Come December, the city of Hoboken will continue its litigation with Shipyard Associates, a Hoboken development company that wants to continue building residential housing on the northern waterfront. The city recently drew up a settlement in which Shipyard would keep the land as open space and develop denser housing on the west side of town instead.
But after the Monday, Nov. 14 council meeting, at which more than 20 residents spoke against the settlement, the council voted unanimously to reject it.
The defunct monarch settlement proposal
The developers, Shipyard Associates, want to build two 11-story buildings near Sinatra Drive and Shipyard Lane, with 70 residential units. In 2011, the city of Hoboken challenged the project in court, saying that Shipyard Associates wrongfully abandoned a 1997 plan that included three tennis courts and a tennis pavilion on the North Pier, in addition to residential housing.
The neighboring Hudson Tea Building Condominium Association also challenged the project, as did the Fund for a Better Waterfront. Neither group was privy to the settlement negotiations.
Shipyard was also preparing to build a different development on the west side of town. They had already won approval back in 1998 to build a 186-unit development at 800 Monroe St. The proposed settlement would have allowed them to add 79 more units, of which 27 would be affordable housing units. Thus, more than 250 units would have been added to the property.
In return the developers would give the city $500,000 to clean up pier debris, conduct an engineering analysis, and start the work needed to design and eventually construct a new waterfront walkway.
The city estimates that continuing to litigate could cost another $1 million.
Twenty-eight members of the public were signed up to speak on the resolution Monday night, most of them against the proposed settlement agreement.
Residents on the west side of town spoke of density issues including parking, traffic, and sewerage if 800 Monroe St. were to have the additional units. Members of the public also spoke on the lack of community input and transparency in forming the proposal.
Some said the outcome pitted the west side of Hoboken against the waterfront community.
A few attendees spoke in favor of the settlement, citing the cost of ongoing litigation, the uncertain outcome of the suit, and the need to preserve the waterfront for all of Hoboken’s residents.
The administration of Mayor Dawn Zimmer had favored the settlement, saying the city had already spent $1 million in legal fees.
For months, the city had been in closed-door negotiations over the agreement. Four council people on a subcommittee were there as well – Ravi Bhalla, James Doyle, Peter Cunningham, and Jennifer Giattino. Yet, the council voted unanimously to reject the settlement.
The mayor, Mello, Doyle, and Bhalla are up for re-election next year.
The council’s reasoning
Councilman David Mello led the vote stating that the developers need to be held to their prior agreement to create open space and the city needs “to fight the good fight. ” He said the “Barry’s have been bullying this town” and “have forgotten their roots” citing their fathers work in the 70s creating applied housing.
Councilman Ravi Bhalla said that the choice was difficult, as he knows no matter what decision the council makes there would be residents who would be upset with the decision. He said the “mayor and I are very close politically. We are friends, but we aren’t the same person. We disagree on issues and this is one of them.” He said he believes the city can do better and create a settlement that would not “sell out the western part of the city or its residents” and still preserve the waterfront.
Council President Jennifer Giattino echoed Bhalla’s statements and said she believes there could potentially be a better agreement that doesn’t pit one neighborhood against another.
Councilman Michael Russo said, “This is a bad deal, end of story, bottom line.” He said “This is our city and we will fight tooth and nail until we achieve the goal we need to achieve.”
Russo said he believes the city has been asking too much of western Hoboken citing the recent Bijou development project approved by the council in July which would includes over 400 units in the same neighborhood.
Before casting his no vote Councilman Ruben Ramos said “The person who negotiated this deal should be here to defend it tonight, but she’s not here, because I think even she knows it’s a bad deal.” He said he believes the west side of Hoboken has sacrificed enough and that the city needs to work with the residents.
Councilman Peter Cunningham agreed with the council and residents citing the increased density as a concern and said he was in favor of accepting the litigation risk and continuing to negotiate with the developers moving forward.
Councilman James Doyle agreed with density concerns and said “right from the beginning the biggest problem was density. I too will not be supporting this tonight”
Councilman Michael DeFusco said he doesn’t believe the city would be getting enough in return in the settlement agreement. He said of the $500,000 “that won’t do more then buy a fence that’ll go around the sight for 5 years as we try to find the money to develop that park.”
He said the buildings lack of retail space is also a concern as he believes in smart responsible development which would add to the town’s vitality and a building with no retails space doesn’t do that.
Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher recused herself from the discussion and vote because of a conflict of interest. She lives in the Hudson Tea building, which is party to the city’s litigation along with the Fund for a Better Waterfront.
At the end of the council’s comments and official vote the attendees erupted in applause before the majority departed.
After the councils rejection Mayor Dawn Zimmer released a statement thanking the public for its feedback on the proposed settlement agreement.
“There are very legitimate concerns from residents in western Hoboken about burdening one neighborhood with added density, and I fully understand and respect the City Council’s vote,” said Zimmer.
She added that as a result of the no vote the city will be back in court in December but added that the city would continue to try and find a new settlement agreement that would “protect our waterfront without increasing density.”
Marilyn Baer can be reached at marilynb@hudsonreporter.com.