Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kalebxtentacion OP t1_j6xbiu8 wrote

Reply to comment by NeoLephty in The Future of Newark, and The Arc Tower by Kalebxtentacion

And why don’t u like the project?

1

NeoLephty t1_j6xhxch wrote

So many reasons…

But the most basic reason I will give is that this doesn’t help the residents of Newark. There’s ALREADY more empty housing available in Newark than there are homeless people and this won’t solve our homeless problem. There’s already too many glass buildings and not enough canopy cover for walking around, and this will contribute to the problem. There’s already issues with parking and this provides no additional parking while, as just mentioned, making the city more uncomfortable to walk in.

I oppose trying to change the population of the city over reinvesting in what the people of this city actually need. Especially since, as you very well know, there are ALREADY a bunch of developments going up.

This development includes 20% affordable housing - the absolute minimum they can include - and I guarantee that the 20% won’t be affordable to the majority of people in Newark that need housing help.

So I oppose it.

1

Kalebxtentacion OP t1_j6zbiis wrote

Most of your reasons are just speculation, the job of the skyscraper or any big development is to bring new people in and allowing current people to move in. Newark isn’t a city of poor people. There are many people in Newark with money who can afford this.

  • And your wrong it does help residents of Newark. When one theater square was built it allowed many of high school students to work there. Giving the younger generation jobs. The gateway center isn’t a residential tower but the new restaurants allow teens and adults to work there. With this tower and many more attracts many jobs and businesses for us to work in. Without One theater square I wouldn’t be 18 years old in college and already an assistant manager. Just because this tower doesn’t fit all your needs and expectations doesn’t mean it’s not needed. Also having no parking makes it better aren’t u tired of cities and this country giving it to the automobile. If you live downtown walk downtown, if u need to travel take a train, take a plan, ride a bike. This isn’t some country town where you need a car to get around. But I understand where you’re coming from but I just don’t agree with you, but Atleast your reasons are more valid than James street
1

NeoLephty t1_j70mbnt wrote

Yeah, I see you keep saying “Newark isn’t a city or poor people.”

I’ve lived here 30+ years. Newark is a working class city and most working class people can’t afford these buildings.

Nothing I said is speculation. The glass WILL make the city hotter. The housing ISNT needed. And comparing a building designated for business to a residential one as evidence of it producing jobs is ignorant. You’re not goi g to get a job in someone’s apartment because this building is going up, you’re just going to welcome more competition from outside for the jobs that are here.

And again, there is already more empty housing in Newark than there are homeless people with many new residential buildings already going up.

This. Isn’t. Needed.

2

Kalebxtentacion OP t1_j70n8yk wrote

Housing isn’t needed or skyscrapers aren’t needed?

1

NeoLephty t1_j70pg19 wrote

Do me a favor. Head over to Penn Station tonight and ask some of the homeless people there how this new skyscraper is going to help them. Ask them about how much the current Newark residents like themselves are going to benefit from this construction.

Let me know what the consensus is.

2

DrixxYBoat t1_j7c3a75 wrote

This is a hilarious take. Building additional housing is a long game just like everything else. You give up a little and pray that 10 years down the line, your investment will hold true.

It's the same reason why we throw tax abatements at lionsgate and why whole foods in the hahnes pays no rent.

It's the expectation that if we build now, people will come later, and an economic boom will come later.

Newark does not have housing for billionaires. We barely barely barely have housing for millionaires.

The economic positives of having an upper class fostered in Newark severely outweigh the positives of what...trying to fix a complex homeless issue while our downtown withers away and dies? You've got a whole lot of downtown businesses barely hanging on.

Moreover, I firmly believe that this is not a mutually exclusive situation. We can focus on two things at the same time.

I abhor the homeless problem we have, but you cannot expect substantial + positive change in Newark if you're not willing to get fucked in the ass a little bit by gentrification. You just can't.

With the covid monies finally hitting our budgets, now more than ever is the time to build.

1

NeoLephty t1_j7c8zjh wrote

No, you’re incorrect.

Newer and more expensive housing raises housing prices in the area and locks the existing residents out of the market.

