Quote:

They just tore down the old unemployment building across the street, and the area is mostly low-rise, so will remain pleasantly low density.

In terms of aesthetics, it will spruce up nicely. It's a nice area overall, and the grammar school is very good. I went there as a kid, and it has always been a leader in gifted programs in the city. It is also an extremely diverse neighborhood.

The "passivehaus" quote is fascinating and quite a mouthful. Kind of like using a ten dollar word when a dollar will do but anyway the developer is not going to use it so why report it at all?

more ......

Grand opening of Kennedy Lofts signals 'great day' for Journal Square: developer

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... veloper.html#incart_river

** ***************************

Quote:

That area is not bad at all. PS #11 across the street, JC Courthouse down the block. The google map needs to be updated as of last week?.

Kennedy Lofts in Jersey City's Journal Square may be joined by an upscale neighbor

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... eighbor.html#incart_river

** ********************************

Also the proposed development of 30 Journal Square the old JJ building will be almost next store.

40-story tower planned for site of old Jersey Journal office

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

.

man look at the google map street view next to this building, it looks really bad. I wouldnt want to live there.

I think the area north of jsq path is much better, south has a long way to go.

I live down the hill from that building, by the Newkirk/Summit intersection, and a new building like that will be a good addition to the area. A few upper income residents will help change over the local dime store style convenience stores to better retail outlets. The storefront stretch between Sip and Academy on Summit is pretty bad.

Maybe it'll also result in actual quality of life patrols to keep drunken derelicts from hanging out on the front of the municipal courthouse after hours.

Quote:

Do you also consider the tax abatement you were given by being able to deduct your mortgage interest and real estate taxes from your federal income socialist government? What about the gift you got from Uncle Sam by not having to pay capital gains taxes on the first $500,000 of profit you made when selling your house. You sound like the pot calling the kettle pinkish.

Thank you for making my point exactly (re: moving the conversation in another direction instead of admitting you were wrong on your initial point). What does the re-val have to do with talking about the differences between two journal square projects real estate projects?

I already agreed that abatements need to revised / structured properly and I don't know enough about the facts on both of the projects we are talking about to know whether that is the case (I suspect they are not structured as well as they could be in both cases).

The key word in the sentence you quoted in the report is "can"- "..these financial arrangements can create tax inequity and present opportunities for unfair favoritism or cronyism." It doesn't say abatements are bad, just that they can be...again, no one disagrees with you on this, including me.

If you do read the article, make sure you don't overlook this sentence "...these financial arrangements can create tax inequity and present opportunities for unfair favoritism or cronyism." The reason Fulop cancelled the reval, the didn't want an angy public seeing their taxes go up while he give cheap abatements to developers.

Yvonne - Way to change the subject...

I didn't say anything about abatements other than I am for them when used properly. I didn't read the entire report you reference (which is 4 years old), but the summary indicates that abatement policies need to be reviewed / restructured to ensure that they achieve their desired purposes...I dont think anyone (myself included) would disagree with that.

The problem with trying to refute your points is that you never admit when you are wrong and continuously either move the conversation in another direction or ignore what you have previously said.

Yes, but one has a 12 year abatement and the other has 30 years with bonds guaranteed by the public. By the way Maise the State of New Jersey would disagree with you over abatements.
http://www.nj.gov/comptroller/news/docs/tax_abatement_report.pdf

Both locations are prime....

I am not selling anything nor am I making a case for abatement policies (which I am generally for when used properly). I was just pointing out your hypocrisy in comparing the KRE development to this relatively minor $10 million rehab (source: http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... lvr.it&utm_medium=twitter). Again, you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to real estate development / construction - just because you thought the building was in terrible shape does not mean it was difficult to convert to residential use. Location is meaningless when comparing the scope of work of a $10 million repair job to building a $600 million modern sky scraper.

I have absolutely no personal interest in this project other than being a Jersey City resident (and happen to have some knowledge of commercial real estate development). You just need to better understand how your limited knowledge in some areas does not make you suited to be so critical of everything and confuse people who might not know better.

I don't buy what you are selling Maise, 100 Newkirk St was the old Welfare building and it was in terrible shape for years, compared to KRE which is next to the PATH, you have prime location. Besides, this is the United State of America. We tell other nations about free enterprise. Free enterprise means you take the risks for the rewards. KRE risks are on the back of taxpayers and I will not receive a dividend check when KRE makes a profit. Really, we are practicing socialism government. But I cannot say it was well as Councilman Fulop when he attacked Mayor Healy on his abatement policy.

Quote:

Yvonne - You can't compare a $10 million rehab of an existing building to a $600 million plus ground up development. The time, risk, manpower, and capital investment it takes to do what KRE is doing at Journal Square more than supports the 30 year abatement, especially if you believe that 12 years is appropriate for the Kennedy Lofts.

You might know a lot about the history of Jersey City, but you clearly have no idea what you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to real estate development (which I have gleaned from multiple threads).

I remember when Healy gave this abatement, 12 years, while KRE under Fulop, which is next to PATH receives 30 years plus 10 million in redevelopment bonds.

From JJ comments:

Excellent news for Journal Square!!!!
.
Check out their web site..

http://kennedylofts.com/history/

?Two days before Election Day in 1960 John F. Kennedy made his last campaign speech before returning to New England at Journal Square. Hudson Boulevard was named Kennedy Boulevard soon after his assassination. 100 Newkirk Street, built by the architecture/engineering firm of Comparetto and Kenny and completed in 1965, was named the John F. Kennedy Office Building in his honor.?

Jonathan Lin | The Jersey Journal

?A very bright future? is in store for Jersey City?s Journal Square, the developers of a new high-end residential building there are saying on the eve of its grand opening, after years of great expectations and disappointments in the area.

Developer Hopkins Group LLC and partner Skyrock 100 Newkirk are calling the 40,000-square-foot, eight-story Kennedy Lofts, located at 100 Newkirk St., the ?reimagined, redeveloped and reborn John F. Kennedy Office building.?

The building used to be home to Hudson County?s welfare division.

?The project will offer great value and will be highly appealing to people who appreciate what this vibrant and diverse neighborhood has to offer,? said Matt Weinreich, the principal of Hopkins Group LLC. ?We expect that many of the people who will move here will be discovering Journal Square for the first time.?

The project, which cost more than $4 million, features 56 residential units, including nine studios, 39 one-bedroom apartments and eight two-bedroom apartments, according to Weinreich. Prices start at $1,500 for studios, $1,700 for a one-bedroom and $2,100 for a two-bedroom, according to kennedylofts.com.

Amenities at Kennedy Lofts include a fitness center, tenant storage lockers, bicycle storage, a lounge, a game room and a roof terrace.

Last year in March, Hopkins Group LLC received a tax abatement from Jersey City to develop Kennedy Lofts. The developer will pay $93,000 annually over 12 years in payments in lieu of taxes, with statutory staged increases over that period.

More