Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
 |
Posted on: 2009/7/13 22:11
|
|||
 Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
Zoning Board Hearing Tonight To Be Carried to New Date
Monday, July 13th,Hearing To Be Rescheduled; Stay Tuned At 5:15 today we received word from the Planning Division that the hearing tonight will be carried to a new date. There will be a meeting, but only to try to set a new date. All business will be carried. We are rushing this out in the hopes that it will reach you before you start out for the meeting. We will send information about the new date as soon as we know more.
Posted on: 2009/7/13 21:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Those sound like legit options, Ian.
Xerxes: what's wrong with those plans?
Posted on: 2009/7/13 17:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Or alternately, service could extend westward restoring service to Kearny, Bloomfield and Glen Ridge when the Booton line was merged with the Montclair line.
Posted on: 2009/7/13 15:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
A sixth Street Light rail line would probably connect from a Terminus in Hoboken or a Terminus in Bayonne to a terminus in Secaucus Junction as an initial phase. Just one station along Sixth Street would bring mass transit within a quarter a mile of the western fringe of downtown, which right now is underserved. As the route passes through the arches, I would imagine two stations would serve the heights, one near Baldwin Avenue / Court Plaza, and the other at St. Pauls / JFK Blvd. A stop at Baldwin would about 1.5 miles from the Congress Street light rail station, meaning most of the heights would then be within 3/4 of a mile of one station or the other. The light rail could then continue on to Secaucus Junction with a terminus there. This redundant connection would sever several purposes. Connecting Main, Bergen, and Pascack Valley train services with a direct route to Jersey City without passing through Hoboken; connecting Jersey City with park and ride services at Secaucus; provide service to Secaucus station when NJ Transit commuter rail is not functioning either because of poor scheduling or because service interruptions. Future expansions could continue westward towards Lyndhurst or northward toward Secaucus proper.
Posted on: 2009/7/13 14:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
BrightMoment wrote:
Posted on: 2009/7/13 7:29
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
And there lies the problem with using Sixth Street as a light rail extension...or for that matter THE ARCHES!
Where would a light rail along the ARCHES go? And where would light rail along Sixth Street GO? To Journal Square?....Again? I know that Alan wants a route to the Heights...but there's the big questions: WHY and HOW and TO WHERE? You cannot say "start out this way" without a corresponding "and then end THAT way" especially if you are talking about only a couple miles or a couple blocks! Yes, build a bikeway allong the ARCHES....tear down the EMBANKMENT, perhaps repalce it with a half mile long bikeway ... and let the bikers find their own way. A billion dollar, couple yards wide park in the sky that runs only several blocks....MORONIC!
Posted on: 2009/7/13 0:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Sorry, but I wouldn't know where to put the route. I'm not familiar with the engineering of it: which rock to blast, which hill to climb, etc. I believe the Mayor proposed running it on top of the Embankment. Where did he envision it going? I really wouldn't know the details. For example, if it sweeps up Newark Avenue, well that seems quite steep and busy. Route 139 is probably too busy and may present practical hurdles with the roadway below, though it is wide enough. But perhaps it could sweep alongside Newark Avenue to turn on Palisade. But then there's the school. Too dangerous? I'm just not sure. It should probably connect to Secaucus Junction. Personally, I'd rather preserve the Bergen Arches as parks/ bike routes/ etc., but that may well be a good route for a light rail.
Posted on: 2009/7/12 14:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Alan,
You want a light-rail extension from the Newport Mall to "wherever in the Northwest." Can you nail down that "wherever" a bit? Building light rail for the sake of building light rail doesn't appeal to anyone except Jersey Transit.
Posted on: 2009/7/12 14:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I did get that notice, last time I got one of these I made a special trip to the post office only to be disappointed. You can tell it's gonna be garbage if everyone in your building gets the same notice. I'm not gonna pick it up I don't know if it will ever get to me.
Posted on: 2009/7/12 13:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Did anyone else receive a certified letter from Hyman's lawyers last week explaining the July 13th appeal? It was an inconvenience to say the least as I thought it was something else and stayed home the next day to receive it. I'm glad it cost them $3.40/each for the postage.
Posted on: 2009/7/12 12:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Posted on: 2009/7/11 23:15
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Thank you for the link. I saw a similar one.
