It's amazing how unreflective you are about using the exact same arguments frequently used against small multifamily and midrise. As always, NIMBYs want what they want and contort to justify it.

Zone 16 is the only zone where permits are "enforced" 24 hours, Monday thru Friday. When they first started this back in 2018, it was Monday thru Saturday (!).

Source.

I take it about 3 times a week, and have almost always found it to be reliable.

I am sure Evil Corp has an army of lawyers and accounts to find tax loop holes or write off the losses.

It is certainly implied by your refusal to share it. At this point I'd just find it weird if it did exist, I mean who claims to have data, actually does have it but just refuses to share it across multiple replies? That's weirder than just making it up to begin with. Still, if by some odd chance this data that literally measures how connected people are to their neighborhood and shows, in your exact words, "most people are disconnected", I think myself and others would find that very interesting. That's a very specific claim on a metric pretty hard to quantify, so if such data exists I think it would be fascinating to read.

A few replies ago when I first asked if you'd share, you said "Happy to to", and then didn't. And then didn't again. And didn't again after that.

It either doesn't exist at all, or it does but doesn't show what you claim it does and you've realized that and don't want to look silly, or you're just maybe not that polite. I can't tell which. I'll say again though, asking for data when one person claims to have it is not hostile and not an abnormal request. If you claim to have data that shows a specific point you should be prepared to share it on request, and probably just include it in your initial remarks to begin with. Citing sources, and all.

I'll reply again if you have any actual data to share, otherwise I think this conversation is pretty much purposeless.

Arguably, the post itself is disingenuous because the title includes the Reddit phrase "ELI5" which is "Explain like I'm 5". Folks have pointed out that some of the concerns OP is raising don't hold water (ex. casting a shadow, preventing connection between two areas, etc.). By doing so, these responses are somewhat providing the explanation: setting aside qualitative reasons, there wasn't a clear-cut quantifiable reason to not approve it.

Using "ELI5" in the title seems like a way to get people commenting with the assumption it would be an informational thread exploring the reasons for and against the building, but...well, you've seen how this thread has played out.

I didn’t indicate the data doesn’t exist, lol

So there is no data, got it. You could have saved us some time by just not claiming to have data in the first place.

Since there is no data, this basically comes down to something that is purely a matter of personal preference and opinion. I am a fan of buildings like this, I live in one myself and it's the best place I've lived in this city. I think the design for this new one looks pretty great and will make a good addition to the neighborhood.

If you had some sort of study with data that literally showed people who live in a particular type of building are "less connected", I would find that pretty interesting. It probably wouldn't change my overall opinion on the building, but it might sway other people and would be worth considering. As you've indicated though, the data doesn't seem to actually exist, so it's not really relevant.

For future reference, when one person claims to have data, other people asking to see it is not a weird or hostile request.

Because you’re not being genuine. You’re playing the “give me the proof so I can refute it” game and it’s silly. If you really want to know the answer you will look it up.

I posted asking why this building is getting approved when it doesn’t meet zoning or fit in with the character of the neighborhood. It doesn’t make any sense to me. If you have no reasons why, that’s cool, no worries, you don’t have to come up with one - but man, you have to learn how to google if you want to know something - don’t rely on other people EVEN IF THEY GIVE YOU A LINK. One link shouldn’t convince you, lol.

If you want to remain uneducated, you can do that. If you want to educate yourself you can do that too. Google is free.

I don’t know about that, I’m also in a large “luxury building” downtown and I didn’t get an increase when i renewed in 2021. I can’t imagine that the giant corporation that owns my building did that out of the kindness of their heart when they nickel and dime us on everything. Back then I was told that they could not raise my rent at the time, so last year I ended up getting a 15% increase instead to recoup costs.

Multiple people here have asked you to link to this alleged data and you seem to be extremely hesitant to do so.

You say you have data that shows a high rise apartment building makes the residents less "connected". Okay, cool. Sounds interesting. Let's see it.

Thanks.

>Legally rent could not be raised from March 2020 until January 1, 2022 due to a statewide NJ eviction moratorium.

This is 100% wrong for OP's situation. The rental rate increase restriction was only on rent-controlled or non-owner occupied dwelling of 1 to 4 units. OP lives in a large building, which was not subject to this restriction.

https://www.jerseycitynj.gov/cityhall/HousingAndDevelopment/housingpreservation/landlordtenantrelations

Shake Shack in Grove st will probably be up and running before this

OP's building is DEFINITELY not rent controlled. It was built in 2017.

$1000/mo or year?

Floory McFloor Face

I don’t think one developer’s profit, and a handful of view seekers, should be able to destroy a charming, human scaled neighborhood. We can have density (YIMBY!!!) without non-sustainable, environmentally unfriendly high-rises. This is a wonderfully diverse neighborhood and we can achieve density with mid-rises vs the super dark high-rise areas of downtown. It’s ok to achieve density another way.

I read it. You are literally NIMBYing, it's exactly what you're doing. You don't want a building that is too big for a neighborhood, IN YOUR OPINION! The process of empowering everyone to weigh in and veto any and every development plan has gotten us to this point of housing shortage.

I prefer to let the market rather than the incumbent residents decide whether to build 2, 6 or 16 stories. Across the country, people that speak passionately about desiring to preserve their neighborhood's 'special character' are often merely presenting code for keeping it wealthy and white.

Great article about how a town on a SF commuter line fought passionately to keep out condos that might impact their views of the hills and the 'unique character' of their town.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/business/economy/housing-crisis-conor-dougherty-golden-gates.html

Happy to, but you should really rely on your own research. You likely won’t accept any data sources I provide so I urge you to do your own research and look at peer reviewed data or at least data summarized by reputable publications. I know we have a tendency to dig our heels in and just want to be right, but I would guess that intuitively you know and understand that neighborhoods full of high-rises don’t promote neighborly interaction and engagement the way a more human scale building does. If you want to pretend it does, I won’t stand in your way. It’s ok to prefer high rises, but it’s not fair to stick one in the middle of a neighborhood, blocking sunlight to a park, so that a developer can make $$$, and a few people have a good view. This is not what’s best for the city or the neighborhood. The benefits of housing density can be obtained with mid-rises and without the negative effects of high-rises.

Laparkan does a lot of shipping to the Caribbean

Lol. You’re supposed to check your car, it’s your responsibility. The person who posted the signs in a timely manner is following the regs, so should you.

Yes, choose. You can pay for garage or lot space and avoid any street tickets entirely. Or you can sell your car. All of this a choice. A couple of tickets in the grand scheme of things isn’t a huge deal. Posting this thinking you’re in the right because you leave your car sitting for a week is absurd. You know the rules. Follow them. Or pay the ticket.

“choose” to street park? you think I have a driveway but choose to park in the street instead?

This is your fault, though. You know there’s a 48 hour window. So check your car every other day. It’s not hard.

You live in an incredibly densely populated city and choose to street park. This is what comes with it.

Oooh, the latest and greatest data from 2006!!! Tell me more!!! Sorry, dude, but no, lol. It’s not sustainable and better information is out there.