Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ericmartindale

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
Hackensack Discussion / Re: Anderson St neighborhood laundromat gone
« on: December 06, 2022, 12:17:32 AM »
The redevelopment project is a done deal, and the pastor of The Gathering Church told me "we have two years to get out".  They are renting space to the rear of the Walmart. They fully intend to stay in Hackensack.

1. I don't think these big redevelopment projects with little or no setbacks should be crossing over the railroad.  It's setting off too many people's alarms. 
2. I don't agree that the block is "blighted"
3. The block that is blighted is to the east, and they only tore down part of that block. They left a row of terrible storefronts on Anderson, they left very old houses and a vacant lot on Park Street, and they left the ugly auto repair shop on Passaic Street. I'm not a fan of Hackensack Market either, it's just a giant bodega with everything very overpriced, and they are just preying on the community.  I just don't understand the city's "blight" criteria, where there is real blight, nothing is done. Where there's viable businesses with adequate parking, the city calls that "blighted" and tears it down.
4. The setbacks for these types of projects were intended for Main Street, and maybe State Street. For the rest of Hackensack, we want yards around new buildings complete with landscaping, or we want neighborhoods with houses preserved by the zoning.
5. I also don't like how close the units are going to be to the railroad. 

Also, I found out the State is changing their universal building codes, and the days of these 5-story buildings are coming to an end. They will be allowing special types of composite and engineered lumber to be used for at least 10 or 11 stories.  So future buildings will probably be massive cement parking garages with 10 or 11 stories of wood above them.   I'm sure Hackensack will either change it's zoning to come into conformity with the State, or grant lots of variances to allow them to be built

Hackensack Discussion / Re: Rudy's may be coming down soon (just a guess)
« on: October 09, 2022, 01:58:47 PM »
Lately I have mixed feelings about some of the redevelopment.  What they did to the print shop across from Aldi's was very unsettling to me.  That block was not blighted, not by any realistic definition. 

Well, at least this block on Anderson Street is truly blighted.  And across the street is blighted as well.  This development is located right smack at the train station, so it's a true "transit village" concept.  This is what urban redevelopment is supposed to be about.  I just don't like it when the concept is applied beyond it's statutory intent, to the detriment of property owners that might not want to sell.

I am cautiously optimistic that this development will be a big plus for the neighborhood.

That's the new building across from The Green.   A one story office building was there, and that's where Rick Salkin had his law offices.  And before that, the historic Mansion House, headquarters for George Washington for several weeks during the American Revolution, stood there. 

May I suggest that this site transition from private ownership to ownership by the City of Hackensack.  And then the website costs would be borne by the city, and the City Historian will be in charge of the site. 

And it just so happens that the City Historian will require zero training on how to manage this website...LOL.  And if the City Historian wants to designate someone else to supervise this site, that's his choice.


I hope the site stays up.  In the past when I contributed more, my contributions were mostly unwelcomed and unappreciated.  That's why I rarely contribute any more.

Hackensack Discussion / 2020 Census
« on: August 14, 2021, 12:15:14 PM »
The 2020 census was finally released.  Hackensack was at 46,030.  I think over 1000 new units have been built and occupied since then, so I wonder the population is in the range of 47,500 - 48,000 now

LOL, in 1947, lots of people were switching from coal to underground oil tanks.  And if it might leak someday, they didn't care, it was underground.

Hackensack Discussion / Re: "THE SACK"
« on: December 05, 2020, 05:15:39 PM »
Johney, it's a combination of factors. The steady decline in the retail stores as the big ones left one by one, esp. Arnold Constable. Also the decline in the number of well-paid employees working in the downtown. Not only The Record, but also the major banking headquarters at 211 Main Street, and even the County moved its administrative building a block south to Hudson Street. Homeless facilities multiplied after 1985, harming the character and reputation of the areas. All the new residential buildings are designed to spark a turnaround, and yes, they will shop and dine downtown, but the REAL CUSTOMERS are those who work downtown. Once the Downtown becomes trendy, better stores will come in, and then the employers will want to be where the action is. More employers will come to The Sack.

tried to get a picture of that with my cell phone.  Got nothing close to the quality you captured

There are too many postings of things completely unrelated to Hackensack, and it's caused this site to wane in popularity.  Good music, but not relevant to Hackensack at all.

Information Resources / Re: 1938 Red-Lining Map - Zoomable
« on: August 18, 2020, 03:05:55 AM »
Notice also that Borg's Woods and what would become the Byrne/Brook Street subdivision were left un-rated and uncolored on the map. What did that mean in terms of a builder wanting financing? I bet it wasn't easy to get financing in an un-rated area. The Byrne/Brook subdivision wasn't built until about 1950. Borg's Woods was purchased by John Borg in 1939 at a sheriff's auction, which was 3 years after he bought the mansion at Summit & Fairmount, and only one year after the red-lining map came out.  Most of northern Bergen County was also un-rated, and development was lack-luster until after World War II.  Perhaps the red-lining map had a lot of impact for about 7 years, and some impact for another 5 years. And by the 1950's, it didn't have much meaning in terms of builders getting financing.

Information Resources / Re: 1938 Red-Lining Map - Zoomable
« on: August 18, 2020, 03:00:14 AM »
The yellow areas explain a lack of multi-unit development during that era. Yellow areas were considered by the banks to be "imminent to decline." If you look at what areas of Hackensack are red and yellow, it's a map of where multi-unit development WAS NOT built from 1938 through the 1940's, and perhaps a few years more. So for instance, you have multi-unit buildings from those years built in the southern part of Fairmount where the banks said OK to financing by builders (Hamilton & Franklin, on Clinton west of Clarendon, and the NE corner Clinton & Grand), but all multi-unit development stopped in the vicinity of Anderson Park (that was designated as a yellow area), and nothing multi-unit was built in the yellow areas further north in Fairmount. I wonder that the banks thought the northern parts of Fairmount were imminent to decline because houses being built were small and lots of working class Irish were moving in (say around Main & Catalpa), but Passaic Street, Hamilton Place, and Clinton Place (& vicinity) had much larger houses, and they were relatively new, and more white collar than blue collar, and at the time there were many more families of White Protestant background that the banks favored. The red-lining map provides a lot of evidence in terms of development patterns in Hackensack.

Information Resources / Re: 1938 Red-Lining Map - Zoomable
« on: August 16, 2020, 02:47:17 AM »
Used by banks to discriminate against whole neighborhoods when it comes to lending.  Interesting that they appear to discriminate equally against Black and Italian neighborhoods, see the First Ward of Hackensack as well as Lodi.

Note also the line around Passaic Street in central Hackensack, and that must have been the boundary of the Black neighborhood in 1938. The map showed both sides of Passaic Street as being good (those blocks of Passaic Street had an even better rating than the northern parts of the Fairmount Section of Hackensack), but both sides of Stanley Place were red-lined. The red-lining zig-zagged on Park Street, also interesting.

From a historical perspective, the map says a lot, and perhaps explains housing and development patterns in different neighborhoods. If buyers and developers are not able to secure affordable financing, this reflects on how much new construction or rehab occurs.  In this way, the banks decide which areas prosper, and which areas suffer.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13