"Compare the level of craftsmanship with the level found on cookman.
It appears that either a) the BW job supervisor was asleep on the
beach, or b) there was no qualified supervisor/quality assurance at
all, and unskilled workers were left to do the best job they could."
You can't make a purse from a sow's ear, you can't get craftsmanship
unless you employ craftsman and we won't get redevelopment till The
Fish recognizes that people aren't going to buy a `pig in a poke'.
Amid all the hoorahs, self-congratulations and spent tears at the
groundbreaking October 14th was a revealing statement by Dean Geibel,
the intended developer of C8 that the project would not be built till
it was pre-sold.
The Fish's parsimony regarding this project communicates to
prospective buyers, that this is a quilt work, amateur attempt at
merchandising, which lacks either the financial wherewithal or
intestinal fortitude to do it right. How and why would a bunch of
Fishy subordinate developers invest their money on a project that
screams half assed? We can expect lots more paint over the next 26
years but not much construction, few sales and little else.
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Tedesco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> you are being kind in calling it a paint 'job'. The color aside
> (apologies for that have been made; we all make mistakes), it
> appears as if the bricks soaked up a lot of that color. Anyone want
> to lay odds on wether or not they even used a base coat of the
> appropriate primer?
>
> It looks totally unprofessional. Compare the level of craftmanship
> with the level found on cookman. It appears that either a) the BW
> job supervisor was asleep on the beach, or b) there was no qualified
> supervisor/quality assurance at all, and unskilled workers were left
> to do the best job they could. That is not meant to demean whoever
> actually did the 'work' on the job. The onus falls squarely
> with those ensuring the quality of the job(IMO) as well as, possibly,
> the quality of the materials.
>
> It is in total contrast to Cookman. You walk away from a stroll down
> cookman with 'wow, they are really taking this seriously!'. The BW
> leaves me shaking my head and saying to myself 'They must be
> joking!'
>
> Maybe it wouldn't matter if the BW was not being touted as 'back'
> and ready to go. I feel the press release was extremely premature.
> First impressions can not be underestimated in the case of bringing
> AP back, especially when a unrealistic level of expectation is being
> wired to the rest of the world. It might be more jurisprudent for
> them to spend their press release efforts on promoting events,
> instead of making over the top and untimely claims.
>
> While the amount of people down there today was suprising (if not
> impressive), I am sure I was not the only one who left feeling what
> was 'fixed' looked cheap, tacky, and temporary. All of that, plus
> the fact that more than one portion has a long way to go in regards
> to meeting even a baseline level of safety can not bode well. I will
> certainly be back because I live here, the question is how many of
> todays vistors will be repeat customers?
>
> tony
>
>
> --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "David J. Mieras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Code enforcement is to busy threatening business owners w/ $500
> per day
> > fines for an extension cord instead of holding our beloved Asbury
> Partners
> > to the development agreement terms and conditions. I guess the
> City has
> > accepted the 1st Avenue pavilion paint job as a total renovation
> as
> > stipulated in the agreement. What is the City afraid of? I don't
> get it?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Lighty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 6:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AsburyPark] Asbury Park Readies For Busy Summer
> Season
> >
> >
> > > On 5/28/05 6:29 PM, "charlie leonard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> "Sure there are 'debris nets' but how long before
> > >> someone gets hit with something and the city is
> > >> sueded?"
> > >>
> > >> the city doesnt own the casino, so why would the city
> > >> get sued?
> > >
> > >
> > > Why was New York City so worried about lawsuits from 9/11 ?
> If
> > > something
> > > happens to a tourist or person in Asbury Park whether or not
> it's property
> > > owned by Asbury Partners, I would have to believe that the city
> would be
> > > named in a lawsuit as well. People sue everybody even remotely
> related to
> > > things and there is a good point to be made that the City should
> make sure
> > > that people living and visiting the area be kept safe. That's
> why you
> > > have
> > > things like building inspections and code restrictions.
> > >
> > > There is something very, very wrong here. The pavillions that I
> saw
> > > yesterday were not in good shape and the one with Hojos was in
> shape far
> > > beyond what I would expect would condemn a building on Cookman
> Ave. Do
> > > they
> > > have different restrictions on the oceanfront than in the
> downtown
> > > district?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
