhouse in the Baltimore Inner Harbor to ours. For starters, the JC Powerhouse has sat unused for many, many years. The Baltimore Powerhouse never saw more than 10 years without activity, so it never deteriorated like ours. Second, the Baltimore Powerhouse is right next to a much larger urban renovation success (the Inner Harbor) which made its restoration and repurposing a much more viable possibility. Our Powerhouse is next to nothing... the closest thing is a waterfront that features boring, uninspired buildings with nothing going on to attract large numbers of people from afar, or even from the immediate area. Just to the northeast, you have even more uninspired housing in the form of Avalon Cove, and the other Newport buildings. The Powerhouse neighborhood is coming along nicely, but then again it does not have the commercial or entertainment draw of something like the Baltimore Inner Harbor.

Agreed, also Baltimore is clearly the center of everything in its region - it is the center of commerce, culture, sports, entertainment. Jersey City is not this. It is very much a bedroom community and it looks to remain so, for the foreseeable future. I think this would struggle anywhere around here except Manhattan -- in terms of outside Manhattan it might have some legs in Wiliamsburg because that has started to attract some volume of visitors over the past 5 years or so.

I'm not sure how I feel about the Powerhouse. I'm a fan of preservation so I would like to see something done with it.

Posted on: 2016/4/25 18:42

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#137

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Issue an RFP for a company to repurpose the Powerhouse for retail or some other purpose along with a sizable residential/commercial/mixed-use component to fund it, and let the proposals and private dollars flow in.

So firggin' easy. If they can do it in Baltimore, why not here with our market is much stronger thanks to proximity to the city. Current plans call for a 40-story tower to help fund the preservation, shit... make it a hundred stories with no height limit and watch how many developers are jumping over each other to save the Powerhouse. Already four 70 story towers planned for the area, why not a 100 if it gets the job done.

I can't believe I'm hearing all these calls on her to demolish Powerhouse all for a park? Seriously?? 6th Street Embankment is the next logical location for the park.

yes so "firggin easy" - just to show how out of touch and clueless you are.

No point to even continue this discussion, it's just a waste of time.

Posted on: 2016/4/25 18:20

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#136

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Issue an RFP for a company to repurpose the Powerhouse for retail or some other purpose along with a sizable residential/commercial/mixed-use component to fund it, and let the proposals and private dollars flow in.

So firggin' easy. If they can do it in Baltimore, why not here with our market is much stronger thanks to proximity to the city. Current plans call for a 40-story tower to help fund the preservation, shit... make it a hundred stories with no height limit and watch how many developers are jumping over each other to save the Powerhouse. Already four 70 story towers planned for the area, why not a 100 if it gets the job done.

I can't believe I'm hearing all these calls on her to demolish Powerhouse all for a park? Seriously?? 6th Street Embankment is the next logical location for the park.

Talk about false equivalences....You can't compare the Powerhouse in the Baltimore Inner Harbor to ours. For starters, the JC Powerhouse has sat unused for many, many years. The Baltimore Powerhouse never saw more than 10 years without activity, so it never deteriorated like ours. Second, the Baltimore Powerhouse is right next to a much larger urban renovation success (the Inner Harbor) which made its restoration and repurposing a much more viable possibility. Our Powerhouse is next to nothing... the closest thing is a waterfront that features boring, uninspired buildings with nothing going on to attract large numbers of people from afar, or even from the immediate area. Just to the northeast, you have even more uninspired housing in the form of Avalon Cove, and the other Newport buildings. The Powerhouse neighborhood is coming along nicely, but then again it does not have the commercial or entertainment draw of something like the Baltimore Inner Harbor.

Posted on: 2016/4/25 18:00

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#135

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

I wonder if you understand the level of current disrepair of the Powerhouse. It isn't a matter of rehabilitation. The place is on the brink of collapse.

Do you understand the conditions of the powerhouse? I have been inside several times with Cultural Affairs. The worst parts, the corroded iron stacks and the east facing tower have been removed/stabilized. I'd think the Port Authority would move their equipment if it was "on the brink of collapse."

Yes, parts of the Powerhouse are on the brink of collapse. But, don't take my word for it. Straight from the group spearheading the calls for its preservation:

Quote:

It was apparent that the rooftop monitors deteriorated significantly since the stabilization project began. Several pieces of concrete encasement have fallen off. The Agency?s structural engineer for the project assessed the situation and determined that the monitors be demolished as quickly as possible to prevent any further damage to the structure below. It was noted that the roof monitors were in danger of collapsing within the building.

and this:

Quote:

While performing their work an unstable section of the monitor wall on the east side of the building collapsed.

Both quotes taken from here: http://www.jcpowerhouse.org/2013/08/16/roof-demolition/

Posted on: 2016/4/25 17:55

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#134

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Issue an RFP for a company to repurpose the Powerhouse for retail or some other purpose along with a sizable residential/commercial/mixed-use component to fund it, and let the proposals and private dollars flow in.

