Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
43 user(s) are online (28 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 43

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 4 5 »


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/10/7 11:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2401
Offline
.Magnolia Landing Series features local artisans, vendors near Journal Square (PHOTOS)

Updated on July 23, 2017 at 9:45 AM Posted on July 22, 2017 at 6:15 PM
By Corey W. McDonald The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY -- A number of artisan, vintage and food vendors were on hand near the Journal Square PATH station Saturday for the Magnolia Summer Landing Series.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... e.html#incart_river_index



PS - if Starbucks is your cup of tea...the new Journal Square location is open for business.

.

Posted on: 7/23 15:08
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4076
Offline
Quote:

papadage wrote:
I am glad you informed me my non-driving mom did not raise up properly by taking us to the doctor on a bus. What a relief! Now I can rest easy.


My mother did not drive either but the doctor was walking distance, that is not the case anymore. I have kept the same doctor and dentist for a long time, yet both moved. The doctor moved when St. Francis was changed into housing and the dentist moved when his business was burgalzied. Both are not walking distance.

Posted on: 12/16 14:06
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/12/30 11:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 497
Offline
I am glad you informed me my non-driving mom did not raise up properly by taking us to the doctor on a bus. What a relief! Now I can rest easy.

Posted on: 12/16 13:47
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4076
Offline
There will be a time in most people's lives when owning a car is the practical answer. It basically starts when you have kids. It is difficult to put an infant on the back of a bike to take your newborn to the doctor's office.

Posted on: 12/12 21:15
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1777
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.


You are correct, and luckily the practical people have won the debate.


You can't get any more practical than paying for the use of a service.

Posted on: 12/12 16:15
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3319
Offline
I wonder if underground parking is prohibitively expensive, or if developers just want the cheapest option.

Posted on: 12/12 15:16
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 15:38
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2918
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.


You are correct, and luckily the practical people have won the debate.

Posted on: 12/12 13:44
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1777
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.


Again, parking in a crowded city is a luxury, not a right. If you want the convenience of a parking spot in a city, you'll need to pay for it.

This is nothing more than paying for a service.

Posted on: 12/12 13:20
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 628
Offline
Quote:

nafco wrote:

1. Fine, build garages to absorb the extra parking from the new developments, but PLEASE hide the eyesore garages underground or in the middle of the block on large scale projects so we dont have to see the streetscape ruined with these structures.



Can't be realistically done as undergound garages are prohibitively expensive $$$. There are also water table and flooding issues. Hiding the garages middle block can only be done on very big sites.

Quote:

2. On the other hand, more parking offered will encourage more drivers. Even if parking is not an issue bc its self contained in the building, you are going to have a big increase in traffic on these narrow streets through the city. Encouraging people with a NYC mentality to move in and ditch their cars will make for a better standard of living for existing drivers and peds who dont want to navigate a city over capacity with cars.


The sooner they add a dedicated streetcar line in a private right-of-way to bypass all the stalled cars on JFK, the better. Traffic is getting worse than Manhattan on JC streets,

Quote:

I dont think proposing a building this small near mass transit without parking is such a bad thing. But apparently we're years away from that being a popular idea.


It's exactly the type of building we should be building in Journal Square. If I were term, I'd open up a contact with one of the nearby lots and say parking will be provided to residents at the going rate of the lot. There you have it, parking for any new resident that wants it. With zone parking, there would be no issuance of a permit for the new residents since parking would be available.

Posted on: 12/12 13:07
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 628
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.


Let the market solve this problem. Developers will respond to market conditions and strike the right balance in providing parking for residents and accommodating those that don't want a car. The city has failed miserably as the downtown buildings only have 40 percent of their garage occupied.

Parking adds significantly to the cost of housing. Each spot costs around $40,000, which is subsidized by the housing component. There is no such thing as free parking.

Also the city should revise on street parking permit requirements. Residents in new buildings should be ineligible to receive a permit and would have to pay for a private spot if none in their building. That protects the current spaces for existing long term residents and guards against a cheap developer marketing their building as "ample on street parking nearby."

Posted on: 12/12 13:01
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/8/1 15:34
From journal square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.


