Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
44 user(s) are online (35 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 44

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 4 5 »


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3761
Offline
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i would be happier with 4 or 5 stories which is consistent with the rest of the block and create a more uniform look/height


What rest of the block!? The whole area between 8h and 9th Streets (between Manila and Marin) is ringed by tall buildings. And, across from this location is the god-awful looking Newport parking deck. I am really, really baffled by people's seeming opposition to what would essentially be the beginning of the end for the bad 80's policies that allowed certain design/building choices to happen.

There is no neighborhood to speak of when you are talking about Marin Blvd North of 2nd Street. Is either fences, or parking lots, or nothing. I am glad to hear a developer is already approved for that block between 8th and 9th. With any luck, the JCFD HQ structure with 70's government building aesthetics will be gone soon, as well.


Um, 8th & 9th in no where near CC and Barrow. Are we talking about different buildings? I must have missed something in the thread.


Look at post #122

Posted on: 2015/6/4 16:18
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/8/1 19:34
Last Login :
2020/7/29 17:36
From journal square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 261
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

blanquiita wrote:
Quote:
Put the four floors of parking underground


Is that even an option considering how prone to flooding that area is?


It's possible of course, but underground structures in general are very expensive to construct, which is why this developer went the cheap way out and proposing it go above ground. I say that's not acceptable and they need to find some other way of providing parking that won't ruin the experience as people walk by the building. I especially like Fomite's idea about the stoops and windows at street level. It would blend better into the neighborhood. What's really important is making sure they got the bottom floors right.

I absolutely hate walking around Newport. Above ground parking garages that are visible from the street should be banned in much of the city, especially in a historic area. Finding a creative way of providing parking should be the cost of doing business for the developer.

I feel like the tone of this thread has shifted, and the right questions are being asking about the design of the structure, rather than the conversation to date, which have been focused solely on height.



I typically dont understand the building height discussion regarding new construction in this city. I understand that JC is unique and seems unplanned at times when allowing a 50 story building next to a 2 story house, but this is not the case here.

I do agree that it is more important to have the building interact with neighborhood at street level. The planning board should not allow what happened at Newport to happen anywhere else. And this includes 5 floors of garage at the base level. If its at all possible to hide the garage within the building or to the rear of the lot, thats the best case scenario.

Hopefully things are improving, but the planning board has still had its share of hiccups recently.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 15:00
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 20:28
Last Login :
2017/11/7 17:48
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 730
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i would be happier with 4 or 5 stories which is consistent with the rest of the block and create a more uniform look/height


What rest of the block!? The whole area between 8h and 9th Streets (between Manila and Marin) is ringed by tall buildings. And, across from this location is the god-awful looking Newport parking deck. I am really, really baffled by people's seeming opposition to what would essentially be the beginning of the end for the bad 80's policies that allowed certain design/building choices to happen.

There is no neighborhood to speak of when you are talking about Marin Blvd North of 2nd Street. Is either fences, or parking lots, or nothing. I am glad to hear a developer is already approved for that block between 8th and 9th. With any luck, the JCFD HQ structure with 70's government building aesthetics will be gone soon, as well.


Um, 8th & 9th in no where near CC and Barrow. Are we talking about different buildings? I must have missed something in the thread.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 14:43
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/29 21:35
Last Login :
2017/7/26 14:00
From Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 82
Offline
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
Great news K-Lo. The next step is when developers have the guts to not include parking in their developments. To me it seems silly to include tons of parking in a building that is a 60 second walk to a 24/7 subway, but maybe that's just me.


The parking requirements should be watered down - if the market demands parking, parking will be provided.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 14:34
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
Great news K-Lo. The next step is when developers have the guts to not include parking in their developments. To me it seems silly to include tons of parking in a building that is a 60 second walk to a 24/7 subway, but maybe that's just me.


Me too, but I think the inclusion of parking is a municipal zoning requirement. It's silly to me to impose minimum parking requirements for a development at or near a subway station.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 14:19
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12
Last Login :
2020/9/30 18:46
From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2294
Offline
Great news K-Lo. The next step is when developers have the guts to not include parking in their developments. To me it seems silly to include tons of parking in a building that is a 60 second walk to a 24/7 subway, but maybe that's just me.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 14:07
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
The Jersey Avenue development has moved parking below street level.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 13:17
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:

blanquiita wrote:
Quote:
Put the four floors of parking underground


Is that even an option considering how prone to flooding that area is?


It's possible of course, but underground structures in general are very expensive to construct, which is why this developer went the cheap way out and proposing it go above ground. I say that's not acceptable and they need to find some other way of providing parking that won't ruin the experience as people walk by the building. I especially like Fomite's idea about the stoops and windows at street level. It would blend better into the neighborhood. What's really important is making sure they got the bottom floors right.

