Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
38 user(s) are online (31 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 38

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 2 (3) 4 »


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
This will be built on city property so no property taxes are paid, the city will spend the money for maintenance, so the developer is off the hook. No taxes plus no maintenance equal sweetheart deal for developer of $45 million dollars.

Posted on: 2014/8/20 22:06
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#56
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/5/22 21:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 88
Offline
What you're talking about is urbanization. Yes, the trend has been going that way for years.

I am talking about the implied idea that car-based cities don't exist or are unsustainable/do poorly economically (in response to Yvonne wanting there to be a parking space for every resident, in addition to parking available at all destinations within a city). My point is they do exist (Houston), but it won't work here because too many people want to live here (in a very, very small area), to be close to NYC, and therefore land is at a premium. Free parking doesn't make the owners money. The land is simply too valuable, and we have efficient mass transit that can get you where you need to be without a car. That is not the case in Houston. Period. And yet Houston has one of the strongest economies in the country. So car-based cities can and do prosper.

I am not arguing the trend that cities are moving toward urbanization rather than suburbanization. Not sure how that got confused, but if you look at the previous comments, they are about parking.
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

jctexan wrote:
I grew up there, so, yeah, I'd live there. But to be fair, that was a time when no one would live downtown so it became a ghost town at night, therefore crime was bad, etc. the only reason to go downtown was for work or a ticket.

The reason the car culture works (despite the article saying the recovery of Houston's economy after the oil crash was due to building buildings :)) is that Houston has tons and tons of space. So they don't have to concentrate in one area. And therefore, they don't have a majority of people trying to get to the same area, as we do here. Houston has 4 or 5 distinct "downtowns" all with a focus on a different economy (medical center, energy corridor, rice university, downtown "downtown", etc) and all with tons of retail/bar/community. It works precisely bc it is so spread out. Would that work here? I would argue (as it seems a lot of people argue) that it wouldn't. My only point is that car culture isn't necessarily bad from an economic standpoint, it just simply can't work here due to the logistics (everyone trying to get into the same place at the same time). I think you and I agree, my point is that car culture and economic prosperity can go hand in hand. But as others have said, not here.


Actually, I think you are still missing the point. Even in Texas, where I lived for many years, and still visit almost monthly, the downtown areas of all major cities are moving towards the same concept as in other places: live, work, play, shop locally. In the San Antonio downtown area, which was deserted and depressing (outside of the River Walk area) they are now putting up lofts that include commercial, retail and restaurants. The same happened in Dallas, and Houston. Austin already had something similar. The goal is to spur development that allows people to live, work and play all within small areas. Of course, in places like Texas, a car is still a necessity, as distances can be daunting and impractical for mass transit, but the downtown areas are being revitalized as it is being done all over the US.

Posted on: 2014/8/20 18:58
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
Hudson County View on the $20 million complex, I wish the true numbers will come out, taxpayers will pay $45 million in rent. But nevertheless, here is the video. http://hudsoncountyview.com/mayor-ful ... osed-mlk-city-hall-annex/

Posted on: 2014/8/20 14:55
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3449
Offline
Quote:

jctexan wrote:
I grew up there, so, yeah, I'd live there. But to be fair, that was a time when no one would live downtown so it became a ghost town at night, therefore crime was bad, etc. the only reason to go downtown was for work or a ticket.

The reason the car culture works (despite the article saying the recovery of Houston's economy after the oil crash was due to building buildings :)) is that Houston has tons and tons of space. So they don't have to concentrate in one area. And therefore, they don't have a majority of people trying to get to the same area, as we do here. Houston has 4 or 5 distinct "downtowns" all with a focus on a different economy (medical center, energy corridor, rice university, downtown "downtown", etc) and all with tons of retail/bar/community. It works precisely bc it is so spread out. Would that work here? I would argue (as it seems a lot of people argue) that it wouldn't. My only point is that car culture isn't necessarily bad from an economic standpoint, it just simply can't work here due to the logistics (everyone trying to get into the same place at the same time). I think you and I agree, my point is that car culture and economic prosperity can go hand in hand. But as others have said, not here.


Actually, I think you are still missing the point. Even in Texas, where I lived for many years, and still visit almost monthly, the downtown areas of all major cities are moving towards the same concept as in other places: live, work, play, shop locally. In the San Antonio downtown area, which was deserted and depressing (outside of the River Walk area) they are now putting up lofts that include commercial, retail and restaurants. The same happened in Dallas, and Houston. Austin already had something similar. The goal is to spur development that allows people to live, work and play all within small areas. Of course, in places like Texas, a car is still a necessity, as distances can be daunting and impractical for mass transit, but the downtown areas are being revitalized as it is being done all over the US.

