Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
49 user(s) are online (43 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 49

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 (2) 3 »


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15
Last Login :
2019/2/27 14:41
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 448
Offline
I shy away from conspiracy theories, but holy crap.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 21:03
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
202 York is owned by York Street, LLC, at 279 Grove Street. aka Silverman.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 20:51
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
11/27 23:30
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1399
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i hope the owner sues..i thought it was against the law to seize private property for commercial development even if it is condemned


Kelo vs. City of New London made it okay to do just that. It ranks up with Griggs vs. Duke Power and Dred Scott as some of the worst decisions ever made by the Supreme Court.


Griggs v. Duke Power was a landmark victory for civil rights.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 20:02
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2897
Offline
Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
The thing that really bothers me about this (having read the report found here http://goo.gl/Blo2Y0) is the total smear job they're trying to run on 202 York. I feel bad for whoever lives there. From page 8:

This three-story, five-unit multifamily building is in poor condition. The exterior has a rear yard, strewn with trash and surrounded by a chain-link fence that is falling down.
Inside, the building is dark, cramped, and lacks proper life safety updates.
The generality of the building is of substandard design with small inefficient units. An exterior survey reveals a minimally maintained building
with unidentifiable opening for possible venting and un-repaired patching.
Loose and hanging wires, and wired entering and exiting the center, side and front walls. While the vinyl siding appears new, it is impossible to determine
the true condition of what it covers underneath. The visible fa?ade that remains is a mix of stucco, brick face, tile and concrete.
The rear of the building, although it does contain a metal fire escape, requires some repairs to insure it is closed and secure. In its current state it appears to be
approaching dilapidation and obsolescence. It possesses characteristics of lacking light, air, and space, in a manner conducive to unwholesome living conditions.
Multiple windows are blocked by in window air-conditioning units, the front yard, contain as vent within the ROW indicating the presence of some
underground utility serving the building but within the City ROW. The chimney appears to need re-pointing.
Both the front and the back of the building contain an undersized person door non-compliant to current building code or safety design standards.
This site can be found to meet criteria "a" as an "area in need of redevelopment."


This describes 90% of the low rise housing stock in Downtown Jersey City. This building actually looks nicer than mine from the outside! Crappy fences and poorly installed Comcast/Fios wires do not justify the taking of property by the city for the benefit of a developer.
i hope the owner sues..i thought it was against the law to seize private property for commercial development even if it is condemned


Image here: http://www.realtor.com/realestateandh ... ity_NJ_07302_M57967-32069

(sorry - couldn't post it)

This is the house on 202 York. According to Zillow, it sold in January of this year for $615,000:

Alert
Date Event
01/05/2015
close detail
$615,000
Recording Date: 01/05/2015
Contract Date: 12/29/2014
Sale Price: $615,000
Price Type: Full amount stated on Document.
County Transfer Tax: $615
Total Transfer Tax: $2,153
Transaction Type: Insured Non-Residential Grant Deed
Document TypeDeed

...and a little colorful JC history about the address:

"Three Counterfeiters Arrested: Three men who are believed to be of a gang which has been passing counterfeit quarters and half dollars in New Jersey have been arrested by Secret Service officers in Elizabeth The prisoners gave names as John Harvey John J Haskings and Charles B Herman One was recognized the police as Joseph McArdle of 202 York Street Jersey City In his room were melting pot a sand box some le d and other articles which the Secret Service men are used by counterfeiters. Dickerman's United States Treasury Counterfeit Detector, 1909"



Page 6 of the report says 202 York was assessed at $85,000. How could it have sold for $615,000? I know the reval hasn't been done in a long time, but that much of a discrepancy?