I see your point that more projects mean more people who are likely to drive as would be the case with almost every American city outside of NYC. Even though there is 24 hour mass transit a few blocks away, people are just likely to rely on having a car. I look at it in 2 ways.

1. Fine, build garages to absorb the extra parking from the new developments, but PLEASE hide the eyesore garages underground or in the middle of the block on large scale projects so we dont have to see the streetscape ruined with these structures.

2. On the other hand, more parking offered will encourage more drivers. Even if parking is not an issue bc its self contained in the building, you are going to have a big increase in traffic on these narrow streets through the city. Encouraging people with a NYC mentality to move in and ditch their cars will make for a better standard of living for existing drivers and peds who dont want to navigate a city over capacity with cars.

I dont think proposing a building this small near mass transit without parking is such a bad thing. But apparently we're years away from that being a popular idea.

Posted on: 12/12 9:01
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/10 22:53
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 371
Offline
I see a bunch of "in an ideal world" arguments in favor of not making developers include parking in their planned large multi unit buildings. But its not an ideal world, and many of the people willing to spend the money to live in a new modern building ARE going to bring their cars along with them and try to shoe horn these cars into the existing infrastructure. It would CERTAINLY negatively impact the quality of life for the rest of us. People who already have cars in the area are likely to tell you that its becoming increasingly difficult to find parking as it is, and those of us without cars, the majority, have enough trouble crossing the street without the percentage of vehicles increasing. There is NO good aspect of new construction that does not include parking. In my view the exclusion of parking spaces in new construction is ONLY a reflection of the developers wish to maximize profitability and all development from this point on should include parking within the developments proposed, it should be a mandatory requirement and be non-negotiable.

Posted on: 12/12 8:25
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1777
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

nafco wrote:
I cant understand how some people can halt the development on a project like this that is actually in relative scale with the neighborhood as opposed to every other project in JSQ that is a 60 story tower next to a 2 story house. This would benefit the streetscape in my opinion, but its not my call I guess.


What's so hard to understand? The proposed building did not include ANY parking. That's unacceptable in Jersey City, where people need cars.


You don't need to have a car in Jersey City. If you choose to have one, you can pay for a spot in one of the many parking lots all throughout the city.

Posted on: 12/11 20:09
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
12/11 11:19
From Journal Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4
Offline
I'm not sure I see your point, exart. This block of Perrine is just as walkable as most of Downtown, and more walkable than McGinley Square, as several others already pointed out. We're talking about a spot 5 minutes' walk from the Journal Square PATH stop. I live a couple of blocks away from Perrine on Tuers, and I haven't owned a car for 5 years.


You might need a car where you live, but it sounds like it's a lot farther from the Bergen Ave retail corridor and the PATH station than Perrine Ave is. This place isn't a 15-minute walk from PATH, it's literally a 5-minute walk away. Why are you assuming your situation applies to all of JSQ, especially the areas closer to the PATH?

It's unrealistic to think that car owners would move into a building with no parking in a neighborhood where getting parking is such a hassle. If you own a car, why would you pay a premium to live so close to the PATH and in the middle of one of the biggest traffic and parking clusterf*cks in the city? Your building is another story, because it came with a parking garage, so of course most of the people who bought there brought cars. The truth is that this building will mostly attract carless people, or it'll fail to rent out (which would be the landlord's problem). From my own apartment searches in the area I can tell you that there's robust demand for apartments this close to the PATH from people who want to live car-free, so I don't think the landlord would have a problem.


Forcing developers to include parking screws over people who want to live car-free, because you're forced to pay for the cost of the parking spot in your rent whether you want it or not. Building a structured parking spot costs about $40,000 per spot, and you can bet that developers pass that on to the tenants.

Posted on: 12/11 11:27

Edited by edg2103 on 2016/12/11 11:42:30
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/12/31 13:55
From not downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 24
Offline
Yeah, McGinley Sq is def better than where I am. I appreciate people living without cars. I've done it since moving to JC in 2000. I did it for months in my new neighborhood as well. Not for me (I'm also a little older - probably would've been fine 5 or so years ago still).
But, I can now see that people who will move to these proposed new buildings in neighborhoods outside of downtown (and I guess outside of McGinley Sq), who have the money to move to these buildings, just might want the convenience of a car. I would wager a lot of them would, actually. Every one of the condo owners in my building brought their car (or two) along as well. It's going to happen.
I side with the residents on Perrine on this one.