Perhaps those costs are not so easily transferable as that. But, before that: there already is (some) money for the Embankment. As to costs: (1) costs of the site remediation and materials will be different, and perhaps more uniform. (2) costs of the bridges will vary depending on whether they're built to include the light rail. (3) light rail, if there is one, will augment the costs (4) construction downtown will impact costs (5) JC is a cheaper environment in general than NY, and poses different logistical problems. ... and what's the "cost" of job creation? ...and what's the "cost" (value) of public parks. Obviously meanderers and flaneurs place a higher value on it than you may. Blah, blah, blah. Truth be told... until it's spec'd out in greater detail the front-end costs may be difficult to estimate. On a separate note: I still support the idea of the light rail ON Sixth Street. That would mean less energy (no need to go uphill) and infrastructure (smaller bridges) as compared to having the light rail on the Embankment. That bit starts here: http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewt ... id=194990#forumpost194990
Posted on: 2009/5/27 12:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Interesting article on the High Line and the costs involved from Tuesday's AM NY.
http://weblogs.amny.com/entertainment ... _park_coming_on_line.html The $170 million construction cost for the park has been taken of, with the city putting up $98 million, the federal government committing $22 million and the Friends of the High Line and others footing the rest of the bill. ... However, the city will have to come up with 30 percent of the park?s annual $2 million to $3 million operating budget. And the Friends, which will oversee the 6.7-acre open space, is responsible for the remaining portion. ... Concrete planks will be surrounded by vegetation meant to evoke the natural growth that took over before the train tracks were restored and new drainage put in. There may eventually be food concessions but there will be no dogs, bicycles or rollerblading allowed. ?It?s about meandering,? said City Planning Commissioner Amanda Burden. This is why people like myself do not want the Embankment turned into an overhead park. I grant that the High Line is four times the size of ours here in JC, but lets do some quick math. 170/4 is 42.5 million in initial costs. 2-3mil/4 is 500-750k every year. Given that the JC budget was about $800k short of actually meeting goal, and was cut 15 mil from the previous year, adding on significant expenses is not a good idea. 170 mil for meandering is beyond absurd.
Posted on: 2009/5/27 9:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
he was considering building mansions on top of the Embankment instead. I hear the Whitneys, the Vanderbilts, the Morgans, Rockefellers, and the Kennedys are licking their lips in anticipation. It would be WONDERFUL to see McMansions atop the Embankment and Jersey City could charge admission for people to come and see the funniest site on planet Earth...absolutely "pee in your pants" funny. I wonder if anyone thought of building a Museum to rival the Loure or Versailles.
Posted on: 2009/5/16 15:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Almost the same as the above article but...
Historic Preservation Commission denies request to pull down Sixth Street Embankment by Amy Sara Clark / The Jersey Journal Friday May 15, 2009, 2:21 PM The Sixth Street Embankment says, at least for now. The Historic Preservation Commission unanimously denied developer Steve Hyman's request to tear down the Sixth Street Embankment, a commission official confirmed today. Hyman made the request claiming "economic hardship" based on a city ordinance that allows the commission to let developers tear down historic structures if the developer can show that he or she is unable to get a "reasonable" return on the amount the property is currently worth. The ordinance defines a reasonable return as 12 percent or more on "commercial properties," but doesn't define it for non-commercial properties, nor does the ordinance define what a commercial property is, said Charles Blau, an attorney who served as an independent consultant to the commission. When explaining their votes, several commissioners said they considered the property non-commercial, and that Hyman failed to prove he wouldn't be able to make a reasonable return without tearing down the walls, Blau said. Hyman plans to appeal the decision, said Hyman attorney Dan Horgan. "He feels he has an excellent chance of having his position vindicated in court," Horgan said. The appeal would first go to the Board of Adjustment. If they deny his appeal it will go to Hudson County Superior Court, said Jersey City Corporation Counsel Bill Matsikoudis. Last March, Hudson County Assignment Judge Maurice Gallipoli sided with Hyman in another suit, ruling that the city must consider Hyman's permit applications, such as the one made last night. The city has appealed the decision to federal court. The former railroad embankment stretching from Marin Boulevard to Brunswick Street has been the site of a long and costly struggle between Jersey City, a neighborhood group called the Embankment Preservation Coalition and Hyman. The coalition volunteers want to preserve it as open space. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy wants a combination of open space and a light rail link, for which no money has been allocated. And Hyman -- whose wife, Victoria, purchased the property from Conrail for $3 million in 2005 -- wants to build housing. Hyman has been negotiating with the city over a plan in which he would build several high rises on one or two blocks and the rest would be given to the city for a park and light rail. But last month, Hyman said he was considering building mansions on top of the embankment instead. 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. Maureen Crowley of the Embankment Coalition said the group was "very gratified" by the decision. "We were very happy that the commission saw it the way we did that the applicant did not prove any hardship," she said.
