Waterfront redevelopment project report #2 available options

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Coastal Zone COASTAL ZONE,
information
Center INORMATION CENTER

Report SIT-CMSS-78-lo12
March 1977

WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

REPORT #2: AVAILABLE OPTIONS

Helen Manogue
Arthur Lesser, Jr.

Sponsored by

City of Hoboken through the

Center for Municipal Studies and Services

at Stevens Institute of Technology
0 0
and by
HD
266
National League of Cities and
.N5
aI one

a
a nter
8c4o6s6ma 456f6qf
620&8qU

0t6@2qU0M6Q6(0q!0q@

U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
M36
1977 Contract No UO-T-R-08

City of Hoboken

COASTA
L ZONE
INFORMATION CENTER

CENTER FOR MUNICIPAL STUD-IES @AND SERVICES

STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Castle Point Station
Hoboken, New-Jersey 07030
U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
Report SIT-CMSS-77-1012 COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
March 1977 CHARLESTON , SC 29405-24 3

WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

REPORT #2: AVAILABLE OPTIONS

Helen Manogue and Arthur Lesser, Jr.

Property of CSC Library
Sponsored by

City of Hoboken through the
Center for Municipal Studies and Services
at Stevens Institute of Technology

and by

National League of Cities and
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Contract No. U O-T-R-08

The Research and studies forming the basis for the
report were conducted pursuant to a contract between
the Department of Housing and Urban Development and
the League of Cities-Conference of Mayors, Inc. The
substance of such research is dedicated to the public.
The author and publisher are solely responsible for
the accuracy of statements or interpretations con-
tained herein.

eft
IvA 9:@Lk
M. Peter Jurkat
Director

FOREWORD

This report, the second in a series on the redevelopment of the Hoboken
waterfront,, was written by Helen Manogue, Project Coordinator, and Arthur
Lesser, Jr., Professor of Engineering Economics.

A number of students assisted in its production. John Prescott, a grad-
uate student in Management Science, contributed greatly to the assessment
of attitudes of local citizens and institutions about their waterfront.
Michael Chodnicki and Lawrence Bayern, both under-graduate engineering
students, contributed separate reports whose findings were incorporated
in this one. George Banta and Thomas Kohli actually conducted the land
surveys; they also tabulated the survey results. During the summers of
1975 and 1976 a number of Hoboken High School students assisted with the
land survey. These students were made available to Center for Municipal
Studies and Services through the work-study Governor's Career Program.
Donald E. Asadorian submitted a course project, organized separately from
this effort, on duty free ports and warehouses.

Ann Maresca was primarily responsible for the typing; Ann Windhorst took
the pictures, and Ronald Youngsman and Victor Pianese drew the maps.
Their efforts are greatly appreciated.

During the time of this study, the Center was asked to prepare a policy
statement on urban waterfront redevelopment for the office of Coastal Zone
,Management of the State of New Jersey. This statement is included as an
appendix.

This project was performed under the overall management of the Center for
Municipal Studies and Services (CMSS).

The Center was established at the Institute In January, 1975 through a
contract with the National League of Cities and with the financial support
of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the City of
Hoboken.

The Center is one of.ten urban observatories established as.an experimental
attempt to determine the extent to which college and universities can help
to solve the immediately pressing problems of adjacent urban communities.
The observatory project is approved for three years. It is designed to
cope with the problems of medium-size cities and follows a similar program--
now terminated--which operated in ten of the nation's large metropolitan
areas.

ABSTRACT

Ava'ilable options for the short and long run redevelopment of the City
of Hoboken, New Jersey waterfront are examined. For each section, vari-
ous redevelopment possibilitiesare.examined; those capable of being
supported by the physical and locational aspects of the site are examined
in some detail. Finally, various organizational aspects of planning and
control are discussed.

KEYWORDS

Urban Wat erfront Redevelopment

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD ............. ............................. ........

ABSTRACT ................................ I............ ........

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............. ............................

LIST.OF TABLES .............................................. @v

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................... ...... v

GOAL OF WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT .............................

CHAPTER 1: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 2

Introduction .............................................. 2
Advantages of-Hoboken's Waterfront ....................... 3
.,Disadvantages of Hoboken's Waterfront .................. 4
Conclusions and Recommendations ................. ....... .5
Guidelines for Choice .................................. 6

Alternative Uses and Sites ............................. 7

CHAPTER 2: SUMMARY OF REPORT ............................... .17
.Summary of Chapter 3, Existing Conditions; Update ....... 17
Summary of Chapter 4, Alternative Uses for the
Waterfront ........................ 18
Summary of Chapter 5, Potential Alternative Uses of the
Waterfront ...................... 20
Summary of Chapter 6, Individual.Site Alternatives ..... 25
Summary of Chapter 7, Ideas for Implementation and Control 25

CHAPTER 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS: UPDATE ..................... 30
Land Use ................................................ 30
Vacant Land ............................................ 33
Land Condition ........................... ......... 34
Ownership , ............... ................................ . 36
Tax Status ........................ I ..................... 36
Employment Changes ....................................... 37
Additions to Information a.bout the Waterfront .......... 4o
Economic Base Information ............................... 41

CHAPTER 4: ALTERNATIVE USES FOR THE WATERFRONT ............. 44
Operation Sai'l ........................................... 44

CHAPTER 4: Continued
Erie Lackawanna Ferry Terminal Boat Service to Gateway ... 46
Historic..Site Celebrations .. ..... .................... 47
Tourism on the Waterfront ............................. 48
U.S.S. New Jersey ............ ........................ 50
Hoboken Midsummer Carnival and River City Fair ........ 51

CHAPTER 5: POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE USES OF THE WATERFRONT WITH
CAPITAL INVESTMENTS .............. o .............. 52

Industrial Land Use ........ ............................. 52

Factors for Economic Growth ............................. 55
Commercial Land Use ..................................... 66

Residential Land Use .................................... .70

Recreational Land Use ................................... 71

CHAPTER 6: INDIVIDUAL SITE ALTERNATIVES ..................... 75

Section A ............................................... 77

Section B ...............................................

Section C ................................................. 93

Section D ................................... I............ ]Do

Section E .................................. .............. 104

Section F ................................................. 109

Section G .......................................... 1.12
CHAPTER 7: IDEAS FOR IM PLEMENTATION AND CONTROL ............. 118
Local Level Zoning and Planning Implementation .......... 118.
State and Federal Influences of Implementation .......... 121
Governmental Mechanisms .......................... r....... 123
Specific Mechanisms for Implementation ................... 125
Ingredients of an Urban Waterfront Plarining and Control
System Applied to Hoboken's Waterfront ............ o .... 126
Conclusion .............................................. 129

APPENDICES ................................................... 130
Appendix A. AN URBAN WATERFRONT POLICY FOR NEW JERSEY 131
Append-ix B. ATTITUDE ASSESSMENT SURVEY ......... ....... 138

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1. Land'Use .......................................... 30
Table 3-2. Port Authority Pier Dockings ............ 32
Table 3-3. Vacant Land Parcels .............................. 34
Table 3-4. Tax Status of'Waterfront Land ........... ........ 37
Table 3-@5. Major Waterfront Establishments Full Time Employment 38.
Table 3-6. Employment in Selected Categories in the Jersey City
Labor Area ...................................... 39
Ta.bl.e 3-7. Major Crimes Reported ............................. . @.-.41
Table 6-0. Service Bases: Summary of Requirements and Impacts 83
Table 7-1. Impact of Government Action oh Property Values. 118

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. Hoboken Waterfront Sections ...................... 8
Figure 2-1. Vacant or Idle Land on Hoboken Waterfront .......... 3.1.
Figure 6-1. Upland Area and Pierhead Buildings of Port Authority
Piers ............................................ 80
Figure,6-2. Section C View to South Showing'Sixth Street Pier,
Fifth Street Pier, and Port Authority Pier C :91
Figure 6-3. Section C showing Stevens Park ... ................. 92,
Figure 6-4. Stevens Long Dock (South end) ........ .......
Figure 6-5. Section E. Former Penn Central Piers ............ 103
Figure.6-6. Condition of Pie.rs.i.n Section G, Weehawken Cove ... 1.16
Figure 6-7. Condition of Pie-rs in,Section G, Weehawken Cove 11711,

SECTION MAPS

Section A ............................... ................... 76

Section.B ..................................................... 79

Section C .............. I........ I .............................. 90@
Section D ..................................................... 98
Section E .................................................... 102
Section F .................................................... 108

Section G ....................................................

EXHIBITS

Exhibit I Memo on Plastic Ice 96
Exhibit 11 Letter on Structural Cond'iiio*n''o'f**Weehawken*P'i:e**rs 115

GOAL OF WATERFRONT REDEVELOPMENT

The goal of Hoboken waterfrontredevelopment. is to
restore the waterfront to economic and social vitality
so that it will once again become an inte@,gral part of
the,city rather than a largely useless appendage.

CHAPTER 1: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

This report is the second phase of the Hoboken Waterfront Redevelopment
Project (WRP) conducte *d by the Center for Municipal Studies and Services.
The first phase was an inventory of existing conditions together with
the problems which afflict Hoboken and its waterfront. This second phase
concerns itself with an examination of alternative use possibilities for
the presently under-util;zed and predominantly unproductive waterfront.
There were neither the funds nor time to design site specific alternatives.
The objective was to indicate reasonable possibilities for development.
However, the recommendations in this Chapter are considered to be the
more promis.ing alternative uses at each site together with their advantages
and disadvantages.'

This objective was approached by visiting other waterfront redevelopments
such as Boston, Philadelphia and Savannah, Georgia, but mostly by studying
what other cities such as San Francisco, San Diego, San Antonio and Chicago
have done successfully with their,decaying waterfronts. In s,ome instances
ideas were developed for possible waterfront redevelopment due to familiar-
ity with local needs and local history. Many ideas were considered and
rejected as,infeasible or uneconomic. The funds for this project were
limited and not all concepts could be pursued in depth. It is entirely
possible that as times, conditions, and knowledge changes, additional,
ideas could prove viable and important.

