The big lie about the LG project


New York wants to  control New Jersey development laws
New York wants to control New Jersey development laws

As I drove back to New Jersey across the Tappan Zee Bridge I noticed thousands of homes and numerous high rises that have been built all along the Palisades (all in New York I might add) and are clearly visible from the NY side of the eastern banks of the Hudson River.  There are even homes and retail buildings that have been built on piers way out into the water in Piermont New York and all along the base of the Palisades…all in New York.

And homes continue to be built on at the base, into and on top of the Palisades  every year…and most are visible to anyone who chooses to stare at them. People want those views and they pay a premium for the views from these office and retail buildings and from the homes and apartments.

The New Yorkers who are protesting the LG project want the views to themselves and want to deprive New Jersey residents of the same.  They want us only to have a street level view of trees…and only as we pass by them while in a car or on a bike.  They want the great view while leaving us with a crappy roadside view

All of this has happened and continues to happen along the Palisades in New York by New Yorkers. A bit hypocritical don’t you think?

There is a wide splice of this vista that all the noise is about that is already protected from development…people don’t want to live there companies don’t want to relocate there and the property is worthless for development.

What we really have here is that some New Yorkers want to spread out their vista of what they don’t want to see.  They want to change the game.

We already have in place building and zoning restrictions and NOW these outside groups want to spread these restrictions to other areas that adjoin what is already covered.

It’s basically… Wherever it can be seen, we don’t want to see it.

Just imagine if this type of “vista or visual’ zoning existed in Manhattan there would be little or no high rise buildings…especially around Central Park! No One57…or any other buildings around Central Park.

The most expensive real estate in the world isn’t available for anyone in North Jersey to see because of trees.

This will Never happen in New Jersey because of no one wants to be in New Jersey bad enough!

One57: Tell me this isn't a spectacular view from Central Park
One57: Tell me this isn’t a spectacular view from Central Park
New Yorkers die to have a view of highrises. View from One57
New Yorkers die to have a view of highrises. View from One57

These groups really want the public to mistakenly believe that when the LG building is built….”high rises everywhere will immediately begin popping up all within their vista that we want to protect”.

Sorry this will never happen,                                 so get over it!

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “The big lie about the LG project”

  1. Steven it’s a toss up as to whether your ignorance is sad or laughable. One simply has to look at the destruction of the Palisades south of the bridge and the ugly tower, soon to be followed by a twin, near the GWB in Ft. Lee to know allowing LG to build their monstrosity opens the door to further development. Oh yes people will say there aren’t lots the same size. Well just as a miscarriage of the system was handed to residents of Englewood Cliffs by mayor Parisi and his appointed planning board ways can be found when the almighty dollar is at stake.

    That aside for the moment, you are under a grave misconception to state this battle is being waged solely be New Yorkers. Up until recently the majority of residents in Englewood Cliffs were unaware of the planned LG office tower. Once they were informed by a group of concerned residents and their allies the mayor promptly cancelled the June 17th planning board meeting under the guise of preparations needed for a second grade graduation at the same facility the following day. Then fearing for his political life the mayor called a press conference and tried to appear as a mediator between LG and it’s opponents. The truth will come out in the end and favoring planning board members and the mayor can say goodbye to their positions.

    Trying to compare buildings near the Tappan Zee Bridge to the LG office tower that would breach the tree line by at least 70 feet, called barely visible (now that’s a big lie) by LG, is apples and oranges. What’s at stake here is a portion of the Palisades that presently has no comparable breach above the tree line of the Palisades which you conveniently forgot to mention is a National Natural and Historic landmark. Views of such landmarks must not be disturbed and if LG attempted to disrupt the view of a landmark in their home country of South Korea the government would not permit it.

    Your “what if” comparison to building in NYC is also off the mark. There weren’t any 200 million year old cliffs that needed to be demolished or have views marred to build in NYC. It is plain to see you are all about the money, perhaps you can try going west and building on the Grand Canyon while you are at it.