So firggin' easy. If they can do it in Baltimore, why not here with our market is much stronger thanks to proximity to the city. Current plans call for a 40-story tower to help fund the preservation, shit... make it a hundred stories with no height limit and watch how many developers are jumping over each other to save the Powerhouse. Already four 70 story towers planned for the area, why not a 100 if it gets the job done.

I can't believe I'm hearing all these calls on her to demolish Powerhouse all for a park? Seriously?? 6th Street Embankment is the next logical location for the park.

Posted on: 2016/4/25 16:34

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#133

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/1/23 19:44
Last Login :
8/3 21:41

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 344

Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

It can and should be easily restored.

No it cannot. Some of the replies here just shows how clueless and ignorant the advocates understand the situation.

You all keep saying we can turn it into this and that, to "easily" restore it. Yet continue to keep your head in the sand and ignore reality - 1) there is NO MONEY to restore it 2) it NEVER will be feasible in term of economics for any private developers to step in.

Why do you think it's been sitting there for 10 years without any developer touching it? while the whole area next to it were built?

So it's all great you think we can turn it into a theater, museum, whatever. The reality is it will just sit there for another 10 years as a dangerous abandoned warehouse while the clueless continue to scream - protect and restore without offering any real solution or path forward.

Posted on: 2016/4/25 16:25

JC_Man

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#132

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/5/22 20:46
Last Login :
2022/5/31 3:07

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 495

Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Yes - JC has a population density of approximately 17K people/Sq Mile - Hoboken - 25K and NYC 28K. And up until a few years ago the immediate area around the Powerhouse was parking lots for the past few decades.

Posted on: 2016/4/23 2:13

JCman24

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#131

Home away from home

Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15
Last Login :
2019/2/27 14:41

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 500

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

I wonder if you understand the level of current disrepair of the Powerhouse. It isn't a matter of rehabilitation. The place is on the brink of collapse.

Do you understand the conditions of the powerhouse? I have been inside several times with Cultural Affairs. The worst parts, the corroded iron stacks and the east facing tower have been removed/stabilized. I'd think the Port Authority would move their equipment if it was "on the brink of collapse."

Jersey City has thrown out too much of its history to allow yet another monument be destroyed. There are plenty of parking lots in the area that could be utilized for green space if the city really wanted to do so. The waterfront walkway is also not that far away.

Posted on: 2016/4/23 1:52

JCman24

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#130

Home away from home

Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15
Last Login :
2019/2/27 14:41

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 500

Quote:

JC_Man wrote:

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Hello, fellow JC Man. I agree that the Powerhouse should be saved at all costs, but it was built in 1908. The 1910 census had Jersey City's population at 267,779. That is higher than it is today by over 10,000. Downtown was high density at the time, but in the tenement sense, not the luxury highrise sense.

Posted on: 2016/4/23 1:29

JC_Man

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#129

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/5/22 20:46
Last Login :
2022/5/31 3:07

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 495

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
i have said it many times, this whole project is a complete joke and will never be practical. All it does is waste money with nothing to show for it.

Meanwhile this dangerous structure in the middle of a high density residential zone, directly on top of the path transformers / main traffic lanes, and in an area that is very susceptible to high winds are allowed to continue to deteriorate.

It is both a major hazard and a boon to all the residents living near it. It has become a complete garbage dump, that smells in the summer, and also blows the garbage everywhere when it is windy.

Someone needs to grow some balls, and tear it down, cover up the transformers in a safe structure, connect the triangle area (another garbage dump) next to it, and put a grass field or plant some trees.

God knows we need some green space in that area, with at least 5 highrises (1 mega high density) coming online in the next 2 years, on top of the existing highrises already in place, and ZERO park/green space.

All those historical preservation nutjobs be damned, it's an abandoned brick warehouse, all the cool features like smoke stacks and large glass window are already completely destroyed. I want those "advocates' to live there for a few weeks and see how they like it.

Dangerous structure? It's a four story, historical structure that was there LONG before the area became a high density residential area. It can and should be easily restored. You make it like it's a 50 story building built on wooded stilts. Please.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 23:35

jcgirl

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#128

Just can't stay away

Joined:
2004/10/17 17:20
Last Login :
2019/4/18 18:53

From Near the water, but on the land

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 82

Its best to keep it as a building of some sort - the slab is protective of the contamination that lies beneath. Chromium and PCBs if I had to guess.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 19:02

nafco

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#127

Home away from home

Joined:
2007/8/1 19:34
Last Login :
2022/4/27 19:59

From journal square

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 269

to want it torn down is a very short sighted response to what can be a great addition and attraction to the neighborhood which is desperately lacking something besides another bland high rise residential building (which is what it will be replaced with if torn down).

Having the powerhouse act as a part museum of how it used to run as well as a profitable place for recreation and business with large outdoor plaza space will much better serve the community on the whole. I agree that financing is an issue, but it has been successfully done in the past, and can be done again. its in a prime location, so someone will bite eventually.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 18:31

JCnewbie

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#126

Newbie

Joined:
2016/4/22 16:01
Last Login :
2016/12/14 15:47

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3

parks > no preservation of powerhouse

some preservation > no preservation

so then,

parks + some preservation > no preservation

my suggestion: strip down the powerhouse to the walls and facade. keep select historic relics w/in it. Build a new structure w/in said walls - anchoring walls and facade to new structure to strengthen and reinforce the crippling structure. thus, you accomplish the preservation of the symbol and combine updated, cost-effective construction.

thoughts?