Many ideas were intuitively appealing. For example, a ferry boat restau-,
rant for Hoboken was considered before one was established at Edgewater,
New Jersey just 10 miles or so north of Hoboken. Some preliminary inquiries
satisfied us that another such ferrbyoat restaurant in Hoboken would be
hard pressed economically due to the number of diners (at least 500 per day)
required to fill it.

The feasibility ofa.privately financed and operated aquarium on the water@
front was explored. This idea was pursued with an owner of the Mystic,
Connecticut aquarium, a beautifully designed and operated facility.

A prime obstacle in.the way of establishing an aquarium on the Hoboken
waterfront is the lack of land for the aquarium itself and for parking.
One statistic will put this into, focus. Along the undeveloped Hoboken
waterfront, there are approximately only 12 acres of dry land (upland).
Time and again lack of dry land proves to be the prime obstacle to develop-
ment, unlike some of the other Hudson communities.

The idea of establishing a foreign trade zone (FTZ) in Hoboken at the
Port Authority piers seemed to be a good one. We decided to look into.
the subject of FTZ's and as a consequence had it thoroughly researched.
The evidence -indicated that an FTZ in Hoboken probably could not support

itself based on the experien'ce of other installations in the New York
metropolitan area. The Port Authority supported this conclusion.

Another idea that has intrigued Hoboken is, to use the Porth Authority
piers for.motion picture studios. Hobokenis Community Development Agency,
researched the idea and found the piers unsuitable without very expensive
modifications.

Advantages of Hoboken's Waterfront

As alternatives were examined and tentatively accepted or rejected within
possiblewaterfront locations, the advantages and disadvantages of the
Hoboken's waterfront from a developmentyiewpoint came intosharper focus.
The primary advantages are that it is not isolated from the rest of t-he
city, as is Libert'y State Park in Jersey City or the Weehawken waterfront.
As far as is known, waterfront property is not subject to flooding.
Also in general, the water depths are considerable but subject to shoaling,
i.e. gradually filling with mud so that dredging may be needed some time
in the future, depending on the.use. The greatest aesthetic advantage is
the incomparable view of Manhattan. However, from a development viewpoint.
this is an intangible with an economic value which can be exploited

Another.advantage is the good physical condition.of the Port Authority
piers. However, this is an advantage only if theirservices,can be ex-'.1
ploited. Unfortunately, with the rapid advances in the use of containers
for shipping of freight and the consequent decline in the traditional ' . I
loading and unloading of ships (breakbulk) practiced in Hoboken, the Poet
'Authority piers are grossly underutilized for this purpose, (three to four.-
ships a month) and there is no evidence.this will change. Thus if the
piers are to be.more fully utilized, alternative uses must be devised..,,
That this is far from a simple assignment is apparentin that other uses
have not already come.,to,light. Also, alternative uses may be inhibited.
by New Jersey Public Law ' Chapter 14, Section 3, 1whIich states thatthe
piers are to be used solely for marine terminal purposes:. One Ooss,ibi,lity
is converting the piers and associated buildings into a commercial recre-,
ational complex whose central attraction will be a small!boat marina.,
facility including repair, storage, sales and possibly also manufactgr'i.ng
plus satellite services, such as a snack barand restau.rant. The physical
feasibility of such a marina and demand forsuch a facility is now under
study.

Hoboken, however, has certain intangible advantages that can be of benefit
to waterfront redevelopment. It is a Viable residential community that
has become a'desirable place to live. It has strong, aggressive political
leadership that has encouraged innovation in land use.. Evidences of this
are obvious. One merely has to look at the extensive federal funding of
residential rehabilitation and public works. The current preparation of a
master plan for the City is supported vigorously by the City's administra-
tion., Renovation of the Hoboken train terminal, the

construction of a waterfront office building and the successful rehabili-
tation of a former factory building into moderate-income housing units
are but three examples of a city-wide revitalization of major proportions.

Disadvantages of HoboLen's Waterfront

As to the disadvantages of development, particularly for industrial use
on the waterfront, they are serious and numerous. This should not be
surprising since if development were attractive, it is safe to say it would
have been done long ago. What are some of these disadvantages?

One of the most serious is the many rotting piers and structures. Until'
these structures are demolished and/or repaired, development is not likely
to occur. It was estimated by a representative of the U. S. Corps of
Engineers in 1976 that it might cost up to $3,000,000 to demolish the
structures. In addition, there would be repair costs to viable structures
by private owners. The Corps is prepared to undertake such a clean-up for
Hoboken and will underwrite two-thirds of the cost with the city, or
possibly the state, undertaking to pay the rest.

However, this is only a first step, with no guarantee that.development will
follow. In fact, it almost surely will not because of a lack of infra-
structure in some locations, i.e. the availability of utilities on the
waterfront north of the Port Authority piers. For example, there is pot-
able water from Fifth Street to Ilth Street on River Road but there are
no sewer lines, nor are any planned, at the present time. Sewer and pot-
able water lines can be made available in Weehawken Cove at rather small
cost, but there is no longer a public access road to this area. A serious
view of development requires an infrastructure, or at least plans to make
it available. Thus, from a development viewpoint, site preparation is the
first order of business. As an example, about $24,000,000 was spent in
public funds at Penns Landing in Philadelphia for site preparation alone.
This consisted of demolishing.old piers, constructing a breakwater and
bulkheads and filling about one mile of waterfront. Only at this.stage
were potential private developers interested. This is not to say that
site preparation in Hoboken will cost $24,000,000, but it is expensive.

Another disadvantage is that there are less than 12 acres of upland along
the entire Hoboken waterfront, not including about 11 acres at the Port
Authority piers. With this exception, at no one location are there as
many as three acres 'of upland. This means that costly fill operations or
piling must take place for any unique use along the waterfront. This will
probably not take place because there are numerous locations outside of
Hoboken with substantial upland where costly site preparation would not
be.needed.

The Hoboken waterfront is often referred to as one of Hoboken's most valu-
able assets. There is failure to appreciate that it is only a potential

asset. Large sums of money must be spent to change potential into a real
asset. It is safe to say that a private developer or user is unlikely to
put up this money unless the waterfront location in Hoboken is unique and
vital for his purpose, and/or that in general the facility would have to be
large enough to justify the spite preparation expense. In the recent past
only two such uses have materialized. One was a plant to desulfur crude oil
and another to stor& oil. Dvth of these needed deep water facilities.
However, neither was suitable in a densely populated urban area for a
variety of reasons. It follows that if a waterfront location is not
unique or vital, it must compete with other areas where sites for example,
may be less costly. Of course, another alternative is for sites to be
prepared by public funds, as in the case of Philadelphia. Despite this
gloomy view of the potential for redevelopment of the waterfront, we have
found some alternative possible uses for portions of the waterfront that
have merit and appear to be feasible, as well as to be in demand. It is
up to the political process to decide what alternatives, if any, are
desirable for Hoboken and how much in resources should be allocated to
their implementation.

Conclusions and Recommendations

As one final observation, the outstanding assets that Hoboken has on its
waterfront are the three major employers and taxpayers, Maxwell House,
American Can and Bethlehem Steel Shipyards. A priority superior to,one
of redevelopment is to do everything possible to encourage these firms to
remain in Hoboken. To aid in doing this, we endorse the idea that,an
Economic Development Corporation, or another similar organi-
zation should be set up by the city. Such an organization.was authorized
by the City Council. It has not yet been established. One of the function's
of such a corporation would be to act as a liaison between the city and
these business firms. It would provide access to City decision-makers.
It follows that this corporation would fulfull this same function for
other employers in the city.

Although the Hoboken waterfront has some valuable attributes, as pointed
out above, it also has serious shortcomings, namely the large sums of
money needed for site preparation and in some cases, provisions for util-
ities, if the waterfront is to be made suitable for commercial and/or
industrial use. By far the most expensive investment for site preparation
would be Weehawken Cove. Like the rest of the Hoboken waterfront, it has
little upland, some 4.5 acres, about half of this consists of. decaying
concrete decking on rotting piling. The rest of Hobokenis part of the Cove
is underwater,' some 19.6 acres. Thus to make Weehawken Cove attractive
for development four things must.come about: (1) demolish and remove
rotting structures, (2) repair where possible, (3) provide an infra-
structructure including a vehicle access road, and (4) provide upland by
pilings and concrete decking or by bulkhead and fill. The fill or piling
in itself is a formidable undertaking because of the 20 feet or so thick-
ness of silt in the river. (A cost estimate of these four steps is

outside of the scope of.this report). Development may then begin:
residential housing, hotels, or industrial usage. Site preparation
all along thewaterfront, requirihg substantial capital investment,
must occur before development can take place.

Considering that the costs of site preparation vary widely along the
waterfront and that the money for doing this may be forthcoming, a num
ber of possible alternative uses for the waterfront are presented with
their advantages and disadvantages. Prior to that, however, Guidelines
for Choice are listed which can be used to determine the alternatives
for sites.

Guidelines for Choice

Hoboken needs Increased recreational opportunities both public and private.
The public shall have access to the Hudson River somewhere along the
waterfront. Where feasible, user fees may be planned in order to finance
.the maintenance of recreational facilities.

..No use will be suggested which will obstruct the view of Manhattan from
the waterfront where it is now visible from an elevation.. Aesthetic
qualities of waterfront redevelopment should be considered in order.to
enhance the quality of life for the people of Hoboken.

Hoboken needs increased ratables. However, any heavy indust,rlal'activities
along the waterfront which are noisy, hazardous or otherwiseenvironmentally
polluting, are to be discouraged. Any proposed facility.,that Would in-
crease truck traffic on Hudson Street at and along 11th,Stmet shouldl,not,
be encouraged. d

Any Waterfront activity should be compatible with the.res.identia.1 density
,and character of Hoboken. The waterfront shouldnot be developed at a
scale which is an inordinate strain on the city either inlermsrof resources
.or traffic congestion. Neighborhood impacts of redevelopment planSrshould
be explicitly recognized and accommodated whether these impacts are support
facilities or security arrangements.

