Browsing this Thread:
14 Anonymous Users
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Did someone actually write "world renown DJ's"? Talk about the greatest scam ever pulled! In any case I agree with Coincey on why we don't want to try and recreate NYC in DTJC. It's a suburb of NYC and any attempt to live up to NYC is going to result in Hoboken II. I agree that the singles crowd has basically been passed over and JC has skipped right to the young family crowd. I know because I've been here 25+ years. I do think that areas like JSQ will become more and more popular with younger people as the rents are cheaper/you can have roommates and the commute is more tolerable to youth. I won't say hipsters because many hipsters are just feigning poverty! I do love how my joke about cars=chicks has been taken and carried across threads. As far as a job in he NJ suburbs? No F***ing way!I work all over. Last week was a shoot with an Olympic skater (Car needed North NJ 4:00am call) and yesterday was with Tony Bennett (NYC= Car Stayed home).
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yes, huge revelation that the world runs on money and not hugs and kisses.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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:
Yikes.....
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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:
Why is that amazing? People can use cars but not have their life revolve around having immediate cheap parking. Plenty of people realize that their auto use creates an impact and are willing to pay extra for parking if it creates a more liveable city. When I lived on Monmouth Street, we went through the ritual along with everyone on the block of moving the cars across the street for street cleaning. Sometimes that was the only use for the car that week. We then decided to spend a bit of money for a garage spot a few blocks away. Despite that, life was still worth living.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Before I get the, "you are not living in reality, blah blah blah"
http://gothamist.com/2013/01/19/do_yo ... 5000_congrats_youre_m.php So I would actually like to revise my statement, A good job, to me, is if you make over 250k then there is no comparison between NYC and JC if you prefer city living
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
She said *good job* Sorry, maybe we all have different definitions here. A good job to me is one where I do not have to worry about money. To me, that is 180k+ a yr. at least. If you have the cash flow, prefer city living, then it is a joke to compare NYC to JC.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
A general reason given by my Manhattan transplant tenants: A renovated apartment with a lot more space and 1/2 the price.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:40
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
True, why be like NYC - not like people consider NYC the capital of the world. True, what has the 30 and under 30 crowd ever done for America - except bring amount revolutions in technology (Youtube and facebook) and commerce (jeff bezos of amazon at age 30) If you have a good job in manhattan and have a choice between JC and NYC, why on earth would you be here?
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
What I find amazing is the number of people who use cars, then support projects that have limited or no parking!
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I hate abatements but if they are within the guidelines, I protest not. Just make them build them yesterday. haven't some of the projects been on the drawing board for 10 years already!
Posted on: 2013/10/23 14:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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, we should all be so lucky if the Journal Square area has the same "problems" as downtown.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 13:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm not one of the people who want DTJC to be more like NYC. All of the amenities you mention are easily available to me and at the end of the day I come back to a pleasant neighborhood and terrific old house and a lovely garden. As far as catering to the single under 30's - it seems to me that neither government nor private enterprise gives a crap about this demographic. The areas is probably underserved as far as bars and clubs are concerned but yet we seem to have a limitless market for day care and dog care. Does anyone else think that young singles are not sought after as residents? Oh, and to add to the debate about what is attractive - which will more likely get you laid - a great job in Manhattan but no car or a job in the NJ suburbs that requires a car? To level the playing field, let's assume that both people have stainless steel appliances.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 12:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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
|
To be fair, it is within the guidelines proposed by the administration at the outset, as this project is within the "Tier IV" area for abatements.
http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/uploa ... icy%20Press%20Release.pdf
Posted on: 2013/10/23 11:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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 don't mind the density and don't object to abatements for signature projects to jump start development in Journal Square, but 35 years seems too long.
Also, the affordable housing component should be built into the development. Making a contribution to the affordable housing slush fund...I mean trust fund...was what the prior administration did. I like the Loews, but I am also skeptical about these types of payoffs in abatements. It reminds me when Mariano Vega required developers like Lloyd Goldman to make contributions to the Jersey City Museum.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 11:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/4/22 23:08 Last Login : 2015/3/10 21:37 From The Heights.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
265
|
[quote]
vindication15 wrote: People here want us to be more like NYC but only in terms of being more pedestrian friendly. Let's really compare okay? NYC has the best subway system in the US. We have the PATH.... maybe we can try and improve our subway system? Attract more well known businesses? [quote] And that is where it starts. JC needs to focus on building better infrastructure, especially PT, for the entire city if it ever expects to ease the traffic and parking issues. People need to look at the grand scheme of things as opposed to looking at the immediate changes. This city needs to bring back some railways that connected various parts of the city, not just build one more train into NYC. This city stills feels segregated and feels small even though we have a quarter of a million people. The city needs to look at expanding our light rail or adding a new line. Obviously its a long shot but it would garner the best results for the whole city.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 5:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
People here want us to be more like NYC but only in terms of being more pedestrian friendly. Let's really compare okay?
NYC has the best subway system in the US. We have the PATH.... NYC has the best restaurants and world class chefs...our claim to fame is maybe 30 acres and that is about it... NYC has central park while we still have a damaged liberty state park from Sandy circa 2012 NYC has a nightlife where world renown DJs perform and we have umm....barcade and beer garden? I am all for being more like NYC but can we start where it actually counts? maybe we can try and improve our subway system? Attract more well known businesses? Hell, even Newark has a whole foods now...we got beat by NEWARK! can we try and improve LSP? It's been a year - can we try and repair that Sandy damage?
