It's so funny when people who have no knowledge of the preservation community try to portray them and their positions.

The EPC is perhaps the best and most successful organization in the city. They are focused, willing to compromise (reasonably), and have actually taken steps such as identifying and securing funds for the project. This is a group that deserves everyone's full support.

Regarding the need to compromise, it has already been done. There have been plenty of historic resources that have been destroyed in the name of development. The preservation community simply demands that those few remaining that have a proven constituency receive the protection that they deserve.

No one can seriously say that this city preserves too much and gets in the way of development.

Quote:

And if faux-preservationists had there way, Newport would still be a huge rubble strewn deserted railyard covered in diesel droppings echoing the bucolic days of Penn-Central and Lehigh Valley railroad ownership and looking like Dresden after the firebombing. People could stand amidst the refuse and imagine steam locotomtives filling the skies with beautiful spews of coal ash...and dream of the "GOOD OLD DAYS."



Preservationism is a very valuable goal, but preservationists must be discriminating. If preservationist decide that EVERYTHING old is worth saving, then they are nothing better than people who won't clean up after themselves...like those brothers who filled their mansion stem to stern with old newspapers because they were too lazy to throw them out.

"Junk is junk is junk"...Gertrude Stein!

The High Line
Length: 1.52 miles
Total area: 6.7 acres
Buildings travel through 2
City blocks crossed: 22
Total streets traversing: 25
Maximum width 88ft
Minimum width: 30ft
Height: 29ft above
Materials: steel frame, reinforced concrete deck,
gravel ballast, metal handrails.
Design competition: December 2002


Promenade Plant?e
Length: 2.81 miles
Total area: 16 acres
Buildings travel through2
City blocks crossed: 20
Total streets traversing: 21
Maximum width 100ft
Minimum width 30ft
Height: 30ft above
Materials: brick structure with wood, metal and
glass details.
Design competition: 1988

"Blight" is in the eye of the beholder. Take Xerxes assessment for what it's worth: that is, he willingly lives in a Newport monstrosity.

The "Embankment" aka Railroad Tracks is a hideous leftover waste of space from a bygone era. The sooner it is razed the better.
Saving EVERYTHING from the past is NOT saving history anymore than saving old kitty litter or rusty cans.

As for beauty, if any homeowner had a weed filled back yard that looked like that he would face stiff fines.
Views? I agree with the previous poster...the views are better from the street.

There's a good reason that we don't see many parks that are 30 feet wide and 15 feet in the air separated every block with busy streets...I guess bridges will have to be built.

Preservationist who want to save EVERYTHING give a bad name to those who want to save the most beautiful and historic sites. And that Embankment definitely falls into the category of "everything."


Get rid of the BLIGHT!

Bright Moment, love the new photo what happened at the hearing yesterday??

HPC To Resume Hardship Hearing
Wed, Apr. 29, 6:30 pm
City Hall Council Chambers
280 Grove Street

The Jersey City Historic Preservation Commission will resume hearing applications, from six LLCs and Conrail, for hardship exemptions that would allow them to demolish the Harsimus Branch Embankment. The Commission previously denied applications for Certificates of Appropriateness for demolition of the Municipal Landmark.

We cannot gauge how long these presentations will take or if public comment will be taken on this date or at a subsequent hearing. If you intend to testify against hardship exemptions, come prepared. Guidelines are on the Coalition's web site.

Hyman now wants Embankment mansions

Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By AMY SARA CLARK
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

The economy is in the tank. But Steve Hyman, owner of the Sixth Street Embankment, is betting there's still enough rich people around to plunk down $5 million for a mansion in Downtown Jersey City.

Unable to come to terms with the city and environmentalists over plans for the elevated, unused railroad turnaround that runs along Sixth Street between Marin Boulevard and Brunswick Street, Hyman is now proposing to build 12 multimillion-dollar homes on the property.

"The theory behind these houses is that even though the economy is in tough shape, there are still a lot of wealthy people out there, and you only need a few people to make this work," he said.

To appease the city's Historic Preservation Commission, which barred Hyman from tearing down the Embankment's stone walls, Hyman says his new proposal preserves 96 percent of the walls.