Posted on: 2014/8/20 9:53
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#53
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/5/22 21:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 88
Offline
I grew up there, so, yeah, I'd live there. But to be fair, that was a time when no one would live downtown so it became a ghost town at night, therefore crime was bad, etc. the only reason to go downtown was for work or a ticket.

The reason the car culture works (despite the article saying the recovery of Houston's economy after the oil crash was due to building buildings :)) is that Houston has tons and tons of space. So they don't have to concentrate in one area. And therefore, they don't have a majority of people trying to get to the same area, as we do here. Houston has 4 or 5 distinct "downtowns" all with a focus on a different economy (medical center, energy corridor, rice university, downtown "downtown", etc) and all with tons of retail/bar/community. It works precisely bc it is so spread out. Would that work here? I would argue (as it seems a lot of people argue) that it wouldn't. My only point is that car culture isn't necessarily bad from an economic standpoint, it just simply can't work here due to the logistics (everyone trying to get into the same place at the same time). I think you and I agree, my point is that car culture and economic prosperity can go hand in hand. But as others have said, not here.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 19:38
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/23 11:27
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 264
Offline
Quote:

jctexan wrote:
That picture you posted is of Houston in the 80s. It has continued to grow and prosper and remained one of the strongest economies in the country (and was all but recession proof). Not sure that was the best city to choose to attack the inherent badness of cars. :)


That pic is from an article about how the city's turnaround after the 80's recession started when they filled in some of that empty space with human-scale development.

Also: it's still not a place I'd want to live. A neighborhood is about more than just having a job.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 18:34
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#51
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/5/22 21:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 88
Offline
That picture you posted is of Houston in the 80s. It has continued to grow and prosper and remained one of the strongest economies in the country (and was all but recession proof). Not sure that was the best city to choose to attack the inherent badness of cars. :)

Posted on: 2014/8/19 18:24
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
A hypocrite is someone who owns a car but tells someone else parking is not an issue for public buildings. When the point is made that the Medical Center has parking which protects car owners in the neighboring Van Vorst area, you said I should move. Of course you are a hypocrite. There is not one public elected official who has given up their car. Unfortunately, Ward E did not elect Dan Levin, probably the only authentic person who doesn't own a car.

I will recommend this link: Merriam-Webster

You have absolutely no idea what the definition of the word is.

Parking is for visitors of those to the hospital. You are aware that people have family in other towns right? And having parking at a hospital isn't even required. I've pointed out one in the Manhattan that doesn't.

As I said before... people move for a lot of reasons. You want things to return to the way they were in the 50's and 60's? Fine. Move somewhere that still wants the world to be like that. You live in an urban environment. One in which the car is getting ditched. Get with the program or get out. Your choice.

You moved once before. It could have been because you wanted more space. It could have been that you wanted fewer stairs. It could have been that you didn't like the amount of people around or the lack of parking. I don't care to learn the reason but there was one. Guess what the reason will be for your next move... just because you grew up somewhere doesn't give you the right to live there forever...

Posted on: 2014/8/19 16:28
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
A hypocrite is someone who owns a car but tells someone else parking is not an issue for public buildings. When the point is made that the Medical Center has parking which protects car owners in the neighboring Van Vorst area, you said I should move. Of course you are a hypocrite. There is not one public elected official who has given up their car. Unfortunately, Ward E did not elect Dan Levin, probably the only authentic person who doesn't own a car.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 16:08
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
No wonder you use a phony name Pebble, you are mean or really a bully. But I forgive you because you don't know better.

I'm neither mean nor being a bully. I don't believe you know the definition of either, just as you have no idea what the definition of hypocrite is.

People move all the time. An elderly person leaves their walk-up apartment for one with an elevator because the stairs become too hard. Commuting to a job becomes harder in one location and thus someone moves to become closer. People get married and have children and move to be in an area with a good school district.

Nothing ever stays the same. Complaining about the change that is coming is merely spitting in the wind. You can either accept what is coming and embrace it or get out of the way of it and go somewhere that is more amenable.

Maybe you can look into North Arlington or Nutley. Those places have parking and every new development must include it. You'd be able to go everywhere and not worry about finding a spot since they all have lots.

Besides, you've moved once before. Why is it so crazy to think about moving again?

Posted on: 2014/8/19 15:44
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/6/14 9:36
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 416
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
No wonder you use a phony name Pebble, you are mean or really a bully. But I forgive you because you don't know better.


