Stifling waterfront development not the answer
Apr 06, 2014 | 1568 views | 2 2 comments | 5 5 recommendations | email to a friend | print

Dear Editor:

Your story “City approves $100K more to fight pier development” last week really struck a nerve with me. Dawn Zimmer is spending piles of money recklessly, and we as taxpayers are ultimately paying the cost.

The reaction people have against new development in this town is a pet peeve of mine. All residents reap the benefits of a strong real estate economy on a daily basis. Sensible waterfront development near existing transportation is what made Hoboken great. The waterfront used to be a closed off, isolated mess of broken down piers. We certainly wouldn’t have restaurants, shops, waterfront parks and other conveniences were it not for all the real estate development, both big and small, investing money and creating jobs.

Don’t get me wrong, developers should be held to high standards when it comes to the burden they place on public services and infrastructure, but that is not what is in question here. The mayor is attempting to paint this as a potential public safety disaster should another Superstorm Sandy occur. During Sandy, the riverfront wasn’t the problem. Flooding there was minimal. It was the people in the back end of town that had to deal with the most extreme flooding.

Trying to ban this new building may be good publicity for the mayor, and it’s certainly good for the law firms on our city’s payroll, but it’s not necessarily good for Hoboken residents.

Gloria Reis

Comments-icon Post a Comment
April 07, 2014
The city's master plan clearly states that Pier/ direct waterfront development is not suitable for Hoboken. Look at what happened to the condos on the pier in Weehawken. They flooded. Applied also promised Hoboken tennis courts and open space.They should keep their word.
Recall Beth
April 06, 2014
You opinion is of the minority, no one in the 2nd ward wants this development project, end of story...