MediaAvid wrote:
Does anyone know how early the Central Ave and or Palisade Ave jitneys to midtown NYC begin?

JPhurst wrote:
I did not have as many problems as others with the project, though the way it was pushed through was deceptive.

But how is the VVPA illegitimate?

And Yvonne has not had anything to do with it for a long time.

Stringer wrote:

After 16 Years of Construction, American Dream Mall Will Finally Open. Will it Work?

Shopping malls might be living a nightmare, but New Jersey’s American Dream Mall is trying to do something bigger, better and more entertaining. Will it succeed?

The American Dream Mall—once given a deadline to open in 2014 when the Super Bowl was played in New Jersey—has become the butt of many Northern New Jersey residents’ jokes. It’s been empty for years, little more than a garish, multi-colored eyesore to the drivers on the New Jersey Turnpike.

But finally, after 16 years of starts and stops, missed deadlines, three developers, five governors and a major retail contraction, current developer Triple Five claims the $5 billion American Dream Mall in East Rutherford, N.J., will open its 3.1-million-square-foot center in April. That includes 1.5 million square feet of retail, the largest indoor amusement park in the Western Hemisphere, an indoor ski lift, a DreamWorks-branded indoor waterpark, a Cirque du Soleil venue and a National Hockey League-sized ice rink. Subsequent phases call for two hotels and a convention center.

“There’s a lot that you can see with your eye to let you know this thing is coming soon,” said David Townes, a senior director of retail at Cushman & Wakefield whose office is next to the American Dream site in the Meadowlands Complex.

But even as it nears the finish line, not everybody’s convinced the American Dream Mall will really come to fruition. (At least not on the April timetable.)

“We’ve been told this story a gazillion times,” Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, who recently criticized the project on Twitter, told Commercial Observer. “I gloss over these dates on when they’re projected to open.”

https://commercialobserver.com/2019/02 ... inally-open-will-it-work/

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.

You gave the cashier $4.01 and expected $6 back? Where did the $10 come in? How does this make any sense?

Was the bill $4.01, you gave the cashier $10.01 and expected $6 back? If so, why didn't you say?

No wonder the cashier was confused...

Yvonne wrote:
The original employees at fast food restaurants were high school teenagers/college students and retired seniors. It was never meant to be employment for raising a family. Immigrants took those jobs and it became the staple for their income. I remember going to a fast food restaurant and gave the cashier $4.01 so I would get back six dollars from a ten. The cashier was clueless to what I was doing and another cashier had to help her. It didn't help her English was limited.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Bike_Lane wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i understand the need to fix the pipe, but really a complete shutdown. what about reduced service? closure at night and/or just one track open.

They need to rip up the tracks, remove the overhead wires, and bring in equipment to dig down to the pipe. You can't run "reduced service" when the infrastructure itself is gone.

Some people just refuse to understand the constraints and limitations of certain situations.

neverleft wrote:
.
Nine-month suspension coming to three light rail stops in Jersey City

Updated 3:05 PM; Posted 2:55 PM
By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal

JERSEY CITY ? Light rail passengers in parts of Jersey City should prepare themselves for a major disruption starting this spring, with NJ Transit planning to shut down service for nearly a year along a route that includes three stations.

The suspension is scheduled to coincide with sewer work performed by the Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority and will last from June 1 to March 1, 2020. The affected stations are at West Side Avenue, Martin Luther King Drive and Garfield Avenue.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2019/02/nine ... stops-in-jersey-city.html

JCBORN wrote:
I believe they were able to get approval for the additional floor because it will be set back and will not be seen from street level.
I don't have an issue with that. I also like that they were approved for 15 parking spots.

K-Lo2 wrote:
How did it get through? The same way this will get through. Variances.

https://jerseydigs.com/village-neighbo ... swick-street-jersey-city/

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
what's the deal with 359 5th street? i passed that monstrosity the other day. it takes up 100% of the lot and towers over neighboring houses. how was that every approved?

That section of 5th street isn't exactly Jersey City's proudest block (from a design/aesthetics point of view). That new mega house doesn't help though.

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn?t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education

Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!

it is so easy/convenient to blame teachers for poor jc public school system, and i don't doubt that there are many lousy teachers out there, but i don't think people focus enough attention on lousy parents who raise lousy students/children.

It's a cycle of poverty. Lousy children become lousy parents and raise lousy children. The only thing to break the cycle is good education and economic opportunities. I'm all for gentrification if it helps break the cycle. Unfortunately this leads to the displacement of a lot of people, but just having a concentrating poverty in a particular neighborhood or building will never bring about positive change.

Bring in more charters in areas of failing schools and starve out the old ineffective and racist ways.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Sandra Cunningham wrote:
According to the new school funding formula, Jersey City is dramatically overfunded, but when you look around at our public schools that doesn?t seem to be the case. Our students are being provided with a high quality education

Untrue. Our unionized employees are being better paid than 98% of their NJ peers, but our students are being shortchanged. The district is now being run by and for it's employees. I dare anyone to try and read the "user friendly budget" and figure out where the money goes. I found terms used there that Google couldn't even define!

