Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
59 user(s) are online (26 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 59

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users






Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
9/16 13:36
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2480
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:


Let me guess, it was shot entirely in parking garages?


A fair amount.. the rest was somewhere in the desert...




Posted on: 2/4 20:27
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/27 2:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5600
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
I have been in many European town squares that also happen to sit atop a massive lot and the only thing that gives it away is seeing cars emerging from the ground in the periphery of said squares.



This thread is reminding me of a low budget scifi movie from the '90s called 'Circuitry Man'. One of the plot devices was that the underground of the US became one gigantic parking garage. You could travel from LA to NYC via the parking garages.


Let me guess, it was shot entirely in parking garages?

Posted on: 2/4 19:18
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
9/16 13:36
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2480
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
I have been in many European town squares that also happen to sit atop a massive lot and the only thing that gives it away is seeing cars emerging from the ground in the periphery of said squares.



This thread is reminding me of a low budget scifi movie from the '90s called 'Circuitry Man'. One of the plot devices was that the underground of the US became one gigantic parking garage. You could travel from LA to NYC via the parking garages.

Posted on: 2/4 18:17
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/27 2:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5600
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
I fully understand that wanting the city to support/encourage/subsidize underground parking lots is a pipe dream, but it certainly is NOT because it is an impossible engineering challenge. Other cities and countries around the world have figured out how to make it happen, even places with elevations even lower than ours.


It's not the excavation that's the problem, its that the next time the city floods that garage becomes a water tank like many underground garages in Lower Manhattan did during Sandy. I honestly have no problem with some lower floors of hi rises being parking as long as they create retail on the ground floor.

I would also posit that convenient metered parking for shoppers is a completely different issue than residential parking. Everybody wants to support their local merchants, except if it costs them a street spot!

Posted on: 2/4 18:05
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3793
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
I advocate taking a few street parking spots away from local residents and making them metered. I don't think that's so radical compared to demanding massive underground parking lots! Seems obvious to me that anyone suggesting the latter has never dealt with DTJC's water issues. If you've ever had to drive your car up to high ground ahead of a storm you wouldn't even consider it!

As for Europe, I assume the construction and operation of those underground is subsidized like most European infrastructure. We don't roll like that in "what's in it for ME" America.



I fully understand that wanting the city to support/encourage/subsidize underground parking lots is a pipe dream, but it certainly is NOT because it is an impossible engineering challenge. Other cities and countries around the world have figured out how to make it happen, even places with elevations even lower than ours. Heck, most of Netherlands is below sea level, and they have found ways to make it happen. Same for Belgium. Underground parking is not an exotic art form: other places with similar or even lower elevations have done it, and we could learn from them. The costs associated with digging could be dramatically lower with the right company and technology. The benefits are many, and the right politician with the right mindset could see this not just as a benefit for all, but as part of a legacy that would impact generations.

Posted on: 2/4 2:08
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
As for Europe, I assume the construction and operation of those underground is subsidized like most European infrastructure. We don't roll like that in "what's in it for ME" America.


The whole road network is highly subsidized. Around 90% of the cost is funded by something other than property taxes or the gas tax. Subsidized municipal parking lots are also a thing.

Posted on: 2/3 19:56
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/27 2:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5600
Offline
I advocate taking a few street parking spots away from local residents and making them metered. I don't think that's so radical compared to demanding massive underground parking lots! Seems obvious to me that anyone suggesting the latter has never dealt with DTJC's water issues. If you've ever had to drive your car up to high ground ahead of a storm you wouldn't even consider it!

As for Europe, I assume the construction and operation of those underground is subsidized like most European infrastructure. We don't roll like that in "what's in it for ME" America.

Posted on: 2/3 16:49
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3793
Offline
I feel that the "issue" of money is based on a false (you could say, forced) belief that digging, or tunneling, is inherently expensive and not subject to the common sense idea that technology and other related advances can and should make a dent on those costs. For whatever reason, we have accepted that costs ranging from 200 to 900 million USD per mile is acceptable.

