Browsing this Thread:
3 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2011/11/28 22:22 Last Login : 9/8 19:51 From Jersey City yo!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
638
 |
Quote:
How much did the High Line cost?
Posted on: 2012/2/7 23:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
Please come out tomorrow evening, Wednesday, February 8th to the Jersey City Council Meeting at 280 Grove St in support of the Resolution Authorizing a Settlement of Litigation Relating to the 6th St. Embankment (z12).
- Due to court rulings favorable to Jersey City and the acquisition efforts to acquire the 8th St. Embankment, we have an incredible opportunity before us for to settle all related lawsuits, obtain the Embankment and move forward with plans to preserve and reuse it as open space, linking city neighborhoods and the greater region with off-road walking and bicycle trails, and ultimately the East Coast Greenway (http://greenway.org/index.shtml). - Please come out to show that residents care - No need to come before 7:30pm. - Also, please reach out to your council member and the three at-large council members, Peter Brennan, Rolando Lavarro and Viola Richardson and ask them to vote for the resolution, emails here - http://cityofjerseycity.com/citycouncil.aspx?id=1212 - Thank you, Dan
Posted on: 2012/2/7 22:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Honestly I think there would be a better argument for a park if there was no mandatory protection for the embankment. If it could be leveled and the land put to use as a park, that to me has a lot of merit. But as it stands now the embankment itself divides the land, segregates it from the street, and limits the uses for active recreation.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 22:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
Well that's how it usually works, Brewster. People don't fight to save a landmark until they realize that it could be demolished. The fact that, one meeting after hearing about proposed development on the Embankment, people came back and pointed out its historic nature and potential use as open space doesn't strike me as cynical or dishonest. It strikes me as people doing their homework and learning about the value of what is in their neighborhood.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 21:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There's no pleasing some people. Some would rather see the embankment turned into a ramp to the Holland Tunnel.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 20:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I stand by my timeline, and the WSJ article confirms part of the sequence. It wasn't designated historic until after the battle began. Maureen was one of the people at the 1st meeting, and she was there presenting "art" photos of the "beautiful" embankment at the second. The EPC definitely didn't exist at that point. We often had many people from HC at our meetings, the HPNA was higher profile than the HC group at that time. As for zoning, we were clearly told that the abandonment left it more or less unzoned and buildable for anything, it definitely was at no point R1, or many people would have relaxed.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 19:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article on Jersey City's High Line hopes.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001 ... html?KEYWORDS=jersey+city I remember when people said the High Line was a WASTE!
Posted on: 2012/2/7 19:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
High Line Hopes in Jersey City
By HEATHER HADDON - The Wall Stree Journal FEBRUARY 7, 2012 . After a seemingly endless legal battle, Jersey City is on the verge of getting its own version of Manhattan's High Line. An abandoned elevated railway known as the Sixth Street Embankment has been the subject of a litigious preservation effort for more than a decade. Local groups and city officials want to transform the half-a-mile long stone structure into a grassy, landscaped park with skyline views, spanning Jersey City's gentrifying neighborhoods. The park is also envisioned as an important link in a greenway spanning the East Coast. Now, after a federal judge ruled against a developer blocking the park, a settlement that would hand control of the railway to Jersey City has been drafted and is awaiting approval. "This has been an epic legal struggle," said William Matsikoudis, the Jersey City municipal attorney, who estimated the city has spent more than $500,000 in legal fees on the battle. "We're one step