  2. Steven, you mentioned the web site of Protect the Palisades.org, in your posting, but evidently you did not do any research as to the 36 environmental organizations that compose this group. But that would have exposed your BIG LIE that the objectors to the LG monster highrise are only New Yorkers. The truth, which you have only the faintest understanding, is that over half the listed organizations are NEW JERSEY based, including the NJS Federation of Womens Clubs that originally saved the Palisades Cliffs in the late 1890’s from quarriers from NYC looking for the hard rock of the cliffs for use as construction material. But that does not interest you because you are so busy giving out the BIG LIE. Many of us living in NJ resent the arrogance of a corporation in besmirching a US NATIONAL LANDMARK that is also a designated NATIONAL NATURAL LANDMARK that is the Palisades Cliffs NORTH of the GW Bridge, but as a realator, you should recognize the vaule of these designations for the surrounding real estate properties values. You have deliberately ignored the essence of the objection to the LG development…….its NORTH OF THE GW BRIDGE AND IN A LANDMARKED AND PRESERVED AREA, everything else, including the locations you cited is not relevant to this dispute. Even 2 agencies and its director of the US Park Service have written letters objecting to the LG development, which by the way is the equivalent to a 14 story building in a town that has traditionally limited commerical building heights to 2-3 stories or 35 ft. in height. What is it that you don’t understand? This is a NEW JERSEY objection because it affects the quality of life in Englewood Cliffs and it is a treasured US DESIGNATED LANDMARK. We welcome the support of our friends in NY, just as they helped in the early 1900’s with the formation of the tri-state Palisades Interstate Park Commission that oversees the landmark Palisades Cliffs NORTH OF THE GW BRIDGE and they have every historical right to join us in fighting this exercise of corporate arrogance against a US designated landmark. LG would not be permitted to constructed such a building on Korea in a landmarked area, so why are they doing here?? As a realtor with interests other than historical preservation and conservation, be honest in your writings and not try to blurr the issues with your own questionable motives.

    1. Peggy and Mike thank you for your response. To answer some of your points:

      Does anyone other than a landowner or town have the right to regulate the backdrop of the Palisades…and for how many miles back?

      1/ I did do some basic research on the Protecting the Palisades site and my main point was that their depiction of 22+ high rises suddenly sprouting up after the LG project has absolutely no merit and is blatently false…and all of the groups lending their name to this site are party to putting out misinformation. What is depicted in this photo on this site is a lie…and an impossibility

      2/ The New Jersey courts have upheld the LG rezoning…and that is a big deal. They did not recognize the interpretation limiting building heights to 35’. Fortunately or unfortunately all 500+ municipalities in New Jersey have the right to zone their land as they see fit. New Jersey does not have statewide zoning laws, and though I personally do not agree with this, it is the law of the land

      2/ Though Englewood Cliffs has as you put it “traditionally limited commercial building heights to 2-3 stories or 35 ft. in height, if you look closely the outcome has been a huge failure and is now considered obsolete. Is it better to rape the land of its natural resources and environment BELOW the trees, better than building higher and more environmentally efficient? Along 9W is one ugly, outdated and land gobbling building after another. Go onto Google Earth or Apple Maps (which I use on this site) and look down on this are in Englewood Cliffs and you’ll see how in the past development raped the land and left nothing bur huge parking lots and huge spread out buildings covering most of the land. In this day and age no one wants to build that way…its wrong. Environmentalists fight this type of development, and they’re right to do that

      3/ From what I gather, no one is building in an area that is protected from development, and the idea that someone other than landowners own an entire vista does’t seem right especially in an urban setting.

      Spot zoning isn’t allowed in New Jersey

      4/ LG could have designed and sought approvals for an even more efficient 30 story building but the chose not to. From a planning approval they provided the best alternative that this town could have received. Other developers thought this property was best suited for a 30 story building with a retail land low rise residential component….but this would have been met with even more resistance than we see with the LG project. If LG were to decide to leave NJ, would anyone other than the objectors be happy with a McDonalds and a Walmart, because that’s all that would be left to develop.

      Trying to mandate that no one along the Palisades north of the GWB can build above the treetops or cut down trees to have a great view…where someone across the Hudson can see your building is inconceivable…especially in areas that have been developed like in Englewood Cliffs.

      I ask how far back is far enough to satisfy you, because if you look at the Protecting the Palisades site and their rendition of high-rises all along the Palisades, you would have to go another mile or so west to NOT see the buildings they arbitrarily plopped down.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s