BrightMoment wrote:
Embankment Preservation Coalition


December 6, 2007
Dear Coalition Supporter:

As you may have read in the local papers (see links below), on November 26th Steve Hyman presented a conceptual development proposal for the Harsimus Branch Embankment plus an additional 22 acres of Conrail-owned land near the Turnpike Extension at the western end of the Embankment.

Coalition members attended the presentation. Here is our initial reaction:
On November 26th, Mr. Hyman's attorneys asserted legal conclusions about the outcome of pending litigation involving the Embankment. The Coalition believes these conclusions are false or misleading. The Coalition is paying for Mr. Montange (the railroad attorney who put together the winning case for the City and Coalition at the Surface Transportation Board [STB]) to address the Council. A fair and balanced presentation by the City's own attorneys will allow the Council to better understand the City's options.

While we welcome the elements of Mr. Hyman's proposal that suggest it will leave 75% of the property as open space, it also calls for construction of roughly 1500 housing units atop (or in lieu of portions of) the municipal, state, and national historic site, requiring towers looming over the National Historic Districts. Clearly this is a matter of concern to the community and must be thoroughly examined.

Mr Hyman also proposes to locate light rail connections in City streets as opposed to on the Embankment itself. It is not clear how this proposal will be received by, or can be accomplished in a fashion compatible with, adjoining neighborhoods, or whether it in the end will assuredly preserve any of the Embankment or secure the East Coast Greenway connection over the Embankment.

Our mission as a 501(c)3 organization is preservation of the historic Harsimus Stem Embankment and its re-use as public park and trail. We nonetheless recognize that development of ground-level and adjoining parcels could contribute to Embankment preservation, to fostering the East Coast Greenway, and to smart development of otherwise blighted or unused properties in Jersey City.

Although Conrail and Mr. Hyman have challenged STB's favorable ruling in federal court, we believe that the City and Coalition will prevail. Mr. Hyman's willingness to make any concessions may reflect a similar assessment on his part.

In the circumstances, we are concerned that the City not waive its rights or abilities to acquire the Embankment either in STB proceedings, federal judicial review proceedings, or state court proceedings. In particular, the City should be in a position at all relevant times, and fully prepared, to use eminent domain to acquire the property for a price no greater than that paid by Mr. Hyman ($3 million).

Nonetheless, we are prepared to review all proposals by Mr. Hyman with him, the City, and other interested parties in an effort to look for common ground, and, more broadly, to achieve an optimal solution for Jersey City and this valuable historic and open space resource.
Below are links to recent newspaper articles on the topic. As you read, please keep in mind that the reports may not be accurate in all details, and note that "Judge" D'Italia is not a sitting judge but rather an advocate for Mr. Hyman.

Dec 4 Jersey Journal - Task Force on Embankment by Ken Thorbourne
Dec 2 Jersey City Reporter - New Plan for 6th Street Embankment by Ricardo Kaulessar

Nov 28 Jersey Journal - Wary Harmony as Plan Unveiled for Embankment by Ken Thorbourne
Nov 27 Jersey Journal - Hyman Softens Embankment Foes by Ken Thorbourne
Nov 24 Jersey Journal - Something in it for Everyone by Ken Thorbourne
Nov 24 Jersey Journal - Wants equal time for Preservationists by Ken Thorbourne

Thank you for your continued support. We will update you as soon as there is more to report.

Sincerely,


Jennifer Meyer
President
Embankment Preservation Coalition jmeyer@embankment.org

Embankment Preservation Coalition | 495 Monmouth Street | Jersey City | NJ | 07302

murican wrote:
Could somebody please explain this? Are they knocking down the whole embankment?

I thought we had saved the embankment. How is it possible for some people /corporations to apply for its demolition?