away from a settlement that will provide a world-class amenity for the people for Jersey City." So far, the settlement has been tentatively approved by two of the three main litigants: Jersey City officials and Steve Hyman, a Manhattan investor who purchased the embankment from Consolidated Rail Corp. for $3 million in 2003 to knock it down and build housing. The city sued Conrail for making the sale, and Mr. Hyman, in turn, sued the city. Under the terms of the settlement, the city would pay Mr. Hyman $7 million and Conrail would chip in $13 million to settle all the pending litigation, according to people familiar with the matter. Conrail would get development rights along the edges of the embankment, which could yield at least 300 housing units potentially valued at $10.5 million, other people familiar with the matter said. The Jersey City Council is set to vote on the settlement Wednesday, and it appears likely to pass, said Councilman Steven Fulop, a project proponent. The last remaining obstacle is Conrail, which is still examining the deal and wants a "number of open items" addressed, said Kevin Coakley, a partner at Connell Foley, who is representing the company. He wouldn't elaborate. "Conrail is hopeful a settlement can be achieved," he said. Mr. Hyman, who has spent millions of dollars on the court cases, has signed the settlement, said one of his attorneys, Daniel Horgan. "Everybody wants it over with," said Mr. Horgan. "We would like everybody else to sign on it." Even with Conrail's approval, the Jersey City version of the High Line may be a long way from reality. Initial construction could begin next year, Mr. Matsikoudis said, but designs haven't been finalized for the 110-year-old structure, formally known as the Harsimus Stem Embankment. The city would likely hold a design competition. Still, hopes are high. It is "equal to or better than New York's High Line," said city Mayor Jerramiah Healy in a statement. The sandstone-and-granite structure rises to 27 feet at its highest point and once carried Pennsylvania Railroad freight trains along seven tracks to the Hudson River waterfront. Conrail took over the embankment in the 1970s, but rail traffic ceased and nature took over. Ivy covers the walls and the structure is now a regular way station for monarch butterflies migrating from Canada to Mexico. Early ideas to transform it into a park include landscaping the trees and plants already growing on top. A meandering walking trail and a bike path are possibilities along the 100-foot wide embankment, which is wider than the High Line, said Stephen Gucciardo, president of the Embankment Preservation Coalition, a volunteer group formed to save the historic relic. Advocates want a "grand entrance" to the park's eastern section, while the western section would return to ground level and connect to the Bergen Arches, a railroad tunnel that runs through the Palisades. The abandoned tunnel feels remote despite the highways and development around it, said Mr. Gucciardo. "It's like coming upon some kind of Mayan temple that has been overgrown. It's lost in time," he said. The dream for advocates is to connect the embankment to the 2,600-mile East Coast Greenway, a trail that is under development from Maine to Florida. In New Jersey, 20% of the 93-mile trail is complete, said Rails to Trails, an advocacy group that promotes trails along railways. The saga over the Sixth Street Embankment began in 1998, when former Jersey City Mayor Bret Schundler decided to knock it down for housing. There was an outcry from residents, who in 1999 succeeded in getting the embankment added to the State Register of Historic Places. The City Council voted in 2004 to take it over for a 6.5-acre park by eminent domain. The city sued Conrail in 2005 for selling the land to Mr. Hyman, who then filed a dozen separate suits over myriad issues involving the land. Settlement negotiations got a shot in the arm Friday when the U.S. Court of Appeals rejected Mr. Hyman's case and backed the city http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001 ... 04577207602302461274.html
Posted on: 2012/2/7 16:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
But yet Comey states we cannot hire any more cops and we are short of manpower. I love open space but at whose and what expense.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 16:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Yeah, picking and choosing how your individual tax dollars are going to be spent. Good Luck with that! The embankment has been saved from developers so get over it. Bring on the park!!!
