Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
The vote was 4 to 3 that the structure was not considered commercial. Now the process continues as the certificate of appropriate stage of the hearing begins. There will be several more meeting on this.
Posted on: 2010/10/5 22:14
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
1) Don't put words in my mouth, thanks. Your example has nothing to do with the price of tea in China, so kindly take it elsewhere. My point of you can a) spend money on a highline style park or b) make some property taxes on it is a very base, simple thing that even you should be able to grasp without throwing strawmen arguments against. 2) High-rises can be zoned against. If Hyman wants to spend the tremendous amount of money to remove the embankment to simply leave it put as empty ground level abandoned lots, then he's a bigger idiot than anyone on this board has accused him of being already. If anything, he'd leave it as is until the market turned up so he wouldn't spend those millions now.
Posted on: 2010/10/5 22:26
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
> The vote was 4 to 3 that the structure was not considered commercial
Is that good or bad? Robin.
Posted on: 2010/10/5 22:27
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Tern: It depends on if you are for demolishing or not. If not, it's a good thing...for now, until the hearings/debate over the Certificate of Appropriateness.
Corybraiterman: Deciphering through your post (sorry, I was distracted by 'point of you' instead of, what I assumed you meant, 'point of view').... you seem to project a future for the Embankment that's based on utopia and not reality, as if Hyman is a philanthropist and not a developer... And JC is a fair and balanced city... If you review any of the posts here on taxes, developers, abatements (the list goes on...) you will see that your points are refuted by the 'simple thing' that JC government is corrupt: pure and simple. To think that Hyman will create a highline park... or that he will be taxed appropriately... or that the high rises will be zoned appropriately... gives a bit too much credit to our City, who looks for any opportunity to have a greased pocket. One can only hope that the Board does the right thing with the next step, Certificate of Appropriateness.
Posted on: 2010/10/5 22:54
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
We were at the hearings last night - can't beat them for real life drama. Hyman's lawyer repeatedly stated that the city had never put forth an offer to purchase the Embankment.
I'm confused, then, regarding the $7million bond that was presented by the JC Council back in June. Can anyone clarify? Releived that the commercial hardship angle was voted down - though the voting procedure couldn't have been more confusing to the the council or audience. They repeatedly had to clarify what a "yes" and "no" vote meant. Our neighbor, an attorney, said that this was the highest hurdle to jump so having cleared it - we're feeling a sense of relief this morning. Thanking the Embankment organization for their tireless work on behalf of all.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 9:01
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I also attended the hearing. It's the first time I'd seen Hyman's lawyer in action and I was appalled at her arguments. She called the city and embankment coalition corrupt and said they were colluding against the developer (among other things). WOW!
I was also a little confused at the outcome (and I was there!) so thanks to those who have clarified. The process has been so protracted that I would like to give a pat on the back to the embankment coalition for sticking with it and fighting the good fight. BTW, I live a few blocks from the embankment but want desperately to see it preserved as green space for all the reasons others have stated -- park use, linking to other trails, mitigation of air and noise pollution, and absorption of rain water. It's a quality of life issue and it would benefit the entire city.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 9:50
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
My understanding is that when Conrail was selling the land, they received no bids from the city, only one bid from Hyman. JC only made its offer after Hyman had purchased the land.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 10:53
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Hyman won't turn it into a highline style park. Never said he has or will. His opponents want to do that, and I think thats just as bad as high-rise condos. Stating JC is corrupt (while correct) isn't the issue. Asking "what people want" is the question, and those are my answers: Townhouses/brownstones/appropriate buildings, small businesses, ground-level park, some extra parking - in that order - is my answer. Again, the question is "what is to be done with the embankment". High-rise condos and highline style park are the worst options, imo, even including the fact that we have to fight city hall as well as overzealous developers.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 12:30
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Cory,
I cannot fathom how any downtown resident would prefer houses be built on this land rather than a park. What possible reason could you have for wanting more houses built on this land? How much land is there in downtown Jersey City that could be used to make parks? Once that land is gone, it is gone for good, and we are deprived forever of desperately needed open space. What difference is 40 more brownstones going to make to your enjoyment of Jersey City? (In the unlikely event that low density brownstone style housing is what actually gets built). Robin.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 13:52
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'd love more parks. Half-block deep parks aren't all that exciting to me, however. The fact that the land hasn't been used for years as anything means that we're not particularly gaining or losing any ground. It isn't like they're bulldozing Hamilton Park to make houses, it's non-usable space right now.