Any project that would have, regional impact should be coordinated with
neighboring communities' especially the Jersey side of the Hudson and
where feasible, with all Hudson,.River communities in the area.

There must-be within the.city an official mechanism to plan and control
alternatives selected for development and where these alternatives are to
.be sited. This agency might encourage short-term occupancy of certai,n
sites until sufficient interest.develops, for a more permanent usage.

Security aspects for any waterfront activity must be recognized and
accommodated.

Alternative Uses and Sites

A. Recreational Uses

I. Commercial Marina

Port Authority piers and adjoining building (headhouse). (Section B)*
We are satisfied from a physical feasibility viewpoint that the piers and
headhouse can be converted into a rec,reational complex. A principal
feature would be a small boat marina with its usual satellites, such as
repair facilities, boat sales and storage, restaurant and snack bar. So
that the facilities will not be idle during the late fal-1, winter and
early spring months, other recreational facilities are proposed open to
the general public for a fee, such as an ice skating rink, swimming pool,
health club, bowling alleys and selected court games. Whether this con-
cept would be commercially viable.is to be determined.

Advantages
It wil 1 put to work facilities that are largely idle now, which
cannot help but have astimulating affect on Hoboken's economy.
There are almost no recreational facilities of any sort in Hoboken
and surrounding communities. Thus, its facilities would be in de-
mand. The same can be said of a marina. A marina demand study is
in progress in conjunction with the technical feasibility study.

This use would be compatible with Grogan Marine Plaza and would
enhance the attractiveness of living there by boat owners and those
interested in recreation.

The problem of security of facilities would be,minimal.

Disadvantages

Depending on who finances the development, Hoboken's ratables may
not be increased. (This may be true of any activity on Port Author-
ity property.)

The large investment needed for this project will have to actively
sought and development must be co-ordinated with the already pro-
posed facilities to be available in the renovated terminal building
or the commercial building across River Street, i.e. theater or
bandshell.

The letter in parenthesis indicates the section where the property
being discussed is located. See Figure 1-1.

E:::7A

-:1 E

HOBOKEN

==ED]
==L-E=
Bulkhead

Pierhead HUDSON RIVER

FIGURE 1-1
JN

'Profile of the Hoboken Waterfront bySections

Union Dry Dock property (Section E)
This property,, formerly Penn Central just north of the Stevens Long.Dock
was considered for a marina. It is technically feasible to install a
small scale marina here, as an 'alternative site to the Port Authority
piers. Because of its small.s,ize, (2-7 acres of upland and about two
acres of piers,) it would be a completely different operation from the
Port Authority piers recreational complex. It could be a marina includ-
ing for example a docking areaj repair facilities, snack bar, cocktail
lounge and a restaurant. Its economic f 'easibility would depend a great
deal on the cost of leasing the land from Union Dry Dock and the tax
situation.

Advantages
The investment would be considerably smaller than for the recrea-
tional complex proposed for the Port Authority piers.

It would be compatible with a public park on the north and a
Stevens' research center on the south.

Disadvantages
A marina this size would do little for Hoboken's economy, . employing
perhaps seven people.

There is no infrastructure except potable water.

Recommendation

Perhaps it would be better to leave this property undeveloped as
a land bank available for a use or uses not contemplated at this
time.

2. Other Commercial Recreational Uses

Sixteenth Street Pier (Section G)
This pier is now used only for mooring of the two Palace party fishing
boats. The pier is in very bad condition and will be subject to removal,
if and when the Corps of Engineers Drift Project comes to Hoboken. Prior
to that time it is recommended that no change be made in its present use.

3. Open Space Recreational Uses
Fifth and Sixth Street Piers (Section C)
Either or both of these piers can be used for public recreation providing,,
they are structurally sound. Superficial examination indicates the fire-
damaged pier to be repairable, however, no diving has been undertaken to
date to ascertain the underwater condition of pilings.*

Telephone conversation with Joseph Lynch of Mayo, Lynch Associates.

For example, one pier can be used for active recreation (games) and
another for passive (fishing, picnicing, sitting) plus possibly a play-
ground for older children than catered to by Stevens Park. The making of
a demand study for the types.of recreation suitable for these locations
is desirable.

An alternative for one of the piers is for use as a fishing pier, partly
public and partly private, where commercial party boats, such as the
Palace presently docked at the 16th Street pier, and perhaps charter boats,
could tie up; where people can fish and look on from the pier and where
other activities consistent with these uses could take place. There could
be a bait shop, snack bar and perhaps.sea food restaurant, for example.

If the piers are not structurally sound, rebuilding them would be pro-
hibitively expensive, certainly for the kind of recreation suggested
above. The only discernible remaining alternative is to remove them to
improve the appearance of the waterfront and to permit other possible
uses. For example, there would be a small amount of upland remaining at
the site of the demolished piers approximately 1.75 acres. This area,
still further reduced by parking facilities, would be suitable for a
waterfront mini-park, featuring a launching site for small boats and for
passive recreation (a small walkway, benches, barbecue facilities). it
could be very attractive, a place for strollers to go, and enjoy the view.

Advantages
The mayor and council will ultimately own these piers and upland
property south of the Fifth Street pier adjoining the Port Authority
piers.

Personnel from Green Acres on March 23, 1977 expressed an active
interest in the potentiality of the Fifth and Sixth Street piers
for recreation. Green Acres is empowered to fund up to 50% of the
cost and the U. S. Department of Outdoor Recreation can fund an-
other 4CP/..

The view from the piers is unsurpassed.

The sites are within easy walking distance from a large part of
Hoboken.

D i sadvantages

Considering that Stevens has@ security problems at its Long Dock,
the security of facilities at the Fifth and Sixth Street piers may
be troublesome. This may be particularly true at the Sixth Street
pier which is visible only from River Road. However, if this pier
is used partly as a commercial fishing pier, as suggested above,the
operator of the pier could have primary responsibility.

Hoboken Shore Railroad_property, or-successor (Section E)
This area, consisting of somewhat less-than two acres of upland, is just
north of the Union Dry Dock property abuting Maxwell House. It could be
an alternative location for a public park and boat launching ramp.

Advantages

This park would be adjacent to Elysian Park thus cutting the costs
of maintenance and security. This property abuting Hudson Street
is nearer to a large center of population in Hoboken than,any other
feasible park location on the waterfront.

Site preparation would be much less than the Fifth and Sixth Street
piers.

Sue to the shape of the property, narrow at Hudson Street and broad-
ening out towards the River, any noise would be minimal,from active
sports, should they be selected for this site.

A park would be compatible with its being adjacent to dwelling areas.

D i sadvantages

Offsetting the lower costs of maintenance and security is the need
to purchase the property.

Possible revenues to the city from the commercial use of this pro-
perty would be lost.

Swim Club

Hoboken Shore Railroad (Section E)
This property would be desirable for a private swim club providing that
it can be acquired at a reasonable price. However, a demand study is
essential.

Advantages

There is no such facility in or near Hoboken.
It is located near premium housing.

Disadvantages

The public would be excluded,
it would be a strictly seasonal.

4. Occasional Recreational Uses

Activities for River Road - Church Fetes, Midsummer Carnival and the
River City Fair.
In the redevelopment goal statement it was indicated that efforts should
be directed to making the waterfront once again an intergral part of the
city. To aid in this, one of the Guidelines for Choice is to encourage
Hoboken residents' use of the waterfront.

Church Fetes

One means to implement this is to make known to the churches that run
summer street fetes that an attractive alternative place to hold them
could be on River Road.

Advantages

The openness and view adds attractiveness to the activities. River
Road is not as crowded as city streets.

Disadvantages
The warmth and friendliness of the neighborhood will be lacking.
Transporting all the necessities for the fetes may be quite burden-
some.

Street Carnival

Inviting a commercial carnival to come to River Road for a few days during
the summer would attract people to the waterfront.

Advantages

The cost to the city is thought to be nominal. However, this would
have to be determined.
It would be a cool inviting activity for midsummer for residents
otherwise confined to congested city streets.

Disadvantage

River Road would be closed a few days to vehicular traffic.

River City Fairs

These fairs given in the summers of,1974 and 1975 could be repeated
annually.

Advantages

The Fairs were successful in attracting large numbers of people to
the waterfront.

It was something for people to go to and to do during the summer.

Disadvantages

Unlike the two other recommendations above, this one does not have
a built in sponsor and organizer. Until one is found, the chances
of implementation appear slim.
River Road would be closed a few days to vehicular traffic.

B. Commercial Land Uses

1. Housing

Grogan Marine View Plaza (Section B)
The plan to erect another 25 story apartment building as part of.the Grogan
Plaza complex seems desirable. This building would be located on Third
Street between Hudson kind River Streets.

Advantages
A site is already prepared for it.

Parking is accessible.

Transportation and utilities are all in place.

The way the other two Grogan Plaza Towers have been renting ind.cates
an active market for such a middle income facility.

The City will benefit from further tax ratables.

Disadvantages
A building of this size will block the view of residents on Hudson
Street.

Another large building may put a heavy burden on the school system.

it will put more demands in public safety services.

Weehawken Cove (Section G)
The former Lipton Tea Building might one day be suitable for mixed income
housing similar to the recently renovated Keuffel and Esser Building, now
known as Clock Towers. It would be particularly attractive if the land
on the south side could be acquired and used as a public recreation area.

Advantages
Probably the costs would be less than starting from unimproved
land.

Transportation is readily accessible.

Two sides of the building being on the water, a mooring area for
small boats would be attractive.

The view from the building is superb.

Living adjacent to the river is attractive.

Disadvantages
The building is ugly. Perhaps this can be overcome.
It would add to the congest.ion on l4th Street.
Possible employment in the building would be lost.