Posted on: 2012/2/7 16:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2011/11/28 22:22 Last Login : 9/8 19:51 From Jersey City yo!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
638
|
Quote:
Really? I guess you can always say that we NEED more open space in JC, and can never be proven wrong. But we have LSP in JC. An immense open space, one for which Bayonne, Hoboken, Weehawken, West NY or any other densely-populated municipality would kill. It is all about balance, and about whether we can afford the Embankment Park, and about whether it is the best use of our money. I'll give you that Embankment has been deemed historic by the federal and state authorities, for whom I have very little respect, btw. It does not mean that the city needs to spend 7 million to buy Hyman out. And how much more will it cost to build the bridges, the paths, and to maintain the park? Pray tell, and also please elaborate what the total hit to JC budget will be.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 15:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
Quote:
As a former President of the Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy, I can safely say I understand what the term means, as well as the criteria used in determining whether properties qualify as historic. The inquiry is ultimately subjective, so you can never really "prove" whether something is or is not historic. But on this point, I will simply note that it has been found to be an eligible site by federal and state authorities, was approved as a local landmark by the city council after recommendations from the local Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Board, and was recognized as a priority campaign not just by the Conservancy but by Preservation New Jersey. The National Trust for Historic Preservation thought it was historic, as evidenced by their filing an amicus brief in support of the EPC and City in the federal court litigation. In short, just about everyone who knows what they are talking about DOES think that it is a historic resource. Quote:
Great ideas! Any development of the Embankment as a park should include interpretive signage and exhibits. If you have any proposed designs or want to support the cause, I'm sure the EPC and city would welcome your input! Quote:
Open space is at a premium in Jersey City. We need more of it. Had Jersey City been more proactive a couple of decades ago, it perhaps could have acquired the land for less. But it's still a reasonably good deal, and has money earmarked for it, which you can't then turn around and choose to spend elsewhere. In terms of upgrading sewage, the Embankment, even in its current state, is an important ecological boon, absorbing rainwater in a flood prone area of Jersey City Quote: Bizarre rant about the East Coast Greenway Alliance The East Coast Greenway is a long term project. Of course it has gaps. But the great thing about the project is that it doesn't have to be all built at once to be an amenity. Plenty of segments of the greenway are already parks that local, regional, and national users can use right now. Other segments are interim segments which can be used to get from A to B, even if they are not "park" or "trail" per se. New Jersey has in fact been a leader in this regard. Approximately half the trail exists on dedicated pedestrian and bike paths. Next stop, the Bergen Arches!
Posted on: 2012/2/7 14:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
well, if there is a light rail, then obviously the embankment would get extended past brunswick.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 13:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
You keep using the term "historic resource". I don't think you know what that means. There's no resource here. It is an old wall that demonstrates very little.
"Hey kids, here's a wall." Great resource. Want to actually get people to know what JC was like when the wall was built? Make a museum. Show the thousands of impoverished railroad workers who lived in the area that served the warehouses and port companies. They're the ones whose backs built this area into the enormous urban hub it is today. Show the massive pollution to the area that took years to clean up. Get an old rail car and park it somewhere and allow kids to get on board. If you want to mouth a platitude that it's a historic resource, then actually emphasize history. Don't use it as an excuse. You say economically sustainable. How in the world is spending 7 million plus the upkeep for a small park sound economically? Who cares if there's money earmarked for it already, go find something useful to spend it on. Spend 7 million upgrading the sewage system downtown so half the area isn't overwhelmed during bad storms. Spend 7 million on new cops and firefighters to help keep JC safe and perhaps more people would like to live here, thus giving us economic growth. How about keeping our %@&*ing libraries open back to a full-time schedule? Pretty sure you can pay the salaries of the librarians for a long while on 7 mil. All the talk of the east coast greenway is mostly nonsense, as it doesn't currently exist and has HUGE gaps in it throughout much of the area - the embankment being one of the smallest gaps around. There is no "green trail" up and down Maine to Florida, there's a lot of trails that end in the huge urban cities they pass through and they just say "well go down here, it's kind of greenish". Go look at the route right over in NY - you get your option of riding down the West Side Highway or by the FDR drive. Great views, but it has nothing to do with being "green". How is one supposed to get across the Hudson one may ask? Take a break from your ride/walk and take the Path/ferry. Again, nice view if you're on the boat at least, but it's got nothing to do with being an open trail. The "Green"way essentially dies at New Brunswick and the entire area up to Manhattan is nothing but gaps, trails "identified" or "oh the land is in public control, lets lobby to make it kept for the trail." The Greenway is a load and I have no desire to see the town I live in and pay taxes to drop 7 mil + annual upkeep just so some mythical hiking trail that doesn't exit can have a park to go through. ECG can go F itself and the alleged thousands of bikers and hikers on this non-existent eastern Appalachian Trail can go walk or ride up Newark Ave or 6th St or Pavonia Ave instead. It's as green as half the "trail" already is and won't be costing millions for a 6-block stretch when there's countless miles of gaps.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 8:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
could not disagree more - most times visiting Hamilton Park, I run into friends and acquaintances from Wards B, C, D and F and same in parks located in other Wards. The playground at Hamilton Park can get so crowded that families with young children head a few blocks to Enos Jones Park (aka the Oaks).