I absolutely hate walking around Newport. Above ground parking garages that are visible from the street should be banned in much of the city, especially in a historic area. Finding a creative way of providing parking should be the cost of doing business for the developer.

I feel like the tone of this thread has shifted, and the right questions are being asking about the design of the structure, rather than the conversation to date, which have been focused solely on height.




Posted on: 2015/6/4 12:32
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
2020/4/26 22:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3761
Offline
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i would be happier with 4 or 5 stories which is consistent with the rest of the block and create a more uniform look/height


What rest of the block!? The whole area between 8h and 9th Streets (between Manila and Marin) is ringed by tall buildings. And, across from this location is the god-awful looking Newport parking deck. I am really, really baffled by people's seeming opposition to what would essentially be the beginning of the end for the bad 80's policies that allowed certain design/building choices to happen.

There is no neighborhood to speak of when you are talking about Marin Blvd North of 2nd Street. Is either fences, or parking lots, or nothing. I am glad to hear a developer is already approved for that block between 8th and 9th. With any luck, the JCFD HQ structure with 70's government building aesthetics will be gone soon, as well.

Posted on: 2015/6/4 9:49
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/10 20:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

blanquiita wrote:
Quote:
Put the four floors of parking underground


Is that even an option considering how prone to flooding that area is?
i would be happier with 4 or 5 stories which is consistent with the rest of the block and create a more uniform look/height

Posted on: 2015/6/4 1:23
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/7/25 6:04
Last Login :
2016/3/4 21:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 239
Offline
Quote:
Put the four floors of parking underground


Is that even an option considering how prone to flooding that area is?

Posted on: 2015/6/4 0:07
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/4/20 21:48
Last Login :
2017/6/16 18:29
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 97
Offline
I agree with JCGuys, I find the parking structure even more offensive than the height of the building! If the developer put apartments with stoops and windows on the street level I wouldn't be so opposed.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 22:35
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
People should look closely at the criteria in the Redevelopment Plan - which are very subjective with respect to the design of the new building, how the parking is handled, etc. - and ask how they are enforced, who decides, etc., and push hard to make sure they are iron-clad and result in a well designed, contextual building.


The recent approval of the KRE proposal on Marin between 8th and 9th Streets might be instructive. The City Planning Board and Council amended the 14 story height restriction in the long-standing redevelopment plan for this area in favor of the 19 story proposal from the developer. I suppose they need more taxes for the City Budget, and more donations for future political campaigns. The take home for me: redevelopment plans and zoning restrictions mean little or nothing in Jersey City.


Because plans are a guide, not gospel or a commendment. If you chose to believe otherwise, you're going to be thoroughly disappointed.

The KRE proposal was on the edge of a historic district and the lands were long vacant. It would have been a different story if smack in the middle or replacing a historic structure. Plus the benefits the city received in exchange for the extra height was deemed an appropriate trade off - benefits that would have been impossible to envisioned when the plan or zoning was first drafted. This is why we have an amendment process!

My main issue with this building is the parking garage, not the height. Put the four floors of parking underground and the building deceases of 14 to 10. That may be the trade off. I also am fascinated and have yet to hear a decent rebuttal why 7 floors is okay but anything above 7 is bad planning and/or equals the destruction of the community. That's because there is none, and it's just knee jerk reaction...

I'll censor myself as to my opinions why there is such a strong reaction.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 22:15
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/4/29 1:47
Last Login :
2019/11/16 6:03
From DT JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 207
Offline
Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
People should look closely at the criteria in the Redevelopment Plan - which are very subjective with respect to the design of the new building, how the parking is handled, etc. - and ask how they are enforced, who decides, etc., and push hard to make sure they are iron-clad and result in a well designed, contextual building.


The recent approval of the KRE proposal on Marin between 8th and 9th Streets might be instructive. The City Planning Board and Council amended the 14 story height restriction in the long-standing redevelopment plan for this area in favor of the 19 story proposal from the developer. I suppose they need more taxes for the City Budget, and more donations for future political campaigns. The take home for me: redevelopment plans and zoning restrictions mean little or nothing in Jersey City.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 19:07
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/10/15 17:32
Last Login :
2017/5/17 13:40
From Heights
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 766
Offline
This article is about a residential development in Brooklyn Heights that has gotten a lot of press and negative response from the community owing to the apparent non-compliance with the agreed-upon height restrictions:

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/06 ... ion_of_pierhouse.php#more

While there are more differences than similarities between this project and the one on Barrow & CC, it illustrates what can happen when criteria are poorly defined, leading to the developer misconstruing if not out-and-out reneging on restrictions.