Edit to add: This isn't about the cost benefit of owning a car or not. It's about the convenience, and whether people moving into new buildings are going to have cars to park or not.

Posted on: 12/10 19:55

Edited by exart on 2016/12/10 20:18:40
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/12/30 11:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 497
Offline
Quote:

exart wrote:
I lived in the bubble of downtown for over 15 years before moving out of the downtown area. I too believed cars were unnecessary in JC. I carried groceries home on foot, had places like Lee's and Tender Shoot for smaller needs, and restaurants all around (well, at least for the last 5 years). I had zipcar for the times I needed to get more than I could carry, or for the occasional trips to Ikea/Target etc.
Earlier this year, I moved out of Downtown. I'm still under a 15 min walk to the JSQ PATH for my work commute, but you know what? There is no zipcar within walking distance to my place now. There is no grocery store, no place to get kitty litter. Yes, I can order online, but that gets old and complicated with waiting for deliveries around my work schedule/how my building is set up (delivery drivers don't use the intercom!). I cannot get to the farmer's market at the PATH station before it's packed up due to my work hours. There's a whole number of reasons I recently caved and got a car. Thankfully, my building has parking. My plan was to rent my space, but after a few months, I realized that I could really use a car.
If you think you don't need a car in ALL areas of JC, you must live in the bubble of the downtown, where yeah, you totally don't need a car.

But Perrine Ave is not like downtown, and until there are grocery stores, produce markets and/or other amenities in the neighborhood, some people will have cars there.

I used to live a block from Perrine. You can easily go without a car there. There's a market within a 2.5 block walk (C-Town), and another down the hill on Sip, before West Side. There are convenience stores all over the Square, and plenty of places deliver there. There is an Amazon Locker in the 7-11 two blocks away as well. There's a post office, DMV, multipe pharmacies, fast food places, bakeries, produce stands, dry cleaners, laundromat (even ones that do wash and fold), all within three blocks of that street.

You also have the PATH and bus terminal two blocks away.

While some of Jersey City may not have amenities, that does not characterize that block in the least.

Posted on: 12/10 17:58
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/12/22 16:52
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 26
Offline
Not sure about this. We live in McGinley Square, a good 15 minute walk from the JSQ Path. Between Uber, ZipCar (the ones housed at The Beacon), Amazon, and Fresh Direct, we have yet to see the cost benefit of owning a car and paying for parking, gas. But my husband and I really enjoy walking and we don't have small children.


Quote:

exart wrote:
I lived in the bubble of downtown for over 15 years before moving out of the downtown area. I too believed cars were unnecessary in JC. I carried groceries home on foot, had places like Lee's and Tender Shoot for smaller needs, and restaurants all around (well, at least for the last 5 years). I had zipcar for the times I needed to get more than I could carry, or for the occasional trips to Ikea/Target etc.
Earlier this year, I moved out of Downtown. I'm still under a 15 min walk to the JSQ PATH for my work commute, but you know what? There is no zipcar within walking distance to my place now. There is no grocery store, no place to get kitty litter. Yes, I can order online, but that gets old and complicated with waiting for deliveries around my work schedule/how my building is set up (delivery drivers don't use the intercom!). I cannot get to the farmer's market at the PATH station before it's packed up due to my work hours. There's a whole number of reasons I recently caved and got a car. Thankfully, my building has parking. My plan was to rent my space, but after a few months, I realized that I could really use a car.
If you think you don't need a car in ALL areas of JC, you must live in the bubble of the downtown, where yeah, you totally don't need a car.

But Perrine Ave is not like downtown, and until there are grocery stores, produce markets and/or other amenities in the neighborhood, some people will have cars there.

