Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Give it up. I tried to be polite and ask for information, and only saw misinformation and misdirection. It's like Trump answering a point blank question with"You'll see, believe me."
Posted on: 2017/10/18 13:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I've been reading what you wrote, and you repeatedly claimed that the city was transferring property to a developer, which is a lie. You may have had a point about addresses not being included in the ordinance (I don't know what's required by law), but any crumb of credibility you had on this issue was lost when you continued to falsely claim that the city was giving away property.
Posted on: 10/12 20:28 ?Basically, in simple terms, the city is transferring property to a developer? Posted on: 10/12 19:10 ?why isn't the same done when property is transferred? In fact the addresses are listed on the agenda and in the body of the ordinance for handicapped parking but so some reason not on the transfer of land. ? Posted on: 10/12 16:34 ?the city is transferring property to one developer?. and the public does not know what property was transferred because it was not in the ordinance?..This administration is giving away the city?. ?
Posted on: 2017/10/18 1:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
What truth? Have you been reading what I wrote? The truth is lacking in the ordinance. Government, especially the Fulop Administration has the responsibility to be truthful and transparent. Councilman Fulop ran on transparency when he first announced his candidacy for mayor.
Posted on: 2017/10/17 21:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What truth are you talking about? There is no grand conspiracy to sell off Dixon Mills and tear out your precious free parking. You are a delusional nutjob.
Posted on: 2017/10/17 17:26
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The truth bothers people here. I am sure if Healy did this when he was mayor (yes, I would comment here that it was wrong), there would be attacks about corruption. Now, it is just shoot the messager.
Posted on: 2017/10/17 15:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Thank you. Sounds like for most intents and purposes, nothing is happening to lots other than 198. Yvonne, care to add anything? Or maybe you just want to scream "fire" in a crowded theater again?
Posted on: 2017/10/16 13:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
If you want to see what a Mayor Yvonne would look like, vote Matsikoudis. She?ll really be the one running the show.
Posted on: 2017/10/14 23:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I honesty would rather Trump. And that says a lot!
Posted on: 2017/10/14 20:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2014/9/16 19:15 Last Login : 2019/2/27 14:41 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
500
 |
Yvonne for President!
Posted on: 2017/10/14 19:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I wonder if the people here defending the administration works for city hall. Either this administration is sloppy with its paper work for it is trying to hide information.
Posted on: 2017/10/14 18:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
FOR CLARITY. The vacant building/lot at 198 Wayne St was PURCHASED....not given away by the city.
The activity related to the approved ordinance is a result of the new owner attempting to develop and gain an understanding of what can be built. The location of 198 Wayne St is currently within what is called the Dixon Crucible Study Area Redevelopment Plan. Apparently back in the day Dixon had hopes to one day purchase the 4 or 5 buildings/lots within that area of 198 Wayne. Since Dixon did not buy those lots/buildings, an ordinance change is being made to redefine the Blocks within the "Dixon District" The lots closely surrounding 198 Wayne, will now be outside of the Dixon District, and be considered with the "Scattered Sites District". Now that the "Scattered Sites District" has been defined the builder/owner and attorney's of 198 Wayne may have one roadblock out of the way in terms of guidance on how he/she is permitted to build. Copy the below link into your browser to read the details. See pages 15-20 cityofjerseycity.com/uploadedFiles/Public_Notices/Agenda/City_Council_Agenda/2017/2017_Ordinances_2nd_reading/Agenda%20Document(16).pdf Yvonne if you know what you are doing at those meetings an address is not needed. Maybe next time you should have a map with the block numbers if you intend to give your opinion.
Posted on: 2017/10/14 14:47
Edited by Invest on 2017/10/14 15:03:07
Edited by Invest on 2017/10/14 15:05:09 Edited by Invest on 2017/10/14 15:06:19 Edited by Invest on 2017/10/14 15:07:58 Edited by Invest on 2017/10/14 15:10:06 |
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
As has been mentioned several times by other people there's NOTHING for the city to give away, NONE of that property is owned or managed by the city! Why do you continue to lie about things that are so easily disproven?
Posted on: 2017/10/14 14:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you are going to quote me then quote me correctly, I claim the city did not have addresses either in the agenda or the ordinances. This is not an oversight at all. It follow the lead of the city not having an appraisal on the 16 acres of land transferred to Liberty Science Center. It appears this administration wants limited information given to the public.
Posted on: 2017/10/14 13:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Yvonne, you continue to claim that the city is transferring property to a developer, and yet all of the properties you list are not owned by the city (I added the owner information below for you).