Posted on: 2015/7/15 20:02
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 4:17
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5060
Offline
JCman24 is right. 202 York Street has all the characteristics of an old wood frame house and contributes to the fabric of the Van Vorst Historic District. Look at the old house on the corner of Wayne & Barrow being restored. There was pressure to have it demolished but it will look stunning when completed. 202 York is a five family and as such is inspected per code every 5 years. The city with all it resources, Public Works etc., could'nt maintain the perimeter of City Hall or fix the steps and so on. This report is boiler plate garbage and poorly written. Not only will the city demolish a good building it also displaces five families who will need affordable housing.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 19:53
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/7/9 19:50
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:02
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2171
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
The thing that really bothers me about this (having read the report found here http://goo.gl/Blo2Y0) is the total smear job they're trying to run on 202 York. I feel bad for whoever lives there. From page 8:

This three-story, five-unit multifamily building is in poor condition. The exterior has a rear yard, strewn with trash and surrounded by a chain-link fence that is falling down.
Inside, the building is dark, cramped, and lacks proper life safety updates.
The generality of the building is of substandard design with small inefficient units. An exterior survey reveals a minimally maintained building
with unidentifiable opening for possible venting and un-repaired patching.
Loose and hanging wires, and wired entering and exiting the center, side and front walls. While the vinyl siding appears new, it is impossible to determine
the true condition of what it covers underneath. The visible fa?ade that remains is a mix of stucco, brick face, tile and concrete.
The rear of the building, although it does contain a metal fire escape, requires some repairs to insure it is closed and secure. In its current state it appears to be
approaching dilapidation and obsolescence. It possesses characteristics of lacking light, air, and space, in a manner conducive to unwholesome living conditions.
Multiple windows are blocked by in window air-conditioning units, the front yard, contain as vent within the ROW indicating the presence of some
underground utility serving the building but within the City ROW. The chimney appears to need re-pointing.
Both the front and the back of the building contain an undersized person door non-compliant to current building code or safety design standards.
This site can be found to meet criteria "a" as an "area in need of redevelopment."


This describes 90% of the low rise housing stock in Downtown Jersey City. This building actually looks nicer than mine from the outside! Crappy fences and poorly installed Comcast/Fios wires do not justify the taking of property by the city for the benefit of a developer.
i hope the owner sues..i thought it was against the law to seize private property for commercial development even if it is condemned


Image here: http://www.realtor.com/realestateandh ... ity_NJ_07302_M57967-32069

(sorry - couldn't post it)

This is the house on 202 York. According to Zillow, it sold in January of this year for $615,000:

Alert
Date Event
01/05/2015
close detail
$615,000
Recording Date: 01/05/2015
Contract Date: 12/29/2014
Sale Price: $615,000
Price Type: Full amount stated on Document.
County Transfer Tax: $615
Total Transfer Tax: $2,153
Transaction Type: Insured Non-Residential Grant Deed
Document TypeDeed

...and a little colorful JC history about the address:

"Three Counterfeiters Arrested: Three men who are believed to be of a gang which has been passing counterfeit quarters and half dollars in New Jersey have been arrested by Secret Service officers in Elizabeth The prisoners gave names as John Harvey John J Haskings and Charles B Herman One was recognized the police as Joseph McArdle of 202 York Street Jersey City In his room were melting pot a sand box some le d and other articles which the Secret Service men are used by counterfeiters. Dickerman's United States Treasury Counterfeit Detector, 1909"


Posted on: 2015/7/15 19:33
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/12/21 14:43
Last Login :
2015/11/15 0:07
From Harsimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 374
Offline
Quote:

Rorschach wrote:
Hey, why not just give the current City Hall to a developer and have them build a 90 story residential building. Then move all City operations to the MLK Hub


I think this is a great idea, well maybe not 90 stories and maybe not entirely residential. There is just so much patching and reconfiguring you can do.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 19:17
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 0:49
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2491
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i hope the owner sues..i thought it was against the law to seize private property for commercial development even if it is condemned


Kelo vs. City of New London made it okay to do just that. It ranks up with Griggs vs. Duke Power and Dred Scott as some of the worst decisions ever made by the Supreme Court.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 13:06
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 20:28
Last Login :
2017/11/7 17:48
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 730
Offline
Quote:

DanL wrote:

I forgot the "cherry on top", the city can avoid selling the development property to the highest bidder and instead designate another friendly developer who will be touted as the best developer in the world to develop what Jersey City needs most.


