unpublished, November 20, 2002

Dear Editor:

At their November 18 meeting, the Hoboken City Council tabled a set of amendments proposed for the South Waterfront Redevelopment Area. If it had not been for the packed Council Chambers and vocal opposition, the ordinance would have been voted into law, just 12 days after the City first unveiled to the public this new redevelopment plan.

The administration has given much lip service to down-sizing Block B, the one remaining undeveloped site at the South Waterfront. But what they are proposing are two tall towers on this block, one a massive office complex, 175 feet high, and the other an 160-foot hotel. These buildings are higher than the controversial, 17-story 101 Marshall Drive towers which are 158 feet tall. Block B would be 650,000 square feet of development, far denser than the 350,000 for 101 Marshall.

The Monday night meeting involved considerable debate about whether the density of Block B was more or less than what is allowed. I argued that the density of Block B is being increased based on my reading of the ordinance and also my knowledge of the deliberations of the mayoral-appointed Hoboken Waterfront Corporation (HWC) of which I was a member. HWC worked with planners and after many months of work recommended a maximum building height of 125 feet and maximum build-out at 1.8 million square feet for Blocks A, B and C. But in 1995, City officials pushed for greater heights and densities creating a new maximum of 2.3 million square feet. The Roberts administration now argues that 2.3 is the minimum and 2.8 the maximum allowed. The 2.8 number is nowhere to be found in the ordinance. Regardless of what the true numbers are, nearly everyone agrees that the developments at Blocks A and C are far too massive and monolithic. So the aim is not to repeat the mistake at Block B. Yet the City's proposal for Block B is roughly the same number of square feet as Block C (333 River Street).

An obvious improvement would be to select a developer based on the quality of their proposal based on an improved set of design guidelines. Unfortunately, the City has diminished the quality of the design standards and has already selected the same developers, SJP Properties (Block A) and Applied Companies (Block C) to do Block B. We learned at this Council meeting that the Developer Selection Committee and the Hoboken Waterfront Corporation were both abolished many years ago. As a result, the engagement of the City with these developers has been conducted entirely outside the public's scrutiny. To make matter worse, these negotiations appear be influenced by the prospect of advanced multi-million dollar payments from SJP that are included in this year's fiscal budget.

To resolve the problem before us, we should aim for less development and first-class, quality architecture at the waterfront. There are a number of urban design issues that can be reconciled without difficulty. Rather than focusing on high-rise towers and useless strips of green at the ends of the block, the model should be more like Central Park West. To do this, bring in professionals who understand these planning issues and can guide us to the appropriate resolution. This is not rocket science and there should be no question that we can do far better than the current legislation.

Ron Hine
Hoboken