yes, Jersey City has been a city of distinct neighborhoods, but there is no reason to be limited to your own neighborhood. yes, certainly people can disagree and have different values, but this vitriol is kind of baffling. the cost to local tax payers has been mostly city staff time. the bulk of acquisition and development will be paid for with grants and earmarks already in place. whether market rate housing is a net gain on rateables is debatable, not sure of its relevance in this discussion. the benefits of Embankment's preservation and potential reuse have been discussed thoroughly here and elsewhere which naysayers seem to ignore. we all bring to this discussion our own backgrounds and experiences. my experiences tell me - how can we not do this project - save this historic resource and reuse it as a park, trail, bikeway,, greenway, while preserving the rail right of way for the future. how can as a city, we not embrace best practices, to make our city economically sustainable. Quote:
Quote:
Posted on: 2012/2/7 6:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The word "redundant" seems like a negative until the PATH signal system fails and people are trying to circumvent it, or until a train derails in the tunnels and NJ Transit service is suspended between Secaucus and Manhattan. Furthermore, its not redundant for anyone living out on the west side of the heights. And in the short term, it may not seem like a spur to the transfer station is particularly important, but when a new Trans Hudson tunnel is built -- and it will be eventually -- many of the trains that now terminate in Hoboken will continue onto Manhattan; a light rail link to the transfer station will help keep Jersey City and Hoboken office space competitive. Extending a light rail line beyond Secaucus too could have a great deal of implications for downtown Secaucus or points further west. And planning for one future light rail line doesn't exclude completing plans to build out HBLR extensions already in the works. Some metropolitan areas with more foresight than our own are building whole light rail networks from the ground up and garnering federal transportation dollars for their efforts. The result in the long term is metropolitan regions better suited to deal long term trends in higher energy costs and declining GDP.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 3:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
Like any government agency, NJ Transit is the subject of both policy and political considerations. Ultimately LRT via 6th Street didn't make the cut because it's not the best or most needed route. Healy briefly supported it because it looked like a way to get funding for acquisition.
But ultimately it did not have significant support from residents, political leaders, or transportation planners. It is at least partially redundant, and there are more useful and feasible routes for the line.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 3:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
And for a decade, the ARC tunnel was a priority but within 45 days that went from being project number 1 to project next governor's problem to sort out. Five years ago Joey Torres, the mayor of Paterson, was convinced that the HBLR was going to save his city, but unfortunately for the people of Paterson, he didn't quite have enough leverage over the state legislators to make it happen. The point is, NJ Transit doesn't have a priority. Governors and legislators have priorities, and if our legislators can stop
Posted on: 2012/2/7 2:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Tax abatements generate more money for the city. Tax abated properties pay higher rates to the city than ordinary property taxes. Abatements short change county government and school government. The school system does not build parks, roads or sewers, nor do they pay for fire, police and ems protection. County government pays for some parks and some roads, but it doesn't matter because the other towns in Hudson county are helping to offset the difference in lost revenue from our tax abatements. So sure, if you are in Bayonne, you should be pissed off when Jersey City issues abatements. Moreover, the only local government more corrupt than Jersey City government is Hudson County government. So to reiterate, a tax abated property is pumping more cash into the city's municipal budget than unabated property. As to the nonsense with permitting going on with opening new businesses, yes that needs to be addressed. But that is as much an issue of hiring qualified, honest administrators and streamlining the process of permitting. There are various remedies that could address that particular issue. However, that doesn't change the fact that there is still a finite population serving as a customer base and only so much disposable income within that group. The flight of disposable income to Manhattan has a lot to do with available options here. I mean how many more Asian fusion restaurants does the downtown really need?
