JERSEY CITY | Projects and Construction thread - Page 23

Hamilton · #1 Posted **Jun 15, 2017, 5:51 PM**

CIA, it's more accurate to say that the Census's estimate declined year-over-year. But they don't think the population actually declined, they just revised their 2015 estimate downwards as well. The census now thinks there were 263,868 people in 2015 and 264,152 people in 2017, a gain of almost 300.

I think they're way underestimating the growth, but that may be because they overestimated the growth in the 2010-2014 period.

https://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/t...20000US3436000

C. · #2 Posted **Jun 6, 2017, 10:11 PM**

Many reports that the lending environment for residential real estate development in North Jersey is getting tougher, as banks are requiring more equity investment. Here is a good overview here:

https://therealdeal.com/issues_artic...the-fittest-2/

C. · #3 Posted **Jun 7, 2017, 7:29 PM**

I had hoped leases on the upper floors would go much more briskly than the lower floors, to give confidence in the developers to go tall and maybe even return to their early conceptual plan for 80.

C. · #4 Posted **Jun 12, 2017, 7:33 PM**

Quote:

Great new #JerseyCity mural by #sethglobalpainter - proud we have attracted some of the best street artists in the world to JC

Mayor Fulop's tweet: https://twitter.com/StevenFulop/stat...100801/photo/1

I really like these solutions to blank walls. Well done Jersey City!

dc_denizen · #5 Posted **Jun 23, 2017, 1:30 AM**

from WTC...

Untitled by dc_denizen, on Flickr

C. · #6 Posted **Jun 26, 2017, 4:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

from WTC...

Untitled by dc_denizen, on Flickr

JC could really use some more mid-rises to bulk up the skyline and a couple signature buildings with a spire or crown. Ellipse turned out fantastic.

C. · #7 Posted **Jul 5, 2017, 4:58 PM**

https://jerseydigs.com/jersey-city-d...-harbor-north/

A 1,000 unit development coming to Liberty Harbor North. (Funny, I read the JCRA June agenda twice yet somehow missed this one. lol)

This is Block 17 in the Liberty Harbor North redevelopment plan, which allows up to 1,000 units. So no amendment is needed for the density. The plans allows for twin towers up to a maximum height of 45 floors, plus a crown. There is also a few sizable midrise buildings ranging from 8 floors to 16 floors (??) that act as a base to the towers. The south portion of the site (the 16 floor (?) building) is to house civic activities in the bottom 3 floors (think school, library, arts theater etc.)

http://data.jerseycitynj.gov/dataset...ess-051315.pdf pg. 32

C. · #8 Posted **Jul 5, 2017, 5:18 PM**

Ah, Jersey Digs pulled their information from a 2015 agenda. So that gave me an idea to look at other things planned back then that should be up for action next month. It worked!

12-story building planned for 682 Route 440 on the West Side.

A baby 101 Newkirk was alive back then, proposed as a 21-story building. It has since grown in size to at least 50 floors.

And the money shot...

"North River Development, LLC presenting on the construction of a mixed use project consisting of a luxury hotel, marina, 2 million SF of commercial space and several acres of open passive park space on new piers on Agency owned land on Block 11603, Lot 7. The project is located on thirty acres of underwater land within the Harsimus Cove Redevelopment Area."

LOLWUT?

202_Cyclist · #9 Posted **Jul 5, 2017, 8:04 PM**

Not trying to get in a debate about this-- just re-posting the article for reference.

Jersey City is a case study in the perils of politics and real estate for the Kushners
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...017-story.html

C. · #10 Posted **Aug 3, 2017, 2:30 PM**

Hamilton, agreed. I really hate to admit this, but the NIMBYs made one good point: there should be more time for review and comment on the change. It's a bit of a moot point because it would be more manipulative BS to stir up the community. For example, they're presenting the potential massing as the building envelope. This is not a 60-story tower, it will be 35 floors. The propose change has no impact to density of the site.

I personally like high rise towers to setback as they rise from a 5 or 6-story base. Like the buildings that arose after the introduction of the 1916 zoning code for NYC. The current design or new one really doesn't do it for me either way.