2. Apartment, Hotel or Boatel.

Anyone paying a visit to Weehawken Cove will be repelled by its forbidding
appearance, broken down piers, many covered with the debris of years in-,
cluding abandoned machinery, wire rope and so on. Also there are only 2.4
acres of upland. However, the possibilities for Weehawken Cove will be-
come evident when the rotting piers and debris are cleared away. Although
there are disadvantages, mentioned below, it is recommended that serious
consideration be given to a high rise luxury apartment with a restaurant
and small boat anchorage. A possible alternative is a hotel with boat
anchorage or boatel.

Advantages

There high density uses will economically justify the necessary
added investment of creating land by driving piles or building a
bulkhead and filling behind it.

Weehawken Cove is a well sheltered anchorage for small boats. Thus
a restaurant could attract patrons from water as well as land.
Any one of these installations would not call for appreciably greater
municipal services. For example, families with school age chilaren
generally do not live in luxury apartments.

It would add substantially to city ratables and in a small way to
employment.

The evnironmental impact of the apartments would be.minimal.
Public transportation i's available a short distance.away. Pro-
viding an.infrastructure will not be too costly.

Disadvantages

The neighbors of these proposed facilities, Sea Land and the factory
buildings, are not compatible aethetically with the people uses
suggested here. However, there appears to be a very low level of
noise and air pollution from the Sea Land site.

A hotel or boatel can seriously add to traffic on 14th Street.

3. Office - Motel Building

Grogan Marine,View Plaza (Section B)
A developer's plan to erect a 17 story motel-office mega-strUCLure would
help to revitalize the waterfront area. It is planned to be located on
First Street between River and Hudson Streets. Thirteen stories would
accomodate 198 motel rooms, health club, swimming pool, sauna, gymnasium,
conference hall, restaurant, coffee shop, cocktail lounge, and movie
theaters. The four stories for offices would provide 80,000 square feet
in all.

Advantages
According to the Urban Land Institute this office space would pro-
vide 320 jobs.

Tax ratables would.be increased.

It would commercially develop the area.

Disadvantages

The plans for a health club and other activities would conflict
with plans for commercial recreation on the Port Authority piers.

A 17 story structure would be incompatible with the low rise
structures of southern Hoboken. From this viewpoint an eight or
ten story building would be more desirable.

4. Apartment-Medical Office Complex

Grogan Marine View.Plaza (Section B)
Instead of dedicating all fl'oors in the 25 story building for apartment
use, a desirable variation might be to locate medical offices in the
lower stories of the building. The idea seems attractive enough to
warrant further investigation particularly as to demand for such a
facility.

Advantages

.Doctors would have suitable office space at a relatively reasonable
price.

The economic feasibility of the building would be 'improved by rent-
ing office space.

The tax ratables for Hoboken would be enhanced.

Parking is available.

The buil.ding is a short walk (five blocks) from St. Mary Hospital.

A pharmacy and medical laboratory can be located here.

Doctors can live nearby.

With more offices there would be less demand for educational facili-
ties.

Disadvantages

None are apparent providing enough doctors are interested in such
facilities.

CHAPTER 2: SUMMARY OF REPORT

In this chapter, a brief summary of the entire report is presented. It
is intended to provide the major,findings and arguments without the often
vo-luminous supporting detail. The chapter is organized as the rest of the
report

Summary of Chapter 3, Existing C2nditions: Update

Waterfront Property

Somewhat over a ycar-since the preparation of Report #1, the manner in
which the Hoboken waterfront area is used has not changed substantially.
Standards Brands sold its building at l5th Street. It is reported that
it will be used as an industrial park. The Hoboken Shore Railroad prop-
erty became idle. The Long Dock of Stevens Institute is no longer used
because of unsafe conditions. Some relatively minor activity returned
to Port Authority piers A and C (temporarily). The former Penn Central
.Marine Repair Yard was sold to the Union Dry Dock and Repair Company of
Weehawken. The land has been cleared of the fire-gutted buildings and
leveled, but it is still unused. A study is presently under way to deter-
mine the feasibility of using this property for a marina for small recre-
ational crafts.. River Road has been black topped and again is being used
by motorists, bicyclis.ts and pedestrians. The 5th and 6th Street piers,
as well as the Weehawken Cove property, have reverted to City ownership
by foreclosure.

Employment on Waterfront

The one major change in employment on the waterfront was the loss of 849
jobs 070 estimated local) due to the closing of the Standard Brands plant.
.Newly generated employment at'this site has not been estimated;.otherwise,
employment varied due to seasonal and business conditions, parti -cularly
.at Maxwell House due to coffee prices. For Hoboken as a whole, the total
number of jobs in manufacturing declined by 5,500 between 1971-1975.
Employment trends in other economic activities were also down but not
nearly c@ to the same extent. Recent statistics show that the most promis-
ing direction for Hoboken to go is into service industries. A short sum-
mary of crime statistics in Hoboken for 1976 and 1977 concludes the "Up-
date" chapter.

Summary of Chapter 4, Alternative Uses for the Waterfront

Operation Sail

The dangers in and limitations of waterfront usage became apparent in
the planning for Operation Sail, the New York Harbor Bicentennial cele-
bration on July 4, 1976. In general, communities in the north Hudson
County area discovered almost a complete lack of facilities for the gener-
al public to use their waterfronts. For example, there was a lack of pot-
able water, electricity, sanitary facilities as well as impassable roads
and hazardous conditions because of deteriorating piers and bulkheads
throughout the area. In Hoboken only River Road was available for public
access to fhe waterfront. The cost to Hoboken for the people to enjoy
Operation Sail came to over $26,000, an amount which the city is trying
to collect from the state.

Erie Lackawanna Ferry Terminal Boat Service to Gateway

During the summer of 1976 a demonstration boat service was initiated from
Hoboken to two Gateway National Recreational Area sites - Sandy Hook and
Floyd Bennett Field. Over 1600 residents of Hoboken and the surrounding
area enjoyed four trips. WRP urges that Hoboken's Ferry Terminal be used
to extend the boat service in the future. The Terminal is particularly.
appropriate because it has all facilities immediately available for accom-
modating large numbers of people and is at the hub of many transportation
lines.

First Locomotive Celebration

In an effort to put in focus the potential for waterfront tourism, a
commemoration was held on May 13, 1976 in a formal public ceremony held in
front of the Hoboken Post Office Building at River and Newark Streets,
The event so remembered was the first public demonstration in 1826 of an
American-built locomotive created by Colonel John Stevens. A bronze plaque
.is scheduled to be erected in the future as a permanent reminder of the
event which caused Colonel Stevens to be known as "The Father of the Ameri-
can Railroad."

First Baseball Game Celebration

The first professional game of baseball in the United States was played on
the Elysian Fields (.adjacent to the waterfront) of Hoboken on June 19,
1846. On June 19, 1976 the four inning game was reenacted before 1,000
people on the'Stevens Institute athletic field, another event which places
focus on possible reuses for the waterfront area.

Tourism on the Waterfront

Tourism, however, cannot be cultivated only by single, unique events such
as those indicated above. There must be a regular schedule of tourist
attractions publicized in advance. Besides the Ferry Terminal and Elysian
Park there are numerous historic sites along and adjacent to Hoboken's
waterfront. They include the Hoboken Land and Improvement Building (an
office structure of 1889); the Hamburg-American and North German Llyod
piers (renovated and now occupied by the Port Authority); Stevens Park
with its historic cannons and Civil War memorial statue; the old Adminis-
tration Building of Stevens Institute build in 1870; Stevens Gate House
built in 1856, the oldest bulding an the'Stevens campus; Sybil's Cave,
River road about Eighth Street, which was constructed by Colonel John
Stevens in 1820 as a spa where only spring water was served (the Cave was
closed some years ago); River Road and Tenth Street, the site of'th6 first
headquarters for the New York Yacht Club'founded in 1844; and Bethlehem
Steel Shi'p Yards - formerly the site of Fletcher and Sons yard, manufac-
turers of some of the finest marine engines in the world.

A tourism plan incorporating all of these sites into a package presentation,
could be attractive.. However, to make them presentable for tourists, a
considerable amount of money would be needed for reconstruction, renovation
and organization.

U.S.S. New Jersey

Presently an effort is being made In Hoboken to bring the World War 11
battleship U.S.S. New Jersey to Hoboken and place it south of the Erie
Lackawanna Terminal. It could be used as an educational/museum center,
implementing the idea is a formidablid task.

Hoboken-Midsummer Carnival a_nd the-River City Fai

Churches in Hoboken regularly sponsor.carnivals and street fetes. These
could be relocated along River Road during the summer. The River City Fair
was.given in 1974and 1975 under the auspices of the Community Development
Agency with the.Hoboken Environment Committee. Costs for such events are
obtainable from C.D.A. Data on the costs and details of street carnival
shows can be obtained from the Amusement Business Magazine published in New
York City.

Summary of Chapter 5, Potential Alternative Uses of the Waterfront

Industrial Land Use

The traditional patterns of waterfront land uses were seen in shipping,
manufacturing, railroading and warehousing. This was true of Hoboken
as@well as of other waterfront areas. Shipping, railroading and ware-
housing no longer exist on the Hoboken waterfront for various reasons,
some peculiar to the waterfront,,such as lack of space, and some due to
other causes, such as changes in transportation technology.

There are numerous factors in Hoboken that must be considered in planning
for economic growth. For example Hoboken needs jobs basically in the un-
skilled and semi-skilled categories because of a predominately blue collar
population. Due to severe air pollution growth should be looked for in
those types of industries that do not add to the already high pollution
level. Because of the scarcity of undeveloped areas in Hoboken the inten-
sive use of land is essential. The number of employees per acre in manu-
facturing by firms now on the Hoboken waterfront is fairly high.

Foreign Trade Zone

Alternative industrial uses for the Hoboken waterfront were examined in
some detail to determine their characteristics and their possible fea-
sibility for Hoboken. One' of those was the Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ).
An FTZ located near a port of entry accepts goods without the payment of
customs duties. The goods may be stored, manufactured, manipulated, and
exhibited prior to reshipment in domestic commerce and the payment of
duties. An FTZ is created by the Federal Trade Board after it has ful-
filled certain specified conditions. The only New York Harbor FTZ is
located in Building 77 of the former Brooklyn Navy Yard.

