Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
 |
It was not long ago that the warehouse district was twice the size it was. It was all razed for development. "You've got to compromise" they said. And we did. We didn't demand that every old building along the waterfront remain (even Robert Fulton's foundry!).
Mack-Cali has at least put up some interpretive signage around Harborside. Thank G-d for small miracles. But when the community compromised, we had hoped that the city would make good to protect the remaining remnants of industrial history along the waterfront. Then came the 111 settlement. "You've got to compromise" they again said. And New Gold will now be allowed to build a 60 story tower smack in the middle of the district. And of course, now Toll Brothers wants to build 40 stories, and other developers are licking their chops to push their high rise plans on a city that they know doesn't take its history seriously, and wouldn't have the guts to fight for it even if it did. I'm sure we'll here it again. "You've got to compromise." Joshua Parkhurst President Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Posted on: 2006/8/18 12:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I like Whole Foods and Barnes and Noble, and I understand that we have to accept some compromises here, but one problem on the waterfront is that the developers have done a truly terrible job of building the kind of diverse, interesting restaurant and shop scene that you have in Hoboken, let alone in Chelsea. When individuals and businesses consider whether to go to Hoboken or Jersey City, all other things being equal, they're going to Hoboken, just because, aside from the Kitchen Cafe (which I guess is controversial here) and the Komegashis, there aren't enough fun, decent places to eat. The waterfront here is a place where Bertucci's passes as an Italian restaurant and Cafe Spice passes as having spice. Another issue is that Europeans have been in the Jersey City waterfront since 1609. The developers make very little effort to promote or exploit that fact, but Jersey City has a fairly awe-inspiring history. It's aboust as old as Boston, for example. The developers aren't going to save every crack in the sidewalk here, but it stands to reason that saving some of the star historic buildings will, in the long run, be good for property values in the area and give it some cachet. Also, the old buildings are the logical places to put the theaters, restaurants, bookstores, etc. that the waterfront needs to attract and keep ad agencies, graphic design shops. .
Posted on: 2006/8/18 5:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
........................................................................... In JC since 82.
Posted on: 2006/8/18 1:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Sure. Let's all go upstate and start a commune. Better yet, let's invent a scheme where the developers build dream buildings that will last for centuries (Sagrada Familia or La Pedrera come to mind), which are inspiring to visit and live in. You know what? You need MONEY to do that. New York, Madrid, Barcelona, etc, etc have buildings like that. Be happy with JC being better that 20 years ago. BTW - How long have you lived here?
Posted on: 2006/8/18 1:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I want to smoke what you smoke, maybe then I'd understand your babble. You mean the Grove Pointe? Heck, it's much better than what was there before (nothing), and maybe it will help displace the derelicts from the Grove St PATH station. A Starbucks and a Whole Foods would be nice, too. And, btw, for 400K maybe you can get a 400 sq ft studio at GP; 1+ bedroom condos go for much more. Your upstate hillbilly friend is some real estate authority. It would be funny if it were not so tragic (comparing upstate with NY Metro area). The Clockwork Orange comment by jcheights just boggles the mind. Yes, the condo highrises they are building are not in the best of taste architecturally speaking, but what the hell do you expect? Santiago Calatrava? They are much better than the wasteland that was.[/quote] ------------------------------------------------------------------ You are satisfied with so little. It is really rather sad. In your world order, it seems, we should settle for third best, since anything better is too good for us. I hope you are around here ten years from now to take a look at some of the crap that is being built and be able to defend it. Open sky and sunlight and a breeze are so much better than housing built on the cheap that will deteriorate before our eyes. If Grove Pointe looks cheesy now, imagine how time and wear and tear will have fun with it. And if you think that a pile of condos across the street is gonna get rid of the drunks and bums from the train station, you have a lot to learn. My "hillbilly" friend from upstate is way more prescient than you, buddy.
