Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
46 user(s) are online (32 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 46

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 2 3 (4)


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
the developer followed the rules. He didn't make them up. He followed them. The city tried to change the rules mid-stream. That is an injustice. The judge saw thru it and ruled in favor of the developer. You can't change the rules mid stream.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 17:05
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
Why indeed.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 17:00
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1776
Offline
Quote:

K-Lo wrote:
As already noted, the developer refused to negotiate, but I bow to your superior knowledge of the machinations of city politics and our local courts. It sounds as though you are well-versed in it.


Why should the developer negotiate?

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:58
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
As already noted, the developer refused to negotiate, but I bow to your superior knowledge of the machinations of city politics and our local courts. It sounds as though you are well-versed in it.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:54
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
The planning office has processed thousands of site plan applications and missed time lines have never-never- been an issue. Why was it an issue here, because the process was corrupted buy the politicalization of the process. Apparently, that is what the Judge saw thru in the delays, caused by the politics. The community, should have been before the planning board negotiating a workable site plan, not in the gallery of a court room watching the city attorneys get trounced!

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:51
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
No, the judge ruled on an alleged missed deadline. He did not address any of the merits of the case.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:30
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
Well, Judge Turula heard the case, and decided differently. I will defer to the Judge on this issue. He heard the case and decided in favor of the developer. Everyone knows that the site plan application became a political hot potato. Apparently, the Judge saw thru the politics. Take the politics out of this and the application would have been before the Planning Board and the residents would have had input into the site plan and project.The planners in this city get a lot of grief, but they have done an amazing job for the residents of the city and more specifically downtown.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:23
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
The merits of this project notwithstanding, the Planning Board said it had no jurisdiction to hear because there was a zoning issue that needed to be resolved. The City's Zoning Officer determined that the zoning issue could not be resolved and that the project fell outside the Redevelopment Plan.


Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:05
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
according to the planners, that was the idea behind the project, to provide entry level housing for those starting out on their own. My first apartment in JC 30 years ago cost me $160 a month, with a view of NY. Today that same apartment cost almost $1800 a month! We have done nothing to address entry level housing in the city.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 16:03
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
The judge is a local and very familiar with JC and the issues associated with development in the city. By all accounts, he is not a developer yes-man. That said, this case belonged in front of the Planning Board, not a judge.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 15:58
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
Joseph A. Turula.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 15:45
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/9/6 11:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 639
Offline
Quote:

K-Lo wrote:
The VVPA tried very early on to talk to the developer, even before the 'spirited' meeting at Brightside. The first words out of his mouth were "I won't negotiate." During the lawsuit, the City also tried to come to an agreement.

It's easy to reduce this issue to parking and then dismiss the neighborhood as a bunch of entitled babies. As with most things, it's far more complicated than that. It's also unfortunate to see the City condemned for the lawsuit that the developer began.

Who was the judge that heard this?

Posted on: 2014/9/8 15:42
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/7/15 15:47
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 157
Offline
This is interesting. I hadn't heard about this before. As a resident of downtown, I sympathize with the public parking concerns. But, on the flip side, what a great way to bring affordable housing to Jersey City without government subsidies. Also, any time you move in next to vacant property in a rapidly growing city, you have to expect that there will be growth.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 15:23
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/9/10 13:55
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1211
Offline
The VVPA tried very early on to talk to the developer, even before the 'spirited' meeting at Brightside. The first words out of his mouth were "I won't negotiate." During the lawsuit, the City also tried to come to an agreement.

It's easy to reduce this issue to parking and then dismiss the neighborhood as a bunch of entitled babies. As with most things, it's far more complicated than that. It's also unfortunate to see the City condemned for the lawsuit that the developer began.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 15:13
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
I agree. The legal route was a very bad idea!! I can't remember a time when the city won one of these cases.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 14:11
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 15:28
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 731
Offline
Quote:

donnajc65 wrote:
I agree on the parking, but the travesty here is the community lost its opportunity to sit down with the planners and the developer and workout a site plan that worked for the neighborhood. He now has site plan approval!! case closed! We lost.


It is so hard to explain this to the neighborhood associations. This was always going to happen and now they have lost an opportunity to help shape the development.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 13:42
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/1/3 14:12
From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2297
Offline
I'm a bit confused over how big of a deal this development has become. It seems that the main concern is parking ... but it has been said often, that the people moving into this building would likely not be car owners.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 13:40
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
I agree on the parking, but the travesty here is the community lost its opportunity to sit down with the planners and the developer and workout a site plan that worked for the neighborhood. He now has site plan approval!! case closed! We lost.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 13:30
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/11/30 7:46
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1776
Offline
Quote:
I also share the community’s concerns over parking.


Whether people like it or not, a by-product of a growing city (both in population and value) is that there will be less free public parking.

That sucks, but at the same time, space is scarce and free public parking ain't a right.

Posted on: 2014/9/8 13:18
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline

Posted on: 2014/9/8 13:04
Print Top


Re: City lost the law suit against Varick and Bright Developer!!
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/6/10 12:06
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 266
Offline
Quote:

donnajc65 wrote:
How in the world did the city get hammered in court on the micro unit project. I don't get it, if Rolando signed the contract with Rushman and supported the project, why is he now leading the charge in the city council to continue to fight the developers.


The irony is that when the Mayor first met with the Van Vorst Park Neighborhood Association, he explained that the city was hesitant to get involved as it could potentially be a big liability in litigation costs and that the City Counsel determined their case was not that strong. The VVPNA did not relent and eventually the Mayor sided with them. Lo and behold- this happened. Hopefully some sort of compromise is possible.

Posted on: 2014/9/5 16:58
Print Top


Judge OKs site plan for controversial 'micro-unit' project in Jersey City
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/1/10 17:45
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 161
Offline
How in the world did the city get hammered in court on the micro unit project. I don't get it, if Rolando signed the contract with Rushman and supported the project, why is he now leading the charge in the city council to continue to fight the developers.

Posted on: 2014/9/5 16:55

Edited by Webmaster on 2014/9/9 13:53:11
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