Meanwhile, in the span of less than two or three years, the Boring company went from pipe dream to actual handling projects digging tunnels underneath American cities for a pittance when compared to the cost of other tunneling projects around the nation. That's one company with zero prior experience, just a vision, and the drive to implement it, and using technology and new approaches. I bet underground lots could be dug out for a lot less than we have been led or trained to believe.

Posted on: 2/2 22:41
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3793
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i love the way many european cities handle parking by building massive underground lots. oftentimes, i'm not even aware that i'm standing on a massive underground lot until i see cars exiting or a parking sign. i doubt that would go far in the states where people are mostly concerned with free or cheap....the walmart approach to living.


We seldom agree on anything, but on this we have had remarkably similar experiences: I have been in many European town squares that also happen to sit atop a massive lot and the only thing that gives it away is seeing cars emerging from the ground in the periphery of said squares.

As for revenue or profits, some of those lots are not even that expensive! I have rented cars all over Europe and used those lots and seldom have I spent more than the equivalent of 10 USD for over night parking. The lots are SO massive that they can charge comparatively less than here and still turn a profit, obviously.

Posted on: 2/2 22:22
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Of course money is the issue. Water table may be an issue downtown where land is only slightly above sea level.

Remove parking minimums in new development, but require by zoning that any parking be underground. Let the market decide how much parking to build.

Want to rent a one-bedroom apartment? $1,850. Plus there is an additional $150 fee for an assigned underground parking spot... if you want it.

Posted on: 2/2 20:20
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/25 9:08
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3649
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.


Thanks for proving my point. Parking, parking, parking but no concern on how parking impacts housing affordability.


Or transit. You could put BRT on a set of N-S JC roads and have a virtual subway, except for...parking. And I actually agree with part of Yvonne's position, more short term parking for local commerce. But what we should have is more and better metered parking in commercial districts the way Hoboken has. But that's a non-starter, since it would take away resident street parking. Even Key foods should have a row of 15 minute meters out front, If I want to drop in for eggs or zucchini on my way driving home from somewhere, I can't, since the daylighting of the corners there's not even illegal spots to use.


But, why advocate for metered, surface parking? Why not *underground* parking? It’s truly astounding that we have not embraced underground parking more widely in the US. Most cities seem to have embraced surface lots, or the incredibly inefficient/wasteful practice of dedicating the first few floors of buildings to be parking decks. If Jersey City pushed for subterranean lots, we could free up a ton of street space for other purposes (wider sidewalks, bike lanes, more retail and commercial space in buildings, more housing units per building, etc) while ensuring that the need for parking is satisfied.

All over Europe, cities of all sizes (including tiny ones) have embraced underground lots and it really is a game changer for improving walkability as well as aesthetics. Why not borrow from that idea and push for our city to do the same?

Imagine an underground lot under city hall; that would satisfy the parking needs for all of the Grove street businesses and restaurants, and the city could then reclaim all the space taken by metered spots to make room for more lanes, or to widen sidewalks. Or, if you want to think more boldly, you could make all of the Grove area into a car-free, pedestrian zone. The underground lot would allow for people to be close to where they need to go, which is the usual complaint, while allowing for efficient use of city surfaces.
i love the way many european cities handle parking by building massive underground lots. oftentimes, i'm not even aware that i'm standing on a massive underground lot until i see cars exiting or a parking sign. i doubt that would go far in the states where people are mostly concerned with free or cheap....the walmart approach to living.

Posted on: 2/2 19:59
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/2/3 21:36
Last Login :
4/18 19:17
From Way Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1229
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.


Thanks for proving my point. Parking, parking, parking but no concern on how parking impacts housing affordability.


Or transit. You could put BRT on a set of N-S JC roads and have a virtual subway, except for...parking. And I actually agree with part of Yvonne's position, more short term parking for local commerce. But what we should have is more and better metered parking in commercial districts the way Hoboken has. But that's a non-starter, since it would take away resident street parking. Even Key foods should have a row of 15 minute meters out front, If I want to drop in for eggs or zucchini on my way driving home from somewhere, I can't, since the daylighting of the corners there's not even illegal spots to use.