Because of lack of land area only Weehawken Cove along the Hoboken water-
front could be considered the least bit suitable for the establishment of
an FTZ. Even there, it would have to be connected, to an adjacent indus-
trial park in northeastern Hoboken, which is not.being planned. If such
a zone could be created in Hoboken it is still questionable whether there
is sufficient need for one,

Oil and gas off-shore exploration facilities

Another possible industrial use for the Hoboken waterfront is for a site
for some type off-shore oi) and gas exploration support facilities. One
such facili.ty is a temporary service base which would be used for the
transfer of materials and workers to@and from offshore drilling areas.

An excellent transportation'and communication network would be a neces-
sity, as well on ample storage area. Of three possible Hoboken sites,
Weehawken Cove would be the most suitable, but costly for site preparation,
and Union Dry Dock next. The Port Authority pier complex has the space
available for such a base but it is poorly located for helicopter service.
Also, with large tracts of waterfront land available elsewhere in Hudson
River communities, it is highly improbable that this',area of such limited
size would even be considered for a service base.

A permanent service base would require the facilities of the temporary
base plus more space for large drilling rigs. For this facility Weehawken
Cove has the potential needed area except it is now practically all under
water.

Repair and maintenance yards for ocean-going vessels arenow available at
the Bethlehem Steelship repair yards in Hoboken.

Two other types of onshore activities, platform and pipeline installation
and pipe coating, are not judged suitable.for Hoboken. The former takes
the most amount of space and should be close to thearea where the plat-
forms and pipelines are to be installed in the ocean. Hoboken is 175
miles from the nearest discussed site. A pipe coating yard also would
require much space, possibly available "at the Port Authority piers. How-
ever, the close proximity of these piers to the residential area of Grogan
@Iarine View Plaza would appear.to rule out such intensive industrial
activities which are infurious to air quality.

Shipping

As to the traditional use of the Hoboken waterfront for breakbulk shipping,
(the traditional way of handling cargo piece by piece) it barely exists in
Hoboken today and there appears no reason to believe that it will improve
in Hoboken or New York Harbor. As to providing facilities for loading and
unloading containers, Hoboken sim'ply does not have, the landside require-
ments in terms of space or ready truck access to it.

Industrial firms now on waterfront

An important question is whether firms like those already established on
Hoboken's waterfront can be expected to settlelhere. The only possible
place is Weehawken Cove which would require, among other things, extensive
and expensive piling. If such a site should become available at reason-
able cost, what might be the attitude of like firms to settle on the
waterfront? To help answer this question the WRP conductedra personally
solicited survey among existing firms as to their problems and needs.

The survey indicated that existing conditions, although tolerable, are
not such as to induce new like firms to come to Hoboken's waterfront. In

fact, it appears to be not a question of inducing new like firms to
come to Hoboken but rather of taking measures to keep those here now.

Other private efforts for industry to come to Hoboken's waterfront have
ended in economic failure or public opposition in particular to those
that carried with them the potential to endanger the environment as well
as the lives and safety of those living,in the vicinity.

Commercial Land Use

Hoboken's greatest hope for waterfront redevelopment is for commercial
use including possibly restaurants, offices, shops and a whole spectrum
of recreati-onal activities. The particular asset the Hoboken waterfront
has to capitalize on is its unparalleled view of the Hudson River and
Manhattan as well as quick and easy access to Manhattan Island. However,
the amenities of the waterfront such as views, bike paths, parks and river
access must be assured before commercial ventures can be expected to seek
placement in Hoboken. In order to insure this there must be a pol,icy of
economic development (by master plan and zoning codes, among other methods)
which assures a long term commitment on the part of the city to clean,
attractive riverfront growth. The present condition of the waterfront with
its broken down piers, abandoned railroad property and lack of infrastruc-
ture is not conduc.ive to investment. To start this clean up Hoboken can
participate in the Corps of Engineers' New York Harbor Clean-up Program.
This provides two-thirds federal money for demolition of decrepit piers and
removal of derelict vessels. It is important that Hoboken and other Hudson
waterfront municipalities band together to attempt to obtain state aid1for
this essential first step in providing an attractive waterfront.

Commercial buildings

If office space can be supplied in Hoboken under that in Manhattan, at say
$7.50 per square foot as compared with $11.00, there would appear to be an
excellent opportunity for Hoboken to exploit its excellent connections to
Manhattan. A 17 story office building as part of a multi-use structute
has already been proposed for the Grogan Marine View Plaza at First Street
although there may be difficulty in getting financing for this new type of
land use.

Another 25 story apartment building with multi-uses is being considered
for@the north side of Second Street by the Grogan Plaza developers. An
innovation for Hoboken would be the inclusion of a twin movie theater, so
typical of successful shopping centers. (Care should be taken that build-
ings are not made too tall as to be incompatible with the low rise struc-
tures of southern Hoboken.)

Medical complex

Hoboken hat no professional medical office complex, although one would
appear justified because-of the difficulties doctors have in finding
suitably situated office space. A medical complex near St. Mary Hospital
at Third and Hudson Streets in the Grogan Marine View Plaza would be an
ideal location.

Convention Center

From time to time one hears that it would be a good idea,for Hoboken'to
have a convention center. A preliminary investigation shows that a major
convention center requires a great deal of land which Hoboken does not
have. Thus this proposed alternative for the Hoboken waterfront is only
feasible for one of moderate size attractive to specialty trade.shows and
industry/sales conventions.

Movie Studies on the waterfront

The notion that the Port Authority piers would be sui-table for use for
movie studios has been seriously.considered by Hoboken's Community Develop-
ment Agency. It concluded that the piers would not be useful for a.variety
of reasons.

Residential Land Use

The thought of desirable residential housing on the Hoboken waterfront has
always been an alluring one. 'The Grogan Marine View Plaza development is
a continuing step in this direction. Of specific locations, Weehawken
Cove has been most frequently mentioned. As is mentioned so frequently in
this report, the Cove is almost entirely underwater, has no present access,
and no infrastructure, not to mention the eyesore of rotting Ipiers. All
this means that hou,sing at the Cove would be extremely expensive in site
preparation costs alone. In addition, it would appear that the surround-
ing areas would have to be planned to dovetail with the Cove development as
to recreation, a shopping.center, school facility and other amenities that
people expect from expensive housing.

Recreation Land Use

Hoboken is woefully short of recreation areas and it is believed that a
large, unsatisified demand for these areas exists. The waterfront may well
be the plate where some of this need can be met. One possibility is the
development of the Fifth and Sixth Street piers. A major part of the

financing may be available from the state's Green Acres program and the
U. S. Bureau of Recreation. However, the physical condition of the piers
must first be determined.

Rooftops and vacant areas

The rooftops of the Grogan complex can be further developed for recre-
ational purposes. An area of possible multiple recreational use is the
property formerly used by the Hoboken Shore Railroad just north of l4th
and Washington Street. A park and parking facility could be instituted
here. Week days the area may be used for parking and on weekends and
holidays for recreational purposes.

Park settinqs

In the development of the waterfront, thought should be given to placing
the proposed facilities in a park setting. Parks and attractive open
space uses affect the values.of properties on all sides. This sort of
development ]ends itself best to long range, not piece meal, planning and
zoning. A marina in the property now owned by Union Dry Dock would not
be incompatible with this objective.

Marina

There are three possible locations for commercial marinas in Hoboken:
the Port Authority piers, Weehawken Cove, and the other is the property
owned by the Union Dry Dock and Repair Co. Physical feasibi I ity studies
are now in progress with respect to two sites.' Port Authority and
Union Dry Dock properties.

Erie Lackawanna Terminal

This area has been the subject of much study and found to be ideal for
various types of commercial and recreational,facilities.

Recreational criteria

A study by Texas A & M University shows that the Hoboken waterfront has
every characteristic for an ideal recreational area.

Private clubs

A private swim club might occupy the land area north of the Union Dry
Dock 'property provided public access to the waterfront is provided. As
an alternative the club might be an adjunct to a,marinla on the Union Dry
Dock property.

Summary of chapter 6, Individual Site Alternatives

Chapter 6 presents possibilities for redevelopment in each of the Sections
A - G-, defined for this study. No summary is presented. Those interested
in these details should read the chapter. Chapter I has already discussed
recommendations for many of the sections.

Summary of Chapter 7, Ideas for Imelementation and Control

Government at all levels is involved, or should be involved, in the planning
and control of land use. However, government structures alone cannot bring
about.rede@elopment in the private sector. They should act as constructive
influences. Hoboken as it develops a new master plan and zoning code has
an unusual opportunity to do this now. It is hoped that the waterfront
area in Hoboken in particular, and New Jersey in general, will be given
special attention.

State and Federal Influences on Implementation

Also, in a state of flux are the state's and federal government's influences..
on waterfront land use planning and control. The New Jersey Office of
Coastal Zone Management (N.J.O.C.Z.M.) has the task of creating management
policy as well as a mechanism for policy implementation for the coastal
area of the State. There are indrications that the existing Riparian Law
of New Jersey will be used to control land use in the urban area of tne
coast. WRP doubts that it will be effective, nor would it appear to sat-
isfy the requirements of the U. S. Coastal Zone Management Act of.,1972
(U.S.C.Z.M.A.) : Whereas the New Jersey Riparian Law is concerned only
with shores which are washed by the t@ldes, the U.SC.Z.M.A. provides that
management boundaries should include shorelands, the uses of which have a
direct and significant impact on coastal waters. To be consistent with
the Act, it appears that the entire property which abuts the water's edge
should be included in the urban coastal zone boundary.