In addition, tax credits for developers and companies to move to the area trading our education fund - since that is paid for with property taxes - for the development. Companies like Panasonic took advantage of the tax credit but brought their work force with them providing a negligible amount of new jobs to actual Newark residents. Some people moved to Newark for the job further helping displace and price out the current residents (this is essentially part of how gentrification works).

Lastly, your “pray” for returns with this type of investment is not needed when investments into a community - whether that’s education, housing, transportation, social services, etc - all have a GUARANTEED return on investment based on historical data from multiple parts of the country throughout multiple times in history (plus congressional investigations into the subject showing the same).

Moreover - thinking that the commodification of the housing market can be mutually exclusive from housing the homeless is the funniest take in this thread. There’s a reason why policies like Housing First were attempted, showed success, and discontinued.

You seem to abhors the fact that homeless people are in the city and not the fact that there are homeless people as a direct result of policy decisions. Homelessness is a solvable problem but building more expensive housing doesn’t solve it, it exacerbates it.

1

DrixxYBoat t1_j7ch2mt wrote

>You seem to abhors the fact that homeless people are in the city and not the fact that there are homeless people as a direct result of policy decisions. Homelessness is a solvable problem but building more expensive housing doesn’t solve it, it exacerbates it.

I feel very strongly that a strong middle class is the prerequisite to a strong economy for the city.

My summers in Denver as a child are proof of that.

Building more housing should not increase the cost of living for current residents, and I would love to see a form of rent control implemented to enforce that.

I would also support having mixed-income communities in addition to other affordable housing initiatives like rent-to-own, inclusionary zoning, and home ownership programs.

The city has already dipped our foot in the water for many of these, but future projects ought to prioritize them.

Homelessness as an issue sucks really bad, but it's hard to feel like nothing is being done when the city has recently unveiled it's plans to end homelessness https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2022/12/op-ed-mayor-ras-baraka-says-newark-must-put-end-to-homelessness/amp/

We can do both of these things at the same time. I think one of the biggest issues we face is the very slow bureaucratic process, but you cannot in good faith read that article and tell me that the city is doing absolutely nothing.

I think your issue is that homeless isn't being prioritized enough and you would rather see all funds go to that // the community as opposed to opening up the door to new markets and new developments.

My biggest issue with that is that a heavy chunk of our residents simply do not have the skillset to be working lots of the high paying jobs downtown offers.

As an aside, is there a barrier for entry, racism, and negative bias against those of us that are able to handle such jobs? Hell yes.

But our citizens right now are closer to security guard worker than to programmer or attorney.

The best way to fix this is to pour money into our youth, Newark Public Schools, so that the next generation of kids are prepared and equipped with these skills.

Our school budget is already over 1 billion dollars, so the resources are already there.

The management of those resources is a different conversation.

All in all, I feel like we can address most, if not all of your concerns without having to gut this project or forego other development.

Now a better question is, what's the likelihood that we'll do such a thing?

What's the likelihood that we'll implement rent control of this project goes forward?

What's the likelihood that we invest our money into tried and true tactics of community development if this project doesn't go through?

Will we take these monies and spend them right, or will we throw our bread at a different development proposal 6 months from now?

1

Kalebxtentacion OP t1_j71xeul wrote

Yeah I guess affordable housing units also doesn’t help them since they can’t afford that to. Just because it’s not helping homeless people doesn’t mean it’s not helping someone in Newark. Besides complaining about skyscrapers etc etc isn’t helping the homeless too, and what contribution do u make to help the homeless besides from talking about it on Reddit, because it’s easy to talk about it than actually do something.

0

NeoLephty t1_j721gh3 wrote

For one, opposing the construction of this building that isn’t going to help.

But just so we’re clear here, I’m not the person with a bunch of money looking for a way to make more… I’m a resident of Newark standing up for those you won’t even bother speaking to.

I don’t hit the streets daily to try and stop police brutality but I’m opposed to that too.

I don’t go to North Korea to try and free the people, but I oppose that too.

I’m not in Ukraine fighting off Russia but I oppose that invasion also.

Plus, you asked us to voice our opinions about this. I did. Your “well you aren’t doing enough so shut up and sit down” is very telling.

Go away.

1