But, why advocate for metered, surface parking? Why not *underground* parking? It’s truly astounding that we have not embraced underground parking more widely in the US. Most cities seem to have embraced surface lots, or the incredibly inefficient/wasteful practice of dedicating the first few floors of buildings to be parking decks. If Jersey City pushed for subterranean lots, we could free up a ton of street space for other purposes (wider sidewalks, bike lanes, more retail and commercial space in buildings, more housing units per building, etc) while ensuring that the need for parking is satisfied.

All over Europe, cities of all sizes (including tiny ones) have embraced underground lots and it really is a game changer for improving walkability as well as aesthetics. Why not borrow from that idea and push for our city to do the same?

Imagine an underground lot under city hall; that would satisfy the parking needs for all of the Grove street businesses and restaurants, and the city could then reclaim all the space taken by metered spots to make room for more lanes, or to widen sidewalks. Or, if you want to think more boldly, you could make all of the Grove area into a car-free, pedestrian zone. The underground lot would allow for people to be close to where they need to go, which is the usual complaint, while allowing for efficient use of city surfaces.


I think the biggest factor is money. It's a lot less expensive to pave over a lot, or to build an unsightly 3 story bottom to an apartment complex, than it is to excavate several stories underground. I'm with you, though. Underground lots make a world of difference to a neighborhood.

Posted on: 2/2 16:38
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3793
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.


Thanks for proving my point. Parking, parking, parking but no concern on how parking impacts housing affordability.


Or transit. You could put BRT on a set of N-S JC roads and have a virtual subway, except for...parking. And I actually agree with part of Yvonne's position, more short term parking for local commerce. But what we should have is more and better metered parking in commercial districts the way Hoboken has. But that's a non-starter, since it would take away resident street parking. Even Key foods should have a row of 15 minute meters out front, If I want to drop in for eggs or zucchini on my way driving home from somewhere, I can't, since the daylighting of the corners there's not even illegal spots to use.


But, why advocate for metered, surface parking? Why not *underground* parking? It’s truly astounding that we have not embraced underground parking more widely in the US. Most cities seem to have embraced surface lots, or the incredibly inefficient/wasteful practice of dedicating the first few floors of buildings to be parking decks. If Jersey City pushed for subterranean lots, we could free up a ton of street space for other purposes (wider sidewalks, bike lanes, more retail and commercial space in buildings, more housing units per building, etc) while ensuring that the need for parking is satisfied.

All over Europe, cities of all sizes (including tiny ones) have embraced underground lots and it really is a game changer for improving walkability as well as aesthetics. Why not borrow from that idea and push for our city to do the same?

Imagine an underground lot under city hall; that would satisfy the parking needs for all of the Grove street businesses and restaurants, and the city could then reclaim all the space taken by metered spots to make room for more lanes, or to widen sidewalks. Or, if you want to think more boldly, you could make all of the Grove area into a car-free, pedestrian zone. The underground lot would allow for people to be close to where they need to go, which is the usual complaint, while allowing for efficient use of city surfaces.

Posted on: 2/2 15:53
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/27 2:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5600
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.


Thanks for proving my point. Parking, parking, parking but no concern on how parking impacts housing affordability.


Or transit. You could put BRT on a set of N-S JC roads and have a virtual subway, except for...parking. And I actually agree with part of Yvonne's position, more short term parking for local commerce. But what we should have is more and better metered parking in commercial districts the way Hoboken has. But that's a non-starter, since it would take away resident street parking. Even Key foods should have a row of 15 minute meters out front, If I want to drop in for eggs or zucchini on my way driving home from somewhere, I can't, since the daylighting of the corners there's not even illegal spots to use.

Posted on: 1/31 17:17
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 15:17
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4950
Offline
Housing affordability? What a joke, there is no way this country can have housing affordability when citizens are competing for housing against illegal immigrants. When I was in school it was mandated to study the census so I have been following the census since. 1960s, 169 million people and approximately 2 percent were immigrants, I am not sure what percentage were illegal, that figure did not include the immigrants from Cuba. Jump to the mid 1980s, when Reagan was president, he always visited a foreign country by thanking them and gave the number of US citizens who sends thanks too. In 1985, he gave a speech to Portugal. He said, "I and 229 million Americans say hello." Today, that figure is 330 million which is considered a low figure. A large percentage includes legal, illegal and children of both groups that have citizenship. As long as a city is sanctuary, you will not have enough affordable housing.