Even if the HPC were to approve Hyman's mansion plan, he wouldn't be able to begin building anytime soon due to a ruling in August 2007 by the federal Surface Transportation Board, which determined that Conrail never properly "abandoned" the site.

Attorneys hired by the city believe the ruling could mean that Hyman no longer owns the land and the city has to be given the opportunity to buy the land for the $3 million it sold for in 2005. But Hyman has appealed the ruling.

The Embankment Preservation Coalition wants to preserve the land as open space, while Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy wants a combination of open space and a Light Rail link.

In the most recent round of negotiations, the city and the Embankment Preservation Coalition offered to let Hyman build a 490-unit high rise on most of the first block of the Embankment, but he would be required to leave room for the Light Rail and a "Rails-to-Trails" bike and hiking path, Hyman said.

"If Mr. Hyman now believes that he needs to build only 12 luxury units to make enough profit, he clearly should put them in one signature building on the Embankment closest to the waterfront or on the at-grade parcels on the west end," Embankment Preservation Coalition representatives said in a statement.

"This alternative would preserve the landmark Embankment, accommodate a park and Light Rail and have little to no adverse effect on surrounding historic districts," they added.

Hyman is scheduled to go before the HPC on April 29 to again ask for permission to tear down the Embankment walls as part of his original plan to build two-family homes.

Quote:

Those are some great shots. Look, you can see Bed, Bath and Beyond from there. Oh, and the building that used to be a hospital and is now under construction (for the past umpteen months) to be condos. Hey, you can see roofs from there as well. There's the Doubletree Hotel, Newport Mall, the little league field across the street, Shoprite... the same stuff I can see from my window, front step or around the corner. Sweet.

Quote:
The odds of getting shot in Jersey are higher than most things, this being Jersey after all.

Save the hysteria over falling stone chicken little! You have a better chance getting hit by a bullet in Jersey than being hit by a falling stone from the embankment! Give me a break!

Quote:


That thread is still here.

http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewt ... p?topic_id=16984&forum=10

Hi...

What happened to the thread about the falling stones that caused the JCFD to tape off a whole section of the corner of 6th and Erie. It was front page on the Jersey Journal on Tuesday.

Seems that that conveniently disappeared. What about TRUTH do these folks who want to keep the embankment don't realize. And why were the posts removed? Webmaster? Please explain?

The embankment needs to come down before someone is injured by falling stones.

FACT.

Thanks

FG

I'd LOVE to live in luxury up there. But I really think the views belong to all of us. Here's a photo set I took from atop the embankment in late November of 2007:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stc4blue ... 72157603270198814/detail/

luxury housing is better than projects, at least.

Quote:

I somehow doubt you know what you are talking about.

That aside, your comments regarding the Embankment are spot on.

Quote:

I think it's strong enough to hold either, but not until it's reenforced. The owner isn't going to pay for that if he just ends up having to give it back to the city. Although he runs a liability risk. I would sue if a big brick fell on me. Maybe then I could afford one of his proposed units.

I don't mind this plan. I don't mind the park plan. Don't even mind the light rail plan. I just don't want high rises or low income housing.

So what's the deal? The embankment is too weak and crumbling to hold a park but suddenly it's peachy enough to hold luxury condos and a pool? Please.

Quote:

I disagree, Grove/Manila is affordable housing all the way from Bay st to 6th st. NO MORE!!! Bring on the biggest bad luxury money can buy are far as I'm concerned just no more projects that will hurt property values.
I believe these are the best plans I've seen, I never really liked the Light-Rail idea, I see the disrespectful teenage trash that take it from Bayonne to the mall, no thanks! NIMBY!!
If it can't be an elevated park, I think I could actually live with this. Might even be better because a park will not doubt bring crime with it.
What's so wrong with Luxury Housing? Never did understand that mentality, are you afraid of being priced out?

Quote:

I'm going to be a bad pupil and disagree with teacher - I hate the new plan, as I've hated all of the other ones.

Remember, the alternative not low income housing (although that would be a better use than Hyman's proposal), but a park that EVERYONE can use, that respects the history of the embankment, the neighborhood and Jersey City in general. Our city's industrial past and railway center is part of what makes J.C. unique. It's a wonderful part of our heritage.