People should look closely at the criteria in the Redevelopment Plan - which are very subjective with respect to the design of the new building, how the parking is handled, etc. - and ask how they are enforced, who decides, etc., and push hard to make sure they are iron-clad and result in a well designed, contextual building.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 18:20
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/20 15:31
Last Login :
6/9 22:52
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 373
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

ActionDan wrote:
This is probably a stupid question, but why would Two Boots oppose a high-rise in the neighborhood for business reasons? Wouldn't more people (many without cars) be good for their business?


Hi! I had to register to express my frustration at Two Boots. I love their pizza, but if the original post reflects the opinions of their owners, I'll be boycotting that establishment! I love Jersey City, and it's entering an exciting new phase with all these developments. It's only getting better, and I will not support a business actively standing in the way of making a better city for selfish or misguided reasons.

And wouldn't a responsible business owner that relies on street traffic be supportive of new high incomer earners living in the neighborhood? Their position shows an anti city building bias. Where would Two Boots be had there been no Jersey City renaissance or development around Grove.

I say bring on the tower, and it's a shame it's not of higher density. What really matters is the design of the building, so it fits into the neighborhood at street level, especially the bottom six floors. I think I read that this building which subsequently approved, which is great news and means our city council doesn't pander to a minority of illogical loud mouths.

Don't worry Two Boots, this new business will probably increase your bottom line, in-spite of your anti-city building attitude.


Two Boots hates food trucks also!

Posted on: 2015/6/3 18:10
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/4/20 21:48
Last Login :
2017/6/16 18:29
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 97
Offline
I was not able to attend the meeting last night. Can anyone tell me what was discussed? I get the impression this is all happening very hush hush..one day we will just wake up and construction will have started on this eyesore.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 18:03
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/10 20:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

diamat wrote:
A 17 story building would really be out of place. There is nothing even close to that tall around it. It would be seen from all, and cast shadows on, the 3-5 story historic buildings and street surrounding it. In all directions.

For a sense of what the street scape could look like when a 17 story building is added next to lower historic buildings, I strolled down Wayne St to between Grove and Marin, next to 95 Columbus.

95 Columbus is particularly poorly integrated with surrounding area with only garages at street level on Wayne, but it gives a sense of what a 17 story building and 4 level garage can do to the street scape.

A 7 story building - that the current plan allows for - would also be taller than all surrounding buildings on Columbus, Wayne and Barrow, but not completely out of place. And should still provide the developer plenty of money. If the developer can't make money out of that lot with a 7 story building they are in the wrong business.

I know you have a vocal group of "followers" on this board, and I miss the food trucks, but thanks Aaron for highlighting this variance application.
i agree that an 18 story is woefully out of character with the surroundings. i'm all for development, in fact, there were a few 100 story buildings in jc, but in appropriate areas. otherwise, why even have zoning/historical guidelines?


Posted on: 2015/6/3 1:21

Edited by hero69 on 2015/6/3 1:41:48
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/22 16:42
Last Login :
2017/1/30 20:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 80
Offline
A 17 story building would really be out of place. There is nothing even close to that tall around it. It would be seen from all, and cast shadows on, the 3-5 story historic buildings and street surrounding it. In all directions.

For a sense of what the street scape could look like when a 17 story building is added next to lower historic buildings, I strolled down Wayne St to between Grove and Marin, next to 95 Columbus.

95 Columbus is particularly poorly integrated with surrounding area with only garages at street level on Wayne, but it gives a sense of what a 17 story building and 4 level garage can do to the street scape.

A 7 story building - that the current plan allows for - would also be taller than all surrounding buildings on Columbus, Wayne and Barrow, but not completely out of place. And should still provide the developer plenty of money. If the developer can't make money out of that lot with a 7 story building they are in the wrong business.

I know you have a vocal group of "followers" on this board, and I miss the food trucks, but thanks Aaron for highlighting this variance application.

Posted on: 2015/6/3 1:01
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1206
Offline
I don't know that they are publicly available. The developers presented at the VVPA meeting in May. In case you're interested, attached is the Redevelopment Plan from 2004.

http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/uploa ... 7%20Columbus%20Corner.pdf

Posted on: 2015/6/2 20:44
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/5/29 17:41
Last Login :
2015/12/11 18:46
From Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 25
Offline
Can somebody please post a link or some additional information on what the building will look like? Renderings, elevations, site plan?

Posted on: 2015/6/2 17:33
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:

belindiam wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I love it! Hypocrites that claim they are for development and building a stronger Jersey City until development is proposed in their own backyard.

I wonder if this is the mindset of those against this development: I spent a lot of money to live in this historic district, and I'll be damned if I let anyone else move in nearby that didn't pay as much as me.


