Browsing this Thread:
4 Anonymous Users
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
Quote:
The VNA is not supporting this project. The Gupta's bypassed the board and tried to get this through the zoning board without working with them or any neighbors. They are proposing tearing down the existing building and requesting extending the footprint back toward their property line closer to Newark Ave. They are proposing a 3 foot setback from the existing balconies in the yellow building, and I believe that their proposal would have windows which could enable folks to view inside those units with the balconies (not positive). The biggest problem I have is that the Gupta's have had this place since the mid-80's and have let the building deteriorate significantly. It's nothing but a cash cow for the owners who dont live in JC. Only recently have they cleaned up the junkyard that was behind their building. Not only have they done nothing positive for the neighborhood, but their existing proposal would be nothing but another cash grab with no benefit to the neighborhood. Sorry, but variances should NOT be granted if the sole purpose is to line the developers pockets.
Posted on: 2016/3/28 16:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Posted on: 2016/3/28 14:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2009/3/19 15:20 Last Login : 2020/6/2 11:06 From Scenic McGinley Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
709
 |
All of this talk about increasing density without anything mentioned about the need to improve the aging infrastructure. If our sewers, transportation, etc. are all at, or near, capacity now, what do you think is going to happen once all these new high rise apartments come online?
I think any developers getting a variance to go higher should also be forced to pay into a fund set aside for updating our sewers.
Posted on: 2016/3/28 13:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Posted on: 2016/3/27 2:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I hope downtown will not be under water but I do agree, the planning is horrible. There is not enough open space. It looks disorganized.
Posted on: 2016/3/27 0:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Most people I know have a rental property and will use them to pay their taxes. The crappy condo pictured on 5th Street sold for just over $300,000 4 years ago and is now selling for over $700,000? Those people deserve to get hammered by taxes. In truth, I couldn't care less. I am out of here very soon. Jersey City has become the poster child of shotty urban planning. It will soon look like Flushing Queens. In 20 years it will all be under water anyway.
Posted on: 2016/3/27 0:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You know, when the reval eventually happens, anyone downtown who advocates limiting the supply of new housing in hopes of increased property values is very short sighted because they're in for a nasty surprise when they get their tax bill. The only way forward is aggressive growth of the tax ratable base. That unabated 99 Hudson St tower will alone contribute to 2 percent of the ratabale base before reval, and more afterwords. We should have baked the developers a cake. With the coming reval, downtown homeowners should be begging for new luxury developments that will help blunt the impact in a reval. Even if a new building receives an abatement, the land is still taxed and the PILOT payment results in greater revenue to the city than it would have received. This is done by legally robbing the county and school board of funds. The rest of Hudson County has to make up the shortfall for our abatements affecting the county while the whole state does the same for our schools. Horrible laws that's inequitable but Mayor Fulop is fully justified to exploit them if the state is unwilling to change.
Posted on: 2016/3/26 17:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Believe me, when I think about the new residents downtown "density" is the first word that comes to mind. In any case, market rate is one thing but no one in DTJC is going to allow low income housing if they can help it. This is about and has always been about property values. It's no accident that just about every realtor in DTJC owned multiple properties before the boon in development began. It is no accident that in Hamilton Park the Southwest and Northwest quadrants of the park do not contain anything but grass lawns. Those are the areas that faced the homes of the people who were the presidents and members of the H.P.N.A. who controlled what happened where.
Posted on: 2016/3/26 15:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The Jersey City of 2016 is infinitely better than the Jersey City of the 1980s. Development is the primary reason. Obviously there is a lot of shite development out there, and Jersey City must aim for better. Developers won't like it, but JC should introduce design standards in the zoning (a ban on vinyl sliding for new construction would be a start, in my view.) Where you give away your NIMBYism is by citing density. We should be encouraging densities to ensure there is an adequate supply of market rate housing to keep things affordable and to cover the costs associated with any new design standards to require better materials and overall quality. Our current zoning is the problem, and the sooner it's amended, the better.
Posted on: 2016/3/26 3:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It's about the kind of development dopey. The building I'm in is over 100 years old and will be here 100 years from now. The new development around DTJC is shite. Get a clue.
Posted on: 2016/3/26 1:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
GENIUS Picture with labels. Hats off
 375 5th St is tearing down the 3 Story building to build a 5 story building. The issue I believe is whether 375 5th St is leaving any set back or light wells for those balconies at 369 5th. At least that would be a logical concern. 377 5th St next door is brand new but seems to have a 10ish ft rear yard set back. It seems that if that was continued for 375 5th St, at least the back balconies will have light and air. The front balconies closer to 5th St should get a light well around them and that's it. That would be a logical argument by a developer. "let me build higher but I will accommodate these crappy designed balconies" I would love to see the layouts for those front units too. Any realtor here should be able to pull that up.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 22:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
ah HA! Finally, some clarification! Amazing how much trouble we'd have had if this information had been stated with the OP.
