Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
107 user(s) are online (101 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 107

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 »


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:

stc4blues wrote:
Quote:

kencares wrote:
The embankment park can be 100% funded by private and corporate donations, as long as we preserve it until the funding comes through. Have your sewers and and your fancy parks too.


Yes. There's a lot of big real estate money coming into the City, not to mention the folks who store their art collections at Mana Contemporary. If the citizens of Jersey City say loud and clear "we want this and we'll support it" the money will come. Not automatically, of course, donors will have to be courted, etc. But the money will be there.


Agreed. Projects like this make cities unique desirable places that redefine the urban experience.

I cant see Silverman or another developer with strong ties to the community passing up an opportunity like this or Bergen Arches

Posted on: 2016/9/14 12:37
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
Quote:

kencares wrote:
The embankment park can be 100% funded by private and corporate donations, as long as we preserve it until the funding comes through. Have your sewers and and your fancy parks too.


Yes. There's a lot of big real estate money coming into the City, not to mention the folks who store their art collections at Mana Contemporary. If the citizens of Jersey City say loud and clear "we want this and we'll support it" the money will come. Not automatically, of course, donors will have to be courted, etc. But the money will be there.

Posted on: 2016/9/14 11:57
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
if it were 100% privately funded, i would stop complaining instantly. go for it.

Posted on: 2016/9/14 4:28
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/9/8 13:21
Last Login :
2017/4/28 15:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
The embankment park can be 100% funded by private and corporate donations, as long as we preserve it until the funding comes through. Have your sewers and and your fancy parks too.

Posted on: 2016/9/14 4:10
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
no, we don't need that at all. you want it. i want anything to replace that, be it a ground level park, a parking lot, new housing, or failing that, for it to be left as is. anything but the costliest option simply because "oh, that's nice, manhattan has one, i want one too".

i want the sewers and water pipes fixed. i want flood prevention measures in said sewer systems adopted. i want the roads maintained. i want to see a new school or five built. i want more traffic lights and less stop signs. i want that shitty fake brick taken off the intersections. i want more trees planted on the sidewalks.

all of these wants are harder to do when you're spending a LOT of money that the city does not have because you then don't have money left over to do all these other things. some of which include the very basics of living, like working infrastructure. an elevated park is shockingly not part of the basic commitment that a city has to its residents.

and since you mentioned quality of life, downtown has some of the best in this city as is. show a bit of perspective here maybe

Posted on: 2016/9/14 3:34
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/9/8 13:21
Last Login :
2017/4/28 15:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
We don't need tourists. We need quality of life for our residents. A park atop the embankment connecting the waterfront to the heights via the bergen arches will provide that. A casino will not.

Posted on: 2016/9/13 16:23
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
who said i'm pro casino?

seriously, you idiots just love jumping on keywords and not reading. i'll put it in small words and some special formatting for you ding dongs in here

if
you
want
tourists
you
need
to
give
them
a
reason
to
come.

a
small
park
is
not
a
reason.

a
casino
is.

you either a) want to make something for the neighborhood (any old park will meet the area's desires and in fact, would be less costly than an elevated one, allowing for other desires to be met) or b) want to bring tourists into the area, a mostly residential area at that with basically zero other amenities.

this is one or the other. tourists do not make for nice neighbors. they, by definition, do not have a connection to the area and are temporary visitors who think a lot less when it comes to acting the fool (because they're on vacation, duh), add to traffic and mess, etc. etc. businesses benefit, residents as a general rule, do not.

Posted on: 2016/9/13 15:54
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24
Last Login :
2022/11/28 0:04
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1429
Offline
I've mentioned before that while it is great to think big, and we should do so, the Embankment can have value to the city even in a limited form. We don't need to build it as extravagantly as the High Line, although a well designed Embankment/Bergen Arches Trail would be an outstanding amenity.

The example I always point to is Reservoir No. 3. It has some of the same problems as the Embankment. It will be expensive to develop it into the world class park that some envision. It faces the same concerns with the elevated walls. Having said that, the city, the Reservoir Preservation Alliance, the students at P.S. 28, and other members of the community have made it a very special place. Yes, it is not open all the time. Yes, there are safety concerns that have to be addressed if it becomes a "full time" park. But it's still doing quite well.

Investing in quality open space is expensive. Berry Lane Park costs tens of millions of dollars. We can't necessarily find all the funds overnight. But we can think big and also move incrementally. It's worth it.

Posted on: 2016/9/13 14:29
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/9/8 13:21
Last Login :
2017/4/28 15:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 233
Offline
Pretty sure Cory B is just trolling. Pro-Casino anti Park? Either a troll or lowlife.