Remember, there has been a ruling that Hyman never properly purchased the land is therefore not the rightful owner of the Embankment.

Remember that Jersey City is woefully short public downtown green spaces.

And yes, "hopefully" you'll take a dip in the pool, if your new neighbors deign to let you onto their private property.

More luxury housing is the last thing needed in Jersey City.

Terrific plan! Great private use, without congestion, highrises, and more low income housing.
Hopefully, the Mrs & I can go over for cocktails and a dip in that pool!

This is the first proposal I actually like.

They forgot to add fences to keep their children from falling off the sides.

Looks like there is a new "plan" from the developer. Apparently, all he wants to do is make a profit from the City on land that he does not own. I guess he has no case for his Hardship Application.

Great, go for, try to sell 12 $5 million dollar homes!

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

Facing a failing economy and stymied by a lack of progress on his proposal to put 600 units of housing, a park and a light rail line on top of the Sixth Street Embankment, developer Steve Hyman has come up with a new plan.

The plan scraps the park and light rail and instead proposes putting 12 multi-million dollar houses on top of the historic six-block embankment stretching along Sixth Street, from Marin Boulevard to Brunswick Street.

"The theory behind these houses is that even though the economy is in tough shape, there are still a lot of wealthy people out there, and you only need a few people to make this work," he said.

He also said the new plan is more likely to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission, since 96 percent of the wall would remain intact.

"I got back to the basics and said, 'I'm in front of the HPC and (historic preservation) should be their only charge. If they can't deal with the fact that I need to remove (from the wall) 60 feet out of 1000 feet on each block to get an economic return, there's nothing that will satisfy them," he said.


Courtesy of Dean Marchetto Architects
A rendering of what the patio of one of the houses proposed for the top of the Sixth Street Embankment in Jersey City could look like. The openings in the walls would allow for garage and pedestrian entrances for the homes, Hyman said.

He said he hopes to sell the homes for $5 million each.

The fate of the embankment has been under debate since Hyman's wife, Victoria, bought the land for $3 million from Conrail in 2005 to build housing. The Embankment Preservation Coalition wants to preserve the land as open space. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy wants a combination of open space and a light rail link.

But Hyman said he has included those amenities in his previous proposals and has made no progress.

"I tried to accommodate them in every plan and every scenario, but the basic request is to save the wall," he said.

Courtesy of Dean Marchetto Architects PC
A view of what the garage opening in the wall of Jersey City's Sixth Street Embankment would look like in developer Steve Hyman's new plan.

Even if the HPC were to approve Hyman's proposal, he wouldn't be able to begin building anytime soon due to a ruling in August 2007 by the obscure federal Surface Transportation Board, which determined that Conrail never properly "abandoned" the site.

Attorneys hired by the city believe the ruling could mean that Hyman no longer owns the land and the city has to be given the opportunity to buy the land for the $3 million it sold for in 2005. But Hyman has appealed the ruling.

Hyman said if the city really wants the park and the light rail, it should condemn the land and give him fair market value for it, which he puts at around $20 million.

City officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

An Embankment Preservation Coalition official said the coalition needed time to consider Hyman's proposal before responding.

Stay tuned.

Embankment Preservation Coalition Historic Preservation Commission Hardship Hearing Postponed April 14, 2009 NOW APRIL 20! Dear Friends of Embankment Preservation, Applicants for hardship exemptions that would allow them to demolish the Harsimus Branch Embankment have requested a postponement of the hearing scheduled for tonight, April 14, 2009. NOW APRIL 20! They are now asking that the Historic Preservation Commission consider their alternative development proposals at a later hearing. The Historic Preservation Officer will open and close the meeting tonight but otherwise no testimony will be taken, and the hearing will be carried to the regular Commission meeting on April 20. It is expected that, on April 20, the hardship exemptions will be further carried to a hearing at a date, time, and place to be specified. We will let you know these arrangements as soon as we know them. We are sorry for this late notice. We just heard about the re-scheduling ourselves and are rushing to send this out to you. We know you are busy, and hope this message reaches you in time. Sincerely, Embankment Preservation Coalition Board * We do not share your contact information. If you would like to change your email preference or be removed safely from our list, please use the Update or Unsubscribe feature below Quote:[/quote]