WRP was asked by N.J.O.C.Z.M. to submit an urban waterfront policy state-
ment. This was done and appears in this report as Appendix A. The gist
of this statement is that in planning and control, public use should be
given first priority. Whereas a regional approach is preferable in land
use planning, there is no present mechanism in the State tobring this about.
The current Municipal Land Use Law which provides for regional or county
planning is operative only when a municipality gives its planning power to
a regional body. New legislation will be needed to provide for the creation
of regional planning and implementation groups in the State with inputs
from the affected communities.
Because the shore area of New Jersey - the section from Cape May to Rari-
tan Bay - is protected under a permit system created under the New.Jersey
Coastal Area Facilities Review Act of 1973 (CAFRA) it is reasonable to
suppose that other things being equal, more "intensive" uses of the water-
front excluded from the CAFRA area will seek out the urbanized sections of
the coastal zone in the Raritan Bay, the Delaware River, New York Bay and
the Hudson River. Without a specific plan and permit system for land uses
along the waterfronts of these urban areas, lengthy and expensive legal
battles will continue with respect to what facilities should be permitted.

Governmental Mechanisms

There appear to be three possible governmental entities which could take
on regional responsibilities which the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA-) recommends in,its guidelines ,- (NOAA has.been given
the responsibility of overseeing the t.Z.M.A.) They are county'govern-..
ments, councils of government and new regional governments.

County Governments

County government structure in New.Jersey may not be a proper vehicle for
coastal zone management purposes for two reasons. One is that.New Jersey.
counties have no zoning power. Planning boards are advisory only. Two
is that economic and environmental issues and concerns do not have common
boundaries with.counties. Water flows through many counties. A rational
regional approach appears to be a necessity for waterfront management.

Councils of Government

Councils of Government exist in many states but not New Jersey. They are
normally considere&to be confined to planning duties and not implementa-
tion. To be effective, coastal zone management must deal with implementa-
tion as well as planning.

New Regional Governments

In New Jersey these would have to be created by the legislature. They
would provide an opportunity to create a mechanism especially designed
to cover geographic areas and the needs of specific waterfront regions
which share a degree of compatible uses. As stated earlier, if New Jersey
does not create a management mechanism with a permit and review system,
the urban coastal zone will continue to be surrendered to local develop-
ment pressures, as it is today.

Specific Mechanisms for Imp lementation

Unless positive steps are adopted in Hoboken within which waterfront re-
development will take place, things are likely to go on as at present. A
framework needs to be devised to outline what role Hoboken wants the water-
'front to play as @art of the overall goals of the city as contained in its
p
masterplan. For example, it has been suggested that Hoboken's attention
be refocused on the waterfront. Among other things, this would include walk-,
ways, reclamation land for public use, and the location of major recrea-
tional-facilities along the waterfront. A way to approach this objective
is for the master plan to consider the waterfront as a special place
environmentally, socially, economically and historically. It is vital
that this be supplemented by a more active component such as the creation
of a funded Waterfront Development Council, a sub-unit of a city-Wide
Economic Development Corporation. Among other things, the
duties of the Council would be to plan, manage, promote and control water-
front usage.

Ingredients of an Urban Waterfront Planning and Control System as
Applied to Hoboken's Waterfront

The following matters should be included in a work program irrespective of
the organization that implemente it-
I. A planning element should include the services of a landscape
architect and experienced waterfront planner as well as an engineering
consultant, on matters of methods.and costs.

A useful way to develop a plan for Hoboken is to break it into linear
zones: a. Water Zone, b. Park/Commercial/Research Zone and
c. Community Zone.

2. Special attention should be given to the underutilized areas of the
waterfront namely, the Fifth and Sixth Street piers, the Stevens Long
Dock, Union Dry Dock and Weehawken Cove.

3. Additional space might be'created on the waterfront by filling certain
portions now underwater.

4. Recreational facilities should be planned to be located on the water-
front.

5. Where feasible, community facilities should be placed on the waterfront.

6. Planning review.and permits must make certain that private facilities
provide for some areas of public access.

7. The waterfront should be beautiful to realize its full potential.

8. If housing is planned it should not be too close to the water.

9. Methods of maintenance should be required as part of any review pro-
cess.

10. Safety features are essential for every wateredge facility.

11. A review of environmental impact should be standard practice prior to
issuing permits for development.

Control

Develop a control procedure by the.Council for new projects or reuses of
the waterfront before giving permission to proceed. A method to expedite
such a review procedure is to prepare in advance a Community Impact Assess-
ment Report which would provide extensive information on each parcel of
waterfront property. This approach leads to whatlis known as "impact
zoning" in which the capacity of the land and the ability of the area to
accept the proposed facility is of primary concern.

Promotion

Promotion is essential for the development of the waterfront. Sites on
Hoboken's waterfront will not sell themselves in competition with the many
alternate waterfront locations in Hudson county.

Conclusion

This report is different from the usual planning reports in that it sug-
gests, where possible, alternative schemes with their advantages and dis-
advantages. As a further point 'of difference, it reports on ideas that
were researched and rejected, together with the reasons for the rejections.
Finally the,report suggests means of implementation.

The limitation of this approach is that there will not be specific de-
tails of costs for.preferred alternatives. However, this is a task
that can be assigned to the proposed Waterfront Planning and Promotion
Council, a suggested sub-unit of the Economic Development Corporation.
Promotion is the key thought, since waterfront development depends on
vigorous and imaginative promotion.

CHAPTER 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS: UPDATE

Land Use

The way in which the waterfront area is utilized has not changed sub-
stantially since the first report on the Hoboken shore area.

Table 3-1. LAND USE

Category of Land Use Acres % of Waterfront % Change
Study Area 1976 from 1975

Residential 6.0 1.80/1 0
Commercial 3.5 1.0 0
Industrial 138.6 40.5 -.7
Automotive 5.5 1.6 0
Quasi Public 45.9 13.4 -1.0
Park and playgrounds 5.6 1.6 0
Vacant 137.5 4o .1 +2.1

342.6 100.0

(Source: Waterfront Redevelopment Project, compiled by Thomas Kohli,
January 1977)

The loss in the Industrial categoryis accounted for by the closing of the.
Standard Brands Building (formerly Lipton Tea Building) as well as the
12.1 acres owned by the Hoboken Shore Railroad which is now idle.
(See Figure 2-1)

The Vacant category has risen but it also reflects the addition of 2.5
acres of now unused Stevens Institute property called the Long Dock. The
Vacant category also had deductions made from it,since 11 acres at the
Port Authority (P.A.) Piers have been returned to industrial usage.

- @N
E::::7

HOBOKEN

Iif

00== F- F-T

Bulkhead -2

..........

-4 ---

Pierhead HUDSON.RlVER
FIGURE 2-1
N

Vacant or idle Land and Piers on Hoboken Waterfront*

Crosshatched areas indicate vacant.

The intensity of use of the P. A. piers may be ascertained from the
following partial list of 1976 dockings through September.

Table 3-2. P. A. PIER DOCKINGS, 1976

Month - 1976 Pier Cargo ships Average time in port

January
February A & B 2 9 days
March A & B 2 12
April A 4 414
May A 2 5
June A 4 414
July 2-A, I-B 3 9
August A 2 7
September A 3 5
October through December not available at time of compilation

(Source: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, January, 1977.)

The above figures indicate clearly that Pier A - one of two piers built
in 1952 - has been the most frequently used while Pier B (besides being
used for laying up as noted below) was only occupied twice in eight
months. Pier C - the other pier built in 1952 - has been unused since
the beginning of 1976 and thus remains on the Vacant list.

There have been other uses besides loading and unloading at the P. A.
piers which are not included in the list above. These uses include la@ing-
up of ships and rental of the headhouse. The Mobil Arctic was docked at
Pier B for about 18 months since September 1975. In addition to the Arctic
there have been nine other ships tied up from March through September, an
average of one and two sevenths ships per month.' A local. engineering firm
has been occupying the headhouse of Pier B since January l9th.

1. Conversation with Harold,Spillane, Port Authority, 1/7/77

The above-mentioned uses of the P.A. piers do not constitute the
intensity of utilization which is desireable for 'a city as highly devel-
oped, as short of land and as-needful of employment as Hoboken, but it
does represent a distinct improvement over last year's uses.

The Fifth and Sixth Street piers have also undergone some changes in
usage. The skip Achilles owned by Newport Tanker Corporation, was tied
up at the Fifth Street pier from the summer of 1976 until January 20,
!977. This laying up produced no employment. However, the city has
gained about $15,000 2 in rental fees.

As mentioned above, the Stevens waterfront property has also undergone
some changes in land use. The Long Dock area, which extends from abo"t
Seventh to Ninth Streets along River Road, was the subject of a preliminary
engineering study pirformed for the Waterfront Redevelopment Project
(WRP) in June 1976. It brought forth the finding that the Long Dock
was not suitable for pedestrian use during Operation Sail when large
numbers of people were expected to come to the waterfront. Since
that time the dock has been closed even for parking uses.

Tne area just north of the Stevens dock, the former Penn Centrai Marine
Repair'Yard, has been purchased by a drydocking and repair business from
Weehawken, New Jersey. The new owner, accord-ing to a spokesmen,4 has "no
firm plans at this time'' for the area. For this reason and because ti-.e
property is unused at this time, the area remains within the designation
of "Vacant."

Vacant Land

This is a most important element in any land use alternative study. Figure @-l
indicates the vacant areas; Table 3-3 provides the actual area 71n acres
;nvolved for each vacant parcel along the Hoboken river edge.

2. Conversation with Carl Schaeffer, Hoboken Law Department, 2/15/77.
3. William C. Kerr, P. E., Safety Investigation of the Stevens Pier
Facilities for Use as a Viewing Area for "Operation Sail," Center
for.Municipal Studies and Services, (Hoboken, New Jersey June 2:,
.1976). Unpublished report.
4. Conversation with Robert Burke, Union Dry Dock Company, January 6,
1977.