The embankment is a key part of the rejuvenated Jersey City, a connection between the heights and downtown that will connect the waterfront to the Bergen Arches. It is a protected historical structure that must be preserved until the money is raised to properly open it up to the public.

The lack of imagination on the part of some is pathetic. Tear it down for a street level park and it's just a median along a busy roadway. Build condos on it and it's just a wall. Leave it as it is and it's a place for plants and animals to thrive undisturbed until it can become the world-class park that Jersey City deserves.

Posted on: 2016/9/13 14:09
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
2023/1/30 21:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3792
Offline
i agree that jc needs to upgrade its infrastructure...but so does ny/nyc. there have been water main breaks in manhattan too

Posted on: 2016/9/13 13:44
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
hey, you're the one that wants tourism. you want to add 6 million tourists to the area? cool. give em a reason. a 6 block by 0.5 block park ain't cutting it with the infinite to do on the other side of the hudson. casino? that's another story.

while you're at it, give em the infrastructure (what i've been saying all along ffs) to get here and to make it feasible to have them here. because nothing attracts tourists quite like broken water mains.

Posted on: 2016/9/13 13:03
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:

stc4blues wrote:

That's almost 60M tourists right across the river, annually. What would it take to get 1% of them across the Hudson to JC?


a fuckton more than a walking park. now where's that casino thread...


yep great for the neighborhood

Posted on: 2016/9/12 23:44
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
Quote:

stc4blues wrote:

That's almost 60M tourists right across the river, annually. What would it take to get 1% of them across the Hudson to JC?


a fuckton more than a walking park. now where's that casino thread...

Posted on: 2016/9/12 23:36
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
2023/1/30 21:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3792
Offline
Quote:

jcneighbor wrote:
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Wasn't there some chatter about making the space part of a light rail expansion if the park concept doesn't work out?


The administration was accused of making that excuse based on the type of emminent domain invoked I think which is still murky at best.

A ground level park would have to start from scratch in terms of vegetation and foliage which would most likely be lessened to accommodate more people and amenities. The whole selling point of an elevated walking park in this case is that you are seeing the years of natural growth without interference from a view above neighboring buildings and without having to worry about traffic for several long blocks.

The logistics aspect of interrupting traffic shouldn't be an issue unless a truck is 20 feet tall in which case they wouldn't fit under traffic lights either.


I think thor is correct about the eminent domain issue but Conrail was contractually obligated to give the City "first dibs" and they didn't. So it's a messy court fight.

IIRC, the bridges were a hair under 14 feet above the street, so anything replacing them would require that they be elevated above the tops of the stones as they are now.

Agree on the vegetation up top now. It's kinda nice. The logistical issue is public access. Stairs, ramps, how many, where? And for security, do you really think there isn't going to be stuff going down up there at night since it won't be patrolled nor visible from the street?
who cares if there is sex going on in the park after night as long as no minors are present and people take their condoms, underwear and bras with them. there is night-time sex going on in many of the world's big city parks at night....i would name them but i don't wanna give away any secrets

Posted on: 2016/9/12 21:38
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/11/12 17:04
Last Login :
5/7 14:26
From Downtown JC, VVP Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 560
Offline
Quote:

thor800 wrote:
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Wasn't there some chatter about making the space part of a light rail expansion if the park concept doesn't work out?


The administration was accused of making that excuse based on the type of emminent domain invoked I think which is still murky at best.

A ground level park would have to start from scratch in terms of vegetation and foliage which would most likely be lessened to accommodate more people and amenities. The whole selling point of an elevated walking park in this case is that you are seeing the years of natural growth without interference from a view above neighboring buildings and without having to worry about traffic for several long blocks.

The logistics aspect of interrupting traffic shouldn't be an issue unless a truck is 20 feet tall in which case they wouldn't fit under traffic lights either.


I think thor is correct about the eminent domain issue but Conrail was contractually obligated to give the City "first dibs" and they didn't. So it's a messy court fight.

IIRC, the bridges were a hair under 14 feet above the street, so anything replacing them would require that they be elevated above the tops of the stones as they are now.

Agree on the vegetation up top now. It's kinda nice. The logistical issue is public access. Stairs, ramps, how many, where? And for security, do you really think there isn't going to be stuff going down up there at night since it won't be patrolled nor visible from the street?