Posted on: 2009/5/16 14:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/4/18 0:04 Last Login : 2021/10/2 19:00 From Jersey Cxxx
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1404
|
HYMAN GETS A 'NO'
Panel: No 'hardship,' so Embankment stays Saturday, May 16, 2009 By AMY SARA CLARK JOURNAL STAFF WRITER The Historic Preservation Commission was unanimous Thursday night in denying developer Steve Hyman's request to tear down the Sixth Street Embankment. Hyman made the request claiming "economic hardship" based on a city ordinance that allows the commission to let developers tear down historic structures if the developer can show that they are unable to get a "reasonable" return on the amount the property is currently worth. The ordinance defines a reasonable return as 12 percent for "commercial properties," but doesn't define it for non-commercial properties, nor does the ordinance define what a commercial property is, said Charles Blau, an attorney who served as an independent consultant to the commission. The commission deemed the property non-commercial and found that Hyman failed to prove he wouldn't be able to make a reasonable return without tearing down the walls, Blau said. The former railroad embankment stretching from Marin Boulevard to Brunswick Street has been the site of a long and costly struggle between Jersey City, the Embankment Preservation Coalition and Hyman. The coalition volunteers want to preserve it as open space. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy wants a combination of open space and a Light Rail link. And Hyman - whose wife, Victoria, purchased the property from Conrail for $3 million in 2005 - wants to build housing. Hyman plans to appeal the decision, said Hyman attorney Dan Horgan. "He believes the process is so arbitrary and so mean-spirited that it will be thrown out by the courts," he said. Maureen Crowley, coordinator of the Embankment Preservation Coalition, said the group was "very gratified" by the decision. "We were very happy that the commission saw it the way we did - that the applicant did not prove any hardship," she said. The appeal would first go to the Board of Adjustment and, if denied, would go to Hudson County Superior Court, said Jersey City Corporation Counsel Bill Matsikoudis. In March 2008, Hudson County Assignment Judge Maurice Gallipoli sided with Hyman in another suit, ruling that the city must consider Hyman's permit applications, such as this one. The city has appealed the decision to federal court. Hyman has been negotiating with the city on a plan in which he would build several high-rises on one or two blocks and give the rest to the city for a park and Light Rail. But last month, Hyman said he was considering building mansions on top of the Embankment instead. In August 2007, the federal Surface Transportation Board 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. Hyman has appealed the ruling. 
Posted on: 2009/5/16 12:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/11/7 17:04 Last Login : 2015/2/24 18:16 From "Pay for Play"
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1531
|
Deadline Today, May 7th @ 5PM!
Make YOUR Comments to the STB Online Demand an Environmental Impact Statement ! Save the Embankment! 1. Go to: http://www.stb.dot.gov/Ect1/ecorrespondence.nsf/incoming?OpenForm 2. Enter: AB 167 1189 X in the four boxes for Docket No. 3. Enter contact information. 4. Enter your comments and click -Submit. You will receive an email verification. Your comment can be as simple as "Please authorize an Environmental Impact Statement for the Harsimus Branch." If you want to write something more indepth, see the guidelines at http://www.embankment.org/whitesite/actionalert1.html DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS: May 7, 5 p.m. Quote:
Posted on: 2009/5/7 16:32
|
|||
|
Help US Sue Spectra! Join OR Donate! |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/10/9 19:48 Last Login : 2013/2/18 15:54 From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
369
|
Alan Wright you hit the nail on the head. Best idea yet.
Posted on: 2009/5/7 14:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/6/27 22:27 Last Login : 2012/4/20 14:33 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
235
|
Quote:
+1 Best idea on the Embankment I've heard so far.
Posted on: 2009/5/7 14:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Thank you. Of course, the overhead lines adds a little risk to the situation. If others on this board are right, people want to jump/ fall off the embankment and directly onto the overhead lines/ train track!