Would it be nice to have a park? Sure. I don't want an elevated park due to the costs, and the idea of 1-block x 1/2-block parks don't light a fire under me. Let's face a couple facts tho, we're better than many when it comes to parks. We've got: *a good sized park up by Pavonia and Brunswick - big playground, hockey rink, baseball diamond, soccer field, etc. *a nice park in Hamilton - dog run, basketball court, tennis courts, gazebo, playground *a small park over in Van Vorst - dog run, playground, garden *two LARGE parks in lincoln park and liberty state park less than three miles and a mile away (respectively) Go look at google maps and head on over across the river to NYC. Take a look at the tons of neighborhoods with fewer parks than us. Canarsie, Midwood, Bensonhurst, Bed-Stuy, Astoria, Woodside, all of downtown Manhattan just to name a few. Jersey City is fairly decent as far as urban areas and parks go, especially downtown. We're not doing too bad. Having said this, I can at least respect that Hyman deserves the right to make something off his purchase. I don't want to permit him to build high-rises, and hope that JC gov't doesn't screw that up, but he did purchase the place. I say let him wait til the market improves, get rid of a useless wall and build appropriate-sized buildings that won't screw up the neighborhood.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 14:57
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Hyman was a speculator. Why does he deserve to make a return! Do you feel this way about all speculators, homebuyers, investors? What makes Hyman so special>?
Posted on: 2010/10/6 15:38
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Not particularly, no. I just tend to dislike things like eminent domain and not permitting someone who owns a piece of fairly useless land to be able to build appropriate neighborhood-level homes.
He bought the land. Apparently when Jersey City didn't even put in a bid for it (thats what i gather from the recent comments in this thread). If he's willing to pay for the proper environmental studies and to safely remove an eyesore in the neighborhood and make it something useful that won't just fk up the neighborhood, then I really don't see why he shouldn't be permitted to do so. Especially when the other option is the city spends money it can't afford for a joke of a park. I'm ambivalent to a light rail extension - it'd be nice, but man would that suck for the people living on the north half of 5th st. - trains 10 feet from your window? I know I wouldn't want that. Too often, things get delayed for months and years here in JC due to the interference of local officials. Bars, restaurants, etc. etc. keep getting hassled. Remember that thread, I believe it was concerning the Hamilton Park Ale House where one person overheard some JC official bragging about having single-handedly delayed some place for months on end? Dunno about you, but I despise that kind of fiefdom nonsense. Atomic Wings taking years to open up. The new deli on Manila that was supposed to have opened in the spring. Barcade. ThisIsWhyWeCan'tHaveNiceThings.jpg
Posted on: 2010/10/6 17:14
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
There's a few things we can agree upon here:
Quote:
Absolutely correct - this is one of the biggest problems facing Jersey City and it has crippled many businesses to the point where the chance of success was approximately 0%. However, the Embankment is not quite the same situation. For example, Ox wasn't trying to tear down historic structures that many, many people feel passionate about, they were simply trying to start a business and should not have encountered all the headaches that they did. I agree this is a problem of epidemic proportions in this town and severely cripples growth, but I honestly don't think this applies to the current Embankment situation. Quote:
As someone who lives on the north side of 5th street I ain't too thrilled with this proposition either - I personally feel it should be either left as is (some things are simply better the way they are) or at most a foot/bike park only. Put a gun to my head and I would take the Light Rail over tearing it down, but it would not be a clear cut decision without knowing all of the facts. Your point about Hyman owning the land is a fair one - if it turns out Jersey City f'd this up by not purchasing the land then bad on them. I don't know if that's as clear cut as some say but I would certainly not be shocked if that is indeed the case. There is a caveat though - the Embankment has been deemed historic. If I purchased a brownstone on Jersey Ave the historic commission has deemed historic, there is only so many things I can do to the exterior of that building to keep within the guidelines. And even though I own the building and the land, I'm pretty sure I could not tear down that structure unless it had been condemned by the city. (Someone correct me if I am wrong on this point, I'm not intimately familiar with the historic commission guidelines) So even if Hyman owns the land, he bought that land knowing full well it was already on the State Register of Historic Places starting in 1999. Maybe he is stupider than we thought. I'm tired of arguing whether it has aesthetic appeal or not, I think it provides an extremely interesting and appealing aspect to this part of town but that is a subjective matter. I also think the Katyn statue is aesthetically pleasing as an interesting urban monument, but obviously people disagree with that too. This aside, between the historic aspect and the fact that the demolition/construction would be extremely disruptive and potentially dangerous to residents who live near the structure it just doesn't make sense to tear it down.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 18:18
|
|||
|
||||
Re: Embankment- Update Thread |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
cities can change policies and positions over time. and that is good.
city planner, Bob Cotter, flat out stated he had at last night's hearing.
