Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 56

Thread: Newark vs. Jersey City: Measuring Contest

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCMAN320 View Post
    'Motorists can put together convenient itineraries from a variety of public transportation agencies, including NJ TRANSIT bus, rail, and light rail service, PATH trains, ferries, and private buses. New service and additional capacity on these routes and modes exceeds the number of cars that must be diverted during each a.m. peak period.'
    There have been no service increases to HBLR in years. There were service cutbacks in 2010, and they have not increased service since. Not even back to their pre-2010 levels.

  2. #32
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    On the Rails in North NJ
    Posts
    2,585

    Default

    There have been no schedule changes , when ever they change service a new schedule is put out.

  3. #33

  4. #34

    Default

    A nice pat on the back for both towns via a random source: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2...special-report

  5. #35
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,457

    Lightbulb Baraka Needs To Bring In More Business

    Baraka needs to make good on his promise to bring in more jobs and new business to the city. Newark is lagging behind in bringing in new jobs to the city; I really hope Baraka stays true to his word and isn't anti-development. Detroit was ranked 2 spots higher on this list. Now WalletHub isn't Forbes or the Wall Street Journal but the methodology of their study isn't that unfounded. Still a damning report either way. The new Pru Tower should help even though most of those workers are just moving from Gateway Center.

    ====


    Newark is among worst cities in nation in recovering from economic crisis, study says

    By Jeff Goldman | The Star-Ledger
    Email the author | Follow on Twitter
    on July 28, 2014 at 2:23 PM


    Downtown Newark in a file photo. The city's recovery from the economic downturn of 2008 has lagged behind other cities, according to a study. (Aristide Economopoulos/The Star-Ledger)

    NEWARK — Of the 150 largest cities in the country, only three have done a poorer job than Newark in recovering from the 2008 downturn in the economy, according to a new study.

    The state's largest city finished 147th overall after WalletHub compiled numbers of the cities most and least-recovered.

    The study used 18 key metrics — from the inflow of college-educated workers and number of new businesses to unemployment rates and home price appreciation.

    In terms of its economic environment, Newark was rated 134th; among employment and earnings opportunities it was 142nd

    Among the subcategories in which the Brick City fared particularly bad:

    public assistance rate decrease (147th)
    ratio of part-time to full-time jobs decrease (150th)
    violent crime rate decrease (139th)

    Newark scored high marks in one area — it had the seventh largest decrease in the number of uninsured.

    Jersey City finished with an overall ranking of 42, while New York City placed 50th.

    The three cities that have fared the best since the downturn ended are Laredo, Texas; Arlington, Texas; and Fayetteville, North Carolina

    You can read the methodology of the study here: http://wallethub.com/edu/most-least-...d-cities/5219/

    http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/20...ic_crisis.html
    Last edited by JCMAN320; August 13th, 2014 at 07:12 PM.

  6. #36

    Default

    Hamilton states:

    "Sorry, you're making up math. Do you understand the difference between opinions and facts? The US Census numbers are very clear. You incorrectly implied before that the Census numbers suggested JC would surpass Newark next year. But later you admitted your predictions don't come from the Census numbers, but from JC's mayor. The Census deals in facts, while mayors deal in opinions. Mayors are paid to be cheerleaders for their cities, not to be demographers and make accurate population growth estimates for their own cities, let alone to make estimates for rival cities.


    What the mayor and the city of Newark or Jersey City say is one thing, but what the Census numbers say is another thing. As far as I know, professional demographers have a hard enough time projecting populations. So when you tell me to believe that JC will surpass Newark in population next year because the City Govt of JC says so, I'll take it with a grain of salt.

    Newark says it'll be the state's largest city for a long time to come, while JC says the opposite. It's a matter of opinion. Neitheropinion has any bearing on the actual US Census numbers. The trend in those numbers is very clear: If both cities continue growing at their present clips, it will take almost a decade for JC to catch up to Newark. The trend would have to change dramatically between 2014 and 2016 for that reality to change.