Posted on: 2009/5/7 13:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Deadline: May 7th TODAY @, 5 p.m.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/4/18 0:04 Last Login : 2021/10/2 19:00 From Jersey Cxxx
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1404
|
Final Day of Action!
Today, May 7th, at 5pm is the deadline to file your comments with the Federal STB. If you've already done it, THANKS A MILLION! If you haven't please take five minutes and follow the instructions below. Thanks again for all the support!!!! Action Alert! Help preserve the Embankment by sending or having yours and family send an environmental comment to the Surface Transportation Board, the federal agency that will determine the fate of the old Harsimus Branch rail line. It just takes a few minutes: 1. Go to: http://www.stb.dot.gov/Ect1/ecorrespondence.nsf/incoming?OpenForm 2. Enter: AB 167 1189 X in the four boxes for Docket No. 3. Enter contact information. 4. Enter your comments and click -Submit. You will receive an email verification. Your comment can be as simple as "Please authorize an Environmental Impact Statement for the Harsimus Branch." If you want to write something more indepth, see the guidelines at http://www.embankment.org/whites ... DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS: May 7, 5 p.m.
Posted on: 2009/5/7 11:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Alan - that is a great idea! and would definitely benefit the neighborhood.
which is why the city planners haven't thought of it.
Posted on: 2009/5/7 4:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
I see the "sockpuppets for developers" group is up in full force again.
I wonder if Hyman is funding this pathetic effort as well.
Posted on: 2009/5/7 3:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Thanks.
A "new" idea occurred to me: * Embankment into a park, as discussed. * 6th Street one-way westbound. * light rail on 6th street connecting whereever in the northwest to Th. Gangemi/ Newport Mall, and back. * along the way, the light rail would pass by FOUR parks (Mary Benson, Enos Jones, Embankment, and the 6th/ Manila baseball field). Yep. 6th street is wide enough to accomodate the light rail and one-way only traffic. The walkway next to the Embankment would not be necessary because the Embankment would be a footpath and there's a sidewalk on the other side. The light rail would go two-ways. Some streets are similar to this in Paulus Hook. Most of 6th is one way already. Cons: Holy Rosary and St. Anthony of Padua's would object. So would the two-many drivers who use it as a cut-through to get back to Newark Avenue. (But we should not encourage that, anyway). Also, there's a parking question, but a light rail encourages car-less living. Pros: their parishioners love to take the light rail! Running the light rail at street level satisfies the Mayor and other light rail aficionados, secures the park, connects the downtown (incl. park) to the Heights and other constituencies. Also, why make the light rail climb onto the embankment if it doesn't have to? Lots of wasted energy there.
Posted on: 2009/5/6 12:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Nicely put. Xerxes has the intellectual fire power of an asthmatic blowing through a straw, but you handled it well. To Xerxes: CAPSLOCK is not your friend. Go an hero, you Republican dinosaur.
Posted on: 2009/5/5 2:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Why do you believe JERSEY CITY preservationists want to save "everything"? THEY DON'T.
We know the answer, so don't bother: you disagree with their vision of what should be preserved, except that you're glad some preserved things are still intact: Loews. Stanley. Dickinson High. Hague Hospital (now with a new use). You look at a building, and, just by looking at it, you know it's inherent value in that role at that time, and forever into the future for all possible roles and all possible times. Recall that you capitalized EVERYTHING four or five times, and put it in quotes as well, and then said the Embankment and the Power House constitute "everything"-ish blight. Thus, you apparently DO believe JC preservationists want to save everything. They don't. (P.S. I'm not one). THEY SET PRIORITIES, as you admit, though those priorities are not yours, or the priorities may change as circumstances change. Here are some priorities: http://www.jclandmarks.org/campaign-bergenarches.shtml Because you consider the Embankment to be "junk" and "blight", the preservationists who look to preserve it are not good preservationists. You don't value parks, apparently. You want more real estate! Either you work in (de)construction, or real estate... because if you want more density and less green space, self-interest must be your motive. So, do you? You did not answer whether you think these properties can be "saved" for a use you consider a productive, beneficial use, so we can only speculate as to what a good purpose is for you, the Emperor of Persia and Preservation. A good preservationist is one preserves what His Highness wants preserved because it serves "a real purpose." Apparently, preservation cannot be for it's own sake. Only for a modern, purposive sake. If something loses it's purpose, and is in your view unsightly or geographically divisive, it should be torn down before any non-purposive use, as only you deem them to be, can be considered for the site. The only exception to that rule was the Hague hospital, which you want filled with suburbanite yuppy condo-owners, which you deem to be an acceptable modern re-use of an old structure.