Posted on: 2010/10/6 18:39
|
|||
|
||||
New York Times: Sparks Fly Over a ‘High Line’ Park in Jersey City |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Sparks Fly Over a ‘High Line’ Park in Jersey City
New York Times By ANTOINETTE MARTIN Published: November 5, 2010 ![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/11/07/realestate/SUB-njzo1/SUB-njzo1-popup.jpg"); "Click to see original Image in a new window") A developer envisions apartments on a six-acre rail line embankment along Sixth Street in Jersey City. ![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/11/07/realestate/07ITRNJ2/njzo2-popup.jpg"); "Click to see original Image in a new window") Some residents dream of creating a park there. THERE seems to be only one clear point of agreement concerning the vision for a High Line-style park on the old rail embankment along Sixth Street in this city’s downtown: The High Line across the river sure is great. Other than that, common ground has been scarce in the five years since the developer Steve Hyman gave Conrail $3 million for the six-acre embankment — which is broken into blocklong segments running west from Marin Boulevard — for his purpose, which was to build apartments on it. The embankment once supported a half-mile-long freight line connected by bridges over city streets. The bridges have been gone for decades, as have the tracks. Now there is just a weedy jungle atop brownstone walls and a fight over its future. Steve Gucciardo, a real estate broker who has lived in the area for 22 years, says residents of the densely populated Harsimus Cove section have nurtured the dream of creating a park atop the embankment since about 1999. That was also the year a neighborhood group called Friends of the High Line was formed on the West Side of Manhattan to champion creation of a 1.45-mile-long park on an abandoned freight trestle; Mr. Gucciardo went on to help found the Sixth Street Embankment Preservation Coalition in 2003. Robert Hammond and Joshua David of the Manhattan group became early supporters of the “sister project,” and after the High Line opened last year, Mr. Hammond joined the Jersey City coalition’s advisory board. Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy of Jersey City, along with other municipal and state officials, has officially toured — and enthusiastically endorsed — the High Line. Mr. Hyman, too, expressed admiration for it, saying he had visited numerous times and had also toured the Promenade Plantée in Paris, which has been cited as one of its inspirations. “But Jersey City is not New York or Paris,” Mr. Hyman said. “The embankment is not located in an area filled with shops and commerce like those places have. And there is no money here to build a High Line. It cost $150 million in New York — and about a third of that was contributed by celebrity philanthropists.” For the units that Mr. Hyman wants, his architect, Dean Marchetto of Hoboken, has produced designs that could also accommodate up to four blocks of open space. But the coalition remains committed to the idea of a park, and has pursued all manner of legal tactics to keep the land free — even joining with the city to challenge Mr. Hyman’s legal ownership. The issue, still being debated, is whether Conrail took the proper formal steps to abandon the rail line before selling it. The Jersey City version of a High Line park would be shorter and wider than the Manhattan original (each segment of the embankment is 100 feet wide); also, not as tall, as the embankment tops out at about the first story of surrounding row houses. Mr. Gucciardo described the Jersey City site as “perfectly positioned to be part of a network of walkable and bikeable greenways and street-level parks that already exists.” Further, he said, its century-old brownstone walls, now listed on the state Register of Historic Places, are integral to the “historic fabric” of the neighborhood. Mr. Gucciardo, a former chairman of the city’s preservation commission, acknowledged having worked to protect the walls after Mr. Hyman announced a plan to tear them down. That is what apparently sparked the sarcastic twist in Mr. Hyman’s most recent confrontation with the coalition: When the group helped schedule a volunteer clean-up effort of litter and weeds at the embankment for Oct. 23 (National Make a Difference Day), it was publicized beforehand on a community news blog. In a comment posted in response, Mr. Hyman forbade trespassing — and went on to say he wished to “preserve” his weeds. This led to a long back-and-forth online, with Mr. Hyman giving as good as he got from anonymous critics. A few supporters also surfaced, or at least blog posters who said they believed Mr. Hyman’s rights as a property owner were being violated. In an interview, Mr. Hyman said he had partly been “spoofing” about his desire to harbor weeds — but mostly expressing his frustration over having been “blocked at every turn, and taken to every court in the land.” He added that he personally found the brownstone walls ugly. “But now they can’t be taken down. And so we have come up with terrific plans that would keep them in place — including one design that provides parking behind those walls, and a lot of open space — plus, we even threw in an offer to donate two other blocks of space at the west end of the embankment.” “But,” he added, “the city would have had to buy back some of the property from me at a fair price. And the city doesn’t have the money. It’s never going to have the money.” City officials declined to comment on the project while various legal decisions are pending. But Jersey City itself has another iron in the fire, since it reserves the right to re-establish the site as a rail line by extending a light rail system onto it. “It is fiendishly complicated,” Mr. Gucciardo said. “But we still have hope. It took tremendous effort over 10 years to build the one in New York, after all.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/rea ... .html?_r=1&ref=realestate
Posted on: 2010/11/7 10:49
|
|||
|
||||
Re: New York Times: Sparks Fly Over a ‘High Line’ Park in Jersey City |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The apartment building shown on the first rendering is so underscaled as to be laughable.