Just because most people think you're wrong 99% of the time, doesn't make everyone a bully.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 15:34
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
No wonder you use a phony name Pebble, you are mean or really a bully. But I forgive you because you don't know better.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 15:09
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Logic is missing on jclist. Because I said parking should be part of a large development that involved the public I am called "twisted." Personally, I believe some people who believe a city can live without parking is suffering from denial. Pebble, you know I am right about the Medical Center, interesting the old site had no parking for the public. Mostly likely, they had to deal with neighbors complaining about parking. While they downsized the number of beds at the new hospital, they made sure parking was included big time.

Why would I say you are right about something you are so close minded about? As has been pointed out by more than just myself on more threads than this, parking and the push for it is as antiquated as a floppy drive.

You live in a City. It's dense. You want parking? Get out.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 14:16
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
Logic is missing on jclist. Because I said parking should be part of a large development that involved the public I am called "twisted." Personally, I believe some people who believe a city can live without parking is suffering from denial. Pebble, you know I am right about the Medical Center, interesting the old site had no parking for the public. Mostly likely, they had to deal with neighbors complaining about parking. While they downsized the number of beds at the new hospital, they made sure parking was included big time.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 14:11
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If the Medical Center did not provide parking in its present location, what do you think would happen? Visitors would be parking in the Van Vorst neighborhood causing more chaos. Providing parking protects the residents who live near this new complex. It is the reason I suggest the underutilized County Plaza. We are already in debt for $59 million for that place, why add more debt?

The AMC in Manhattan has about 5 parking spots for the whole building.

As I said before: Get on board or get out of the way. It's your choice. The more you keep beating the ridiculous "I need parking" drum the more you look like this:
Resized Image

Posted on: 2014/8/19 13:26
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3449
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If you own and use a car Pebble then you are a hypocrite when I say parking should be available for public buildings. I am sure you will use your car to get to this new complex. The city should have parking so residents like you do not take parking away from local residents. The people in that ward should not have worry about parking when they return home.


In Yvonne's twisted view of a city's future, this is what she would want/expect: Downtown Areas Decimated by Parking Lots, as Seen from Above.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 13:11
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/23 11:27
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 264
Offline
How about, instead of building more parking lots, the city builds a clear, easy to understand webpage that explains how to get to this building from different parts of the city via transit? That would certainly save a lot of tax dollars. We've actually been laying the groundwork for building maps like this through OpenJC.

Here's what happens when you make a city all about cars: https://twitter.com/woolie/status/497218754858602496/photo/1

Plenty of people here have them but use them only occasionally -- they prefer to walk, bike or take mass transit whenever possible, but have a job or family located somewhere that requires driving. Nothing about that makes them a hypocrite.

I grew up in an area where you had to have a car to go anywhere at all, and I'll take a more robust public transit system over more parking any day.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 12:34
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
If the Medical Center did not provide parking in its present location, what do you think would happen? Visitors would be parking in the Van Vorst neighborhood causing more chaos. Providing parking protects the residents who live near this new complex. It is the reason I suggest the underutilized County Plaza. We are already in debt for $59 million for that place, why add more debt?

Posted on: 2014/8/19 12:33
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If you own and use a car Pebble then you are a hypocrite when I say parking should be available for public buildings. I am sure you will use your car to get to this new complex. The city should have parking so residents like you do not take parking away from local residents. The people in that ward should not have worry about parking when they return home.

No, it doesn't make me a hypocrite. When I choose to travel somewhere that doesn't not have very good parking, I plan alternate transit. If I drive out west or visit family elsewhere, sometimes I need to drive, not always.

You are choosing to travel to a location that doesn't have parking and then bemoaning the inconvenience. If it is so inconvenient, don't go. I find parking downtown to be quite unbearable. As such, I never drive downtown. Problem solved!

You have taxis/uber that can drop you off in front of wherever you want to go in the city. You don't physically need to park. If you can't afford the taxi fare, then I suggest moving out.

The city is moving in the direction of the rest of urban civilization: far less dependence on the automobile. Either get on board or get the heck out of the way because you're only slowing progress.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 12:16
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
If you own and use a car Pebble then you are a hypocrite when I say parking should be available for public buildings. I am sure you will use your car to get to this new complex. The city should have parking so residents like you do not take parking away from local residents. The people in that ward should not have worry about parking when they return home.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 11:40
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
On this video in 2010, citizen Candice Osborne, tells the city council she has car payments (0:36 and 1:45) then she goes on to state she promised a car for her son (3:57) and puts $50.00 away each month for this promise (4:07). In the real world, not the make-believe world, people use and drive cars.
http://youtu.be/ixiNMMh-00k

Yes. People, myself included, own and use cars. To say that people only use cars is absurd and that is your entire argument.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 11:25
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
On this video in 2010, citizen Candice Osborne, tells the city council she has car payments (0:36 and 1:45) then she goes on to state she promised a car for her son (3:57) and puts $50.00 away each month for this promise (4:07). In the real world, not the make-believe world, people use and drive cars.
http://youtu.be/ixiNMMh-00k

Posted on: 2014/8/19 11:20
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 17:43
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1904
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It will not have parking that the county has. There is no lite rail where I live. Lite Rail serves only a small section of JC not the majority.