Table 3m-3-

HOBOKEN WATERFRONT PROPERTIES
VACANT OR IDLE

Acres
Section Block Lots Total Underwater

A .139 A Piers .16.3
A-1 Ferry slips 9.3 4.1
A-2 Ferry Ter. 1.02
230 5 Bank Bldg. .088

B 224 PH.] .771
225 PH.I .611
PH-3 .597
231 3 P.A. Piers 4.2 5.2

C 233 1 .689
2-5 6.026
258 2 1.75 4.24

D 258 1 Stevens 3.731
259 2 Stevens 6.86 5.338

E 259 1 4.584 3.665
26o 1 3.27 2.755
2 .591

G 266 PH.] .710 9.889
PH.2 .237 1.625
264 2 2.531 5.349
267 1 8.265 15-746
268 1 5.230
269 PH.F 2.166
135 1 .086

69.859'- 77-.6;T-

Total vacant, idle, underutilized 137-52
This represents 40.1% of total waterfront area.

Land,Condition

Several clearing efforts have taken place along the waterfront which
have had a dramatic effect upon the visual aspects of the area. The
owners of the Fifth and Sixth Street piers have almost completely
removed the gnarled and.burned out super-structures on the Fifth Street
pier. In addition, Union Dry Dock Company, the new owner of the former
Penn Central Marine Repair Yard, has demolished the old buildings, fenced
inthe area and leveled the land. The waterfront in this section looks
neat and clean for the first time in years, a factor which has been the
topic of much local conversation.

Another reason for the increased local interest in this portion of the
waterfront which extends from Fourth to Eleventh Streets has been the easy
access .provided by the mid 1976,opening of the newly paved River Road.
The black-topped-road 5 has a ri.ght of way of 50 feet with an average of
4.7 feet curb to cu.rb. It has given pedestrians, bicyclists (albeit
.without a delineated path) and motorists public entree to one of the
most spectacular views in New York Harbor. The road is being used by
people who have lived all their lives in Hoboken but who have never before
dared to come to the waterfront. 6 Bicyclists can be seen meandering along
the entire length of the road every summer day. River Road provides a
return to the original use of the road; one of a leisurely scenic path
along the River's edge.7
f
There has been expressio 'n of concern about possible safety hazards if a
bike path is created along River Road. The opposite has also been argued
that it is too hazardous not to have a bikg path since the road is a1ready
and will be used for that purpose anyway.

As a result of these concerns there is a study going forward at this time
as to the feasibility of creating a formal b-icycle-path in this area. In
addition, the inclusion of a specific pedestrian right of way would appear
to be a necessity. The present mingling of people and cars could prove a
disastrous circumstance as the road becomes more heavily used by strollers
of all ages. The view from this road is so tempting and the sense of
openness so different from that found in the rest of city, that provision of
a walkway, in addition to a bike path should also be considered.

5. Figures obtained from the Hoboken Community Development Agency.
6. Conversations with Katherine McCabe and Agnes Conway, September 1976.
7. Photographs from Special Collections, Stevens Institute of Technology
Library show River Road used as a strolling and even picnicing area
from `1826 to 1880.
8. The Jersey ournal, "Meetin g called to study River Road Bike Path,"
July 19, 1976 page 1.

With the exception of the above sections, the waterfront study area
remains basically the same as .fair as condition is concerned. Those pro-
perties which.were poorly maintained last year are still the same-no
better and no worse perhaps an indication that something is being done
even if only enough to maintain the status quo.

Ownership

'The important parcels of waterfront land are presently in ownership
trans,ition-.. The old Todd Shipyards and th*e Fifth - Sixth Street piers
ate being foreclosed. The former Penn Central Marine Repair Yard at
Ninth Street and River Road was sold during the.year to Union Dry Dock
,Company of Weehawken, New Jersey.,

The Standard Brands.Building (also know as the Lipton Tea Building) at
15th Street and the riverfront, has been sold to a "rea.1 estate tycoon"
who intends to sub-divide the building containing 660,000 square feet of
floor space on 5.5 acres and renovate it for the use of small industrial
firms. William De Goode of East Orange has been reported in recent news
articles as the new owner.9

Tax Status

As a general rule, tax delinquency is considered a harbinger of the'decline
in care and use of propertiesi it holds the potential for the deteriora-
tion of entire neighborhoods. 0 Farther along in the process of the
decline of properties comes tax liens which are indicative of aneven more
advanced level for concern; abandonment becomes,imminent at this stage.

Tax liens have been instituted on several properties in the southern part
of town. In this particular area it could be an alert.as to impending
abandonment or it could indicate that speculation is occurring. It is
reasonable to anticipate that properties in this area should increase in
value when the commercial growth of.-Southeastern Hoboken begins its fore-
cast rise.]] Until it does, however, a rather sizeable portion ofa pri-
mary block in southern Hoboken presents a decrepit appearance in an other-
wise pr6sperous-looking section.

9. The Jersey Journal "W W I Hoboken Plant bought by De Goode,"
February.11, 1977, page 5.
10. Steven C. Rother, General Counsel, Newark Housing.Authority. Pre-
sentation at Keys to Neighborhood Preservation Conference, Forum 76,
Newark, New Jersey, February 10, 1976.
11. Hoboken.Transportation Center: Final Report, Volumes I and 11.
Hoboken: Hoboken Communi ty Development Agency, 1975.

Table 3-4. TAX STATUS OF.WATERFRONT LAND

Category Acres % of Wa,terfront % Change
Study Area from 1975

Exempt* 132.5 40.5% + W%
Taxed by N. J. 47.3 14.5 0
Div. of Taxation

Foreclosure 52.2 15.9 +15.9
Up to date 90.8 27.6
Delinquent* 8.9 2.70/, - .4
Tax Lien .3 .1 -15.8

(Source: WRP survey, Thomas Kohli January 1977)
'@Due to a review of tax records, Hoboken Housing Authority was found to
own property previously listed as Marine View Housing, as per William
Reynolds, Hoboken Tax Collector.

Two properties have been taken out of the tax lien category and entered
into the procedure of foreclosure since last year, hence the 15.8%.de-
crease in tax lien category. These two - the Fifth and Sixth Street piers
and the Weehawken Cove area - are pivotal pieces of property. Future
owners could literally dictate the caliber of reuse in adjoining areas as
well as on the specific properties themselves. The foreclosures on these
properties provide the city with an opportunity to set criteria for future
uses prior to resale or to create some badly needed public recreation areas.
As with other incidents in Hoboken's recent history, the irony of the fore-
closure situation is profound; what appears to be a loss for the city,could
be its opportunity to bring fresh and innovative uses to these areas.

Employment Changes

This aspect of the waterfront condition is difficult to ascertain with any
constancy due to the great fluctuation in other factors which are not
locational in nature. The rise and fall in employmen.t at Maxwell House
would appear to be directly linked to demand for a product which in turn
is dependent upon raw coffee supply and prices.

The ship repair facility at Bethlehem Steel is also subject to employment
changes on rather short notice.

The move from Hoboken by Standard Brands in 1976 caused the loss of 849
jobs. This meant the loss of about 170 jobs for Hobokenites if the same
ratio holds with other waterfront employers. The increasein shipping at
the Port Authority piers has provided some job activity,12 however, the
longshoremen involved are salaried whether there is work or not due to the
Guaranteed Annual Income arrangement. Thus their actiyity or lack of work
is not reflected.in unemployment figures for the area.

The difficulty in determining employment changes may be seen even more
clearly by a comparison of statistics gathered by the Division of Planning
and Research of the New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry for the
last two quarter@ of 1976 and material gathered in an personal interview
questionnaire procedure conducted by the WRP from January through March
1976.

Table 3-5

MAJOR WATERFRONT ESTABLISHMENTS
FULL TIME EMPLOYMENT

Firm WRP Survey N. J. Dept. of Labor & Industry
Date Employees Date Employees

American Can 2/11/7.6 100 Sept. thru Dec.1976 82
Bethlehem Steel 3/30/76 652 Sept. thru Dec. 641
Maxwell House 3/4/76 1,540 Sept. thru Dec. 1,049
P. A. Piers 2/23/76 0 Sept. thru Dec. NA
Standard Brands 3/15/76 849. Closed 4/29/76 0
Stevens Institute 3/29/76 507 Sept. thru Dec. 641

Far less localized in approach but still important for their content are
the employment figures amassed by the Department of Labor and Industry for
all of Hudson County shown in Table 3-6 which employs the Standard Industrial
Classification Codes14 which pertains to the firms along the Hoboken water-
front.

12. International Longshoremen's Association, Local 2 was contacted but
exact figures were not made available.
13. The Jersey Journal, "Jersey Journal Special - The Unemployed" in 3
parts. First Part February 7, 1977, page 13.
14. Office of Management and Budget, Standard Industrial Classification
Manual 1972, (Washington 1972).

Table 3-6.
Employment in Selected Categories in the Jersey City Labor Area
(Includes all of Hudson County)

1975

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Auq. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec

Food 8300 8200 81oo 81oo 8200 8300 81oo 8300 8200 8100 7900 7900
(20)

Apparel 12200 13700 13700 14000 14700 16000 14300 16300 16200 16700 164oo. 156oo
(23)

Transportation 1500 16oo 1500 1300 16oo 1500 1600 1300 1400 12bo 1200 1200
Equipment
(37)

Transportation 26400 26100 26200 26200 25900 26500 26100 266oo 27000 27100 268oO 26200

1976

Food 8000 8100 7900 7700 7500 7500 7500 7200 6800 7100 7200
(20)

Apparel 15000 12800 16200 .16500 17600 17200 15500 16400 17000 17200 17200
(23)

Transportation 1400 1300 1300 1400 1400 16oo I 4oo 1200 1500 1200 1400
Equipment
(37)

Transportation 26000 26200 25900 25900 26200 26100 25800 258oo 26ooo 26600 26700
(40 thru 47)

S.I.C. designation 2 digit code

It may be seen from the above table that the apparel industry increased
employment in 1976 while food preparation showed losses for every month
in 1976 as compared to 1975. Also transportation equipment showed
losses in employment four months out of 11 in 1976. The above displays
not only the sporadic nature of industrial employment along the waterfront
but also the fact that firms which are located along the river edge show
patterns of decline. Hoboken and Hudson County are.not unique in this
occurrence. The traditional uses of the waterfront in the New York metro-.
politan area (i.e., shipping, boat repair manufacturing) are no longer
large or expanding sources of.employment.15 Changing technologies,
altered transportation patterns and new industrial space needs have
brought a vacancy ratg of about 33 1/3% to the waterfront areas of the tri-
state region itself.'

