"Data shows most are disconnected".

Can you link to this data? I'm very curious how one measures how connected or disconnected a resident is.

I did Google it, and it's ridiculous.

It's usually called infill, and it's unequivocally supported by most and opposed by NIMBYs. From an article in NYT about the infill happening in downtown Brooklyn in 2006

>“Regions and cities, in trying to combat sprawl, are encouraging infill development,” said Ted Droettboom, an official with the Association of Bay Area Governments. “But you’re doing that with existing neighborhoods with existing neighbors, who fear traffic, who fear density and height.”

>The trend toward infill development is in part a product of the “smart growth” movement that has gained currency among land-use planners and environmentalists. Higher-density, mixed-use development built around mass transit hubs, they argue, is more environmentally sound than suburban sprawl and produces better quality of life.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/weekinreview/06confessore.html

You could google it and educate yourself, ya know. No one is forcing you to comment if you don’t understand.

McSq?

"Vertical sprawl" is a new one for me. That's some serious NIMBYism.

Weekdays are great. Weekends are mid

In Jersey City, there will never be a building that casts a shadow southward. OP doesn't know what they're talking about, what the Tropic of Cancer is, or how shadows work.

Alright, moron. Explain how a shadow can be cast on the south side of a building in Jersey City, when the sun will never be north of the building. I'll go get the popcorn.

In reality, the shadow from that building will be cast west, north, and east. But never south.

But none of that matters, because we all know you probably live next to this lot and are just a NIMBY who wants everyone else's rent to go up even higher, just so you can continue to look at an old decrepit steel mill.

So you can’t think of a reason why this is passing the planning board. Got it. No worries. I don’t think anyone can. Hence my post.

The outcomes you're claiming are not certain. I think you're flailing here.

This is it. As someone who doesn't drive, the HBLR is huge for me. Service on the weekends is tremendously frustrating, though--the platforms at Newport especially get packed.

What’s the name of the building?

…try reading instead of guessing what’s being discussed.

“OMG rents are so high! There’s not enough housing available!”

::Development plan on a vacant lot::

“OMG NOOOOOO The community needs that vacant lot!!”

If you had read this, you would see the density is supported as mid-rises. Nobody is NIMBYing. It’s a lot to read though, so I get skipping reading and just going for easy quotes.

>The community doesn't support it.

Tough. Letting communities control density has contributed greatly to the current housing crisis in many cities. Nimbies are gonna NIMBY.

Also if you are interested I’ll send you my invite code- I get a discounted month and so do you.

trepidation noun trep·​i·​da·​tion ˌtre-pə-ˈdā-shən Synonyms of trepidation 1 : a nervous or fearful feeling of uncertain agitation : APPREHENSION

I’m not uncertain as to why I don’t want it. Please can we stop explaining words to each other? Everyone has google, right?

I do not think this is the best we can do as a community. I think we can do better. I’m still waiting to hear why this should be a high-rise, rather than a mid-rise. I cannot understand why the playground should be without light in the morning so a few people can stare at NYC or DTJC skyline from their window? It doesn’t make any sense.

Replying to everything here to avoid multiple threads.

Shadow maps abound. From what I'm seeing you'll get early morning shade in the northwest corner of the park, so you're correct. But it only affects a sliver of the park and won't affect flora or recreational use in any meaningful way.

I would prefer midrise there as well, but you won't get 420 units out of it on that plot. I don't like the surface parking, but otherwise this is a good plan at ground level.

Trepidation is a reaction to any undesirable outcome, whether reasonable or not. And I don't think it's unreasonable to prefer midrise. That said, the urbanist pubs you cite, much as I tend to agree them, are neither data nor best practices in any practical sense.

…can’t even

Yeah…that’s not how it works but…kk

so if you think multiple mid rises buildings would be better than one building, put your money where your mouth is. Gather info like the size of the land, find out about all the building/apartment codes, get with a architect & propose a design for what you think should be there with 420 units.

>I'm not sure what's confusing. Are you saying the community supports it?

That is not what I wrote.

I know of Denis shipping in Brooklyn but its all the way in Flatbush my old neighborhood was trying to see if there's a closer option. Was trying to avoid renting a car and toll etc.

I'm not sure what's confusing. Are you saying the community supports it? https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-council-approves-zoning-measure-to-move-morris-canal-manor-project-forward/

​

The community doesn't support it. They fought it (was supposed to be a park, apparently) and lost. Multiple times, in tricky ways. That doesn't make it right. It still needs planning approval, but it got through zoning in what appears to be a very unfair way. I also just flat out disagree that this is the best use of that land, which our planners are supposed to ensure.

​

I like planning so I read about it a lot, and high rises are not particularly environmentally friendly (the higher up you go the more heat escapes, glass isn't a great insulator, etc) and more and more, mid-rises are touted as the happy medium, better for neighborhoods, and keep the scale human sized and more enjoyable...and why cities like Paris, Barcelona, etc are great cities to live in. They are human scale. Moreover, this design doesn't fit in with the character of the neighborhood. It's possible to get density with multiple mid-rises on that lot without having to resort to high-rises.