Testify at Hardship Hearing Apr 14, 6:30 pm Location Change to 30 Montgomery St, 14th Floor The Jersey City Historic Preservation Commission resumes hearings April 14 for hardship applications by six LLCs that claim ownership of the six stone Embankment segments between Marin Boulevard and Brunswick Street. If approved, the exemptions would allow the LLCs to demolish the six blocks. The hearing location has changed from City Hall to the Planning Division Conference Room, 14th Floor, 30 Montgomery Street, near the Exchange Place PATH station. At an April 1 hearing, the Commission denied, by a vote of 5-0, Certificates of Appropriateness for demolition. Our City ordinance, however, allows owners of historic property who have been denied these permits to apply for an exemption if they cannot realize a return of 12 percent on "current value." The ordinance does not define "current value," but an expert witness for the LLCs opined at the April 1 hearing that it was "assessed value." We expect that applicant presentations will take up a good part of the hearing. Public comment may be taken, or carried over to another meeting. The Commission is under a court order to decide by April 20th, however, so there is incentive to complete the hearings on April 14th. If you plan to testify, come prepared. See our guidelines, which include links to materials the applicants supplied before the last hearing. Note also that the applicants introduced more materials at the April 1 hearing; these are available at the Planning office, 30 Montgomery, 14th Floor.

FGJCNJ1970 wrote:

1) The embankment is no longer in use by any sort of railroad.

That's as good a reason to preserve it.

2) The sections of the embankment that are left have absolutely no historical value

"Absolutely no" is probably not a judgment you're qualified to make. You don't value them, but they go to the history of JC as a town of railroad depots, etc. I think most in EPC does not wish to preserve it just for preservation sake. That message is plain on their posters: "Make my park."

3) Most certainly the embankment contains harmful toxic byproducts from its years of use as a railroad tressel.

"Most certainly" is probably not a judgment you're qualified to make, but thank you for your concern about the children. Even so, site remediation can work without or without demolition.

4) The embankment is a major safety issue in that it suffers from decay and portions of either stone or masonry have fallen off the tops of the structures.

"Major safety issue" is probably not a judgment you're qualified to make, but thank you for your concern about the children. The Embankment has decayed only in parts, and cosmetically.

5) The embankment is a blight on the downtown community, encouraging urban vandalism and graffiti.

This is pure opinion. The thing "encouraging" vandalism is the schmuck lifestyle of the teenagers, etc. It's as if you're trying to blame cars for being stolen, or women for being raped. I'm surprised a person of your conservative nature is not more up-in-arms about the vandals.

6) At night, the embankment is poorly lit, or not lit at all, and creates an UNSAFE environment for criminals to mug and rob citizens.

Rather than install street lamps, this important safety concern is best addressed by tearing down the whole structure. Really? Get a grip.

7) Pro embankment liberals have concocted an unfeasable plan to establish an elevated "park" without any financial plans for real viability. Meanwhile existing real parks such as Hamilton park just TWO blocks away desperately need major restoration.

"Unfeasible" is probably not a judgment you're qualified to make. But, financing is a concern for any construction, including home construction. Suppose the developer runs out of money half-way through... as many do, and he cannot secure bridge loans to finish the project because no units have been spec'd out, must less sold. Then, nobody wins. Financing is an important concern for all parties.

Fortunately, there is already state, county, and local money for it. As to Hamilton Park: that neighborhood should get their act together. Van Vorst is quite nice, and requires only one dog run, instead of the seven over at Hamilton. Talk about tragedy of the commons.

8) Pro embankment persons are against change for the common good and have ulterior motives (like not loosing parking space access behind the embankment).

The "common good" is a nebulous concept upon which we clearly disagree. As to parking: seriously? Get a grip. One person posted that on the forum, I bet. So?

9) Even if a park could be funded and built, it would require significant investment and would increase already extremely high local property taxes.

If you want "extremely high property taxes", you'd live in Summit, Millburn, Montclair, etc. In the meantime, that's just more opinion from someone who doesn't want to pay more than he is. When the Embankment's park is built, your home will be worth more, so you will be able to move to those areas with extremely high property taxes.