Posted on: 1/31 17:15
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.


Thanks for proving my point. Parking, parking, parking but no concern on how parking impacts housing affordability.

Posted on: 1/31 15:29
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
Today 15:17
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4950
Offline
It is obvious some folks on JClist do not go to public meetings in various neighborhoods, it is not Yvonne, it is hundreds of people complaining about loss parking, especially bikes lanes at the expense of cars. There were hundreds of people at Hudson Catholic School including St. Peter's University, making the same complaint. Not to mention, the businesses that are hurt because shoppers go else. Really, how selfish are some comments. In fact the city should do a survey on the people of people that shop in Bayonne or other towns due to the loss of parking.

Posted on: 1/31 13:35
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
How could such a goal be accomplished? Eliminate the scourge of R1 Housing Zoning in the Heights.

A Bayonne Box can easily rent for around $2,500. If that same plot of land housed four or six units, the property owner could rent for a lot less while still making a very handsome profit.

But what about the PARKING!!!!!!!!!!!

Interesting article in the Times yesterday. It's possible density may finally be getting talked about as a solution to high costs instead of rent control.

Everything You Think You Know About Housing Is Probably Wrong
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/art ... ng-skyscraper-museum.html


Yvonne's parking spot is more important than reasonably priced housing for the middle class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_High_Cost_of_Free_Parking

I got my housing - F* everyone else.

Posted on: 1/30 23:49
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
8/27 2:43
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5600
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
How could such a goal be accomplished? Eliminate the scourge of R1 Housing Zoning in the Heights.

A Bayonne Box can easily rent for around $2,500. If that same plot of land housed four or six units, the property owner could rent for a lot less while still making a very handsome profit.

But what about the PARKING!!!!!!!!!!!

Interesting article in the Times yesterday. It's possible density may finally be getting talked about as a solution to high costs instead of rent control.

Everything You Think You Know About Housing Is Probably Wrong
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/art ... ng-skyscraper-museum.html

Posted on: 1/30 23:34
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
How could such a goal be accomplished? Eliminate the scourge of R1 Housing Zoning in the Heights.

A Bayonne Box can easily rent for around $2,500. If that same plot of land housed four or six units, the property owner could rent for a lot less while still making a very handsome profit.

Posted on: 1/30 22:34
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

MikeyTBC wrote:
No chance they're letting all the old residents come back. I'm guessing a lottery to access something like 5% of the new units. Just enough for it to qualify as "mixed-income"


Honestly, I would be surprised if even THAT happens. The cynic in me just thinks or assumes that the developer will agree to some terms, then turn around and petition the council for a variance to have the low-income units replaced with housing built elsewhere, as has been done by so many other developers. I know Fulop is on the record as saying he will not allow for this, but we have seen him go back on his word on other things, and if you have the right connections, I can see a developer pushing for that again, and again.

I agree with JCGuys that we should move away from the concept of "concentration of poverty" but mixed income housing seldom works out as it is billed: some (most) people don't want to live next to others they deem poorer, mixed income housing will often treat their low-income residents differently (sometimes openly, others overtly) and developers and pols have made a mockery of the concept itself by allowing developers to satisfy their commitments by building the approved low-income units in completely different areas of town.

If we are going to institute policies that strive to integrate people more closely, then adhere to those ideals and commitments. Don't just say something and do something else.


Mixed income can be done right. The best examples you would not be able to tell apart the market rate residents and units from the residents of the affordable units.

The problem is it never works if it's luxury building. Too much snobbery on display. Bodhipooh aced the attitudes! "How dare someone poorer than me live next to me."

There are subsidizes and housing lotteries for the poor. The rich can afford anything they want and eat up all the new stuff. But the hard working middle class is being squeezed out of Jersey City.

I think any discussion on creating affordable housing should include normal market rate housing geared towards the average citizen. A new building with rents ranging from $1,000 to $1,500 is more than reasonable for the middle class and a developer would still make a handsome profit. It's just a matter of the city allowing and encouraging the construction.