This is really the only part that bugs me. Just sell the lot at market if you want it developed.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 12:51
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 20:28
Last Login :
2017/11/7 17:48
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 730
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The city is not saying what they want with the parking lot. But let's be realistic, how do people in different parts of the city attend meetings? I called people to attend meetings on matters that effect their wards and they came down but could not find parking. Since JC is almost 15 square miles, parking should be parking of any municipal plan.


First of all. They couldn't have used that lot so not having it in the future = no change.

Second, there is a deck two blocks away and Edison parking across the street.

Third. The PATH lets off right there so lots of people could take that.

Fourth. I lived here now for about 6 years and I can count on no fingers the amount of times I have found no parking at all where I wanted to be. Sometimes I do have to go a few blocks away, sometimes it is annoying. Never have I just be unable to park.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 12:50
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
7/30 1:08
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1204
Offline

I forgot the "cherry on top", the city can avoid selling the development property to the highest bidder and instead designate another friendly developer who will be touted as the best developer in the world to develop what Jersey City needs most.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 12:50
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
JCman, .... and that is how a property is blighted. "Blight" in a multimillion dollar neighborhood. Total abuse of the concept and back door to spot zoning.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 11:17
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#41
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/19 23:23
Last Login :
2019/8/9 17:19
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 23
Offline
Quote:

Bogart wrote:
Quote:

bjay wrote:
I'm not surprised to see the linkage of City Hall with the parking lot across the street. This could be a very smart way to get the developer to pay for City Hall renovations in order to get the right to build on the parking lot. But isn't it a bit odd that the City Hall Study Area includes one single row house on York Street?


Quite odd. I bet there's an interesting story there.



Yes - it would be interesting to know which parking lot they are planning to build on....?

The owners of York St. want to be included in the RDP. Let the building deteriorate, Claim that it is too expensive to renovate properly. Partner with the developer to get included in the RDP. Build a high rise.

Happening at 72 Wayne street too.

So much for the Historic District.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 11:08
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
11/20 6:15
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3637
Offline
Quote:

JCman24 wrote:
The thing that really bothers me about this (having read the report found here http://goo.gl/Blo2Y0) is the total smear job they're trying to run on 202 York. I feel bad for whoever lives there. From page 8:

This three-story, five-unit multifamily building is in poor condition. The exterior has a rear yard, strewn with trash and surrounded by a chain-link fence that is falling down.
Inside, the building is dark, cramped, and lacks proper life safety updates.
The generality of the building is of substandard design with small inefficient units. An exterior survey reveals a minimally maintained building
with unidentifiable opening for possible venting and un-repaired patching.
Loose and hanging wires, and wired entering and exiting the center, side and front walls. While the vinyl siding appears new, it is impossible to determine
the true condition of what it covers underneath. The visible fa?ade that remains is a mix of stucco, brick face, tile and concrete.
The rear of the building, although it does contain a metal fire escape, requires some repairs to insure it is closed and secure. In its current state it appears to be
approaching dilapidation and obsolescence. It possesses characteristics of lacking light, air, and space, in a manner conducive to unwholesome living conditions.
Multiple windows are blocked by in window air-conditioning units, the front yard, contain as vent within the ROW indicating the presence of some
underground utility serving the building but within the City ROW. The chimney appears to need re-pointing.
Both the front and the back of the building contain an undersized person door non-compliant to current building code or safety design standards.
This site can be found to meet criteria "a" as an "area in need of redevelopment."


This describes 90% of the low rise housing stock in Downtown Jersey City. This building actually looks nicer than mine from the outside! Crappy fences and poorly installed Comcast/Fios wires do not justify the taking of property by the city for the benefit of a developer.
i hope the owner sues..i thought it was against the law to seize private property for commercial development even if it is condemned

Posted on: 2015/7/15 4:24
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15
Last Login :
2019/2/27 14:41
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 448
Offline
The thing that really bothers me about this (having read the report found here http://goo.gl/Blo2Y0) is the total smear job they're trying to run on 202 York. I feel bad for whoever lives there. From page 8:

This three-story, five-unit multifamily building is in poor condition. The exterior has a rear yard, strewn with trash and surrounded by a chain-link fence that is falling down.
Inside, the building is dark, cramped, and lacks proper life safety updates.
The generality of the building is of substandard design with small inefficient units. An exterior survey reveals a minimally maintained building
with unidentifiable opening for possible venting and un-repaired patching.
Loose and hanging wires, and wired entering and exiting the center, side and front walls. While the vinyl siding appears new, it is impossible to determine
the true condition of what it covers underneath. The visible fa?ade that remains is a mix of stucco, brick face, tile and concrete.
The rear of the building, although it does contain a metal fire escape, requires some repairs to insure it is closed and secure. In its current state it appears to be
approaching dilapidation and obsolescence. It possesses characteristics of lacking light, air, and space, in a manner conducive to unwholesome living conditions.
Multiple windows are blocked by in window air-conditioning units, the front yard, contain as vent within the ROW indicating the presence of some
underground utility serving the building but within the City ROW. The chimney appears to need re-pointing.
Both the front and the back of the building contain an undersized person door non-compliant to current building code or safety design standards.
This site can be found to meet criteria "a" as an "area in need of redevelopment."


This describes 90% of the low rise housing stock in Downtown Jersey City. This building actually looks nicer than mine from the outside! Crappy fences and poorly installed Comcast/Fios wires do not justify the taking of property by the city for the benefit of a developer.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 3:30
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/11/29 18:19
Last Login :
2015/7/15 3:35
From Jersey City, NJ
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 276
Offline
Here is my guess as to what will happen.

Remember how Silverman first got a 20 year abatement to build luxury condos across the street from City Hall, then didn't build it... and then just two years ago had to take a 10 year abatement instead after a big uproar... to build luxury rentals for transient workers...

This is part two of that agreement.

Guaranteed Jersey City designates Silverman as the developer. Then JC sells the lot for a sweet song for the developer (cheap), plus promises of some "upgrades" and "cheap renovations" to city hall which will be minimal at best.

Then... what will happen is this.... the City Hall district zone will then be deliberately expanded to include the new Charles & Co. building, and they will "renegotiate" their tax abatement to either a 20 or maybe even 30 year abatements as they are in a new "historic" district that is "blighted".

Look at what is going on. They just gave 30 years to the powerhouse arts district. And 20 year tax breaks to commercial hotels at exchange place and grove st.

Meanwhile... all of these abatements are within the original 2013 Tax Abatement restructuring which would have only given them just 5 years.

This is really uncalled for. Mayor Fulop and his puppet council selling out Jersey City for campaign cash and promises of more for his run for Governor.

And the regular taxpayer pays and pays and pays. We need a tax break too, not these rich developers who charge market rate rents and "fills em as they build em" Per the Developer of Park 18 - Mr. Kushner

FG


Posted on: 2015/7/15 3:13
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/6/13 17:16
Last Login :
2017/2/3 3:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 521
Offline
Quote:

bjay wrote:
I'm not surprised to see the linkage of City Hall with the parking lot across the street. This could be a very smart way to get the developer to pay for City Hall renovations in order to get the right to build on the parking lot. But isn't it a bit odd that the City Hall Study Area includes one single row house on York Street?


Quite odd. I bet there's an interesting story there.

Posted on: 2015/7/15 2:22
I live by the river.
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/2/6 0:52
Last Login :
2016/10/13 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 276
Offline
Hey, why not just give the current City Hall to a developer and have them build a 90 story residential building. Then move all City operations to the MLK Hub

Posted on: 2015/7/15 1:45
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/1/11 21:47
Last Login :
5/10 19:38
From Van Vorst Park area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 167
Offline
I'm not surprised to see the linkage of City Hall with the parking lot across the street. This could be a very smart way to get the developer to pay for City Hall renovations in order to get the right to build on the parking lot. But isn't it a bit odd that the City Hall Study Area includes one single row house on York Street?