Posted on: 2013/10/23 4:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Yvonne seems to want JC to be a fly in amber. Except of course where she benefits financially. But many people would rather see a healthy gradient from high density and high activity areas like Downtown and JS, with tough parking, to quieter lower density areas. Future residents have no problems, they can pick where they want, but current residents will bitch and moan about competing for parking even as their property value and quality of life rises.
New Urbanists cite extensive parking requirements as one of the nails in the coffin of vibrant cities. Some of the others are low density zoning and forbidding housing above stores.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 3:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/4/22 23:08 Last Login : 2015/3/10 21:37 From The Heights.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
265
|
This is Jersey City. If you haven't noticed by now we don't share much in common with the rest of NJ. Limited parking has always been and will always be an issue here. Adding parking won't ease anything or fix any parking issues. its only a band-aid to the bigger picture. Whether anyone likes it or not JC will continue to grow. I'm not looking to argue with anyone on the internet who seems to have an agenda but "more parking" isn't the answer.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 3:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Of course parking is important, the Van Vorst Park Association is not pleased with the new development without parking. People use cars in New Jersey, this is not NYC.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 3:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/4/22 23:08 Last Login : 2015/3/10 21:37 From The Heights.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
265
|
Quote:
Again with the fucking parking.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 2:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I do not look forward to the more condo/rentals without parking, saying people will go to NYC, in the meantime, they will have cars and park on streets causing the same problem as downtown. If the city truly cared about Journal Square, it would have monitored the new sidewalks on Newark Avenue that started in August. Just yesterday, I saw another sloppy job of concrete at the old Social Security site, opposite St. John's Church. Concrete is splashed on the building with footprints in the new sidewalk. From my point of view, it appears the city does not care about Journal Square. When will the city monitor new concrete being poured? After all, it is the city's job to monitor this. Permits were posted at the job site so who inspected?
Posted on: 2013/10/23 2:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
And no one is receiving 35 years in JSQ, either. It's 30. They aren't condos, they are rental. The developer is actually the same developer who built Grove Pointe - hasn't flipped out of that. This is a ten-year buildout. No one is going anywhere.
None of the projects you refer to as "in Journal Square" are, in fact "on the square". Nothing has been built on the square in 30 years. Even with a 30-year abatement of their own five years ago, the project on the Harwood site never got going. It is clear that the area needs help. Or do you prefer the current state of decline to continue "unabated"?
Posted on: 2013/10/23 1:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
No one received 35 years downtown. In fact LeFrak did not ask for an abatement. Mayor Cucci campaigned on affordable housing, after the 1985 election, he approached Samuel LeFrak about affordable housing and 270 units were given to affordable housing from the 1500. LeFrak was happy to have the $40 million UDAG grant. He also got rent controlled changed. So the idea of abatements is a bonus from the city. Keeping campaign promises started the abatement saga. By the way, Dixon did not have a long term abatement and that development happened around the same time as Newport.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 1:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Developments in Journal Square need abatements, in my opinion, in order to attract more affluent development there. While there is decent proximity to the City, it is still a very unattractive area. When I first moved here from out of state many years ago, I thought it was one of the most horrible places I had ever seen. I'm not trying to offend anybody - but we need to look at this without rose colored glasses on.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 1:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There are a number of projects being built in Journal Square and were on the drawing board before the election. The property next to PS #31 (the banging and the school complained, article in the JJ) and Van Winkle on Tonnele next to Canco. I guess we will see more 35 years instead of 12 abatements now.
Posted on: 2013/10/23 1:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
When canco was first built, they sold some units for 600k+ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/realestate/29njzo.html?_r=0
Posted on: 2013/10/23 1:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I have a hard time imagining $600K condominiums in Journal Square, which (I walk to and from the PATH station from the Heights almost daily...) is a wasteland in terms of the amenities that would support prices at that point. But is it not a good policy strategy, to encourage a level of development in keeping with JS's being a significant mass-transit up, proximity to NYC and downtown JC, fantastic ethnic restaurant scene? I would need to see more about the related development associated with demand for better amenities, transit enhancements etc., Thoughts/details?
Posted on: 2013/10/23 0:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The last abatement given by Mayor Healy earlier this year in Journal Square was 12 years for the former Welfare Building. But apparently giving shorter abatements is not the goal here. After a few years, the developer will sell the property for a higher amount and the city will transfer the abatement for the previous agreed amount (This happened last month.) So a $400,000 condo, will be worth $600,00 but the abatement will be on the $400,000 value. And we wonder why the city is going broke.
Posted on: 2013/10/22 23:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
35-year tax break proposed for three-tower Journal Square project
By Terrence T. McDonald/The Jersey Journal The $600 million, three-tower residential project that Jersey City believes will transform Journal Square is set to receive a 35-year tax break, in addition to $10 million in bonds issued by a city agency that will pay for infrastructure improvements in the area. The deal is the first for a market-rate project since Mayor Steve Fulop implemented a new policy regarding the tax breaks ? known as tax abatements ? that Fulop says will encourage development in areas of the city that aren?t located along the lucrative Waterfront. READ MORE
Posted on: 2013/10/22 21:34
|
|||
|
||||