I live a block away from the Stone Pony and have no problem with the Summer
Stage events, other than unruly patrons wandering around residential
neighborhoods.
On the other hand, the Sunday night dance parties at Paradise are incredibly
loud and they aren't always very good neighbors about it.
I'm a professional sound engineer, and I measured the volume in my living room
from one of these events at 90 db in my living room. They are also required to
stop these shows at 10 pm, and on several occasions have gone on past 10:15 pm.
That being said, I've heard that a condo development was slated for the lot's
on the west side of Kingsley between 1st and AP Ave. I can't see how that's
going to work out on the boarder of an entertainment zone.
The Stone Pony in another location simply isn't The Stone Pony. Developers who
want to relocate it, or portions of it are just marginalizing it to a brand
name. Do we really want the Stone Pony to become the Original Ray's Pizza of AP?
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "arcman210" <acme87rangers@...> wrote:
>
> It's no question that the summer stage should move eventually (personally I
> hope sooner than later) and the rebuilt Casino Arena portion would make a
> great "Stone Pony Theatre" where large Stone Pony concerts could be held. But
> the original building should never be considered for relocation.
>
> My concern is that the wording in the report seems to state the Stone Pony in
> general should be moved. On page 13 of the summary, points four and five of
> the Committee's reccomendation:
>
> 4. The existing requirement that The Stone Pony remain in its present
> location should be removed.
> 5. The Stone Pony building is shown as a conditional building on the
> Development Control Plan, maximum building heights should be established for
> this area.
>
> This instantly sounds (at least to me) as if the building is not significant
> to warrant being incorporated into future development on the site, and should
> be removed from the plan. I'm just saying this as an outside observer (with
> the highest respect for all of the work that has gone into this). If the
> Stone Pony building itself is important, it should specifically be designated
> as a seperate entity from the Summer Stage so that there is no confusion as
> to what can happen to it down the road.
>
> --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny" <dfsavgny@> wrote:
> >
> > Well since the Pony and all that property is privately owned we (you, me,
> > city) cant tell them what to do with it. But I think its our recommendation
> > that the summer stage move eventually. I see no problem with interior
> > performance spaces on Ocean with residences if you soundproof them.
> > Personally I would not want to see the physical Pony moved. I am even ok
> > with leaving the summer stage there but I cant see how you can build
> > residences next to it. These are my personal opinions.
> >
> > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, cbrianwatkins@ wrote:
> > >
> > > So is leaving the Pony as is, for indoor entertainment (non summer stage
> > > usage) and building a Summer stage on the casino site (strictly outdoor
> > > usage) an option being discussed?
> > >
> > > Or is the Pony not going to be used as a music venue at all, and all Pony
> > > entertainment being moved to Casino site?
> > >
> > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: "dfsavgny" <dfsavgny@>
> > > Sender: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
> > > Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:17:41
> > > To: <AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Reply-To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: Reason for Cookman ave closure?
> > >
> > > I do not think its clear from the recommendations. And I think it was the
> > > concerns I had which is the incompatibility of intense entertainment and
> > > residential uses on the same site(s). The City learned its lesson as well
> > > on that with Cookman. That's why proper zoning specifies uses etc in
> > > certain areas.
> > >
> > > In the original plan, the southern end of Ocean Ave is supposed to be the
> > > heart of intense entertainment uses. In reality, those uses are allowed
> > > almost anywhere in the waterfront area under the current plan. So if we
> > > agree that the southern end and especially the end of Cookman and Asbury
> > > and Ocean is what I called "ground zero", then you have to consider
> > > what's compatible and what's not. I voiced concern that if you wanted to
> > > have intense entertainment uses (like the Pony's Summer Stage) on Ocean
> > > Ave, how could you develop residences above these uses on the same
> > > blocks? And if you agreed then that would preclude (in my mind)
> > > residences on most, if not all of the blocks between Ocean and Kingsley.
> > >
> > > That of course was not going to be given up by the developer. And so
> > > keeping in mind that you can soundproof etc (expensive) I think we are
> > > recommending that the Pony building stay and be incorporated in
> > > developments (similar to what you suggest) but that the summer stage be
> > > moved to the demolished Casino site. What the committee is recommending
> > > is that entertainment uses become less intense along Ocean as you head
> > > north and to make the most intense uses be at Ground Zero. Reasonable I
> > > think.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "arcman210" <acme87rangers@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is there a reason or clarification as to why the Stone Pony was viewed
> > > > as removable from the site? (pardon my ignorance if this has already
> > > > been explained, but in the report I couldn't find reasoning behind this
> > > > move)
> > > >
> > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny" <dfsavgny@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Dave" <dsher4@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rather than attack i will ask dan what the reason for the Cookman
> > > > > > avenue closure is? at first blush i don't agree with it either but
> > > > > > perhaps there is a logical reason. Dan can you please comment?
> > > > > > Thank you
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If you were at the meeting it was explained. The committee is against
> > > > > it. We essentially killed it when proposed by the developer. What we
> > > > > did at the end, just to be fair was say okay, you (Partners) pay for
> > > > > an independent traffic consultant to study the proposal and its
> > > > > effect on traffic. The developer's idea was to create this great big
> > > > > public plaza. We think we already have one further east. But you have
> > > > > to keep in mind how we approached this entire process. To be open
> > > > > minded and fair. Personally I do not think it has a chance but lets
> > > > > see what the traffic consultant says. So in reality, and what maybe
> > > > > is not too clear from the documents is that the committee really
> > > > > rejected the idea and is only recommending that a traffic consultant
> > > > > and the city engineer look into it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
asburypark-dig...@yahoogroups.com
asburypark-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asburypark-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