Posted on: 2016/4/22 16:12

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#125

Home away from home

Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
8/5 12:48

From Jersey City

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 1032

Posted on: 2016/4/22 15:41

JCishome

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#124

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/9/19 17:59
Last Login :
2017/4/18 17:32

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 486

I agree that the city is apparently allowing anyone to build anything, anywhere they want. And while it's an overstatement to call the waterfront a disgrace, it certainly hasn't been optimized. I just think any park that replaces the powerhouse is likely to be a windswept traffic island, not the verdant wonderland you guys seem to envision.

Here's a point maybe we can all agree on - let's put the parks emphasis on the Sixth Street Embankment, a real opportunity to create a unique, sustainable place for recreation and relaxation. AND the powerhouse could be preserved, at least in some form.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 15:01

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#123

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

JCishome wrote:
I get a little aggravated by the people who call for parks, parks parks. If you wanted to live in the suburbs, you should have stayed there.

You obviously do not understand the importance of parks to cities and neighborhoods.

Quote:

Someone with imagination and money will ultimately rehabilitate the powerhouse, and we'll have at least one reminder of who we used to be.

I wonder if you understand the level of current disrepair of the Powerhouse. It isn't a matter of rehabilitation. The place is on the brink of collapse. It will take a massive amount of money to stabilize and undo the damage from decades of neglect. The smokestacks couldn't be salvaged, the structure was exposed to the elements for far too long, and now we are stuck with a building that will require way too much money to try and salvage.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 14:55

brewster

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#122

Home away from home

Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42

From Hamilton Park

Group:
Banned

Posts: 5775

Quote:

JCishome wrote:
I get a little aggravated by the people who call for parks, parks parks. If you wanted to live in the suburbs, you should have stayed there.

Not that I want the powerhouse razed, but part of what makes cities work is having shared greenspace, rather than everyone having their own. It's what has made brownstone DTJC & Hoboken, as well as Park Slope & the UWS, so attractive to families. Unfortunately neither the city nor developers east of Marin have given any priority to parks, our waterfront is a disgrace compared to Hoboken's.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 14:20

JCishome

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#121

Home away from home

Joined:
2013/9/19 17:59
Last Login :
2017/4/18 17:32

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 486

Sorry, but I gotta disagree. Sure, parks are nice and necessary, but the powerhouse is one of the last remaining symbols of Jersey City's past. In a couple of years, that area will be almost completely transformed into a sterile, glass-fronted boring-ville. It will be Atlanta-north.

Someone with imagination and money will ultimately rehabilitate the powerhouse, and we'll have at least one reminder of who we used to be. I get a little aggravated by the people who call for parks, parks parks. If you wanted to live in the suburbs, you should have stayed there.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 14:11

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#120

Home away from home

Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 3932

Quote:

jcguy05 wrote:
i have said it many times, this whole project is a complete joke and will never be practical. All it does is waste money with nothing to show for it.

Meanwhile this dangerous structure in the middle of a high density residential zone, directly on top of the path transformers / main traffic lanes, and in an area that is very susceptible to high winds are allowed to continue to deteriorate.

It is both a major hazard and a boon to all the residents living near it. It has become a complete garbage dump, that smells in the summer, and also blows the garbage everywhere when it is windy.

Someone needs to grow some balls, and tear it down, cover up the transformers in a safe structure, connect the triangle area (another garbage dump) next to it, and put a grass field or plant some trees.

God knows we need some green space in that area, with at least 5 highrises (1 mega high density) coming online in the next 2 years, on top of the existing highrises already in place, and ZERO park/green space.

All those historical preservation nutjobs be damned, it's an abandoned brick warehouse, all the cool features like smoke stacks and large glass window are already completely destroyed. I want those "advocates' to live there for a few weeks and see how they like it.

It sounds harsh, but you are right. I live two blocks away and already tired of the eyesore this has become and frustrated with the utter failure of this project to gain any traction. The neighborhood would be much better served by a park, particularly since the assholes at NJ The One ripped out the park adjacent to their property and have yet to restore it, as originally promised. As you point out, we do not have any green areas AT ALL. The closest park is Newport Green (about half a mile away) and then Hamilton Park three quarters of a mile away.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 2:30

Snapple

Re: PRESERVATION OF POWERHOUSE TO BEGIN

#119

Just can't stay away

Joined:
2006/5/17 14:30
Last Login :
2018/12/13 3:14

From Paulus Hook

Group:
Registered Users

Posts: 71

I hate to say it, but I totally agree. Tear what's left of it down and make a park. I've been hearing these preservation promises for over ten years now. Enough is enough.

Posted on: 2016/4/21 22:26