Posted on: 12/10 12:39
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/12/31 13:55
From not downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 24
Offline
I lived in the bubble of downtown for over 15 years before moving out of the downtown area. I too believed cars were unnecessary in JC. I carried groceries home on foot, had places like Lee's and Tender Shoot for smaller needs, and restaurants all around (well, at least for the last 5 years). I had zipcar for the times I needed to get more than I could carry, or for the occasional trips to Ikea/Target etc.
Earlier this year, I moved out of Downtown. I'm still under a 15 min walk to the JSQ PATH for my work commute, but you know what? There is no zipcar within walking distance to my place now. There is no grocery store, no place to get kitty litter. Yes, I can order online, but that gets old and complicated with waiting for deliveries around my work schedule/how my building is set up (delivery drivers don't use the intercom!). I cannot get to the farmer's market at the PATH station before it's packed up due to my work hours. There's a whole number of reasons I recently caved and got a car. Thankfully, my building has parking. My plan was to rent my space, but after a few months, I realized that I could really use a car.
If you think you don't need a car in ALL areas of JC, you must live in the bubble of the downtown, where yeah, you totally don't need a car.

But Perrine Ave is not like downtown, and until there are grocery stores, produce markets and/or other amenities in the neighborhood, some people will have cars there.

Posted on: 12/9 19:25
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/12/22 16:52
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 26
Offline
With ZipCar membership and in walking distance to the Path, we've never needed our own car.

Posted on: 12/9 18:42
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 15:38
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2918
Offline
Quote:

nafco wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

nafco wrote:
I cant understand how some people can halt the development on a project like this that is actually in relative scale with the neighborhood as opposed to every other project in JSQ that is a 60 story tower next to a 2 story house. This would benefit the streetscape in my opinion, but its not my call I guess.


What's so hard to understand? The proposed building did not include ANY parking. That's unacceptable in Jersey City, where people need cars.


Not sure if youre being sarcastic or not, but in an area thats walkable to 24 hour mass transit which connects to Manhattan and all other forms of mass transit, i wouldnt exactly say people NEED cars. its a luxury but not every single person in JC should have a vehicle. its not sustainable.

if you were being sarcastic, my apologies.


In a city with poor public transit such as this one, people need cars. Certainly, if you are building a big development, no parking at all is completely unacceptable.

You're the one who seemed confused by the development's rejection. I just explained the obvious.

Posted on: 12/9 11:43
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/8/1 15:34
From journal square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

nafco wrote:
I cant understand how some people can halt the development on a project like this that is actually in relative scale with the neighborhood as opposed to every other project in JSQ that is a 60 story tower next to a 2 story house. This would benefit the streetscape in my opinion, but its not my call I guess.


What's so hard to understand? The proposed building did not include ANY parking. That's unacceptable in Jersey City, where people need cars.


Not sure if youre being sarcastic or not, but in an area thats walkable to 24 hour mass transit which connects to Manhattan and all other forms of mass transit, i wouldnt exactly say people NEED cars. its a luxury but not every single person in JC should have a vehicle. its not sustainable.

if you were being sarcastic, my apologies.

Posted on: 12/9 10:47
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4076
Offline
The issue is not whether a community has too many arts districts, I think JC has too many Redevelopment districts. Local laws are ignored in order to give developers what they want at the expense of the general public.

Posted on: 12/8 19:48
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#99
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 15:38
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2918
Offline
Quote:

nafco wrote:
I cant understand how some people can halt the development on a project like this that is actually in relative scale with the neighborhood as opposed to every other project in JSQ that is a 60 story tower next to a 2 story house. This would benefit the streetscape in my opinion, but its not my call I guess.


What's so hard to understand? The proposed building did not include ANY parking. That's unacceptable in Jersey City, where people need cars.

Posted on: 12/8 12:37
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#98
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/8/1 15:34
From journal square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
I cant understand how some people can halt the development on a project like this that is actually in relative scale with the neighborhood as opposed to every other project in JSQ that is a 60 story tower next to a 2 story house. This would benefit the streetscape in my opinion, but its not my call I guess.

Posted on: 12/8 12:26
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#97
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2224
Offline

Jersey City panel rejects 48-unit project near Journal Square

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on December 08, 2016 at 11:58 AM

JERSEY CITY -- Residents of Perrine Avenue are cheering today after they helped to defeat a plan for a six-story, 48-unit building on the small dead-end street near Journal Square.

The Planning Board voted down the site plan Tuesday night, with one member voting in favor. The board agreed with residents in opposition that the plan was too large for the neighborhood.