Posted on: 2016/9/12 20:17
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
2023/1/30 21:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3792
Offline
why not build something truly nice even if it is more expensive. if costs is an issue, the city should seek grants and donations.

the way i see it - although shop-rite is perfectly fine, i'd rather shop at whole foods.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 19:47
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
You negative Nellies sound like these dudes: We're not worthy

Posted on: 2016/9/12 19:38
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:

dr_nick_riviera wrote:
Wasn't there some chatter about making the space part of a light rail expansion if the park concept doesn't work out?


The administration was accused of making that excuse based on the type of emminent domain invoked I think which is still murky at best.

A ground level park would have to start from scratch in terms of vegetation and foliage which would most likely be lessened to accommodate more people and amenities. The whole selling point of an elevated walking park in this case is that you are seeing the years of natural growth without interference from a view above neighboring buildings and without having to worry about traffic for several long blocks.

The logistics aspect of interrupting traffic shouldn't be an issue unless a truck is 20 feet tall in which case they wouldn't fit under traffic lights either.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 19:34
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/11/21 22:12
Last Login :
2023/10/3 18:37
From DTJC
Group:
Banned
Posts: 465
Offline
Wasn't there some chatter about making the space part of a light rail expansion if the park concept doesn't work out?

Posted on: 2016/9/12 18:48
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/11/12 17:04
Last Login :
5/7 14:26
From Downtown JC, VVP Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 560
Offline
Quote:
bodhipooh wrote: Quote:
stc4blues wrote: Quote:
If you're arguing that it wouldn't cost that much though, you're going to lose that argument. Some how, some way, I promise you it would end up costing almost half a billion, if not more.
I don't know what the Embankment project would actually cost, but $500M is an extravagant over-estimate. Chicago's Millennium Park covers 24.5 acres, required considerable construction and landscaping, a starchitect (Frank Gehry), 2 or 3 major artists and it was 'only' $475M (a decade ago). The Embankment isn't on that scale.
Perhaps 500 MM was an exaggeration, but I am fairly confident that EasyGibson is onto something. I would not be at all surprised if such a project would clock in at around 100 MM after all is said and done. The LSP bridge, which is tiny in length, and which didn't require any additional work to the area around it, clocked in at almost 1MM (after more than a year to discuss, plan, and complete) and that was 3 years ago. The embankment will require a TON of time and money to rehabilitate for "safe use" and the collection of bridges, passages, etc will require a lot of approvals and costly designs and construction. I am not saying that the area should be razed or given to a developer, but corybraiterman is not crazy to suggest that a grand level park could at least satisfy the desire for more green spaces without bankrupting a city that is already stretched thin in so many areas. It seems like a lot of the proponents for this Highline-style design are dishonestly portraying this debate as having two choices: elevated park or more development. We could have a ground level park and still enjoy a great many benefits. The Highline idea sounds like a pipe dream to me given the budgetary realities.
I saw corybraiterman's post #7 a few days ago and figured I'd wait a few days to see where it went. Bodhipooh pretty much wrote what I was thinking. I've been here 30 years (DT) and remember the rail bridges. I also remember that a high-profile truck would get jammed under one every few weeks. They'd bring a crew to deflate the truck's tires and then a big-ass towtruck would pull them out. I don't know if that was THE reason for removing them, or not. The access logistics and security issues of an elevated park that only runs about 5 blocks is ridiculous. And regardless of the cost, which will be large, what's wrong with a ground-level park? Hell, the City could probably sell those big square stones to help pay for it. Is it in an area in need of redevelopment, like the very west side of Manhattan or the park in Chicago? No. Will there be any economic gain to the City or nearby residents? Doubt it. And before anyone jumps on my case about being "anti- Historic Preservation", I'm not. I'm restoring my third 1800's rowhouse and I appreciate fine detail. As far as the remains of the rail line are concerned, they're just a pile of rocks to me.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 18:38
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:
bodhipooh wrote: Quote:
stc4blues wrote: Quote:
If you're arguing that it wouldn't cost that much though, you're going to lose that argument. Some how, some way, I promise you it would end up costing almost half a billion, if not more.
I don't know what the Embankment project would actually cost, but $500M is an extravagant over-estimate. Chicago's Millennium Park covers 24.5 acres, required considerable construction and landscaping, a starchitect (Frank Gehry), 2 or 3 major artists and it was 'only' $475M (a decade ago). The Embankment isn't on that scale.
Perhaps 500 MM was an exaggeration, but I am fairly confident that EasyGibson is onto something. I would not be at all surprised if such a project would clock in at around 100 MM after all is said and done. The LSP bridge, which is tiny in length, and which didn't require any additional work to the area around it, clocked in at almost 1MM (after more than a year to discuss, plan, and complete) and that was 3 years ago. The embankment will require a TON of time and money to rehabilitate for "safe use" and the collection of bridges, passages, etc will require a lot of approvals and costly designs and construction. I am not saying that the area should be razed or given to a developer, but corybraiterman is not crazy to suggest that a grand level park could at least satisfy the desire for more green spaces without bankrupting a city that is already stretched thin in so many areas. It seems like a lot of the proponents for this Highline-style design are dishonestly portraying this debate as having two choices: elevated park or more development. We could have a ground level park and still enjoy a great many benefits. The Highline idea sounds like a pipe dream to me given the budgetary realities.
https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/eleva ... rk-high-line-Poughkeepsie restoring this bridge across the Hudson River cost $38M which I am sure included additional supports to account for supports being in a moving body of water and not a stable structure like a street. Assuming 2 or 3 bridges with many some paved walkways and fences around the area could be accomplished for less than $25M I would think. Where the fock does the $500M figure come from ?