    But don't take my word for it:

    http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf...n_by_2016.html"


    ------------------------


    So I'm bringing this thread back instead of replying in the JC thread. (I will say that I very much find it strange when JCMan takes 'here and there' jabs at Newark but then HATES when someone responds to his remarks, but whatever)

    I definitely think JC will overtake Newark in the future but as Hamilton states, probably not by the end of next year. Sure it's possible, but I just don't see it based on the exact link and others posted above (especially since its the city's own mayor making the claim and no one else). There are a number reasons:

    -Infrastructure not designed for its level of growth (especially along the waterfront)
    -Very small land area and much of the city is built out (Newark still has enough vacant lots dotted around the city to make a small town)
    -As mentioned earlier, even though JC is growing incredibly fast, it still faces a near 20k population gap with Newark
    -Newark's own growth, however small prolongs JC's first rank they want so much.

    Some boosterism is harmless...as long as it's not at the expense of another city IMO. If you have to big your city up by kicking another one down then it weakens your position.

    Hell I remember when the JC waterfront looked like Newark's industrial Ironbound. It seems some folks forgot about that era...With all that said, JC is doing great. I don't see how/why JC doing good has to be a bad thing for Newark.

    Just my $0.02.

  7. #37
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,457

    Default

    I don't hate a good debate I hate when people take personal shots at me which quite a few have done. An open debate is fine by me.

    - You don't think that any of the infrastructure underground or around Downtown or the Waterfront has been or is currently being upgraded since all this development took place? That JC didn't plan for this even though JC has upgraded it's master plan consistently over the last 30 plus years? It had to to even support what has been built thus far. JC has on just several recent developments had the developers pick up the tab on the infrastructure improvements. The developers of J2'd are paying for upgrading the infrastructure around their site and PSE&G is currently doing a large gas main upgrade project in Downtown JC and upgrading it's electrical substation at Grand and Pacific. Our transit infrastructure is being upgraded as well with capacity upgrades for the HBLR and PATH.

    - Very small land area yet Jersey City has the largest tax base in NJ. There are still large sites to develop thousands of new units on large swaths throughout JC; Canal Crossing, Bayfront (which will start construction soon after remediation is done next year), NJCU West Campus, the rest of Newport and Liberty Harbor North, etc..

    - That gap can be closed significantly once all these new units under construction come online which wasn't accounted for in 2014 census. We lead NJ in the number of new housing units under construction.

    - Newark's own growth can't keep it from being lapped by JC's

    It's an economic competition so growth and media and press headlines (I don't "booster" considering a majority of my posts relate to building, economic, business, housing, commercial, park, and mass transit development along with redevelopment that is occurring in JC) are going to be part of that competition. If you have a problem with the amount of attention JC is getting that's your problem not mine. Competition by nature comes at the expense of one party or the other. One party comes in 1st and the other 2nd and in most catagories JC has been coming in first ahead of Newark so naturally we want to be the largest city by population in NJ. I am not kicking Newark down I'm just stating why I think JC will surpass Newark.

    Of course everyone remembers what the Waterfront looked like. Nobody is conveniently getting that. That's what makes transformation that much more dramatic.
    Last edited by JCMAN320; May 27th, 2015 at 05:31 PM.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCMAN320 View Post
    I don't hate a good debate I hate when people take personal shots at me which quite a few have done. An open debate is fine by me.

    - You don't think that any of the infrastructure underground or around Downtown or the Waterfront has been or is currently being upgraded since all this development took place? That JC didn't plan for this even though JC has upgraded it's master plan consistently over the last 30 plus years? It had to to even support what has been built thus far. JC has on just several recent developments had the developers pick up the tab on the infrastructure improvements. The developers of J2'd are paying for upgrading the infrastructure around their site and PSE&G is currently doing a large gas main upgrade project in Downtown JC and upgrading it's electrical substation at Grand and Pacific.

    - Very small land area yet Jersey City has the largest tax base in NJ. There are still large sites to develop thousands of new units on large swaths throughout JC; Canal Crossing, Bayfront (which will start construction soon after remediation is done next year), NJCU West Campus, the rest of Newport and Liberty Harbor North, etc..

    - That gap can be closed significantly once all these new units under construction come online which wasn't accounted for in 2014 census. We lead NJ in the number of new housing units under construction.