I live in Dixon Mills and walk by these properties almost every day, so I'm GENUINELY interested in what's happening with these properties. But thus, far, you have made a claim that is categorically untrue (unless your argument is that Hawthorne JC 88 Realty LLC, JJJ Development LLC, Jasco Mgmt Corp are actually "The City of Jersey City"?). I genuinely want to understand the implication of these properties being consider a scattered site. Block 12608: 1. Lot 1 ? 88 Brunswick Street (current owner: HAWTHORNE JC 88 REALTY LLC, purchased from HAUGEDAL, JARL in 2013) 2. Lot 2 ? 200 Wayne Street (converted to condos in 2017; 8 separate, individual condo owners) 3. Lot 3 ? 198 Wayne Street (current owner: JJJ DEVELOPMENT, LLC. , purchased from PORRAS, JAIME E. in 2014) 4. Lot 4 ? 194 Wayne Street (current owner: 194 WAYNE ST. LLC %JASCO MGMT. CORP, purchased in 2003) Block 12707: (converted to condos in 2017; 6 separate, individual condo owners) 1. Lot 3 ? 140 Wayne Street/343 Varick Street Block 12801: (all three purchased by ?WAYNE STREET REALTY, %JASCO MGMNT? in 1998) 1. Lot 2 ? 157 Wayne Street 2. Lot 3 ? 155 Wayne Street 3. Lot 4 ? 153 Wayne Street
Posted on: 2017/10/13 15:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Would you please just SIMPLY state WHAT the city is doing, and/or planning. As others have mentioned, the city does not own those properties or the buildings on those properties. Is Dixon proposed to be the new owner or operator? Will those sites be razed? Will the current tenents be forced to move? Etc... This information will be very helpful to us as a community. Not all of us have the free time to attend council meetings. Thank you
Posted on: 2017/10/13 14:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Why would I care? All councilmembers vote on this and all ordinances in some capacity effects the public pocketbook. Why do you want less transparency? Any action at Dixon will be duplicate all over JC in other redevelopment plans. This is one city, not six. Those boundaries by wards are artificial lines. My tax dollars also contribute to development infrastructure all over JC.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 12:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Why do you even care? This area isn't your neighborhood, why do you feel the need to get involved? You probably think this is some nefarious attempt by the city to steal free parking from fat slobs like you and give it to a GLBT group or something.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 12:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
So Brewster, you are happy with a government hiding information. Could you explain why? For the record, Healy did not hide information in his ordinances and many are labeling Matiskoukis as the next Healy.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 11:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
ROFLMAO!!!! You're like someone shouting "FIRE!!" and when asked "where?" you say "why should I tell you? Go find your own fire to shout about". You're a riot.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 2:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The properties you listed below are not owned by the city. What exactly is the city giving away?
Posted on: 2017/10/13 1:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There are over 100 redevelopment sites in JC. Redevelopment zones allows development at a quicker pace, it limits the impact of regular public hearings. Originally, it was intended for land that no one wanted. But JC as we know is a hot market.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 1:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Genuinely interested in understanding what the ordinance to create a scattered site means, but the properties you list are not owned by the city. What is the city giving away?
Posted on: 2017/10/13 1:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
If you need to understand then I suggest you attend the caucus and council meetings. I do not put the agenda or the ordinances together, the council president does. Basically, in simple terms, the city is transferring property to a developer and no addresses were listed in the ordinance.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 0:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/9/15 18:45 Last Login : 2023/5/12 21:59 From Harsuimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
174
|
Yvonne,
This doesn't even begin to explain what the city is doing. You've mentioned transferring of property a couple of times. Transferring property to who? Is the city giving property away? What are you talking about? I can't agree, or disagree, when I can't begin to comprehend what is happening. Since you started this thread, I kind of need your help in understanding it. What exactly is it you are saying the city is doing? And why are they doing it? Thanks.
Posted on: 2017/10/13 0:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
When the city creates handicapped parking, the address is in the ordinance, so why isn't the same done when property is transferred? In fact the addresses are listed on the agenda and in the body of the ordinance for handicapped parking but so some reason not on the transfer of land. This raises red flags. It reminds me of the city transferring 16 acres of land to the Liberty Science Center. No appraisal was done. When an appraisal was done after the transfer, the land value was $17 million. The JCRA used the land on Union Street and ignored the 71/2 acres that was sold for $35 million. The 71/2 acres is very close to the 16 acres of land while Union Street is not. I don't trust this city. That is why I asked where are the addresses.
Posted on: 2017/10/12 23:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/9/15 18:45 Last Login : 2023/5/12 21:59 From Harsuimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
174
|
What exactly is your issue with it? You seem to be familiar wth what the plans are, but most of us probably aren't. If you want us on your side, it would be helpful for us to know what we're talking about.
I'm not being snarky. I am truly asking you to elaborate.
Posted on: 2017/10/12 22:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
After I posted, I received the addresses from the lawyer.
Block 12608: 1.?????? Lot 1 ? 88 Brunswick Street 2.?????? Lot 2 ? 200 Wayne Street 3.?????? Lot 3 ? 198 Wayne Street 4.?????? Lot 4 ? 194 Wayne Street Block 12707: 1.?????? Lot 3 ? 140 Wayne Street/343 Varick Street Block 12801: 1.?????? Lot 2 ? 157 Wayne Street 2.?????? Lot 3 ? 155 Wayne Street 3.?????? Lot 4 ? 153 Wayne Street This should have been part of the ordinance.
Posted on: 2017/10/12 21:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Dixon Redevelopment Plan
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
At the council meeting, I spoke on city ordinance 17-136, adopting amendments to the Dixon Crucible Redevelopment Plan as a scattered site. I questioned the wisdom of doing this since, the city is transferring property to one developer. The addresses were not in the ordinances. The lawyer for the developer was there and spoke. She said I would receive the addresses the next day. I received one address,198 Wayne Street and was told to look up the other addresses on the city's website. The lot and block are not in the paragraph associated in the sheet for the public and are perhaps in the ordinances. So what I was promised was not deliver and the public does not know what property was transferred because it was not in the ordinance, I am guessing lots and blocks numbers are. The city council member voted on something without the exact addresses. This administration is giving away the city and shutting out the public.
Posted on: 2017/10/12 20:34
|
|||
|
||||