Posted on: 2016/9/12 18:36
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
Quote:
bodhipooh wrote: Perhaps 500 MM was an exaggeration, but I am fairly confident that EasyGibson is onto something. I would not be at all surprised if such a project would clock in at around 100 MM after all is said and done.
No "perhaps" about it. Berry Lane is is over 17 acres and required considerable remediation. No bridges, but lots of playing fields, fencing, and landscaping. It cost $35 million. I don't see the Embankment costing three times that.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 18:28
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#40
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: 3932
Offline
Quote:
stc4blues wrote: Quote:
If you're arguing that it wouldn't cost that much though, you're going to lose that argument. Some how, some way, I promise you it would end up costing almost half a billion, if not more.
I don't know what the Embankment project would actually cost, but $500M is an extravagant over-estimate. Chicago's Millennium Park covers 24.5 acres, required considerable construction and landscaping, a starchitect (Frank Gehry), 2 or 3 major artists and it was 'only' $475M (a decade ago). The Embankment isn't on that scale.
Perhaps 500 MM was an exaggeration, but I am fairly confident that EasyGibson is onto something. I would not be at all surprised if such a project would clock in at around 100 MM after all is said and done. The LSP bridge, which is tiny in length, and which didn't require any additional work to the area around it, clocked in at almost 1MM (after more than a year to discuss, plan, and complete) and that was 3 years ago. The embankment will require a TON of time and money to rehabilitate for "safe use" and the collection of bridges, passages, etc will require a lot of approvals and costly designs and construction. I am not saying that the area should be razed or given to a developer, but corybraiterman is not crazy to suggest that a grand level park could at least satisfy the desire for more green spaces without bankrupting a city that is already stretched thin in so many areas. It seems like a lot of the proponents for this Highline-style design are dishonestly portraying this debate as having two choices: elevated park or more development. We could have a ground level park and still enjoy a great many benefits. The Highline idea sounds like a pipe dream to me given the budgetary realities.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 17:37
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
Quote:
If you're arguing that it wouldn't cost that much though, you're going to lose that argument. Some how, some way, I promise you it would end up costing almost half a billion, if not more.
I don't know what the Embankment project would actually cost, but $500M is an extravagant over-estimate. Chicago's Millennium Park covers 24.5 acres, required considerable construction and landscaping, a starchitect (Frank Gehry), 2 or 3 major artists and it was 'only' $475M (a decade ago). The Embankment isn't on that scale.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 16:29
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/3/8 23:14
Last Login :
2017/8/17 3:49
From Erie
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 316
Offline
Quote:

thor800 wrote:

Walking infrastructure how big ? 30 feet maybe ? Its not like they are building the friggin pulaski skyway.



The bridge at the end of Jersey Ave that connects to LSP cost..... drumroll please.....


$800k.


I still maintain I could build that bridge myself, annually, for the next 80 years, and still come in at under that budget, but that's probably a separate conversation.
Point is, putting bridges back up, fences along the entirety of the edge of the structure, as well as whatever ADA crap you'd have to do(I'm picturing a ramp with 100 switchbacks, emergency lights, and raised bump warning mats near the edges) would push this project into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Personally, I think that if Jersey City maintains its trajectory, it would be worth it and would serve as a fantastic way to visually and socially connect downtown with other neighborhoods if done in accordance with Bergen Arches, etc.

If you're arguing that it wouldn't cost that much though, you're going to lose that argument. Some how, some way, I promise you it would end up costing almost half a billion, if not more.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 16:02
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:
In Berlin on Wednesday, Fred Dixon, the chief executive of New York?s tourism-marketing agency, NYC & Company, plans to announce a forecast of 59.7 million visitors this year. That would exceed last year?s record of 58.3 million visitors by 2.4 percent


What are the commonalities again?


