HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #561  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 7:49 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Quote of the decade: "Leon Yost, senior commissioner on the Planning Board, said the project is really two towers and that he was “pleasantly surprised” by the architecture, which he credits to the design of the Toronto-based architecture firm Page and Steele."
LOL good God. Facepalm.

Newport is such a lost opportunity on so many levels. Close to two PATH stations literally 5 minutes from Manhattan plus two HBLR stations, yet so car-oriented and sterile and dead at street level. Acres of parking lots, and that 6-lane highway that passes for a "Boulevard." It's like a Manhattan snob's ill-conceived stereotype of what "Jersey" is about, come to life.

This site is a 6 minute walk to Hoboken PATH. This is their last chance at redemption. They better not blow it!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #562  
Old Posted May 4, 2017, 9:26 PM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton View Post
LOL good God. Facepalm.

Newport is such a lost opportunity on so many levels. Close to two PATH stations literally 5 minutes from Manhattan plus two HBLR stations, yet so car-oriented and sterile and dead at street level. Acres of parking lots, and that 6-lane highway that passes for a "Boulevard." It's like a Manhattan snob's ill-conceived stereotype of what "Jersey" is about, come to life.

This site is a 6 minute walk to Hoboken PATH. This is their last chance at redemption. They better not blow it!
They've gotten better stylistically and with retail/amenities in their more recent buildings... the Ellipse actually looks pretty damn nice. Hopefully they will keep moving the ball further but in the not too distant future they can re-imagine those big box lots and build residential on there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #563  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 12:28 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
That empty lot at Bright and Varick Streets? Apparently the Van Vorst Park Association has been wasting its resources and money holding it up in court for 4 years. Why ? Because they fear a "Hoboken-like atmosphere" ...

Quote:
By Terrence T. McDonald | The Jersey Journal
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on May 04, 2017 at 7:07 PM, updated May 04, 2017 at 9:12 PM

JERSEY CITY -- In a blow to a Downtown neighborhood group, a state appellate panel ruled today in favor of the developers of a planned five-story, 87-apartment "micro-unit" building long opposed by the group.

The decision affirms a lower-court ruling that gave automatic approval to the developer's plans following the city's failure to approve the project during the 95-day time period prescribed by state law. The plans never went before the city Planning Board.

Donna Jennings, attorney for developers Rushman-Dillon, said her clients are "thrilled" by the ruling but remain frustrated that the project remains stalled four years after it was first proposed.

"We've lost four years," Jennings told The Jersey Journal. "It's a win but it took four years to get us what we were entitled to."

Residents of the Van Vorst Park neighborhood objected to the planned development -- slated for a formerly city-owned lot at Bright and Varick streets -- arguing that the proposed density was inappropriate for the area and that residents were left out of the preliminary approval process.

One resident during a November 2013 meeting about the plans expressed fear the building would create a "Hoboken-like atmosphere" in the area, which sits about one half-mile west of the Grove Street PATH station and comprises mostly three- and four-story brownstones and apartment buildings.

A representative for the Van Vorst Park Association, which appealed the lower-court ruling, said the group is "disappointed."

"Land use approvals aren't supposed to be granted automatically," said the group's attorney, Cynthia Hadjiyannis. "It is in everyone's interest to have a public hearing. Unfortunately the redeveloper was able to circumvent the process with the aid of the courts."

The two appellate court judges who decided the case contradicted the residents' claims about not having a say on the project.

"There were numerous noticed public hearings during the redevelopment process at which no member of the public, including VVPA, appeared and objected regarding the issue of density or on any other basis," the ruling says.

Rushman-Dillon's micro-unit project, which would have been the first in this area, received the go-ahead from city planners in September 2013, when the city told the developers that their application was "substantially complete," a key step before the project could go before the Planning Board for final approval.

At about that same time, Van Vorst residents began calling on Mayor Steve Fulop, who took office in July 2013, to slow the process. At first, the Fulop administration said there was little they could do, but after the heated meeting in November 2013, the city reversed course and told the developers the density of the project presented a problem.

In January 2014, the city denied the application and in February 2014, Rushman-Dillon sued.


Seven months later, Hudson County Superior Court Judge Joseph Turula ruled in favor of the developers, granting them automatic approval. Today's decision upholds Turula's ruling.

The Van Vorst Park Association has 20 days to petition the New Jersey Supreme Court for a possible review. City spokeswoman Jennifer Morrill indicated the court battle is not over, but it's not clear the city has any legal standing to appeal. It was named a defendant but was not an appellant.

