whats the update on this? I am intrigued
I made the google earth - hobby only. I update it when I have time or when a new project finds my attention.
The person who posts as HELLOJC here got a bunch of NIMBY millionaire condo owners who live across the street to come out last night and kill this project with its 150 affordable units, 850 other transit oriented homes, and school spaces. Pure selfishness on their part!
how do you know all of this?
I watched the city council meeting last night.
and he anounced himself as HELLOJC from YIMBY forums?
She has mentioned in here that she is the leader of the local NIMBY group for that area, PADNA. I am not outting her, she established her identity.
I like high rises. I like smart and thoughtful building that works with rest of the existing structures, in line with the character of this redevelopment plan and the master plan’s intentions for certain areas. I’m very interested and excited about 310 Washington and 100 Bay projects. Unfortunately this amendment is chaotic and full of promises that would not materialize and any bonuses in density could not be applied - AT THIS TIME. It could come back in 2026 new and hopefully improved.
And I’m not a millionaire but I do own a condo bought during pre-construction. Don’t hate me.
Not you, but the condo owners you brought out to oppose are millionaires.
Every NIMBY I’ve ever seen NIMBY anything always says the same–I support development, just not here, not like this, not now. A high-rise is perfectly in character in a high-rise district like this!
it was two people, not a bunch.
I want everyone else on this board to think about these statements. Consider the location of this building, with a 60-story tower two blocks north, two 50-story towers one block south. Multiple towers 40 to 70 stories within a 5-minute walk. If a high rise isn’t in character surrounded by other high-rises, then a highrise is never in-character anywhere and should never be built.
You forgot the nine-story (115 ft tall) National Historic Landmark (1978) and local historically significant “The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company Headquarters” building that’s 25 feet away on the same block, not across the street.
Rehabilitation Zone: Block 11509, Lot 2; 144-158 Bay Street; AKA, The Great Atlantic &
Pacific Tea Company Headquarters, 1907-1915; individually listed, State
and National Registers: Pivotal. This building maintains a unique place in
the history of American industry. Redevelopment of this building requires
a particularly sensitive approach with due consideration of the historic
development of the building and the maintenance of historic building fabric.
Rebuild to original/historic profile, maintain sky light and water-tanks,
gently clean, re-point, and repair brick and concrete, repair existing and
replace deteriorated and/or missing awnings and loading docks where
appropriate. Permit a one story penthouse setback one column bay from all
facades.
Transition Zone:
The Transition Zone consists of portions of the redevelopment area to the south and west
of the warehouse district for which a portion of the tax block is also within the warehouse
district. In other words, each block that is partially within the Transition Zone is also
partially within the warehouse district. In several instances individual historically
significant structures abut the Transition Zone. In other instances, portions of the Transition
Zone are located directly across the street from the historically significant Great Atlantic
& Pacific Tea Company Headquarters building located at Block 11509, Lot F2 (144-158
Bay Street), which is 114’8" in height from grade to the base of the primary cornice. In one
instance, there is an approval that was granted prior to adoption of this redevelopment plan
for a new building on lot 4 within block 11502 (159 Second Street), which allows for the
construction of a new building that is 90’4" in height from grade to the base of the primary
cornice.
The Transition Zone includes portions of Blocks 13002 and the Western portions of
Blocks 11506, 11509 and 11502.
The purposes of the Transition Zone are as follows: to create a buffer through the use of
design and bulk standards to protect and enhance the historic and visual character of the
adjacent warehouse district. and in particular the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company
Headquarters building; to create an attractive and appropriate gateway to the warehouse
district from the West; to create a cohesive neighborhood that includes the warehouse
district, the Transition Zone, and the community to the west: to encourage the consolidation
of undersized lots; and to create an attractive street front along Marin Boulevard that
extends the building lines that were created by the existing structures along Marin
Boulevard in Block 11502.
There are other high-rises 60 feet to the east and south of the warehouse. They do not diminish the warehouse imo, but accentuate it, and another one 25 feet away would not either. When the warehouse was built, there was a building immediately adjacent that was later demolished. I respect your opinion that it diminishes the warehouse, but given it is entirely subjective, it should not be a basis for depriving others of apartments in a housing shortage.
There is even a historic warehouse nearby (Manischewitz) with a building built literally on top of it. People could have made the same objections about character, but because objectors didn’t prevail in those objections, we are getting a new home for the NJ Symphony Orchestra on that site as well as hundreds of new homes.
Putting the school inside the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company Headquarters building is a huge challenge, attaching another structure to the west side of the building won’t pass the historic preservation folks, the elevated platforms around the building will cause issues with student safety in exiting and entering the building. There are already severe rules on the facade, visible lobbies, entrances, ramps, loading bays - possibly tall hurdles. Putting a public school in an existing mix-use building has not be done. They usually like to build a new school with open space for the kids, auditorium and gymnasium space. BUT no one from BOE or the NJ SDA has told the HEDC that this location is the perfect place to build a school - they might be talking about a new school soon, no location specified anywhere (there will be a need in JSQ too) - but not a useful carrot to get the bonuses the developer is asking for now.
SCHOOL SPECS:
NJAC 6A:26 - https://nj.gov/education/code/current/title6a/chap26.pdf
NJAC 5:23 - https://www.nj.gov/dca/codes/codreg/ucc.shtml
NJDCA Best Practices Standards for School Under Construction or Being Planned for Construction -https://www.nj.gov/dca/codes/alerts/pdfs/2008_11_10_bps_school_construction.pdf
“I like development and this project! Just not here, not now and when you come back next time it won’t be then either!”
If you’re a NIMBY at least accept you’re a NIMBY
I thought this forum was about the buildings and development - stereotype shaming is unproductive and you don’t know me.
There is no stereotyping going on…it’s reasonable to call someone blocking housing in their metaphorical backyard a NIMBY—“not in my backyard.” People call out nimbyism all the time on this forum. We just haven’t had any members instrumental in blocking housing before as far as I remember!
We should stay civil here and not do personal attacks, but we are allowed to criticize opinions and actions, so long it stays on-topic!