    - Newark's own growth can't keep it from being lapped by JC's

    It's an economic competition so growth and media and press headlines (I don't "booster" considering a majority of my posts relate to building, economic, business, housing, commercial, park, and mass transit development along with redevelopment that is occurring in JC) are going to be part of that competition. If you have a problem with the amount of attention JC is getting that's your problem not mine. Competition by nature comes at the expense of one party or the other. One party comes in 1st and the other 2nd and in most catagories JC has been coming in first ahead of Newark so naturally we want to be the largest city by population in NJ. I am not kicking Newark down I'm just stating why I think JC will surpass Newark.

    Of course everyone remembers what the Waterfront looked like. Nobody is conveniently getting that. That's what makes transformation that much more dramatic.
    JC does have a the largest tax base and that's wonderful. However, of all the people JC can add do you honestly see JC reaching a population beyond 350k (without significant land expansion)? Newark has already been at numbers far beyond that quite comfortably. Newark may never see those numbers again, but over time it's going to be much easier for Newark to add its thousands here and there. JC simply doesn't have the room to keep up its current explosive pace.

    The population gap absolutely has been closed between JC and Newark (no one anywhere argued the contrary as far as I know). However, myself and others think you place too much faith in Fulop's 'end of next year' claim. So much so that you don't even want to entertain the possibility it might not happen. I'm saying it's possible, you're pretty much saying it's guaranteed.

    Why would I have a problem with the amount of attention JC is getting (or any city for that matter)? If you're talking about all the articles you post about JC development I never say a thing (even keeping mostly quiet when you slip in your occasional Newark jab). Yet, as I recall, the more recent Newark article highlighting Newark development you immediately shot it down as a boosterism (and you've done so more than few times). So if anyone has a problem with city attention it's most likely you in the case of Newark (most of us like JC waaaay more than you like Newark lol).

    I agree about the waterfront's dramatic change. But, you feel Newark can't overcome its woes even when JC did.

  9. #39
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,457

    Default

    I don't know; JC has never had highrises before but like NYC to add more people you go vertical. There is room in JSQ to go vertical and there is no height cap around the JSQ PATH and there still places on the Waterfront to build out. Our peak was 316,715 and that was with the Watefront on both sides of the City being industrial with no habitation. Highrises on a place that was previously industrial with rail yards along with JC becoming even denser than it was in 1930 I think I can get to 350,000 beyond that yes it would difficult. Newark's suburban style of land use when outside of Downtown and Ironbound will make it difficult ever achieve anywhere close to 438,776 peak. Newark has lost density in those years since.

    I conceded in the JC thread that it may not be by the end of next year if Newark adds and it's same pace but I think it will happen before 2020.

    Other such as Nexis though will say I'm boostering and the reason I mentioned boosterism in the Newark thread was only as a shot back. Pointing out Newarks issues isn't a jab those are real issues that are holding Newark back and Newark has not shown that they can get a handle on them yet. Not saying they won't, just not right now.

    I don't dislike Newark getting attention along with JC; thats good for NJ's urban core I just don't see all the hype in these articles when they highlight the same three to four projects in Newark as the sign Newark is back. Gateway was built over two decades and that was suppose to be Newark's rebirth then. NJPAC was suppose to signal a rebirth and nothing. Pru Center just started spurring development last 3 years. These articles can all be compared to those written in the 80s, 90s, early 00s that Newark was the next hot spot and it didn't happen then and it hasn't happened yet. To me thats boostering. All these developments create islands that for decades have been unable to be connected. I'm just still skeptical and won't do victory laps for Newark until I really start to see a change which as OFTEN as I am in Newark I don't really see yet. There is potential and good bones but Newark just isn't there yet. Not saying it won't be just not yet.

    I've had family in JC for 6-7 generations and I myself was born and raised here and I hear it over and over from other people that JC never got as bad as Newark did and that people in JC were so thankful for that. Newark fell further and harder than JC did it's going to take more to bring it back and longer; I never said it can't overcome it's woes it just still has a very long way to go and not close to overcoming them anytime soon.

  10. #40

    Default

    You definitely mention something that I want to point out as well: I don't like recycled development articles (at least depending on the context). Especially when its projects that haven't started and there's bs start dates. With that said, I like articles that make mention of actual development and planned projects by companies with a proven track record.