Given that this developer is planning on making lots of money, I doubt that any of the units will go for cheaper than the going rate at the, mostly historic district, units around them.

You know what would be hypocritical if approved: through the front windows of our unit we would see a four story parking lot and a 18 story tower but yet we would still not be able to replace the now aluminum windows by anything but custom made windows - wooden with panes in a specific green color ! - in order to preserve the historic nature of our street/building.


As I stated earlier, the design of the building, especially the parking garage, is what concerns me, not the height of the building. I'm hopeful these issues can be ironed out and the 'gargantuan' tower can proceed. That area of Christopher Columbus needs this development.

Posted on: 2015/6/1 15:52
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/1 7:30
Last Login :
2018/2/26 0:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 8
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I love it! Hypocrites that claim they are for development and building a stronger Jersey City until development is proposed in their own backyard.

I wonder if this is the mindset of those against this development: I spent a lot of money to live in this historic district, and I'll be damned if I let anyone else move in nearby that didn't pay as much as me.


Given that this developer is planning on making lots of money, I doubt that any of the units will go for cheaper than the going rate at the, mostly historic district, units around them.

You know what would be hypocritical if approved: through the front windows of our unit we would see a four story parking lot and a 18 story tower but yet we would still not be able to replace the now aluminum windows by anything but custom made windows - wooden with panes in a specific green color ! - in order to preserve the historic nature of our street/building.

Posted on: 2015/6/1 14:52
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/4/20 21:48
Last Login :
2017/6/16 18:29
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 97
Offline
Just want to remind everyone there is another meeting to discuss the proposed 18 story building tomorrow night at the Barrow St. mansion.
Please come by to help preserve the historical Van Vorst neighborhood.

Posted on: 2015/6/1 13:39
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/10 20:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I think I read that this building which subsequently approved, which is great news and means our city council doesn't pander to a minority of illogical loud mouths.


The only pandering is by speculative housing developers to young urbanites.


Also known as catering to their customers. You say this like it's a bad thing.
why have any codes or development plans if they are going to be changed constantly. there is no compelling reason for an 18-story tower, especially on that piece of land.

Posted on: 2015/5/28 23:24
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2898
Offline
Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I think I read that this building which subsequently approved, which is great news and means our city council doesn't pander to a minority of illogical loud mouths.


The only pandering is by speculative housing developers to young urbanites.


Also known as catering to their customers. You say this like it's a bad thing.

Posted on: 2015/5/28 20:16
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 729
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I think I read that this building which subsequently approved, which is great news and means our city council doesn't pander to a minority of illogical loud mouths.


The only pandering is by speculative housing developers to young urbanites.

Posted on: 2015/5/28 20:01
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:
one can be pro-development and concern about community preservation. who says that site needs to have a gargantuan tower and not a 7-story tower. if the developer can't make money with a 7-story building, then he should sell it to someone who can


On the same line of reasoning, why is a 7-story tower seen as okay and how would a taller building harm the community? Yes, it's written in the redevelopment plan for 7-story but it's a plan, which means it can and should be amended when appropriate.

The design of the building, to make sure if fits into the surrounding area, is much more important to me. And based on what I've read so far, needs a lot of work. It's foolish just to focus on the height and numbers when it comes to city building.

Posted on: 2015/5/28 16:47
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/10 20:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3635
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
I love it! Hypocrites that claim they are for development and building a stronger Jersey City until development is proposed in their own backyard. It's the same thing with the Hilltop people up in Journal Square. Literally 100 yards from the PATH station and 20 yards from one of the tallest buildings in Jersey City but would rather the site stay a parking lot.

I wonder if this is the mindset of those against this development: I spent a lot of money to live in this historic district, and I'll be damned if I let anyone else move in nearby that didn't pay as much as me. Cry me a river.
one can be pro-development and concern about community preservation. who says that site needs to have a gargantuan tower and not a 7-story tower. if the developer can't make money with a 7-story building, then he should sell it to someone who can

Posted on: 2015/5/28 16:34
 Top 


Re: Gargantuan Tower Proposed for Barrow and Christopher Columbus
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/28 0:34
Last Login :
9/25 2:27
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 968
Offline
Quote:

K-Lo wrote:
This site is approved under a Redevelopment Plan for 7 stories, like Charles & Co and the building going in at the former Borinquen site.


It's also legally permissible to propose a modification to a redevelopment plan, which is exactly what is happening now. Just because it's 7 stories now, that doesn't mean 7 stories is gospel until the end of times or that the redevelopment plan should be used as a tool for those against development.

I'll be speaking at City Hall in support of the modification of the redevelopment plan and I invite like minded individuals to come with me.

Posted on: 2015/5/28 16:32
 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