CITY OF JERSEY CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION PUBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the following items will be heard at a Regular Meeting of the Jersey City Historic Preservation Commission on MONDAY, November 19, 2007 at 6:30 pm in the Conference Room of the Department of Housing, Economic Development, and Commerce on the 14th floor at 30 Montgomery Street, Jersey City, NJ. Parking is available on Christopher Columbus Drive. 1. Call to Order 2. Sunshine Announcement 3. Roll Call 4. Approval of Minutes 5. Correspondence 6. Announcements 7. Open Public Comment 8. Old Business Carried from October 22, 2007 A. Case: H07-227 Applicant: Paul Maracina, applicant for Vision Design and Development, owner Address: 212 Washington Street Block/Lot: 67/K.3 Zone: Paulus Hook Historic District For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new parapet wall, cornice, and roofing system to accommodate larger living quarters at attic level of a contributing, altered circa 1885 to mixed use building, constructed circa 1865, Italianate townhouse in the Paulus Hook Historic District. Application incomplete as of 11/13/07. B. Case: H07-167 Applicant: Michelle Donato, Esq. for 247 Manila Avenue, LLC owner Address: 441-7 Manila Avenue Block/Lot: 247/50.A Zone: Sixth Street Embankment, Grove Street NDP Redevelopment Plan Area For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the municipal landmark site of the Sixth Street Embankment. Recommendation to the Planning Board Carried to December 17, 2007 Meeting at Request of Applicant C. Case: H07-168 Applicant: Michelle Donato, Esq. for 212 Marin Boulevard, LLC owner Address: 437 Marin Boulevard Block/Lot: 212/M Zone: Sixth Street Embankment, Luis Munoz Marin Redevelopment Plan Area For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the municipal landmark site of the Sixth Street Embankment. Recommendation to the Planning Board Carried to December 17, 2007 Meeting at Request of Applicant D. Case: H07-169 Applicant: Michelle Donato, Esq. for 354 Cole Street, LLC owner Address: 99-105 Coles Street Block/Lot: 354/50.A Zone: Sixth Street Embankment For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the municipal landmark site of the Sixth Street Embankment. Recommendation to the Planning Board Carried to December 17, 2007 Meeting at Request of Applicant E. Case: H07-170 Applicant: Michelle Donato, Esq. for 280 Erie Street, LLC owner Address: 618.5 Jersey Avenue Block/Lot: 280/B.1 Zone: Sixth Street Embankment For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the municipal landmark site of the Sixth Street Embankment. Recommendation to the Planning Board Carried to December 17, 2007 Meeting at Request of Applicant F. Case: H07-171 Applicant: Michelle Donato, Esq. for 317 Jersey Avenue, LLC owner Address: 621-27 Jersey Avenue Block/Lot: 317/50.A Zone: Sixth Street Embankment For: Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the municipal landmark site of the Sixth Street Embankment. Recommendation to the Planning Board Carried to December 17, 2007 Meeting at Request of Applicant

Xerxes wrote:
Good Lord,

How many times must we scroll through the same fanciful picture with waving fields of green extending presumably beyond the horizon?...

BrightMoment wrote:
Dear Embankment Supporters:

Despite yesterday's last minute withdrawal of the developer's applications from consideration, they remain very much alive.

Attached is the Jersey City Planning Board's summary of actions taken at yesterday's meeting.

Click here for PDF file: Planning Board Action Summary of Aug 14, 2007

Please note that Items 6, 7, 8 and 9, affecting the future of the Embankment have been tentatively rescheduled for September 25, 2007. Please keep these dates open and plan on attending this very important meeting.

We will do our best to keep you informed on the status of this application as we learn more from the EPC and the City Planning Department as we move closer to the September hearing date.


All the best and thanks for your continued support.


Geoff Elkind
HPNA

gtosatto wrote:
Can't wait! It's great to have good news to celebrate.

Gina

ianmac47 wrote:
The advocacy groups you mention are biased lobbying organizations that each have their own specific agendas, none of which have anything to do with providing transportation alternatives, aiding economic growth, or facing the realities of Jersey City's expanding population.

The Embankment Preservation Coalition:

"The Pennsylvannia Railroad Harsimus Stem Embankment Coalition is a 501(c)3 organization incorporated in the State of New Jersey. It works to protect the elevated stone embankment that was once the easternmost portion of the Pennsylvania Railroad freightway,"

The East Coast Greenway:

"The Alliance plays an essential role in making the East Coast Greenway a reality. We set the vision, define clear criteria for the kind of trail to be created, provide the needed coordination among the many players who will develop, own, and manage the trail"

Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy:

"Founding members, alarmed by rampant development, came together in a concerted effort to preserve, protect, and promote other irreplaceable historic resources of Jersey City, such as Whitlock Cordage, Reservoir 3, The Bergen Arches, Cobblestone Streets, St. John's Episcopal Church, and the Warehouse Historic District....JCLC works to preserve endangered historic sites, conducts historical walking and bus tours, sponsors historical exhibitions, and publishes preservation-related literature"

Further you state that there are hundreds of people in support of preserving the embankment, yet in a city of 240,000 residents, even a thousand supporters is far less than even 1%. And in addition to that, while many people want to see a park built on the land where the embankment sits, not all of those people who want a park want to preserve the stone wall.


