Recent comments in /f/Newark

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_j24pvne wrote

I mean we do need to preserve our city's architectural history as much of those styles arent seeing a revival anytime soon. However, there is a point where these buildings just cannot be saved. I am not for just burning everything to the ground and then building, but when you have the old Essex County Jailhouse just sitting in prime real estate, and being a haven for crime, while also depressing property values and every person that goes in there says no amount of cash can save it, but historical reasons keep it there because some still think they can turn it into a museum... you just gotta be realistic.

There are many buildings being razed that can literally be saved, and those should be... but anything else should be looked at objectively and move from there. Newark has a ton of resources and a wide range of wealthy anchor institutions here that many cities our size dont, and we should use them to help preserve the city's history... but at some point its not doable for some places.

However, the article makes note of an interesting theory that Mayor Baraka is razing the city's history because it represents a time when the city excluded black and brown people from its prosperity. I dont know if its entirely true, because gentrification will just do the same... but it puts a whole new spin on why he has been a very pro-development mayor compared to when he was a councilman. It basically seems to suggest that Newark's current prosperity and redevelopment happened because it was a minority city and not because its trying to shed its minority and poor people. Again, I do not know if I buy it, but if it is true what a weird logical hoop the mayor is jumping through to gentrify the city while claiming we are re-writing the city's history.

15

HighCaliberBullet t1_j24h1vp wrote

Idk, but I have a bunch of crackheads hanging out around my area that litter, when there’s like 5 garbage cans they can use. Also, my dogs end up trying to eat the crackheads’ chicken bones.

11

Satanic_Doge t1_j24h00s wrote

Lack of local ownership of the community means the people who spend the most time in it are the least invested in it, so they treat it like shit because doing otherwise doesn't do anything for them (in their views).

15

uncharteredshit OP t1_j24gkxy wrote

Reply to comment by datarobot in Donation Pickup? by uncharteredshit

Yeah, no luck with SA or Goodwill…checked Catholic Charities website and didn’t see an option to donate clothing (only monetary, gifts of stock, and the like). I did leave a voicemail message for the NWK chapter. Will see what happens and report back.

Thx!

1

ahtasva t1_j24fce4 wrote

Historical preservation is a scam. A way to make well to do liberal feel good about themselves. The rejection of the Arc tower on the grounds that a run of the bank building that happened to be built in the 1920’s should be preserved at the expense of 1000units of desperately needed new housing exposes the “historical preservation” racket for what it is.

Any building worth preserving has already been preserved! Will preserving a school on the basis of it having been build 100 years ago change the fact that 1 out of 3 kid in NPS can’t read at grade level?

Perhaps it’s time to stop solving imaginary problems and start paying attention to real one .

−1

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_j24biyk wrote

Not to be that guy all the time, but litter and dirty city streets is a major issue in almost every major US city. You can google litter and enter any major city and read article upon article about how dirty said city is. Its just such a big and complex issue. For one, cities are usually super dense which usually means more trash and more trash usually means more of it will overflow causing the issue. Another reason is that cities in the US usually take out the garbage in big plastic bags and leave it on the sidewalk on trash day which allows the homeless and animals to pick at it. Another reason is that US cities have been conditioned to not spend money on major infrastructure projects that would seriously tackle the issue. For example, in Europe, cities have long gone for placing trash underground where it would be collected at a later date. That costs a shit ton of cash to retrofit cities with that, but lead to healthier environments.... in the US, since the 70s, policy has turned from spending money on internal issues to basically leaving cities to fend for themselves which pushed cities to rely on major credit bureau to help them invest in major projects (this is why a city's Moody score is so important as they literally dictate which cities are worthy of investment and which ones are not [basically, if a city uses less of its budget on social services like police, fire department, sanitation, and can balance the budget they are investment worthy]), and that has forced cities to ignore major social issues.

Also, there issue of cycles... if you grew up in a city with trash issues you are more likely to contribute and unfortunately Newark, like many of its siblings, are all suffer from that cycle.

7

spacemantrip t1_j23ibza wrote

I enjoyed living in the Ironbound but one of the major driving factors for leaving was the state of Penn Station and the surrounding area. I've seen people poop against the wall and it sat there for weeks until the rain washed it away. My wife and I volunteered on Thanksgiving and the park and surrounding area was THRASHED.

14

ahtasva t1_j23h5pp wrote

Exact same situation in the ironbound!! People have absolutely no sense of common decency. I blame the city. Tight enforcement and heavy fines for trash being left out without bins or in anything other than trash bags would set people straight pronto. People respond to incentives; make it expensive to litter and they won’t.

PS> the cost of trash bags is no excuse for not bagging and binning your trash. If you are a tenant, landlords should be providing sufficient bins.

17

tuggyforme t1_j22gzdm wrote

Most reduced income tenants do not feel it is their responsibility to handle trash, even though you will see it as their responsibility in almost all leases. They also don't want to spend their money on trash bags, which are getting more expensive by the year. The city (yes, Newark is an actual city) does not place enough litter bins on the sidewalks, and they often fill up quick, and it all blows away all over the place.

Most properties are 2 to 4 units, which means there is no staff to sweep the grounds and rebag poorly-bagged trash.

Larger buildings (20+ units) tend to have a superintendent on premises. That person typically goes through the entire building's worth of trash twice a week, rebags all of it in heavy duty bags, and picks up litter every single day around the property, including dog poop, and then schleps all those bags out to the sidewalk for regular pickup. I did that singlehandedly twice a week, every week in the south ward for a few years of my life. On that job, I have smelled odors that left me gagging while wondering how on earth or what on earth those odors came from. I had a few rats jump at me a few times in the process. I knew of some superintendents in other buildings that did not keep up with it, and it resulted in a lot of trash everywhere too.

I also experienced at least a dozen times where homeless or random people came by and tore open the trash bags looking for recycables or other items they can use, and then leave whatever they didn't take just spread out all over the place. That used to really piss me off. Not much I could do except feel bad for those fked up ppl, and clean everything back up.

Buildings with 50+ units tend to keep private rental dumpsters that get emptied by a truck every week. It's a lot easier on the superintendent. But those buildings are few and far between.

That's how you end up with loose trash and litter everywhere.

23