JSleeze wrote:
Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:

This conversation is about if a decline of the # of millionaires in NJ will have a fiscal impact on the State, so it is relevant that the top 1% of earners pay 43% of NJ's income taxes because a small drop in the high-earner population will have a disproportionate fiscal effect.

This is a back of the envelope estimate, but if the number of filers in NJ with $1 million or more in income fell by only 1,000 , it would be a loss of at least $100 million in income taxes, since those $1 million income people would pay (at least) an average $100,000 in income taxes each.

$100,000 x 1,000 = $100 million

We aren't talking about the "fairness" by progressive definition of the NJ tax code, where paying 43% of income taxes might be construed as "unfair" if the top 1% possesses more than 43% of the state's income.

However, the top 1% in NJ doesn't earn 43% of the money. I don't have the number, but it's a little less than that.

This conversation is about people with assets in excess of $1 million. You're confusing net worth with income. People with $1 million in assets (e.g. someone who owns a 2br condo in 77 Hudson or Crystal Pointe) typically makes far less than $1 million per year.

JPhurst wrote:
After 9/11 New Jersey Association of Railroad Passengers was advocating connecting the PATH to the Lexington Avenue line. Apparently the tracks are the right width, and with all the construction that had to have been done, it would have been feasible. It never got off the ground and never got to the point where one would have to figure out which agency would run it.

Toonces wrote:
If walking is really an option people are seriously suggesting, how about using the upper portion of the Holland Tunnel? Now, I don't know what sort of infrastucture is in there, but the tunnel itself is round - yet when you're driving, the visible "ceiling" of the tunnel is apparently 8-10 feet below the top of the circle (demonstrated, in part, by this picture taken during construction). Seems to me there's plenty of room above the roadway for a pedestrian/bike path.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/67827566@N00/11639849305

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

As I understand it, the problem is traffic and signalling in tunnels, not a shortage of rolling stock.

Dolomiti, are you just trying to tweak me with the bridge comment knowing it drives me nuts? Of all the stupid ideas, it's the stupidest. Even if it was doable (it's not) there's probably no lower return on transportation investment than allowing the relatively few people who live downtown and work in Lower Manhattan AND are inclined to walk or bike to do so.

And, inclined to walk ~30 minutes just to cross that hypothetical bridge.

And yet, thousands of people do exactly that, every day, with the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridges.


Quote:

There are no pedestrian bridges in the world with that kind of length for very good reason.

Try again.

Big Dam Bridge is 1.28km; Bob Kerrey Bridge is 940m; Nescio is 740m. Those are all relatively new bridges.

It's not common, but that alone does not prove it's a bad idea. E.g. almost no transit systems in the US use open gangway cars; does that, in and of itself, prove that it's a bad idea?

The width of the Hudson is twice that of the East River where all three bridges (Williamsburg, Manhattan, and Brooklyn) are located. You are comparing apples to oranges.

A bridge from DTJC to Lower Manhattan would be over 1.25 to 1.5 miles, at a minimum. None of the examples you mention are nowhere near that. Try again.

Very few people commute via the Brooklyn. It is estimated that 4,000 people cross it every day. Take away the sizable amount of visitors/tourists, and the number that is actually commuting to/from work is very small. About 2.5K cyclists cross it every day. Even under the best/rosiest of estimates, you have 5,000 commuters crossing the Brooklyn bridge every day. That's about 5 - 7 PATH trains, or 30 minutes of added rush hour service.

If you want to see a more efficient method to add capacity, at least suggest cable cars/gondolas. That could be a much more effective solution than the idiocy that is a pedestrian bridge over the Hudson.

Let's say this thing was somehow built at a billion dollars* or less. It will probably have no impact to reduce PATH overcrowding. It may even attract more people to PATH as a shitload of tourists will use the system to get off at exchange place or WTC to then walk/bike/rollerskate over the Hudson to Manhattan... The billion dollars or whatever is actually spent on the 1.5 mile pedestrian bridge could probably serve more people by doing transit investments.




*Let's be real. This is New Jersey and the real cost will probably be $5 billion plus.

Quote:

The proposal is a 5,000-foot-long, 200-foot-high bridge that would allow pedestrians and cyclists to avoid the circuitous, increasingly crowded, and frequently frustrating PATH trains. The conceptual two-level span features paths for walking and biking, sweeping views, greenery and seating. The design also includes cafes, retail spaces, solar panels, artwork and free WiFi. The idea is to originate at the abandoned Pennsylvania Railway Embankment in downtown Jersey City, gradually increase in height, and terminate at a higher elevation in Manhattan, with elevators, stairs and ramps to reach the ground.

From NextCity: https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/desig ... w-jersey-to-new-york-city

Frinjc wrote:
So the oculus cost $4B including the mall and the transportation hall. Is the Port Authority getting any concession/rental income related to the commercial activity?