Posted on: 2009/5/5 0:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
So: why do you believe preservationists want to save "everything"? My post was very precise and NOWHERE did I say "preservationists want to save everything." GOOD, VALUABLE preservationists are discriminating in what they work towards saving. My implication was that those working in Jersey City are NOT good preservationists because they work hard to save things the city can better do without...like this mess of old rock that divides the city for no purpose. Many REAL preservationists have damned the building of the BQE because it walls off part of the city. The awful embankment, like the monstrosity of a wall built along Washington Blvd. to support the light rail do the same thing. Why do I think the "preservationists" in Jersey City deserve the quotes? Because they don't know good from bad and waste time on falling down horrors like the Betz Brewery (now razed) and the ultimate nightmare, the Power House. (No, I'll correct that...the Embankment is the WORST of the worst...the ultimate blight from the choo-choo era. Why is their no more interest in the ARCHES? What is this nonsense about the Embankment serving as the bike path on the greenway instead of the Arches? Did the JC "preservationists" get tired of a decent idea? Why work to save the hideous Betz brewery while allowing the Majestic theater to be demolished except for a single front wall. No there is nothing wrong with good honest preservation. But there's no such thing like that among the gadflies in Jersey City POSING as preservationists. As for the straw man Newport rebuttal...nonsense. My post was directed squarely at the person who said that since I lived in Newport I must have no taste...I suppose HE lives in a tent on the tasteful Embankment or in the Powerhouse?THus I did not put up the Newport straw man, someone ELSE did...but it fit my argument reasonably well because had the same "preservationists" BEEN downtown at the time, I'm sure there were a couple monstrosities still standing they would have tried to save. But most of them had not arrived yet; they were probably in their parents' ticky tacky houses in suburbia. Good preservationists get GOOD things saved...bad preservationists try hard to save junk. In Jersey City, the City Hall is worth saving, the old Medical Center was worth saving (and they should raze the new one tomorrow) Loews and Stanley were worth saving...but so were the Pix and the State (now both gone.) The wonderful school on Palsade and Newark is breathtaking. But the Embankment...tear it down right after Wilzig Hospital; saving a couple bodegas in the Heights makes more preservationist sense. 
Posted on: 2009/5/4 23:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Xerxes wrote:
Quote:
A "straw man argument" defined: Misrepresenting the position of another in order to discredit that position, though it may have only a seeming resemblance to the one being presented. Thus, by stating this "straw man" as a legit presentation of the other's view, it is easy to tear apart that view without addressing the actual view of the opponent. It is a classic trick, and predictable, boring, and unhelpful. Unfortunately Xerxes, you tried to do that in the quoted paragraph above when you say preservationists want to preserve "everything". And here: Quote:
And here: Quote:
And here: Quote:
...but nobody really wants to save "everything." Thus, you are misrepresenting the preservationist view. Preservationists know they must choose their battles, as money is tight and political will must be cultivated for particular purposes. Also, an arts group who wants to buy and convert a Bright Street firehouse (city property) for modern use is not equivalent to nor identical with a preservation society who wants to preserve the White Eagle Hall (currently church property) for it's architectural legacy. Sometimes their work overlaps. So: why do you believe preservationists want to save "everything"? No, really. If you do not address that question nobody will understand your position, and nor should they respect it. I am trying to understand the basis for your view, that some wily preservationists... i.e., not just people chatting, but people actually making efforts to preserve old architecture... want to preserve "everything". Further, why do you think these properties cannot be "saved" for a use you consider a productive, beneficial use. Are you looking for more housing stock? More population density? More parking?
Posted on: 2009/5/3 16:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Ever seen pictures of the old Erie rail station there? Wouldn't it have been cool if someone had managed to save it and turn it into the new PATH station and 'Town Square', sort of like the Haymarket in Boston. At the time no one had a vision for the Newport area that extended beyond construction of a brand new fancy mall to act as a magnet for the district. I can think of a lot of things people regret having torn down, but for some reason, I can't think of anything that has been saved by preservationists only to be later considered a mistake.
Posted on: 2009/5/3 14:41
|
|||
|
||||