"This is not the end and we have no intention of backing down as we side with the community on this important issue," Morrill said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #564  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 9:45 PM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
Good Lord, would love to tell the "Van Vorst Snob NIMBY Association" to put it where the sun don't shine, their bleatings are so obnoxious. We're not talking about a 30 story tower here but five stories and pretty understated...my real complaint is if the developers will try to push $2,000 as market price for these units, should be half that at most. And please I hate the city comes to its senses because there is no problem here whatsoever at least with the concept.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #565  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 10:32 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
Yeah, when I see these complaints about a "Hoboken-like atmosphere" that translates to me as "young people who aren't lucky enough to own million-dollar brownstones like me."

Whenever people talk about what classes of (law-abiding) people do and don't deserve to live in their neighborhood, that's really off-putting to me. And then they force the city to break the law and subvert the approval process in order to keep "those people" out. It seems very ugly on its face.

Quote:
Hopefully they will keep moving the ball further but in the not too distant future they can re-imagine those big box lots and build residential on there.
Yeah. I think they should start with the Staples lot, but I think that (and Newport Mall) are owned by Simon, not LeFrak, and I'm not sure if they'd be interested in developing residential/mixed use. However the Target is owned by LeFrak. **EDIT: Actually the area between Washington and Marin does allow residential development, I was wrong about that**

Last edited by Hamilton; May 6, 2017 at 12:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #566  
Old Posted May 5, 2017, 10:59 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton View Post

Whenever people talk about what classes of (law-abiding) people do and don't deserve to live in their neighborhood, that's really off-putting to me. And then they force the city to break the law and subvert the approval process in order to keep "those people" out. It seems very ugly on its face.
.
NIMBYism by nature is selfishness. Its not about the city, the growth, the opportunities for a better urban area. It's all about me, me, me!

That's what they are concerned with. They could care less about others.

It's off putting, immoral, and hypocritical. They at one point had the opportunity to thrive in "X" city, why shouldn't others?

NIMBYS are not visionary, they are regressive. They do not think big. If it wasn't for visionaries, we'd still be here:



What we need is more housing. They are concerned with prices, yet lack of housing is causing that. Pissed off about some road construction, yet roads are needed to keep up with the traffic. They think they are doing good, but in their selfish "me" bubble, they do not see the bigger picture. They are on plan A,B,C, while the visionaries are on X,Y,Z.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #567  
Old Posted May 7, 2017, 1:22 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
One Journal Square is in national news for all the wrong reasons. Fucking Kushner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #568  
Old Posted May 7, 2017, 1:27 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Damn media really. EB-5 is a great program and needs to continue and accelerated IMO!

Sensationalising nothing for ratings. Foreign investment in the U.S. benefits our cities. We need more of it, and if it means citizenship for those who invest, I'd rather have those people any day of the week here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #569  
Old Posted May 7, 2017, 4:47 AM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
One Journal Square is in national news for all the wrong reasons. Fucking Kushner.
I'm wish CIA here... KUSHNER 1????????? Seriously?????????? The smarmy way they are hawking Chinese investment, tying it in so close to Trump... it's appalling. I thought Jared was the grownup in the room and the more I read about him strutting around like a political big shot the more I'm infuriated. The Chinese are nervous according to the article that despite the possibility of great rewards from investing that Trump will somehow be brought down and they will wind up with egg on their face and are hesitant to invest. The Kushner contigent was crowing about the stable funding of the project... then go ahead and start it, build one at a time if it's more sensible economically... just do it or get out!!! Mayor Fulop pushed out that union pension investing company that was lollygagging with that property and Kushner seemed a knight in shining armor... but he got bit by the politics bug and now that side of the Kushner development empire seems in total disarray. Maybe it's time Fulop get the Kushners out...I seriously hope something gets done in a hurry to ensure that the Kushners build or they sell to developers that actually can get the job done. Because it's been ten years now of broken promises and dashed hopes and as Journal Squared is being realized there is no reason why this project should be in such a situational limbo. None whatsoever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #570  
Old Posted May 7, 2017, 11:13 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
The only thing that will make me feel better is if Kushner abuses his political position to insitute a no fly zone over Journal Square, abolishing any FAA say in the heights of the building in the process, and increases the size of 1 Journal or "Kushner 1" Square from 777 ft to 90 floors and over 1000 ft!!!

C'mom man. Everyday that site remains vacant and scaled down makes him look weak. I had much hogher hopes.

The One Journal Square curse strikes again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #571  
Old Posted May 8, 2017, 4:50 AM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
The only thing that will make me feel better is if Kushner abuses his political position to insitute a no fly zone over Journal Square, abolishing any FAA say in the heights of the building in the process, and increases the size of 1 Journal or "Kushner 1" Square from 777 ft to 90 floors and over 1000 ft!!!

C'mom man. Everyday that site remains vacant and scaled down makes him look weak. I had much hogher hopes.