My lord, you are obsessed with parking. You live in an urban city. That means that cars are more optional. There are buses that will take you to this location. And, not for nothing, but I happen to think that the city would be extremely stupid if they decide your personal convenience is the number one factor in development.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 10:58
Dos A Cero
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#34
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/5/7 17:02
From DTJC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 118
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It is about parking, if you leave downtown JC, residents of this city have cars. Some have 2 or more cars because different spouses drive to work. If they rent, then their tenants also drive. Stop living in your small micro world where everything evolves around downtown. Or as one of the candidates called, "the beautiful people."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ ... _households_without_a_car

This info paints a clear picture that Jersey City is one of the top 5 (it's #3 in fact) cities with households without a car. When I talk Jersey City, I don't talk downtown vs JSQ vs Greenville. It's one big city.

Not saying that there isn't a need for parking in certain locations, I'm just pointing out that you may not realize how few people actually have cars in this city. It's all about the percentages. Maybe you need to reconsider where you live, as this city may not be conducive to your driving culture.

Posted on: 2014/8/19 10:52
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
It is about parking, if you leave downtown JC, residents of this city have cars. Some have 2 or more cars because different spouses drive to work. If they rent, then their tenants also drive. Stop living in your small micro world where everything evolves around downtown. Or as one of the candidates called, "the beautiful people."

Posted on: 2014/8/19 10:28
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/12/11 19:13
From Right here!
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 753
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
It will not have parking that the county has. There is no lite rail where I live. Lite Rail serves only a small section of JC not the majority.


OF COURSE THERE IS NO LIGHTRAIL WHERE YOU LIVE! YOU USED TO LIVE WHERE THERE WAS LIGHTRAIL SERVICE BUT CHOSE TO SELL YOUR HOME AND MOVE TO AN AREA WHERE THERE WAS NONE. IN FACT THERE IS A THREAD ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF TRANSPORTATION. IN FACT THE WHOLE WEST SIDE OF JERSEY CITY, BAYONNE, HOBOKEN, ETC HAS NO ACCESS TO THIS SERVICE. I BET IF WE LOOKED WE WOULD FIND A THREAD WHERE YOU BITCHED AND BELLYACHED ABOUT THE LIGHTRAIL GOING THROUGH THE PRISTINE NEIGHBORHOODS YOU USED TO SKULK ABOUT LOOKING TO SEE WHAT EVIL YOU COULD MAKE OUT OF BRET SWEEPING HIS SIDEWALK.

I have been looking over area maps and cannot find one town in a 10 mile radius that would meet your lofty expectations. I bet you will find something wrong with Heaven when you and St. Peter are mulling things over at the Gate.


Posted on: 2014/8/19 7:21
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3016
Offline
It's not about the parking Yvonne. Sheesh!

Posted on: 2014/8/18 22:50
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
It will not have parking that the county has. There is no lite rail where I live. Lite Rail serves only a small section of JC not the majority.

Posted on: 2014/8/18 21:51
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/16 21:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3016
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Have you been to County Plaza, dtjcview, the former Block Property? The building in underutilized. Some people have offices that are over 1,000 square feet. The building is too large. It has plenty of parking, we should be using that site. It is near Montgomery St. which means it is also close to the bus system.


Yes I've been there a few times. Most recently to file a tax appeal. And it's also a waste of space. Why shouldn't the county sell or lease that property too and move to the hub? Close to transport - you're kidding, right? MLK has the buses AND light rail. County Plaza could easily become Beacon II.

Posted on: 2014/8/18 21:41
Print Top


Re: Jersey City planning $20M City Hall annex on MLK Drive
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4462
Offline
Have you been to County Plaza, dtjcview, the former Block Property? The building in underutilized. Some people have offices that are over 1,000 square feet. The building is too large. It has plenty of parking, we should be using that site. It is near Montgomery St. which means it is also close to the bus system.

Posted on: 2014/8/18 21:17
Print Top




« 1 2 (3) 4 »




[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