    The difference between articles from 2 decades ago and now are that they aren't single developments spaced a decade apart. Nowadays you have developments coming online with far more frequency and permanence than in years past. Even the Ironbound where there has been awesome renewal along Ferry St. and some periphery. Granted it's not JC level of development, BUT one has to admit it's way more than the decades of old. It's the most development Newark had in the last half century.

    Newark definitely lost density in that time, but a lot of those lots are still there and can be built on. Additionally, Newark finally updated the old zones so there can be residential development where previously there were offices and/or retail.

  11. #41

    Default

    I just want to add my two cents into this discussion, but first I should apologize to JCMAN320. When I posted the census estimate for 2014 I never meant it to get out of hand. I just was really excited to see both cities are continuing to grow it shows that this state can support urban areas. Anyway back to the apology, the only reason I retorted back at you was because facts show Newark is starting to turn a corner, and I felt like you were just blindly following what City Hall was saying which isnt correct. I live in the city of Newark and I see new projects getting off the ground day in and day out, they may not be big downtown or Ironbound projects but they are there. I would love to show you the new luxury aparments being built up the hill from Route 21 on Broad St, or the new condos being built on Summer Ave. in the North Ward and many others that honestly dont get headlines but go a long way to stabilizing those neighborhoods. Newark lost alot of density over the years, yes but it had to change with the times. When the only development your city is getting is the type of housing stock it currently has then why not say yes to it. It is better than having many of the housing just sit there be abandoned after half the population left. The density problem can be fixed with another change in zoning laws. As for the crime and budget problem, those are things that this city cannot over look, but I will say this if you know Newark you will know that a majority of the crime happens in the south and west ward which is why development is mainly happening downtown, Ironbound, parts of the North Ward, and University Heights.
    Honestly, this is the only way for Newark to get out of the financial hole it is in by creating development opportunities, and creating areas that can help fund the city's fight against crime. It will happen as I think developers are now taking a chance on Newark, and we are seeing it with more development coming together to not create islands of development, but areas of sustained growth. While, I dont particularly enjoy some of your jabs at Newark, I do enjoy your love for the city of Jersey. I do think Jersey City will overtake Newark, but all that will do is help Newark down the line so I do not really see it as a threat because in all honesty our cities are so close together that development for one city will help the other greatly. Hell if we were any other state our two cities would already be incorporated into one huge city. Anyway sorry for today shouldnt have happened. Hopefully, this can lead to more educated discussions about our cities down the line.

  12. #42

    Default

    Newark officials repeatedly claim that its infrastructure could handle a population of 500,000 and that is possible for a number of reasons.
    • There are a LOT of vacant and underused sites that are ripe for development
    • A lot of buildings are partially or completely vacant. Most of Market Street is only used on the ground floor retail.
    • The new zoning eliminates or fixes many of the suburban-style setback issues (6 foot MAXIMUM or less for most houses).
    • It also promotes denser development around the PATH and Light-rail stations and the BRT routes. There is a strong likelihood of one or two new PATH stations in the future.
    • The parking lots around Penn Station could easily handle 50-100 new buildings, 8 stories on the Ironbound site and closer to 30 stories on the Downtown side.
    • A decrease in parking requirements and the complete ban of parking as a single use will open a lot more sites for development.

    Things that are needed for this include but are most certainly not limited to:
    • New Light Rail lines and BRT lines following the avenues that lead out of downtown to connect with surrounding towns
    • Streetscape improvements throughout
    • Facade renovations everywhere
    • A program to go after and fine "absentee landlords"
    • Eliminate most variances that still allow surface parking
    • Build a few parking decks with ground floor retail that the developers could pay into, rather than developing their own parking
    • Reduce the parking requirement (the actual usage for Teacher's Village which is quite far from PATH or Light Rail is one space for FOUR units.)
    • Local business hubs should be developed at the intersections of the main avenues, creating neighborhood centers.
    • ALL of the schools need to be seriously renovated or even replaced. Many new ones will be needed.
    • A far expanded PR campaign for the city. If Booker did one thing to help Newark, it was to be a never-tiring cheerleader for Newark.
    • A city-wide network of martial-arts schools. If the kids could protect themselves without weapons, they would not feel the need to use them or join gangs for protection.
    • Several new parks to join a renovated Weequaic, Washington, Branch Brook, Independence, and Lincoln Parks. Particular emphasis should be paid to expanding the riverfront park continuously as far as possible, which should happen soon.
    • Several programs are needed to remove the "No Loitering" signs, replace the windows that have security gates with shatter-resistant glass, and install permanent parklets. The Better Block program is a good, albeit temporary start.