Posted on: 2006/8/18 0:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
............................................................................ Double Amen to that. Finally, someone says something sensible on this List. On a relatead note: that Gruv Pwan thing is an affront to a person's eyes. They just better have one helluva wonderful Starbucks and AuBonPain and CVS and Kim's and Barnes&Nobel and Zabar'sWest to make up for that magnificently ugly heap of dreck. A friend of mine, visiting from upstate, wanted to know why we are building public housing right there at the train station! Shows what a nice positive impact Gruv Pwan has on first time visitors to our fair burg. When I informed her that they are 400K condos in there, she just laughed. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.[/quote] I want to smoke what you smoke, maybe then I'd understand your babble. You mean the Grove Pointe? Heck, it's much better than what was there before (nothing), and maybe it will help displace the derelicts from the Grove St PATH station. A Starbucks and a Whole Foods would be nice, too. And, btw, for 400K maybe you can get a 400 sq ft studio at GP; 1+ bedroom condos go for much more. Your upstate hillbilly friend is some real estate authority. It would be funny if it were not so tragic (comparing upstate with NY Metro area). The Clockwork Orange comment by jcheights just boggles the mind. Yes, the condo highrises they are building are not in the best of taste architecturally speaking, but what the hell do you expect? Santiago Calatrava? They are much better than the wasteland that was.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 22:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
jcheights wrote:
Just from a purely aesthetic point of view, this place is going to look like Clockwork Orange land in 10 years with all the bizarre garbage high rises they are putting in.[/quote] ............................................................................ Double Amen to that. Finally, someone says something sensible on this List. On a relatead note: that Gruv Pwan thing is an affront to a person's eyes. They just better have one helluva wonderful Starbucks and AuBonPain and CVS and Kim's and Barnes&Nobel and Zabar'sWest to make up for that magnificently ugly heap of dreck. A friend of mine, visiting from upstate, wanted to know why we are building public housing right there at the train station! Shows what a nice positive impact Gruv Pwan has on first time visitors to our fair burg. When I informed her that they are 400K condos in there, she just laughed. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 22:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
I base my assertion on what I have heard from the residents of the PAD themselves, and their neighborhood association (PADNA). As far as I have seen, they are nearly unanimous in their opposition. They were sold on a historic district, and now they get Goldman's towers plunked right in the middle of it. With respect to the Embankment, the EPC is probably the best to ask. But here's what I have heard. 1) In the last round of court battles, Judge Gallipolli struck down the ordinance that requires a developer to submit proof of abandonment before getting approval to develop the property. He also said that the planning board could not deny the site plan. As I understand it, however, he did say that Hyman would still have to go to HPC and receive a Certificate of Appropriateness before getting a demolition permit. 2) The Surface Transportation Board proceeding is still pending. 3) There have been rumors of Hyman using the Embankment as a bargaining chip to obtain some other property that he wants. I have no idea whether these rumors are credible. Joshua Parkhurst President Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Posted on: 2006/8/17 22:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
josh,
you really have a deluded concept of the value added by labeling something historic. how do you know that 150 bay filled up because people bought into the historic concept? what about the other non-historic projects nearby that have sold well? you have in the past credited historic designation as helping to triple values downtown, when they have really just mirrored what's happend all over the tri-state. As for the Secretary of the Interior, i find it funny when the vast majority of people on this site bash the US govt (not necessarily you) but then use it when it comes in handy. I have countless issues with the historic guidelines as they are drawn. You can't paint a brush across the US vis-a-vis historic issues out of the context and hope to get it right. A little farmhouse in a bucolic section on Montclair is one thing. A delapidated structure in the middle of the path of a booming metro area is another. elgoodo, people don't move into an area, spending 100's of thousands of their hard earned money, hoping that things just stay the same or get worse. Josh, what's the latest with the Embankment?
Posted on: 2006/8/17 21:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Ditto.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 20:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
Quote:
I agree. I'm grateful for all of you efforts too, Josh and gang. Gina
Posted on: 2006/8/17 19:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
JPHurst, you do have some supporters out here.
I'm really sorry to hear about this, and Josh et al who worked so hard on this, we thank you. Having lived here for almost 10 years now, I'm grateful for any progressive efforts to improve the city and know how much flak they end up getting from people who don't even attend council meetings. For the rest of the thread, there's a lot of literature on this topic, which is interesting from both the arts and economic development angle. It's a vital part of understanding the new rise of US cities. Just from a purely aesthetic point of view, this place is going to look like Clockwork Orange land in 10 years with all the bizarre garbage high rises they are putting in.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 19:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
Who was willing to do so? Every developer who, until the city capitulated, was willing to construct according to the redevelopment plan. The buildings had to be constructed so that most of the units would function as live/work space. This basically meant turning them into lofts. A fraction of these had to be set aside as affordable housing for working artists. Plenty of people were willing to buy the market rate spaces. The places that were constructed filled up almost immediately. The district was working. Very well. Until the city sold out those who spent over a decade making it work. Joshua Parkhurst President Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Posted on: 2006/8/17 18:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
 
|
Who in their right mind would invest in artist workspace properties? No one. So that land would stay in its run down condition forever.
Don't get me wrong. I am not happy with glass towering boxes, but it is naive to think that you could get a new soho. If anything you would get a new version of the south street seaport.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 17:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
And to the person who said Jersey City couldn't compete with Soho or Chelsea for an artist/cultural area. You're right, Jersey City will never be New York.