Here's a screenshot of the properties involved:  OK, so they want to build... what, exactly? That's a nice sized yard, maybe 30 feet to the property line of the old Texaco station. Are they tearing down the building and doing a new one? Adding a second building in that yard accessible through the basement? Details are required here imo
Posted on: 2016/3/25 22:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
On Zillow, I see one unit on the market at 369 5th St (Yellow Building with weird balconies AKA Oak Condominiums) for 715K and another unit pending for $725K. I also see that these units were bought for $388K in 2012? A 2bd 2bath with parking for 388K for 1200 SQF is a STEAL even in 2012. Maybe that's why it was sold so cheap since they knew that at some point someone was building something next to it and blocking the light and air.
http://www.zillow.com/homes/369-5-TH- ... alse&fromHomePageTab=rent you can also see the floor plan if you scroll to picture 14 and balconies so this must be the corner unit facing newark ave and 5th St. respectfully, if you are buying for $380K and selling for $700K in 4 years, I call that a WIN.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 20:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
375 5th Street is the one seeking a variance not the old Texaco Gas Station which is on Newark Ave owned by BGT Enterprises. 375 5th Street is owned by the Gupta's who also own a lot of other sites in other parts of the City.
Oak Condominiums, yellow building with weird balconies was supporting the Gas Station development since I believe the developer left a sizable cut out for those balconies facing Newark Ave. The Village Neighborhood Association was also supporting the Gas Station BGT project. I am not sure if the Gupta's are accommodating those balconies. Is the Village supporting Gupta's project? Since this thread was started by the Oak Condominiums (yellow building with weird balconies), can you please share if the Gupta's are building next to 369 5th balconies or leaving any cut out for those balconies?
Posted on: 2016/3/25 20:31
Edited by JCActivist on 2016/3/25 21:00:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm assuming you live on undeveloped land?
Posted on: 2016/3/25 20:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Exactly this and when you see floor to ceiling windows you should run away. That monstrosity by Enos Jones looks like crap and will probably be leaking like a sieve soon. The "not our problem" attitude is all you'll get once you've actually bought some of these properties. The developers are cashing in and getting out with sweet deals. I have lived in DTJC for a long time and sure development is inevitable. In the Hamilton Park area I would not have hesitated to buy into the old St. Francis Hospital as the units were built on the bones of a solid old building. Everything else I see going up in "new construction" looks flimsy and rushed. Cramming people in is not progress except for the developers. I am guessing most of the push comes from single people who are looking to up their chances? Soon we will have a city of losers.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 19:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
The alternative is to demand more from the developers than crappy mediocre buildings, particularly when they are seeking variances to put up these buildings and they dont even live in our community. We shouldnt sell ourselves out so cheap or else this town in going to look like crap in 20 years and everyone will say " what were they thinking?". This is why we should not be so gleeful to cave to any developer request for a variance in the name of "progress". Keep in mind that the developer doesn't give a darn about our neighborhood - they just want to jam in as much density as they can so they make more money - then go home to their mcmansion in the burbs.
I was walking by a building in downtown under construction today( a building that obtained a variance) and saw workers cutting huge "blocks" of white styrofoam. The next worker was then coating the styrofoam in concrete, so that the end product looked like large concrete slabs. They were "making" a lot of these. Any builders on here have any idea why they would be doing this? Sure seems like shoddy construction to me if these styrofoam "slabs" were going to be used in the construction....
Posted on: 2016/3/25 19:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
So what's the alternative Vigilante? Being anti-progress?
Seems to me that aside from loss of parking, the town certainly looks better than it did, and there are more food options, even if some are over-hyped or mediocre - with more quantity, some are bound to be good (and some are). There are more living options as well, even though the price point is getting higher. Not really sure bothers you so much.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 19:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
All you pro-development and "progress" people are getting what you deserve. Shitty construction from people who make deals, build cheap and leave town. Enjoy your shite buildings, shite views and shitty inconsiderate neighbors. Not to mention your crammed to the gills commute, parks and over-hyped restaurants.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 18:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/11/12 17:04 Last Login : 5/7 14:26 From Downtown JC, VVP Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
560
|
Huh?? Width of the street? It's either facing Newark Ave or Brunswick. Newark is plenty wide but I've never heard of the height restrictions governed by street width. As for flooding, that area is higher than the parts just to the West of it by the Turnpike. It wasn't flooding there during Sandy FWIW.
