Weird how Downtown Newark has no limits , yet has a closer approach then Journal Square or Downtown JC..
I think the Flight patterns are narrow over Newark , only the East Ward is under the approach..I'd like to see if Newark did have a potential supertall if the FAA would get involved. Agreed it wouldn't appear to make sense to limit Jersey City but not Newark. Something about the flight patterns?
Most of Manhattan is under a series of severe flight restrictions. I believe all fixed wing aircraft cannot be within 2000 feet of the ground if flying over Manhattan and there is a large restriction area over the World Trade Center site. I think it is large enough to extend to the JC waterfront... I think it should be extended to include the other large clusters of towers.I saw that a couple of proposed 900+buildings in the LIC area of Queens were lopped off to close to 750 ft. The FAA is being more forceful these days, but the buildings in Manhattan aren't over the same flight paths surrounding the local airports? I really hope the proposed 30 Journal Square tower, probably which will be developed after the two towers of One Journal Square are built out(they will be done simultaneously as per JCMAN320 at Wired NY's "Jersey City Rising" forum) will remain at the proposed 72 stories, 799 ft and not be shaved any. The good news on One Journal Square is that the smaller tower got a height bump up to 777, same height as the formerly intended 942 ft taller second tower was loped down to. It does look like groundbreaking will begin very soon now.
And as well the second and largest tower at the Journal Squared development also received it's final approval from the FAA and interestingly enough seemed to hold up to a slight height bump and will be 759 ft. So in very short order we'll be seeing a trio of massive residential/mixed towers all over 750 ft. transforming the skyline of the heart of Journal Square. Within five years we'll have at least four towers between 759 and 799 ft anchoring a truly modernizing Journal Square(and several more of height of 500ft and upwards). So while the downsizing of the biggest tower is a bit of a bummer, lots to be excited about over the next few years!
Regarding downtown, other than the two lots owned by Goldman Sachs at 50 and 55 Hudson, are there any more potential areas for 900+footers? I dread too that 900ft will be the limit even for downtown as per what happened with 99 Hudson getting chopped from 950 to 899ft... but other than possibly the lot on 111 First which was supposed to have been built out as the centerpiece of the PAD district, where else can 900ft be justified or practical downtown/waterfront?
Oh, and thanks towerpower for the info on the elevation disparities between the Square area and the waterfront.
The curse on this project continues.I want to be clear with residents on where the city stands here. Last week, the developer of this project submitted an application to Jersey City for a tax subsidy and abatement on this property. The administration made clear to the applicant that the city is not supportive of their request and while the law requires a first reading ordinance vote if they submit an application, I don't foresee the council voting in favor. I know for certain I have made my feelings clear here on this project and what I feel works best for Jersey City. This tax abatement application doesn't work for us.