Quote:

Ultimately, the concerns about light rail are not based on the "passions" of a "vocal minority" who don't know as much about urban planning as the I-man. Rather, they are carefully considered positions which have been arrived at by people who have, for several years, been involved in a unique opportunity to utilize a historic and natural resource for a public good. It bears noting that these people are not just yelling at others to do the job. These are the same people who worked to secure millions of dollars and funding to acquire the property, and to fight the legal battle which, last week, resulted in a crucial win that gives the city an opportunity to utilize the Embankment for public good, whether as rail or as open space.

The embankment coalition makes clear their single purpose is to save the elevated stone embankment. The coalition's purpose is not to create a sustainable city or to manage Jersey City's growth or transportation needs; it exists to prevent the destruction of the embankment.

The Greenaway alliance has a specific goal of connecting east coast cities with "an urban alternative to the highly popular Appalachian Trail." That's a great goal, but has nothing to do with creating a sustainable city. While a trail system is transportation oriented, it has absolutely nothing to do with practical considerations for moving people on daily basis. Their interest is entirely based on creating the trail network, not creating a transportation network to service the thousands of daily commuters of the metropolitan region.

Finally the JC Landmarks Conservancy is again an organization of preservation, with a stated goal of ensuring critical landmarks are preserved. Yet again, there is no mention of managing the city's growth or balancing future needs.

Like any advocacy group, these three organizations are most concerned about their own agendas rather than the greater good, or they confuse their own agenda with the greater good. The NRA probably wouldn't support a ban on handguns in cities; the Sierra Club probably wouldn't support lower standards for auto emissions; Christian fundamentalists probably wouldn't support building an abortion clinic. But the NRA isn't an authority on crime, nor the Sierra Club an authority the auto industry, nor right to life groups authorities on abortion. Similarly, the embankment coalition, the greenway alliance, and the JCLC are not authoritative organizations on urban planning. They are agenda driven lobbyists looking to promote themselves and their values. Yet they approach any discussion of the use of the embankment as though their beliefs are paramount, as though the debate should end with them.

Just because you and your organization have spent years working towards a goal does not make it the right goal or the best goal. Members of Americans for Fair Taxation may spend years studying the federal tax system, but that doesn't mean the best public policy is to "abolish all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax."

super_furry wrote:
I got off the phone with the City Planning and they confirmed that item 6 is NOT on the agenda tonight.

JPhurst wrote:
The hundreds of people are just the people who have actually donated time, money and other resources to make things a reality. I'd be glad to put this to a voter referendum, would you?

You seem to think that any action needs to be taken by some sort of Platonic form of "Urban Planner," detached from the pesky cries of the people who, you know, actually live in the city. Cities are created by their constituents, and ideally ones who are active and seek to build community and community institutions. Residents may advocate for social services for the poor, may advocate for a light rail line, may advocate for park space, may advocate for night life, or may advocate for a number of such things. Without such inputs, not even the best "Urban Planner" has anything to work with.

If you really think light rail is the best use, then go out and do something about it. And I don't mean post on JClist and make inaccurate personal attacks on the volunteers who disagree with you. I mean go out and secure millions of dollars in funding (done by EPC and its allies), and get hundreds of people to support and volunteer for the cause (ditto), and help retain legal counsel to set aside the unlawful sale of the property so it can be put aside for public use (actually, you don't have to do that, because that's now been done for you. You're welcome, again.).

And convince NJ Transit to shelve the other proposed HBLRT extensions, because you insist that the Embankment Bergen Arches extension is more important than service to Bergen County, to the Meadowlands via North Bergen, or to NJCU, Rte 440, Society Hill, Kearny and Newark Airport. And while your at it explain to NJT why another HBLRT extension trumps Monmouth-Ocean-Middlesex service, or the Lackawanna Cutoff, the RIVER LINE extension to the capital, or the West Trenton Line. Oh, and then there's that little project that has to do with building another tunnel under the Hudson, how could I forget?!