Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
Quote:
While I agree with most of your post - this part irked me. It's already ugly so do whatever the F&*% you want to it? I walk down CCB every day and I was ecstatic when Porta put windows in - it made the block feel so much less rapey. I'll be happy if that surface parking lot disappears, too - but it completely depends on what goes in on the ground floor. Case in point - the newer building on the northwest corner of Barrow and Wayne. Only 4 stories, but the entire ground floor is parking. Don't care how many shrubs you put in front of it - it's deadspace. Right now, I have a 7-story building going up behind my 3-story row house in Harsimus Cove that will basically cast a shadow over my entire house and I can forget having any plants growing in my back yard ever again. I'm semi-devastated but there's nothing do be done about it now. 18 stories going up in a neighborhood like VVP makes my heart sink.
Posted on: 2015/5/16 9:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Come on Aaron, don't play dumb. I know you read this board, including some other posts in this thread. But to clear up your confusion, the fact that this snake oil logic in post 55 was successful, along with your lobbying, is why I made my post. "If we give it time, we will get all of the restaurants we want. But so long as there are tables and food trucks at Grove Plaza restauranteurs will be less likely to build. I know everyone loves convenience. But convenience has costs." http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=361426 So reverse your efforts, bring back the food trucks, and we'll have that beer.
Posted on: 2015/5/16 1:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If you have a problem with the city fee structure for food trucks, then lobby for higher fees. It doesn't mean you should ban them outright. Doing that means you do want to use the government to eliminate your competition.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 22:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Oh, absolutely - there are low-rises, though, they're just on the other sides of the proposed buildings (Marin/1st and Marin/Bay both have approved high rise buildings) on or close to Grove Street. The whole point of the various Development Plans is to have appropriate levels of transitional space between the high-rise waterfront and the low-rise historic downtown, and to maintain the industrial/historic character of the Powerhouse area. Now, they seem to be doing a good job of the latter, maybe a little less so on the former. There's a bit of moral hazard involved in throwing away large development plans for single (even large) lots. And the whole point was to have transitional areas from 30-ish story buildings to 10-ish story buildings to low rises. Other than that, though, I'm fine with the plans for these towers because, as I said, the alternative is a couple blocks of ugly eyesores and wastes of very in-demand space, and the towers will assuredly include plenty of retail and restaurant space and lots of new patrons for local businesses. I'd much rather see something on a scale closer to Charles&Co for that area, though.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 18:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I am with you on all points, but I have a quibble with the one above: to say the proposed building for LMM Blvd. and 1st St is going to be next to low-rises is a bit disingenuous. In the immediate area: 150 Bay St (10 stories across the street, behind Powerhouse Lounge) The Art House (12 stories, plus rooftop area) The Morgan (Part of Provost Square, 38 stories, diagonally across from location in question) The Oakman (also 12 stories) Waldo Lofts (12 - 15 stories?) Within two blocks of the area: The One JC (40+ stories) The additional towers slated as part of Provost Square 70 Columbus Simply put, the area comprised by the borders of LMM Blvd to the West, Washington Blvd to the East, 1st St to the North and Columbus Dr to the South, is a veritable collection of high rises, some already in place, others mid-construction, and a few future ones. The new one proposed for the corner of 1st and LMM Blvd will fit right in. As for character of the area, there is none right now: unless you count trash strewn streets, Section 8 low income housing and surface lots as "character". I hope they approve for development for LMM Blvd... it could use some sprucing up!