BUT, Chelsea and Soho have become so wildly expensive that they're not what they were either. They were edgy areas full of artists and funky art locales, then the rich moved in, followed by the chain stores, and the artists got priced out. Jersey City had a chance to attract those people because it's more affordable (and it still is despite the recent upsurge), and the area was designed to keep it that way by designating space for art's uses and for affordable artist housing. Now it's going to be just a boring extension of Newport. And I predict in twenty years the entire area will be worn, run-down and become a maze of unremarkable glass boxes filled with identical cookie cutter apartments full of by-then undesirable stainless steel appliances (stainless steel kitchens are the 1970s avocado green kitchens of today). How sad that our city leaders didn't have the foresight or gumption to stick to their attempt to do something better and more interesting for the future. And for the person who wants Whole Foods and Barnes and Noble in downtown Jersey City? Keep dreaming . . . or pack up and move to Edgewater, it's all there for you.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 16:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
Quote:
My standard is the same as the United States Secretary of the Interior. If it meets the criteria for historic significance, then it is historic and warrents protection. 111 First Street met the criteria based on both its architecture and use. The fact that New Gold Equities actively neglected it doesn't diminish that's significance. The preservation of the district is precisely what led to its development. These were abandoned warehouses with virtually no use. Planners with foresight, neighborhood advocates, preservationists and artists all worked together to create a great redevelopment plan that would have incorporated the existing stock into a vibrant neighborhood. The elements of this plan included historic preservation and setting aside some units for artist live work use. And it was working, too! 150 Bay Street was restored according to standard and it filled up almost immediately! By residents who bought into the concept of historic district. Tens of millions of dollars in equity were invested by those residents. Other developers, while receiving some slight variances here and there, went along with the program. An abandoned district began to flourish. But one developer decided to play the role of freeloader. Because of the proposed redevelopment, his property all of a sudden had a much higher potential value. He used to have an abandoned warehouse in a district zoned for industrial use. He could have redeveloped it according to the plan and made millions. But that wasn't enough, he had to build at least 18 stories. When he wasn't allowed to, he sued. Then started to demand more than he even planned for. 20 stories, 40 stories, now an obscene 60 stories. This was so even though without the redvelopment plan which "deprived him of his property rights" he would have been stuck with an industrial use building. We need not re-argue the historic significance of 111 First Street. That was discussed at length, and even the developer's "rent-a-consultant" had to admit that the building met the criteria for significance. A building does not lose its historic significance simply because you don't get it. Joshua Parkhurst President Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Posted on: 2006/8/17 16:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm never less than amazed by people who move to a city who don't want to live in a city.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 15:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
just because something is old, i.e., historic doesn't mean it necessarily deserves to be preseved. historic structures of architectual merit are one thing, but by your standard nothing would every be able to be removed so that the city can grow and prosper.
jersey city's version of Soho? how deluded.... i agree that about 4 or 5 buildings are worth saving down there but i'll never adopt your sclerotic vision for every square inch downtown. what the hell is wrong with toll bros. building a tower at the proposed site? the area is practically blighted and it's never going to be what soho was and chelsea is. we're right across the river from one of the cultural capitals of the world. we are not going to create another one in downtown jc of all places. i'm looking forward to seeing jobs created, more residents and tax revenue to the city - abated of not. maybe then we will get a whole foods and a barnes and noble someday.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 15:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
The entire neighborhood was most definitely historic, in the same way that any of our historic downtown neighborhood residential neighborhoods are historic.