Posted on: 2015/7/14 23:58
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 22:45
Last Login :
2016/6/1 22:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
It looks like the city is trying to up zone their own land, the parking lot across the street from city hall and cash in on the sale of the property with the new zoning. Its looks like this administration has learned from the developers on how to score big in the land use game.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 21:43
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 4:17
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5060
Offline
The vacant lot (parking lot) @ the sw corner of Montgomery & Marin was chiseled out of contributing structures within the Van Vorst Historic District. The plan 20years ago was to build a City Hall annex on the site. Now the city has decided to build it at the HUB on MLK Drive. Any new construction on the Van Vorst site must be reviewed and approved by the HPC, the Zoning Board of Adjustment, the Planning Board & the city council. If this protocol is not followed the Van Vorst District will chalk up another no-no onto a growing list of intrusions on the SHPO's list. The city's use of continued eminent domain tactics has threatened the historic districts in Jersey City for many years though the average citizen is unaware of same. That is because the city adeptly shapes public opinion in its favor time after time counting on a constant turnover of residents unaware of the past. As a result we will now have a multi-story "hockey puck" sitting in the shadow of City Hall.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 21:32
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#32
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/7/14 19:23
Last Login :
2017/9/26 14:56
From Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 11
Offline
Quote:

tbo wrote:
From what I understand, there is no redevelopment plan yet. Tomorrow's agenda is for a Resolution to accept City Hall as a "non-condemnation" study area (fancy word for blight - essentially does the same thing)


i think the "non-condemnation" part just means there's eminent domain power in the study area

Posted on: 2015/7/14 20:59
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#31
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/19 23:23
Last Login :
2019/8/9 17:19
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 23
Offline
From what I understand, there is no redevelopment plan yet. Tomorrow's agenda is for a Resolution to accept City Hall as a "non-condemnation" study area (fancy word for blight - essentially does the same thing)

The RDP is "in the works"

Posted on: 2015/7/14 20:48
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
There are four agenda items for tomorrow's meeting affecting downtown:

City Hall RDP
Newark Pedestrian plaza
powerhouse arts
Cafe ordinance -- to bail out Prato permanently so they don't have to apply for a variance.

All at 10 am.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 20:44
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
7/30 1:08
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1204
Offline
in a way, it is a legal way to spot zone and continue to grant downtown abatements. to me, it looks like a pretty egregious abuse of nj redevelopment law.

certainly pushing the envelope far and then some.

Quote:

DanL wrote:

keep in mind, a redevelopment plan is NOT necessary to develop the land according to existing zoning or to even get variances, but if this piece of land in the midst of booming Downtown Jersey City, is determined to be an area in need of redevelopment area by the blight study (and it always is), then the city will be able to do as I mentioned - break the historic district zoning and now be able to grant another downtown tax abatement.

Quote:

Sommerman wrote:
so DanL - have you learned anything more about a redevelopment plan for City Hall?

Posted on: 2015/7/14 20:12
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/11/12 17:04
Last Login :
5/10 16:17
From Downtown JC, VVP Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 495
Offline
And isn't it convenient that the meeting is scheduled for 10:00 tomorrow morning when few can attend? Shady dealing, as usual...

Posted on: 2015/7/14 20:01
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall - This just in.
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline

Posted on: 2015/7/14 19:55
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
...and you've identified the key issue. High rise.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 13:33
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
11/27 23:30
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1399
Offline
If it's just a single lot, I don't understand the need for a redevelopment plan. It can either be built on under existing zoning or the zoning board can grant necessary variances.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 13:32
 Top 


Re: redevelopment plan for city hall
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/12/21 14:43
Last Login :
2015/11/15 0:07
From Harsimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 374
Offline
Quote:

Lima17 wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The city is not saying what they want with the parking lot. But let's be realistic, how do people in different parts of the city attend meetings?


If you insist on driving, park at either Grove Pointe (3min walk), or 50 Columbus (6min walk). Don't be dumb AND lazy.


http://www.nj.gov/oag/dcr/filing.html

Yvonne, do efforts to curtail citizen participation fall into the above organization's bailiwick? I don't think it would be too hard to prove that eliminating free parking would cause a drop in attendance and participation. It would also give an advantage to Ward E.

Posted on: 2015/7/14 11:37
 Top 




« 1 (2) 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017