Instead, the only thing that gets built are these luxury rentals with a special number of handpicked low-income renters to occupy the subsidized units.

Posted on: 1/30 22:23
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
9/16 13:36
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2480
Offline
Or just offer current residents a payoff to leave. This is what happened with the Duncan Ave projects years back, when they were emptying them out for demolition. Someone in the know at the time told me 90% took the cash payoff.

Posted on: 1/30 18:13
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3793
Offline
Quote:

MikeyTBC wrote:
No chance they're letting all the old residents come back. I'm guessing a lottery to access something like 5% of the new units. Just enough for it to qualify as "mixed-income"


Honestly, I would be surprised if even THAT happens. The cynic in me just thinks or assumes that the developer will agree to some terms, then turn around and petition the council for a variance to have the low-income units replaced with housing built elsewhere, as has been done by so many other developers. I know Fulop is on the record as saying he will not allow for this, but we have seen him go back on his word on other things, and if you have the right connections, I can see a developer pushing for that again, and again.

I agree with JCGuys that we should move away from the concept of "concentration of poverty" but mixed income housing seldom works out as it is billed: some (most) people don't want to live next to others they deem poorer, mixed income housing will often treat their low-income residents differently (sometimes openly, others overtly) and developers and pols have made a mockery of the concept itself by allowing developers to satisfy their commitments by building the approved low-income units in completely different areas of town.

If we are going to institute policies that strive to integrate people more closely, then adhere to those ideals and commitments. Don't just say something and do something else.

Posted on: 1/30 17:08
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/9/20 14:11
Last Login :
3/19 16:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 895
Offline
No chance they're letting all the old residents come back. I'm guessing a lottery to access something like 5% of the new units. Just enough for it to qualify as "mixed-income"

Posted on: 1/30 15:42
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
Today 13:06
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 958
Offline
Quote:

JC_Man wrote:
Who is paying for this?


If it's mixed-income housing, presumably the developer will be paying for the construction with the federal government paying for the long-term housing subsidies.

It's probably a good thing to have the developer pay for the much needed housing repairs in the 75-year-old complex by creating new units, but I'm not naive enough to believe that all the current residents will be welcomed back to a high-rise complex.

The alternative would be just to let the current complex fall further into disrepair with patchwork repairs funded by the housing authority.

Mixed-income housing is the way to go. No more concentrations of poverty.

Posted on: 1/30 11:30
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/10/7 15:46
Last Login :
Today 17:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3123
Offline
.

Redevelopment of Jersey City’s Holland Gardens may take longer than expected

Today 6:01 PM 2020
By Joshua Rosario | The Jersey Journal

Plans to redevelop the Holland Gardens public housing complex will take longer than expected as the Jersey City Housing Authority is extending its timeline on the project by six months, officials said.

The city plans to knock down the housing complex near the Holland Tunnel and replace it with a mixed-income residential high-rise that will house former Holland Gardens residents


https://www.nj.com/hudson/2020/01/rede ... longer-than-expected.html

Posted on: 1/30 3:24
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/5/22 20:46
Last Login :
Yesterday 3:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 445
Offline
Who is paying for this?

Posted on: 2019/8/15 1:58
Top


Re: Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/7/30 20:03
Last Login :
9/5 4:01
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 358
Offline
sounds like residents are getting scammed.

Posted on: 2019/8/14 20:22
Top


Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in JC
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/10/7 15:46
Last Login :
Today 17:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3123
Offline
.
Plan calls for high-rise to replace 75-year-old public housing complex in Jersey City

Updated 12:38 PM; Today 11:53 AM
By Joshua Rosario | The Jersey Journal and Patrick Villanova | The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY – Residents of the Holland Gardens public housing complex could be getting posh new digs under an ambitious plan that calls for the current complex to be redeveloped as a mixed-income high-rise.

The Jersey City Housing Authority proposal calls for at least 500 units to be developed at the current Holland Gardens site near the Hoboken border. Officials contend the project is needed to better integrate the current complex into the surrounding neighborhood, where various residential developments are planned or already completed.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/08/plan ... mplex-in-jersey-city.html

Posted on: 2019/8/13 21:52
Top








[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