In any such district, there will be buildings that, on their own, stand out as landmarks. Other buildings are contributing buildings that, on their own might not warrent designation, but should be protected as part of a greater whole. A single Italianate rowhouse might not be considered a national landmark. A neighborhood full of them is. The warehouse district represented the last remnants of the industrial age in Jersey City, and one of the few areas where you had this contiguity. Rather than re-hash everything, I will simply refer people to the excellent nomination of the district that had been prepared by Rick James, a former Conservancy board member. As for 111 it was not simply a contributing building but a pivotal building that could have been landmarked in its own right. Goldman's own historic consultant CONCEDED that the building had historic value. His only argument against granting it historic protection was that because of its deterioration, it's ability to project that history was "impaired." The translation of this into normal English is that because Goldman neglected the building and let it rot, that he should be allowed to take advantage of his own neglect, say it's "just a pile of bricks" and tear it down. The Conservancy vigorously and publicly opposed the settlement of this litigation, because by allowing New Gold to bully the city, they tore a building in the heart of the district down. It now makes it more difficult to designate the rest of the district as historic and protect these remaining landmarks. And as of now, there is no such designation. The redevelopment plan does require that other buildings be restored in a certain way. Without historic designation, however, there is no review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Essentially, the city is asking the planning board to oversee historic restoration. I have a great deal of respect for members of the planning board, but this just isn't their job and not their area of training (although there are a couple of very good members who know the area). Furthermore, in a historic district, there is consistent oversight when a property owner makes later restorations, renovations, or maintenance. That will not exist in the new "rehabilitation zone" called for in the plan. The Powerhouse still has its designation on the National Register of Historic places, and I doubt anyone would contest that it could be placed on the municipal register individually. There are also some buildings in the district that could receive individual designation (the Butler Brothers warehouse, for example). But there is no doubt that the settlement hurt not just 111 but the entire neighborhood. And there is no doubt that other developers like Toll Brothers will now be emboldened to demand the right to construct high rises in what could have been Jersey City's version of SoHo. We said that this would likely lead to a domino effect all along. But we must admit, we didn't think developers and city officials would have the chutzpah to prove us right so soon. Joshua Parkhurst President Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy
Posted on: 2006/8/17 14:33
Edited by JPhurst on 2006/8/17 15:18:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
The Powerhouse is no longer in danger of being torn down and there has been a developer designated to redevelopment it. Unfortunately, it will be boxed in by the "Trump" tower to the south and a potential 67 story tower behind it, where 111 First St. now stands
111 First Street is a historic building, with it the warehouse district met the standards for historic designation, without it, the district may not.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 14:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'd agree that 111 First has no architectural merit. It's a pile of bricks. But the warehouse building opposite of it has architectural merit (in my opinion), and certainly the Powerhouse itself is an architectural gem.
If we allow the Powerhouse to be torn down (or stripped of its protected status), we're no better than the Taliban which shelled the giant Buddha statues into dust. I am actually serious about this parallel.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 14:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13 Last Login : 2021/7/30 1:08 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1225
|
The judge gave the city opportunity to correct technical and procedural issues and redesignate the historic district prior to the legal settlement. The city failed to act.
My quote referred to this article - Powerhouse designation threatened " Toll Brothers, for example, is preparing to file a site plan for a 40-story high-rise at the site of the Manischewitz building in the district, a project that would not happen if not for the settlement, several city officials said." When the city's corporate counsel presented the settlement terms to the city council in June, he denied that the settlment terms would cause a domino effect throughout the district. Now, before the city has even enacted the settlement terms, the "dominos" are begining to fall. Powerhouse Arts District - RIP Quote:
Posted on: 2006/8/17 14:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
That's great news.
I'd support saving a couple of buildings down there but to label the whole are historic was a bull**** move from the start (it was a tactic to battle goldman @ 111 first). To my mind a building need to be old AND have architectural merit to be worth preserving. Most of the buildngs in that district don't meet the test. The historic designation was pushed through by the anti-development lobby and it was unfair and could not be supported in court or in the council. Actually, building new towers by the powerhouse is probably the only chance to save it. The city will have some leverage to have developers donate towards it's rehab. Otherwise it will sit fallow like the embankment probably will for the next 20+ years.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 13:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Does anyone know if the city tried to appeal the judge's ruling? If not, did the city give some reason? (Other than the actual likely reason of everyone being on the take.)
Posted on: 2006/8/17 13:36
|
|||
|
||||
|
Powerhouse historic no more
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Powerhouse 'historic' no more
Thursday, August 17, 2006 By JARRETT RENSHAW JOURNAL STAFF WRITER The Jersey City council yesterday officially stripped the historic designation from the Powerhouse Arts District and removed it from the oversight of the city's Historic Preservation Commission. The changes were included in the amendments to the Powerhouse Arts District Redevelopment plan approved yesterday by the City Council. The amendments passed by a 7-2 vote, with Councilman Steve Fulop and Councilwoman Viola Richardson opposing the changes. The changes are a result of the controversial 111 First St. settlement, which allowed New Gold Equities to bypass the district's historic protections and build high-rise residential buildings. "This is a domino effect that we feared," said Daniel Levin, president of Civics Jersey City, who argued that the lifting of the protections will lead to other developers building high-rises in the zone. The judge in the lengthy legal battle invalidated the Warehouse Historic District - which shielded the area's historic structures from wreckage - and forced the city to make the changes, said Jersey City Corporation Counsel Bill Matsikoudis. He also added that the changes do not impact the artist housing included in the plan.
Posted on: 2006/8/17 13:31
|
|||
|
||||