Posted on: 2015/5/15 17:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Dear JC"Man". I would love to know where this vitriol comes from. Please accept my invite to out yourself and vent over a beer in a public place. I'll pay. (BTW, I fully disclosed the parking in my initial post. As to my address, it's irrelevant. I've supported similar efforts no where near my house and was prompted to post on JClist by my neighbors. See nextdoor.com)
Now. Back to the issue. I am also pro-development. I've been in JC for close to 20 years and have seen how much it has helped. I'm also happy that a quality developer (BNE) is behind the project. I've met with them twice and was impressed. 7 stories or 18 stories, the building will increase my house's value. I'll no longer look at an ugly parking lot. Finally, as someone mentioned, the density will be great for Newark Ave. businesses. So what could be bad? Height. Van Vorst Park has a character. Newport has a character. Basically, I support efforts to maintain the character of our neighborhood. I like living in a neighborhood more akin to the West Village than the Upper East Side. If we keep throwing out redevelopment plans, we will have no planning.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 16:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you want to find out more and hear from the developer, come to the VVPA meeting next Tuesday. Developers who discuss their plans with the community in advance of final design often receive excellent feedback and ideas -- and incorporate them into their plans.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 16:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Unfortunately, this is also an impossible problem to solve. NJ Transit and the Port Authority run the show, and they don't really care about the same things that a metropolitan transit agency or a city planner should care about. Other than a rapid transit bus line, I doubt JC itself could do much, but this is something that Hudson County as a whole is going to have to figure out in the near future. Doubling light rail frequency could help, extending it as well. Maybe extending (and subsidizing) the ferry system to go up and down the Jersey coast, making stops in Weehawken, Hoboken, JC, etc.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 16:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I think you just have to spend some time in the Heights, to realize traffic problems are not necessarily tied to the density of development. The Heights is predominantly low-rise, yet the streets are clogged with cars, every available patch of grass in front of said low-rise houses has been paved over for parking, and it's faster to walk the 1+ mile to catch the PATH at Journal Square than take the bus, because the traffice between Franklin Street and 5 Corners is so bad. High rise development can be successfully integrated with a diverse built environment such as DTJC, but the bigger problem is JC's failure to address it's infrastructure needs, implement traffic calming measures, and create disincentives for car ownership. Not to mention, perhaps more critically, advocate for multi-modal mass transit improvements both to/from NYC and within JC e.g. to other neighborhoods, other shopping districts, etc. Dealing with that issue will ultimately also benefit DTJC residents, by making development in other parts of the city more attractive and taking the pressure of your neighborhood.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm absurdly pro-development. Development brings density, density (to a point) makes neighborhoods more lively, brings more dining, shopping, and nightlife options, more investment in public infrastructure, and generally improves property values and often, lifestyle to a plurality of residents. That said, development has to be responsible. What do I mean by that?
1. Maintaining character of the neighborhood. Van Vorst Park area has a strong low-rise character, while Columbus Blvd is ugly and wouldn't be hurt by a high-rise. This sort of thing could be accomplished by both building design (matching the character of the existing buildings) and height offsets. It could also be accomplished by simply being more reasonable on the height. The developer is going to make a killing whether it's 18 stories or 15. 2. Ensuring that the ground floor, or even the first two floors, are primarily used for retail and restaurants. The reason that a lot of the high-rise areas built ~10 years ago feel so dead is that they have parking, large lobbies, and other non-neighborhood-enhancing features on the ground floor. This decreases walkability, and should be a non-starter for plan approval. 3. Appreciating the entirety of a proposal. Amending the MGM Redevelopment Plan to allow the construction of a big tower next to low-rises, where there was previously an auto body shop or surface parking lot, might violate #1, but it's so much better for a walkable, downtown neighborhood than the auto body shop or surface parking lot that it might be better, overall. Amending the PAD plan to allow a developer to tear down a beautiful historic warehouse to construct a tower is a different thing, altogether. 4. Reasonable landmarking and preservation. Areas of NYC have gone too far. JC might not be going far enough. Some of the character of low-rise neighborhoods can be preserved in the face of high rises with building designs that maintain historic facades while allowing towers to rise inside the lots. This approach worked well in Chicago, and could work well here. Yes, it's expensive, but seriously, developers and landowners in DTJC are killing it these days, and the city council should be demanding that they give back their fair share. 5. Community givebacks, and not bullshit ones. Parks and other green spaces, appropriate preservation of character buildings, hell, even improvements to public transit and overall city infrastructure... all this can help improve the neighborhood and end up as a win/win for the developer and the residents - improving the neighborhood lets the developer get more money for the units it's building, and makes the residents happy as well.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It?s unfortunate how much anonymous flak Aaron M takes because he dared to publically voice opposition to the operation of a mobile food court in very close proximity to restaurants, but that?s not the argument. I suspect most people who are aware of their environment can recognize that tall buildings integrate very poorly with a low-rise architectural landscape and the communities that surround them?it?s a simple argument. Getting back K-Lo?s comment, I would think that political leaders and the city?s coffers don?t stand much to lose by interfering with large national retail stores in a small section of town. Developers on the other hand, make offers and form alliances that are difficult to resist for reasons we can all understand. Unfortunately, tall buildings are the future for a great deal of Jersey City. Last call was an hour ago, and the lights are on; we?re not hot enough to be picky, and we don?t have enough cab fare to get home by ourselves.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/12/18 2:57 Last Login : 2017/9/14 20:15 From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
747
 |
Can't we fix the traffic on marin before adding thousands of more people. The cacophony during rush hour is a bit much.