Posted on: 2010/11/7 17:14
|
|||
|
||||
The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
I just got my April issue of National Geographic and there is a good article on the High Line in NYC and just how special it is to all who visit. In the article they call it a "happy exception." It's a damn same that our city council wasn't forward thinking enough to see the embankment as worth preserving before Hyman got it for a song. We need more of these "happy exceptions" and certainly not more condos built upon condos.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... high-line/goldberger-text
Posted on: 2011/3/19 13:21
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I love the part where the guy who originally bought the high line for ten dollars lost his court battle to keep it.
maybe that legal lightning will strike again in JC?
Posted on: 2011/3/19 13:39
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I'm all for more parks, but can we stop the insanity of the Embankment people? The High Line has elevators to bring up the disabled and has multiple workers with walkee-talkees patrolling it constantly. If it wasn't patrolled and cleaned, it would become a seedy no-man's-land in days.
To turn the Embankment into that kind of park, we'd need bridges to join all the sections, multiple elevators, security guards, lamps, fencing, and landscaping. No one's going to spend that much money for a park that doesn't even go through a high-traffic part of town. Pick your battles, people. There are plenty of other places to beautify downtown.
Posted on: 2011/3/19 13:47
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
THANK YOU. A park as isolated as the embankment would be is foolish here. Jersey City isn't Chelsea. I don't want condos either. I wish it could just be left as it is...
Posted on: 2011/3/19 13:56
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
or turned into something useful. like - gasp - an actual working railway.
Posted on: 2011/3/19 14:00
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm all for more parks, but can we stop the insanity of the Embankment people? The High Line has elevators to bring up the disabled and has multiple workers with walkee-talkees patrolling it constantly. If it wasn't patrolled and cleaned, it would become a seedy no-man's-land in days. I can not applaud statements like this enough.
Posted on: 2011/3/20 4:49
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The Embankment as an open space park would become a destination spot regionally and nationally due to connection to national East Coast Greenway Alliance, a 3,000 mile hike and bike trail from Maine to Florida. Locally, the Embankment you would hve additional usage and nearby retail places, whether restaurants, bike shops, etc, would all benefit. Like the High Line, we would add to tourism and economiic development as well as recreation for all. A non profit group appointed by the City, such as the Enbankment Preservation Coalition, could apply for corporate grants to manage the property after JC purchased it from Con Rail if EPC federal suit succeeds or through eminent domain purchase by JC. ![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://www.sunrisetrail.org/images/ecgmaplogo.jpg");) According to this 2001 study for the East Coast Greenway Alliance, they reference how much NJ generated in tourism dollars for the state :TABLE 2: State of Tourism Along ECG New Jersey $13.9 Billion "Travel Industry Association of America Tourism Works for America Report 1998" Local and Tourism Use of the East Coast Greenway Prepared for the East Coast Greenway Alliance © 2001 Prepared by Alicia Schatteman Schatteman Consulting Services e) Services and Amenities Another component of a successful trails tourism program is evaluating if the local communities have the necessary infrastructure to support a growth in trails tourism. For example, are there shopping and retail opportunities for visitors? What are the hospital and emergency medical facilities like and where are they located in relation to the trail? The ECG will be one of the few, if not the only trail, to cut through major urban areas where the tourism infrastructure already exists to a large extent. Preferences for services and amenities are very dependent on the how the user travels (alone, with family, with spouse, or in a group). f) Transportation and Access The East Coast Greenway is located proximate to the most developed transportation infrastructure in the United States: · System of interstate highways and expressways allows for fast access to the whole north east corridor · The many international airports, some of the busiest in the country, are located here, with direct flights to every part of the world · Numerous smaller, regional airports · Rail transportation along the northeastern corridor by Amtrak. Rail should be considered a critical partner in trail access since it facilitates linear movement. The policies regarding the transport of bicycles have restricted its role to date. · Not to be overlooked because of the urban nature of the ECG, is access to public local transportation such as buses, subways and ferries Transportation corridors dominate the northeastern United States. This is can be a positive feature, providing linear movement along the ECG corridor.