Who cares if they're puting things on the roof? It will be taller than the building next to it- Ceiling height? Seriously? The balconies on the property line currently have no fire escape or other means of egress (other than jumping onto a concrete slab) Sound? They won't hear the traffic on Newark as much with a building next door to block the sound. The building was a crazy-stupid design to begin with and the buyers there clearly didn't see the big picture. "HOPING" something doesn't get built next door was a gamble and they lost...
Posted on: 2016/3/25 16:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
HOW wide is the street? My understanding is the height of the building is supposed to be based on the width of the street. Also, take another 6 feet for the height of the building for flooding. Will the developer be putting things on the roof of the new building also?
How high are the ceilings in the new structure, and how much space are they allowing between the floors?( I think it's about 1 and a half feet, not sure) Is blocking your balcony a fire hazard or anything? Sound?
Posted on: 2016/3/25 15:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/11/12 17:04 Last Login : 5/7 14:26 From Downtown JC, VVP Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
560
|
Ditto on the confusion, given the 5th St. address, and also agree with Lima.
That (now-empty) lot was a Texaco gas station for decades. It was just over 1 story high. I used them for car repair work for years and had noticed those balconies which I thought was really unusual on the property line. Given the value of real estate in Downtown I wasn't surprised that the property was sold.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 12:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
My fault, I was confused. I thought it was the new condo that had just been built on 5th St, but that turns out to be just up the block. 370-something. If you pan to the left on your link, you can see the back of that building, which was what I was referring to.
Honestly, I had no idea that was a 5th St address even lol. Sorry again. Back on the subject, I agree with Lima - your balcony was gonna lose its view the moment anything went up, regardless of height.
Posted on: 2016/3/25 11:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
Joined:
2016/3/23 1:43 Last Login : 2017/8/18 19:32 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
20
|
When you buy a property next to an empty lot and the balcony is right up against the property line, how can you be surprised when this happens? smh
Posted on: 2016/3/25 3:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
These balconies that are on the property line: https://goo.gl/maps/badaJvytz1n The developer of the OP's building, and buyers in that building, had to know this was a possibility. If your own building got a variance to build to the property line, your neighbors could too. Remember all the howling owners in 700 Grove did when Zephyr lofts was built up against their units and "stole" the NYC views they paid for?
Posted on: 2016/3/25 2:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I walked by this today, and I'm curious about something. The only balconies are the tiny, mini balcony-ettes that are less than 2-ft wide in the front of the building. Let me repeat that, you have balconies on the north-facing, street side of 5th street. How is any development taking away these balconies and your light? Are you referring to the lot on Newark behind your backyard? Because there are no balconies back there, just windows. Nice big windows that give you light, sure, but they aren't balconies. Also you have a backyard to get in some light regardless of a 5-story building that goes past your backyard.
Posted on: 2016/3/24 23:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Quote:
It's not BGT, http://bgtenterprises.com/ But the developer >seems< to have several other properties in Jersey City, registered to same address: http://njparcels.com/owner/0906_9901_5
Posted on: 2016/3/24 14:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Parking under the turnpike would be a great idea.
Posted on: 2016/3/24 9:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If it's BGT who is building them, they just built a gigantic buliding on 3rd St that is pressed fresh along the sides of both buildings it's sandwiched between. They also blighted all of the daytime parking spots with no parking on one side from Jan-April and the other from Feb-July, not to mention the 2 buildings that just came down on Brunswick between 2nd and 3rd and the CitiBike in front of Sen Hai. The parking czar is in full force when the construction doesn't have the streets closed off. I miss living in this neighborhood when it was quiet but for 2 years now I wake up to hammers, drills, loud trucks, and the police ringing doorbells for everyone in the building to move their cars. They usually start the noise around 6:45am.
I feel for the OP if you have to deal with this kind of stuff along with losing your balcony. Big boxes built with ticky tacky and they all look just the same.
Posted on: 2016/3/24 5:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: We need your help in the village!
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
It's called implied setback as per Nick Taylor (head of zoning). My lot was 22 by 45 in the Village. Following existing guidelines would have meant a building that's 22 by 10 (45-35=10) or 220 SqF per floor not taking out for the staircases
The intent of the rear yard set back was 35% rear yard. That being said, these zoning rules were also really not intended for Jersey City today and R1 specifically has been in the books for well over 20 + years as it was explained to me. That's really also why there are variances; some rules in the book just don't make any sense.
Posted on: 2016/3/23 14:41
Edited by JCActivist on 2016/3/23 15:05:45
|
|||
|
||||