    If Newark can get the investment and finally break the bad press, it can easily develop. There are so many cheap sites that are ripe for development. Jersey City has a lot of sites, but most of the easy ones are already spoken for, leaving only Journal Square and the other western sections.

  13. #43
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,457

    Default Response to Quote in Newark thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
    But so is Jersey City...most of the newer buildings in both cities still have massive parking garages attached to them. The Waterfront section of JC is very auto centric...and not very pedestrian friendly...parts of historic Downtown are very auto centric aswell... Your LRT systems services a small portion of JC...and a smaller % of residents actually use the system. Most people who live in the Waterfront area use the PATH over the LRT... During Rush hr both cities suffer from Gridlock...all those office employees are driving to the turnpike...its the same with Newark and 280...
    I wasn't comparing cities, as I so often get criticized for, but I'll briefly entertain your statements; I don't want to get this thread off topic so I will post my response in Newark vs. JC thread. The Waterfront area is seeing more and more infill because it was once all railyards and warehouses, similar to the Docklands of London. As I'm sure you have noticed the surface lots that were a temporary use are being built over and all of these new developments have store front and connect to the street at the sidewalk. The garages while, I'm not a fan of, are being built as part of large high rise developments in NYC because people will still want the convenience of out of town trips and if they have the money will own a car just for those journeys. Historic Downtown is not auto centric at all. Jersey City BTW has NO parking minimum like other cities.

    Our Light rail system is the 11th most heavily used in the country (16,691,558 a year, 54,434 a day) and since its opened has crushed ridership projections. When it opened they over eagerly though it would move 100,000 which is common because most transit agencies always high ball the opening of a new line or system compared to what actual ridership will be. Since it opened and NJTransit realized that it was going to move through under developed area for quite a few years they adjusted and since they did that ridership has steadily gone up, not fluctuated between 10,000 riders like you state in other thread. Newark's light rail ridership has fallen by 2,000 riders to 18,505 a day and 5,356,687 a year. Jersey City's rail transit system (PATH and HBLR) covers more of JC and Hudson County then Newark rail covers it's city. Majority of HBLR right of way is on historic planned ROW that was laid out by railroads over a century ago. The Jersey Central from Liberty State Park to West Side and LSP to 8th Street. Every current station along that route with the exception of LSP was an historic station as well. From Hoboken Terminal north to Tonnelle Ave. it used the old freight River Line ROW. Downtown JC ROW was mostly new with the exception of Essex Street to LSP cause that was also a freight line ROW. Newark took it's street car line and put it in the drained Morris Canal to alleviate crowded streets from street cars, it wasn't a planned ROW.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_by_ridership

    Point is the historic ROW served those neighborhoods in the past so it made sense to use them again since those neighborhoods grew around those lines. Secondly we have the PATH which is our subway rail line that serves JC. Many JC residents use them daily; I see it everyday as I use the HBLR and PATH daily for work and off peak and weekends to get around. JC residents don't just use both systems to get to NYC, they use them to move through JC and Hudson County. I take the HBLR late at night at times and the train is as full as it would be mid afternoon. JC has a similar mass transit mix to Boston and Philly with subway rapid transit (PATH), light rail (HBLR), ferries, cabs, and buses

    Yes people to drive to JC just like Newark but we are more multi modal. Buses, taxis, Uber, ferries, bike share pick up the slack. Jersey City has the second highest use of mass transit ridership in the nation after NYC, and ahead of DC (with cities of 100,000+ ppl) at 48%. That includes, PATH, HBLR, bus, cabs, ferries, etc. While people commuting to work Downtown and Manhattan contributes to that number that also includes people traveling within the JC and Hudson County limits.
    Last edited by JCMAN320; October 7th, 2015 at 04:22 PM.

  14. #44

    Default

    I always said people need more lead in their diet.

    And then everyone got amnesia. LOL.

  15. #45

    Default

    I hope this doesn't turn into a 'versus' crime thread. I don't think that was the original intention of it. I see it turning south fast...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software