Posted on: 2011/3/20 6:39
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Not to be too disrespectful, Bright, but that seems like a bit of a load of bull. That would require not only building the Embankment park, but rebuilding the bridges so it connects to back to the rails. Also, those rails are private property of Conrail last I looked, and are active shipping lines. Since when are people permitted to hike on them?
Posted on: 2011/3/20 14:43
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Get the facts. The High Line is 1.45 miles long. The Embankment is .5 miles long. A big difference as far as up-keep and security would be concerned. Also, if you bothered to go to the meetings or look at the renderings you would clearly see they are proposing gradual walk ways to address wheelchairs so no need for elevators.
To see this potential green space toppled over to make room for more cheapily constructed condos that will just stress our streets and infrastructure even more is plain stupid and shortsighted. The bottom line is that the Hyman's have more foresight and business sense than Robert Cotter, the Planning Director in JC and the entire staff at the Department of Housing & Economic Development & Commerce. Imagine getting a half mile stretch of JC real estate that runs into Hamilton Park for 3M. Let's not forget, the Hyman's didn't buy this in the 70's. They snapped it up in 2005 and the deal wasn't behind some secret door. In fact, Conrail notified Jersey City about its intent to sell the land “but JC declined to act." Now these knuckleheads want to spend close to 8M to get it back. Feet draggers. There has been 3 administrations since all the Embankment talk started and the Hymans swoops in when the JC suits are sitting on their thumbs. Some group of minds we have working for us. Hudson County Politics at it's best.
Posted on: 2011/3/20 16:18
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC's High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
That still requires security, maintenance and etc. etc. etc. Less is not the same as none. That still costs money. Money that would be much better spent in other ways. Even a street level park would require much less outlay and less upkeep. I can't state it enough: the entire idea is crap and even worse in these poor economic times.
Posted on: 2011/3/22 18:04
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC\'s High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Posted on: 2011/3/26 10:48
|
|||
|
||||
![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://www.embankment.org/whitesite/embankmenttowaterfront_new.jpg"); "Click to see original Image in a new window")
![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://www.embankment.org/whitesite/embankment_new.jpg"); "Click to see original Image in a new window")
![Click to see original Image in a new window](javascript:CaricaFoto("http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o258/BrightMoment/logo-url-banner-padding-600x56-web-2-1-1.gif"); "Click to see original Image in a new window"){kind=logo}
Re: The Embankment could have been JC\'s High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm referring to the rails west of the fields at Ferris and the field/park near Brunswick/Pavonia. I know for a fact they were still active in the late 90s, as I used to cut across them often on my way home from Dickinson. I saw a freight train just last night over Grand St. heading north - however I couldn't tell you if it turned west up to the Journal Sq. area or continued north past Newark Ave.
You're saying that stretch in between Dickinson and the park is now inactive?
Posted on: 2011/3/27 0:54
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC\'s High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Demolition Hearings Set to Resume
Zoning Board To Consider Permits March 29, 6pm, City Hall The Jersey City Zoning Board of Adjustment is scheduled to resume hearings on applications to demolish the Harsimus Branch Embankment. The next hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, March 29, in City Hall Council Chambers, 280 Grove Street, beginning at 6pm. If more time is needed, the hearing may be carried to Wednesday, March 30th. You may recall that, in October 2010, the Board, by a vote of 4-3, denied Certificates of Economic Hardship on a commercial basis. The applicants are now returning to finish their applications for Certificates of Appropriateness to demolish the historic structure. 
Posted on: 2011/3/28 17:30
|
|||
|
||||
Re: The Embankment could have been JC\'s High Line |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Any updates from tonight?
Posted on: 2011/3/30 22:11
|
|||
|
||||