That's almost 60M tourists right across the river, annually. What would it take to get 1% of them across the Hudson to JC? 3%? That's 600,000 and 1,800,000. If they each spend $10 in JC, that's $6 to $18M. If it's $50, then $30M to $90M.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 16:00
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:
In Berlin on Wednesday, Fred Dixon, the chief executive of New York?s tourism-marketing agency, NYC & Company, plans to announce a forecast of 59.7 million visitors this year. That would exceed last year?s record of 58.3 million visitors by 2.4 percent


Quote:
As of 2010, Atlanta is the seventh-most visited city in the United States, with over 35 million visitors per year.


Quote:
"Last year [2012] we broke a record. We had 42 million people visit the city of Atlanta. We?ve never had that many visitors before," the mayor said.


What are the commonalities again?


Potential for tourism ?

Seems pretty obvious

Posted on: 2016/9/12 15:39
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/7/3 5:49
Last Login :
2022/4/28 22:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1384
Offline
Quote:
In Berlin on Wednesday, Fred Dixon, the chief executive of New York?s tourism-marketing agency, NYC & Company, plans to announce a forecast of 59.7 million visitors this year. That would exceed last year?s record of 58.3 million visitors by 2.4 percent


Quote:
As of 2010, Atlanta is the seventh-most visited city in the United States, with over 35 million visitors per year.


Quote:
"Last year [2012] we broke a record. We had 42 million people visit the city of Atlanta. We?ve never had that many visitors before," the mayor said.


What are the commonalities again?

Posted on: 2016/9/12 15:18
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/2/8 16:51
Last Login :
2019/9/4 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 366
Offline
Quote:
stc4blues wrote: A Glorified Sidewalk, and the Path to Transform Atlanta
Planners now say Atlanta?s population, which stands at about 463,000, could double in the next 15 years. Many of the new residents could end up living along the BeltLine. In a study this year, Mr. Leinberger and a colleague, Michael Rodriguez, showed that areas they identified as ?walkable urban places? in the nation?s 30 largest metro areas were gaining market share over car-dependent suburban areas for ?perhaps the first time in 60 years,? and earning higher rental premiums. The High Line in New York, which turned an elevated stretch of Manhattan rail line into a linear park, is perhaps the best known of the nation?s urban infrastructure makeovers. Chicago?s has also converted an old elevated track into a greenway, christening it the 606. Miami?s Underline is reimagining 10 miles of underused land under its elevated Metrorail system as an art-lined ?urban trail.? Still, many say Atlanta?s plans stand out. Private investment along the entire proposed route has surged to $3 billion. Foundations and private donors have given more than $54 million for paths, parks and other amenities. Home prices have risen in formerly overlooked working-class neighborhoods where the BeltLine is set to expand. Candidates in the 2017 mayoral race, meanwhile, are turning BeltLine promises into central elements of their campaigns.
This requires actual progressive thinking to accept tho which some people are incapable of apparently. The key to major acceptance is self-sustaining operations financially which is the challenge. Projects such as this have major benefits to surrounding property values and businesses, but sadly tend to be evaluated strictly on profitability similar to mass transit.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 14:05
 Top 


Re: Drop By Barcade to Support the Embankment Preservation Coalition
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/2/8 17:21
Last Login :
1/16 19:07
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 404
Offline
A Glorified Sidewalk, and the Path to Transform Atlanta
Planners now say Atlanta?s population, which stands at about 463,000, could double in the next 15 years. Many of the new residents could end up living along the BeltLine. In a study this year, Mr. Leinberger and a colleague, Michael Rodriguez, showed that areas they identified as ?walkable urban places? in the nation?s 30 largest metro areas were gaining market share over car-dependent suburban areas for ?perhaps the first time in 60 years,? and earning higher rental premiums. The High Line in New York, which turned an elevated stretch of Manhattan rail line into a linear park, is perhaps the best known of the nation?s urban infrastructure makeovers. Chicago?s has also converted an old elevated track into a greenway, christening it the 606. Miami?s Underline is reimagining 10 miles of underused land under its elevated Metrorail system as an art-lined ?urban trail.? Still, many say Atlanta?s plans stand out. Private investment along the entire proposed route has surged to $3 billion. Foundations and private donors have given more than $54 million for paths, parks and other amenities. Home prices have risen in formerly overlooked working-class neighborhoods where the BeltLine is set to expand. Candidates in the 2017 mayoral race, meanwhile, are turning BeltLine promises into central elements of their campaigns.

Posted on: 2016/9/12 11:36
 Top 




(1) 2 3 »




[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