Hamilton · #11 Posted **Aug 3, 2017, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CIA

Hamilton, agreed. I really hate to admit this, but the NIMBYs made one good point: there should be more time for review and comment on the change. It's a bit of a moot point because it would be more manipulative BS to stir up the community. For example, they're presenting the potential massing as the building envelope. This is not a 60-story tower, it will be 35 floors. The propose change has no impact to density of the site.

I personally like high rise towers to setback as they rise from a 5 or 6-story base. Like the buildings that arose after the introduction of the 1916 zoning code for NYC. The current design or new one really doesn't do it for me either way.

I agree, these buildings are not stellar designs (i.e., ugly). JC has been seeing better design in recent years. This is a bit of a step backwards design-wise. Hopefully the latter towers will be better.

As far as review/comment, I'd agree if it was a major change, but I doubt any of the people complaining even noticed that the setback they're eliminating was written into the plan to begin with. If they have legit concerns about it, fine, but all too often these sorts of complaints are just a way to muck up the wheels and slow down a project long enough that it'll be canceled.

The PAD Neighborhood Association has a history of doing that. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawsuits without any merit, against projects in the PAD.

Crawford · #12 Posted **Aug 3, 2017, 3:01 PM**

I hope future phases have the 60-floor option. This site needs some real height; not just a bunch of similar towers.

C. · #13 Posted **Aug 3, 2017, 11:57 PM**

Urby is 78% lease-up in five months at average rents of $57.50 per square foot.

As of July 31, 2017.

C. · #14 Posted **Aug 4, 2017, 3:08 PM**

YIMBY did another sit down with the mayor.

http://newyorkyimby.com/2017/08/inte...ment-boom.html

At this current pace, Urby is going to lease all 762 units in less than 6 months. It's odd that Urby is one of the most successful RE developments in the state and they have yet to break ground on phase 2 despite having full planning permission. This tells me a change may be in the works...

Stay tuned

What if Phase II & III were raised to 95 stories twin towers in exchange for community benefits in the base of the building? Mack Cali has already bumped up the planned Harborside 8 and 9 from 700 to 1000 units, based on the strength of the market. Why not Urby?

Hamilton · #15 Posted **Aug 4, 2017, 6:11 PM**

^^^ This article claims that they plan to get started on Urby II within the next year.

Still says it'll be 760 units, so I don't know if they've changed anything

http://www.njbiz.com/article/2017073...ith-high-hopes

C. · #16 Posted **Aug 4, 2017, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hamilton

^^^ This article claims that they plan to get started on Urby II within the next year.

Still says it'll be 760 units, so I don't know if they've changed anything

http://www.njbiz.com/article/2017073...ith-high-hopes

https://www.mack-cali.com/media/1047...uartersp17.pdf

Possibly. From two days ago. Urby II isn't scheduled to begin in 2017. In 2018, they're scheduled to start 1,741 units.

Crawford · #17 Posted **Aug 4, 2017, 8:12 PM**

That article mentioned that Port Liberte will (finally) be completed. I know there's lots of undeveloped land there.

I wonder if they go the highrise route, or if they continue the current look/feel of Port Liberte?

Hamilton · #18 Posted **Aug 4, 2017, 8:23 PM**

^^ Doesn't fully answer your question, but the redevelopment plan under which Port Liberte is governed (the Caven Point RDP) allows buildings of up to 15 stories. However, allowable densities are very low--only 20 units per acre (that's about half the density of a block full of typical 2-family homes). So if they do build tall, they'd have to build fewer overall buildings.

They could get an amendment to the RDP, but there's been no talk of that as far as I can tell.

CIA, thanks for the link. Super-informative, as always!

C. · #19 Posted **Aug 9, 2017, 6:07 PM**

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=229372

57 and 59-storey buildings next to Home Depot!

750 units and a sizable non-residential component. This one is going to generate significant media attention. Developers are some guys named Fourteen Florence Street Corp.

C. · #20 Posted **Aug 9, 2017, 8:55 PM**