The One Journal Square curse strikes again.
I'm pissed because this area, this site could be SO MUCH MORE. And it IS possible... just watch how quickly Journal Squared on the other side of the PATH building is coming along, soon to be ready for its biggest tower to soar 759 ft to the sky. If this side of the Kushner building empire can't put up, hoping for Mayor Fulop to pressure them to move aside and sell to someone who can. We've waited 10 years with so many broken promises and false starts. The time for this crap to stop is NOW.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #572  
Old Posted May 9, 2017, 7:02 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
In lighter news, WalletHub ranks Jersey City ranked the #1 most culturally diverse city in the US:

https://wallethub.com/edu/most-diver...#main-findings

It ranks Jersey City as the 2nd most diverse city overall after NYC, factoring in religious diversity, economic diversity, socioeconomic diversity, and cultural diversity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #573  
Old Posted May 9, 2017, 8:42 PM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
^that is definitely a positive on a day we need to hear that. Good news we absolutely can use!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #574  
Old Posted May 10, 2017, 3:16 PM
Hamilton Hamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Journal Square
Posts: 446
Soo...today the FAA gave interim approval to One Journal Square. Great timing, LOL

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...22462826&row=9

Also, Kushner backed out of the bidding for the Bayfront site (a 95-acre site with potential for 8,100 apartments). It had been the lead bidder:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...over-conflicts

Last edited by Hamilton; May 10, 2017 at 5:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #575  
Old Posted May 10, 2017, 3:39 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton View Post
Soo...today the FAA gave interim approval to One Journal Square. Great timing, LOL

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...22462826&row=9
LoL. It will be interesting to see the final report to see if there is any mention of the 900ft version. I'm thinking the height reduction had less to do with the FAA and more to do with WeWork departing and other changes. I doubt a 100,000+ sqft of retail is still planned. In related news, Journal Squared was granted final approval yesterday, minus the lighting rod.

Quote:

Also, Kushner backed out of the bidding for the Bayfront site (a 95-acre site with potential for 8,100 apartments):

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...over-conflicts
Wow. This guy is having the worst week ever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #576  
Old Posted May 10, 2017, 5:24 PM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
I feel bad in a way for Jared... but right now best thing for him would be to leave Washington and politics and get the family company back on firm ground because right now, it's a disaster. He has a better shot saving his family legacy than accomplishing anything meaningful working under daddy in law President(for now) Trump.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #577  
Old Posted May 11, 2017, 2:18 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Just when you think things can't possibly get any worse for Kushner Co. and One Journal Square, the thread gets mysteriously locked. ROFLMAO!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #578  
Old Posted May 11, 2017, 2:34 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/n...velopment.html

More news!!!


The office component has all but been eliminated to increase the number of residential units.

The changes would have to go before the planning board, but Kushner Co. disputes this fact.

Kushner Co. is planning two unrelated office buildings in Jersey City.

Kushner Co. was seeking additional subsidies from the city for Kushner 1, but the city was concerned about oversubsidize due to the change in plans.

IF built, Kushner 1 will be built in phases instead of all at once.

This is dead, in it's current form anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #579  
Old Posted May 11, 2017, 2:51 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
We live in a strange world...

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2...ed_journa.html

The biggest booster of this project is now Councilmam Rich Boggiano and he plans to vote for the abatement. Lol. Hell has frozen over.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #580  
Old Posted May 11, 2017, 6:10 AM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
Boggiano is odd, lol .. he did also support 30 Journal Square(who knows about that project now) as well as that legendary 50 story tower being built off of the Square. But heaven help you if you try to build on the sidestreets of Hilltop!

Long term abatements as part of developing Journal Square will be necessary for awhile... at least for the next few years until it is seen that the Square is becoming a viable, indeed vital neighborhood in the heart of the city. That kind of vibe isn't there yet. But once it starts being that kind of lively residential area with lots of retail and dining options as well as cultural, won't be necessary.

I'm wondering now... the Kushners seem to be regrouping and still would like to pursue this. Even Boggiano realizes this lot can't remain a vacant eyesore that keeps reminding everyone of the years of constant failure and promises. Maybe a reworking as it appears going on behind the scenes IS the way to do it... I don't think Mayor Fulop appreciates the sleazy way the Kushners were playing the game and he'd be right to be angry. But if we can get a little better deal for Jersey City out of this, playing a little hardball is worth the aggravation. But that is only if something positive can come out of it. I hope he is keeping options open, and it may be that selling as soon as possible to another develop without the baggage is still what the best solution is. I hope though there is a way to get something done.

Since the FAA approval finally came through, let's not let it go to waste, lol!

I like(and have talked about) what the Kushners appear to be doing now... one at a time and concentrating on residential with a sizable retail component.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:39 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.