I cannot link to the specific findings, but I hope you will explore this site to get your head straight:

http://www.nj.com/news/bythenumbers

Of course, those are average numbers and do not account for the condos (foolishly?) purchased 3-5 years ago, and thus newly assessed.

10) The embankment proposal has huge insurance implications. Unlike a traditional ground park, this is an elevated train tressel and because of the height, the insurance costs to the city would be enormously expensive. Also, very expensive safety measures would have to be incorporated to prevent someone from falling off.

Yes: they will need insurance, and fences.

11) The ground area abutting the embankment frequently becomes a dumping area for trash, rubbish, discarded shopping carts, etc.

And garbage cans.

12) certain portions of the embankment are listed on the internet as cruising grounds for inappropriate activity ranging from drug dealing to sexual misconduct - again presenting a danger to the community.

The Embankment is not the cause, nor the likely locale for such behavior. If people cruise or buy drugs there: so? You're concerned, again, about lamps and poor policing... not about the structure.

As concerned as you are about the children, I'd think you'd be a Republican.

Quote:

I live on that block now and with all due respect you don't live here anymore so shut your yap. KEEP UP THE WALL!! I'd rather have it stay the way it is than tear it down. It is by no means an eyesore. It is a natural untampered space the way it is. Last thing we need is Hyman's aesthetic to F$^% UP sixth street. You are fooling yourself if you think anyone is gonna build brownstones there. The broken lights are Hymans responsibility, if you still lived there you would notice that he doesn't shovel his sidewalk either, that would be taken care of with a park!
Are you serious? Promiscuous gay sex? Get the F*** outta here!!! You have lost your marbles. We have people being shot and your priority is that tearing down the embankment is going to reduce the promiscuous gay sex in JC. I have never ever heard anyone complain about promiscuous gay sex, It doesn't appear to be affecting most people.
This block is no longer what it was when you were here, nightmare that it was. That's what I hear anyway.
To compare Healy to Gorbachev is an insult to Gorbachev. Healy is a useless drunk bum who has an overinflated ego and view of himself. People who support him are unless drones standing in the way of progress for this city and should be ashamed at the moral standard they are being party to.
If a child fell from the new park the child would be a very good fence climber and the parent would be unfit.

"Don't believe these leftest NIMBY crazy's." To this I say don't believe these gay, fear mongering storytelling imbesols!!
Why don't you move to alaska and be Sarah Palin's personal stylist!

Embankment Preservation Coalition Thank You for Sending an Environmental Comment to STB! April 8, 2009 Dear Friends of Embankment Preservation, You and hundreds of other concerned citizens told the federal Surface Transportation Board this week what the Harsimus Branch and its stone Embankment means to our community, and how you think rail abandonment and demolition will affect us. On April 6, the Board responded to a Coalition request and extended the public comment period for thirty days, to May 7th. We thank you for this outpouring of support, and ask you to keep the comments coming. Please spread the word to friends and neighbors that there's more time to weigh in with the federal agency that has so much power over decisions that will affect our families, neighborhood, city, and region for decades to come. Tell them: 1. Go to www.stb.dot.gov . 2. Choose E-Filing. 3. Choose Environmental Comments from the righthand column. 4. Enter, in the four boxes, the Docket No.: AB 167 1189 X . 5. Enter contact information and a comment, and click Submit. Comments may be as brief as "Please carefully consider the effects, direct and indirect, of abandonment and demolition on our community," or commenters can use suggestions at Embankment Preservation Coalition . We will know in May if our collective voice makes a difference on the federal level. Important decisions are upcoming at local and state levels, too, and you can be sure that decisionmakers will take note of the number and quality of your comments. By virtue of your expressing your interest in Embankment preservation, you are on our email list for news and updates on Embankment status.* We hope you will continue to lend your support to this grassroots effort. Sincerely, Embankment Preservation Coalition Board * We do not share your contact information. [...]

Yes, tear it down and replace with a blocks-long row of Bayonne Boxes

Tear it down. Just do it in a way that's accounts for any toxins.

The embankment is an eyesore and creates dangerous zones for pedestrians.

An elevated park will never be paid for.

Tear it down.