The six-story building at 19 Perrine Ave. would have replaced three single-family homes. Residents in opposition criticized the plan not just for its scale but for not including any parking.

Read more:  http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... 48-unit_project_near.html


Posted on: 12/8 12:09
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#96
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/8/1 15:34
From journal square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
The use of language is flawed isn't it? Its claiming to include ....."spaces for theaters, art galleries and studios, museums, libraries and more".... When you put the letter "S" at the end it makes it plural, right? SO are they claiming there will actually be two or more libraries in this small complex? More than two museums? Two or more theaters? Its a bullshit list of imaginary substance that was clearly thrown together in haste. It is NOT being specific about what it claims to be offering in exchange for a zoning variance and I believe the bar should be higher for proposals like this. If the developer has substantive things it can bring to the table they should have no trouble at all listing them and DEFINING them. Pointing to other unrelated developments in other parts of the world and claiming you can do the same is NOT in itself a plan for success.


When I hear "spaces for...", I just imagine an empty lot where one of those institutions could go, if it was ever built. If it took this many years to develop a profitable luxury building, you can imagine how long it would take to build anything for the publics benefit.

Posted on: 2016/10/27 9:35
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#95
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/10 22:53
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 371
Offline
The use of language is flawed isn't it? Its claiming to include ....."spaces for theaters, art galleries and studios, museums, libraries and more".... When you put the letter "S" at the end it makes it plural, right? SO are they claiming there will actually be two or more libraries in this small complex? More than two museums? Two or more theaters? Its a bullshit list of imaginary substance that was clearly thrown together in haste. It is NOT being specific about what it claims to be offering in exchange for a zoning variance and I believe the bar should be higher for proposals like this. If the developer has substantive things it can bring to the table they should have no trouble at all listing them and DEFINING them. Pointing to other unrelated developments in other parts of the world and claiming you can do the same is NOT in itself a plan for success.

Posted on: 2016/10/27 6:23
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#94
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2016/3/22 21:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 20
Offline
It says it in the article: "allowed to build taller high-rises than zoning allows in exchange for creating spaces for theaters, art galleries and studios, museums, libraries and more."

Newark did this with NJPAC and it has been a great improvement to the area. Go to the area around military park and you'll notice the transformation happening. I think that serves as a good example of this working.

Posted on: 2016/10/26 12:16
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#93
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/10 22:53
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 371
Offline
What exactly comprises an "art district" and what are its characteristics that give it substance beyond the "selling the sizzle" aspect of a real estate developers initial pitch? Developers should be asked to define EXACTLY what those words mean and then when the project is complete there needs to be a mechanism in place that judges weather or not a viable "arts district" has been created. After all this is the valuable trade off the developers are offering the city in exchange for the go ahead to build whatever they want. If they are claiming they can bring an "arts district" to an area where before there was none, and they are claiming it is a contribution so valuable that the city should overlook zoning, then they should have no trouble defining it exactly and guaranteeing it will happen upon the projects completion. Are there people at city hall that can weigh in on this issue and point to examples int he recent past where developers created an Arts District as they promised?

Posted on: 2016/10/26 6:44
Print Top


Re: What’s going there? (Journal Square edition)
#92
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3319
Offline
Quote:

neverleft wrote:
.
Jersey City envisions arts district near historic Loew's

By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
on October 25, 2016 at 12:19 PM

JERSEY CITY — The neighborhood behind the Landmark Loew's Jersey Theatre in Journal Square would be set for a radical transformation under zoning changes up for final adoption by the City Council tomorrow.

The changes would allow the Harwood family to construct residential high-rises and arts facilities on a roughly 2-acre area the family owns that runs along the PATH tracks. The area is now home now to parking lots and a garage.

The city hopes the changes will lead to the creation of a cultural arts district connecting the neighborhood west of the Loew's to Journal Square. The Harwoods would be allowed to build taller high-rises than zoning allows in exchange for creating spaces for theaters, art galleries and studios, museums, libraries and more.


http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... e.html#incart_2box_hudson


can a city have too many arts districts?

Posted on: 2016/10/25 19:18
Print Top




(1) 2 3 4 5 »




[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