Columbus heading east is a disaster at Grove. Two lanes having to merge into the middle lane since the left lane is for buses only and the right lane is for taxi's and crappy buses from the Beacon.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm pretty pro development, but that seems like a bad spot for 18 stories and I'd hate to start seeing increased height creep into that area.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12 Last Login : 2020/9/30 18:46 From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
2391
|
Quote:
A building of any size would be an improvement over an auto body lot, which makes no sense on a main thoroughfare of an increasingly residential and developing area. While I agree that there is (some, although quickly decreasing) need for an autobody shop near downtown, this is not a great place for it.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 15:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12 Last Login : 2020/9/30 18:46 From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
2391
|
18 stories is a little too high, in my opinion. However, let's remember that the majority of this building's facade will be on Columbus, and from that angle I don't think 18 stories is too out of place.
I wonder if the design would be such that the Barrow Street side would be 6-8 stories, and it would step up for the facade on the Columbus side. 15 stories or so is reasonable, I feel. And no, I don't think 18 stories constitutes a tower, and certainly not a gargantuan tower.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
He opposes it for personal, not business reasons. In his second post in this thread he said he lives right next to the proposed tower. Of course, he didn't disclose that up front, when he called for action to stop the "gargantuan" tower. He also knows many on this forum want new towers to have a lot of parking so he included the lack of tower parking in his original post. Not because he cares but because it's more likely to get others on his side. That's what he's all about, lobbying the government to get what he wants and trying to manipulate the public to do his bidding when that fails.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Been to Rivington Street lately ? 'nuff said
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12 Last Login : 2016/11/8 21:51 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
704
|
(First, I don't live in the immediate neighborhood, so I don't care about this particular development one way or another.)
If current zoning permits only 7 stories, a 18 story building will need an exemption, yes? Without seeing the design, it's hard to comment, but intuitively I feel a building more than twice as tall as other buildings will change the neighborhood. Whether that's improvement or not, I don't know. But once this is approved, it will be used as a precedent to develop other perhaps even taller buildings, yes? Will Christopher Columbus become like Newport in a not so distant future?
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
This is probably a stupid question, but why would Two Boots oppose a high-rise in the neighborhood for business reasons? Wouldn't more people (many without cars) be good for their business?
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I understand WholeFoods may move in to JC after completion.
Love their vibe.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 14:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Two Boots can spend more than food truck operators and prepared food stands at the Grove St farmers market. So he can successfully get them banned and enjoy his little victory there. But he can't outspend huge developers so he comes on here with his typical snake oil sales pitch intended to get people to do his bidding for him. Sorry Two Boots, enjoy another loss (like the proposal to limit chains downtown). I hope they extend the tower to 30 stories.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 13:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Who spends more money on government and has closer relationships with political leaders?national retailers or developers?
Posted on: 2015/5/15 13:21
Edited by Frank_M on 2015/5/15 13:38:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Does anyone else find a bit of disconnect with the City approving every effort to 'densify' living space while attempting to maintain the Mom and Pop feel of downtown stores? I just don't get it.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I do agree that an 18-story building on the corner of Columbus and Barrow would seem out of place. But, the OP did not help his cause by using hyperbole. An 18-story building is NOT a gargantuan tower.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Since you moved out RE values have gone up and the quality of life has gotten better. We're happy you left. If you think that future development and higher population density won't occur in you neighborhood you're in for a rude awakening.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2014/9/19 1:29 Last Login : 2020/3/12 17:59 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
200
|
Quote:
I completely agree. Marin is a hideous thoroughfare. When I have friends come to visit my place, I always direct them to walk up Erie or Jersey Ave so they can see how beautiful Harsimus Cove and HP are. But more often than not they walk up Marin and mention how industrial and derelict it looks. The new high rises already going up are a vast improvement on the empty lots that were there before. Once the empty lot at Marin and Bay and the Budget car rental are developed, and the Shoprite, BBB, Pepboys mega development are finished, Marin will look so much better. But agree with opposition to a high rise at Barrow and Columbus. VVP, HC & HP's height restrictions should be respected, IMO. The Marin corridor is a different case altogether.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:11
Edited by Webmaster on 2015/5/15 14:43:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
+1 I find it really exciting to see what's happening Downtown. RE values are going up and new commercial space is opening. This place is changing quickly and all for the better IMHO.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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
|
Damn, I read the title and got all excited, hoping for at least 50 floors. Nothing to see people, move on.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 12:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Another person that came here when it was perfect (to them) and wanted to see it encased in amber to protect her sensibilities. Don't worry about DTJC. It's doing fine. And, when you left, four other people showed, excited about the way it is trending.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 10:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
More chicken little BS. The 38-story tower would be an improvement over what's there already (an auto body shop, and a mess of parked cars) and it will improve the look of the area. As for your wind tunnel complaint, what do you expect?? We live in a windy area. And LMM Blvd is very close to the waterfront, so wind is obviously going to be an issue around there.
Posted on: 2015/5/15 10:32
|
|||
|
||||