Posted on: 2012/2/7 2:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2011/11/28 22:22 Last Login : 9/8 19:51 From Jersey City yo!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
638
|
Quote:
This board is getting many eyeballs. Maybe people who read this thread will realize they are being conned and will take action. I will contact City Hall, and encourage others to do so as well, whether being pro or against the Embankment Park. But to your point, since Healy is already supporting the park, and I am sure Fulop does as well, I suppose people who oppose the City spending millions on the Embankment Park stand very little chance. As a long-time JC resident I am very much used to my pockets being picked by the City Hall. The taxes are up all the time, the crime sucks, and here we are, talking about a 7 mil Hyman buyout and a multiple of that to make it a park for a small community. That is CRAZY.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 1:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Could there not be a more productive way to make your argument than continue to type a redundant argument on a board with "deaf ears"? Perhaps put together your own association to argue your points at say city hall or take it to the paper? Maybe that will help you feel heard and as a taxpayer you can feel like you're doing something if you think this is so wrong.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 1:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2011/11/28 22:22 Last Login : 9/8 19:51 From Jersey City yo!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
638
|
I think one thing that corybraiterman and I are trying to raise that is obviously falling on deaf ears here (no surprise) -
THIS IS NOT MONEY WELL SPENT. The city does not have the 7 million to buy out Hyman, and does not have untold millions more to develop that "historic" structure into a park. Oh, wait, maybe they do - they will pick MY pocket. Me, who will use the Embankment Park maybe one time, like I used the Highline in NYC. Once, and that was enough. So you are brazenly telling me that because YOU believe it should be a park, all of JC taxpayers should pay for it. Wow.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 1:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
One other point. If the only issue was preventing development, then the park is not necessary. The Embankment was listed on the municipal register of Historic Places. Hyman's application to demolish was denied. Game over.
So if all people wanted was to hoard parking spaces and prevent their real estate from being diluted from overdevelopment, that battle was won before the Court of Appeals ruling.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 0:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/2/3 21:36 Last Login : 2020/4/18 19:17 From Way Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1300
|
Quote:
Okay, but preserve it from what? Bears? What else threatens property in a city other than eminent domain or real estate development? (and, well, gas pipelines.) Hyman put a face to the bogeyman. And who knows, without his specific plans of destruction/domination, perhaps there wouldn't have been this urgency - which drummed up quite a rallying cry - and resulting success of the Preservation Committee. Whatever the reason, I'm so happy you prevailed.
Posted on: 2012/2/7 0:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
Maybe they joined the EPC, but to say that the committee became the EPC is a stretch. For the simple fact that the most vocal leaders such as Annie Kessler and Maureen Crowley were from Harsimus Cove.
I am curious about the zoning of the plot. When I attended the initial planning board sessions when Hyman was seeking to subdivide the spots, it was classified as R1. He insisted that he was just looking to build to zoning and not seeking towers (or, for that matter, tax abatements). His desire for towers and the like began when he started trying to make a deal with the city. If the plot he keeps is the block between Grove and Marin, then that's probably the best place for any large development, to the extent large development is desirable.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 23:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Just for the record, I remember the HPNA meeting, must have been around 98, where the embankment issue was 1st raised, and the main thrust of the discussion was to keep it from being developed, or to get it zoned low-rise similarly to surrounding blocks, since it's zoning would allow for just about anything at that point. I don't know if Hyman was the owner then. but development plans were being made public. HPNA members wondered about tearing it down to make it greenspace. More people were concerned about new construction increasing competition for parking than anything else. A committee was formed to explore the options, and I remember being startled a month or 2 later by their presentation based on historic preservation, that not even being a serious part of the discussion previously. That committee eventually became the EPC.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 22:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
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
|
Quote:
I think you give the argument too much credit. Efforts to preserve the Embankment long pre-date Hyman's attempts to develop the property. They go back at least as early as the Schundler administration. I know that the Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy supported preservation well before Hyman got involved. There is, of course, legitimate concern about the proposed development. Among other things, it would have abolished a historic resource and placed a block of new development right on the dividing line between two nationally recognized historic districts. And there was also concern about eliminating so much green space in a flood zone. All valid points. But the main thrust of the EPC throughout all these years wasn't about what they wanted to keep out, but what they wanted to keep. And thanks to their determined work, the city has kept a historic resource and much needed green space.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 22:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
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 read what you said, it just makes no sense.
The Embankment will likely not attract as many people as Liberty State Park, or for that matter Lincoln Park, but will significantly more trafficked than a local park. It probably will be an attraction along the lines of Reservoir #3, attracting 1) mostly nearby residents but beyond the few blocks, 2) a reasonable number of other citywide park-goers and 3) the occasional out of towner. And when it is ultimately linked as part of the East Coast Greenway, it will attract significantly more out of towners. The wide membership of EPC, along with the various endorsers of the proposal which go well beyond the three downtown neighborhoods that immediately abut the park, strongly demonstrate that this park has much wider appeal than its detractors care to admit. I guess the East Coast Greenway Alliance chose to re-route the trail's route and to hold its annual convention in Jersey City because this national not-for-profit decided to one day get involved in creating "private" park space.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 22:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/2/3 21:36 Last Login : 2020/4/18 19:17 From Way Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1300
|
Quote:
see, now, you don't really know what it means. NIMBY is really "not in my backyard....but okay elsewhere." this goes for windmills, landfills, power stations, train tracks....amenities that are necessary, if not aesthetically appealing. we need and/or want them, just please, not next door. a lot of your downtown neighbors think more unchecked residential development is simply unnecessary - anywhere downtown. so we're not NIMBYs. we're NIABYs: not in anyone's backyard.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 22:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Embankment- Update Thread
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Then you should try reading what people have already written. I will spell it out for you once again, since you can't seem to use basic common sense to put 2 and 2 together. Small parks, especially ones in residential areas exist solely for the neighborhood they are located in. Van Vorst is not a destination park. No one comes from the Heights or Greenville or Journal Square to spend their afternoon in Hamilton Park. Liberty State Park is a destination. People can drive their cars to it, park, go to the Science center and look at views all day long. Central Park is a destination. You take the kids out and play a game of baseball, take them to Wolman Rink or the Reservoir and go to Sheep's Meadow for a concert by world famous musicians in a venue that can support a million people. The Highline is a destination. It is located in the core of downtown Manhattan, surrounded by hundreds of bars, restaurants, stores and public transportation. Lincoln Park is a destination park. It has plenty of open fields for football and soccer, a track, baseball diamonds, pond, parking, tennis courts, basketball courts, picnic areas, etc. The Embankment has no amenities, has no views (unless you like looking at the underside of a highway on one end and a Bed, Bath & Beyond on the other, with the same brownstones that you can view from any block in between), no parking, no transportation to and from, and has no attraction to anyone outside of those who live in the area. It is a park for the Hamilton Park residents only, and not something that has any benefit to JC as a whole. It is a waste of a LOT of money and would be better served by being a number of things, a high rise condo not being one of them.
Posted on: 2012/2/6 21:54
|
|||
|
||||