Most obviously the time has come to reassess portside usage rather than
continue,the practice of dwelling upon port management which has been
the approach to waterfronts over the last several decades.17

Additions to Information about the Waterfront

Crime Statistics. After Waterfront Redevelopment Report #I: Existing
Conditions was published, requests for further information concerning
Hoboken were received by the WRP office. The one leading factor which was
sought was information concerning the crime rate in Hoboken. It is
added in Table 3-7.

15. New York City Planning Commission, The Waterfront, (New York,
January, 1971), P. 7.

16. Tri-State Regional Planning Commission, The Tri-State Coastal Zone:
Management Perseectives (New York City, April, 19757, -P.10.

17. Mitchell L. Moss, IlThe Urban Port: A Hidden Resource for the City
and the Coastal Zone, " Coastal Zone Management Journal, Volume 2,
Number 3, pp. 241-242.

Table 3-7

MAJOR CRIMES REPORTED, 1975-1976

Type of Offense. Reported
1976 1975

Murder, 2 0

Manslaughter 0 0
Forcible rape 2 0
Robbery 80 106
Aggravated assault 136 120
Break, E ntry & Larceny 752 776
Larceny (over $50.00) 437 354
Auto theft 354 347

Totals 1763 1712

(Source: Annual Report for 1976, Department of Public Safety, Department
of Police, Hoboken, New Jersey)

The city is considered to have a 17o crime rate, a very low figure for
an inner city.

Economic Base Information 18

Between 1963 pnd.1972 "the economic base of Hoboken (has) steadily dete-
riorated." The manufacturing and retail sectors reflected declines while
service industries showed growth. This Hoboken trend is consistent with
the regional growth patterns which the Regional Plan Association (RPA)
has been calling attention to for some years. RPA has noted that the
major increases in New York regional sources of employment to 2000 will
be experienced in the service industries and not in manufacturing.19

18. Statistics in this section are from.the Hoboken Community Develop-
ment Agency Report, "A Summary of Characteristics of Hoboken's
Economic Base - 1963-1972" by Edward J. Sullivan, Economist. Unpub-
lished report. All quotes in this section are from this source
except where otherwise noted.
19. Regional Plan Association, Projections for the New York Urban
Region's Counties, (New York, July, 1973).

Hoboken, like Hudson County itself is.basically a blue collar area
dependent.upon jobs in manufacturing and transportation.20 . The greatest
'humber of manufacturing firms in the city in 1972 was foundin the apparel
category (SIC 20). This information dovetails with the employment figures
mentioned in the sections above. There were in 1972 90 apparel firms
representing an increase of 14 firms since 1967. However between 1971
and 1975 one hundred and thirty-two other firms left the city or went
out of business. In those four years alone the number of total.jobs de
clined by 5,500.21

The number of wholesale trade firms in Hoboken declined by 35% (County
decline was Sr/o) from 1963 to 1972. Hoboken lost.46 of the 101 whole-
sale establishments which left Hudson County during that period. Though
total sales volume increased 55% in Hoboken, the County sales.increased
141% showing that Hoboken has suffered a distinct decline in wholesale
trade activity in comparison to the county which remains,fairly stable..

in the area of retail trade Hoboken sustained a 3WIo decrease in retail
establishments (Hudson County had a 24. decline). BY 1972, 55% of all
Hoboken retail firms had payrolls (County had 61%). It is interesting
to note that a great portion of the total sales volume in Hoboken (and
the County) was produced by firms with payrolls. In addition, "eating
and drinking places" (SIC 58) formed the largest retail business group.

The retail sales volume showed an increase of 40.8% in.Hoboken from 1963
to 1972 (88% for the County), but this is considered to be reflective of
inflationary causes. Generally, the city may be said to have lost retail
-firms and to be part of.a contracting market.

The Selected Service industries,in Hoboken (specifically SIC codes 70 and
75 were used in the Community Development Agency study) showed a loss of
@20 firms balanced by only I addition since 1967 for a net decrease of 7%
compared to an 11% decrease in the County. The total receipt volume,
however, increased by 17CP/o asopposed to 119% in the County. The Hoboken
Community Development Agency's economic base report notes this total
.receipt volume increase is a reason for viewing the.selected service
industries as an "increasingly 'important sector of the city's economy."

Increases displayed intotal receipt volume of selected-service industries
was not enough, however, to offset the.losses sustained in manufacturing
and retailing. It may be concluded.that though the general condition of

20. Hudson County Planning Board, Land Use Study and Plan, (Jersey City,
December, 1974), p. 45.
21. Hoboken Community Developm ent Agency, "Summary of Changes in Hoboken's
Manufacturing Industries 1,946 -1975," (Hoboken September, 1976).
.Unpublished report.

Hoboken's economic base is deteriorating there may be some hope,to..be
found in future encouragement of carefully chosen service industries
such as those represented in SlC groups 70 through 84.

These groups include: hotels, personal and.business services; auto
repair; motion pictures; other amusement and recreation services; health;
legal, educational and social- services, and museums. Also of worth may
be the whole spectrum of activities-found in SIC groups 60 to 67, i.e.
finance,, insurance and real estate.

CHAPTER 4: ALTERNATIVE USESFOR THE WATERFRONT

This chapter illustrates how the waterfront has been, used over the.,Iast
few years without capital investment of any sort. Some further sugges-
tions are made as to other future uses some of which will require capital
investment.

Operation Sail

Perhaps the most energetic and intensive waterfront project of 1976 or any
year which sought immediate and inexpensive use of river front property
was Operation Sail, the New York Harbor Bicentennial celebration. the
dangers in and limitations of waterfront usage became apparent during the
planning for the-event. In general, communities in the north Hudson County
area discovered a lack of potable water, electricity, sanitary facilities
(even lack of sewerage lines), as well as impassable roads and hazardous
conditions due to deteriorating piers and disintegrating bulkheads.,

In Hoboken the lack of space for public access to the river's edge became
an additional problem. Police had to*contact private property owners to
caution them that they probably would experience attempts at tresspassing
and would have to provide adequate policing of their areas so that the
public could not enter. If accidents were to occur, individual owners
were warned that they would be liable.

The Stevens Long Dock - one of the areas intended foe public access (see
Map Section D) was subjected to an engineering review in June.2 As a
result of the study's discoveries, the area had to be closed to the public.
This closing left only River Road itself for public access to the water-
front area. As a result the six blocks from 4th to 10th Streets (Map 1-1,
Sections C, D, E) were heavily utilized on July 4. Portable toilets had
to be provided by the City. The owners of the 5th Street pier

1. A recent report by Judy Bryngil for WRP concerning the infrastructure
along the Weehawken waterfront, shows these lacks in detail in that
community also. January 1977.

2. William C. Kerr, P. E., Safety Investigation of the Stevens Pier
Facilities for Use as Viewing Area for "Operation Sail," Center for
Municipal Studies and Service*, (Hoboken, New Jersey June 21, 1976).
Unpublished report.

Section C) sold tickets for July access. Stevens Institute granted
permission, upon written request, for private boats to weigh anchor in
the Yacht Club anchorage (southern, part Section D), the only mooring area
along the Hoboken shoreline. In addition, Stevens Institute had Alumni
Weekend in progress by July 4 so that the upper campus was fully utilized.
Maxwell House (southern part Secti,on F) opened its waterfront parking lot
to employees, their families and invited friends. Port Authority (Section
B) opened Pier C to a selected group of people.

What became very obvious in July was that access to the waterfront with-
out a ticket or express permission was extremely limited for a reason.
The owners of areas which were utilized had the following demands made
upon them:
1. Increased liability coverage;
2. Need to provide all amenities - toilet facilities,
water, telephone, electricity;
3. The expense of maintenance during and clean up
after the event;
4. Need to provide for parking.

Hoboken is reques .ting $26,063 from the state for its Operation Sail
expenses.3 The breakdown is as follows:

Operation Sail expenditures Amount
Police (overtime) $11,723,85
Firemen (overtime) 2,795.55
Crossing guards - traffic direction 992.00
Public safety personnel 1,096.20
Public Works personnel 6,671-00
Public Works - park personnel (overtime) .687-00
Portable toilets (12) July 3 - 4 - 5 1,6oo.oo
Signs 498.00

$26,o63.6o

Other expenses such as fencing, litter basket purchases and repairs of
drinking fountains in the parks were charged to other accounts and are,
therefore, not reflected in the above amount.

On July 4, 1976, the waterfront of New York Harbor was never so much in
demand for general public usage and never was it more apparen,t that there
is little space for that general public.
3. Hoboken application for reimbursement from the state for Operation
Sail expenditures.

In the main, the following requirements for people usage of the water-
f ron.t rose to the fore:

1. Need for an area of river edge publi.c access
in every waterfront community;
2. Need for a mooring area in every riverfront
community;
3. Need for potable water, electricity and sewerage
lines to*be installed or connected to existing
main lines;
4. Need for careful design and supervision of water-
front properties and,their usage.

Erie Lackawanna Ferry Terminal Boat'Service.to Gateway.

During the summer of 1976 the Hoboken Community Development Agency in
cooperation with the Waterborne Transportation Subcommittee of the Gateway
National Park System initiated a demonstration boat service from,Hoboken
to two Gateway sites - Sandy Hook and Floyd Bennett Field. On 4 occasions
400 passenger Circle Line boats were *rented and over 1,600 residents of
Hoboken, Jersey City and Hudson County enjoyed trips of I to 1-L hours one
2
way as well as the joys of outdoor recreation and,exhibits. at Gateway
destinations. The boats left from and returned to the Immigrant Pier at
the Erie Lackawanna Terminal (southern part Section A).

In June,legislation (S 5599) was read into the Congressional Record by
Senator Harrison Williams which asks for a demonstration project,under
Section 6 of the Urban Mass Transportation Actof 1964 to provide mass
water4orne transportation servicefrom Jersey City and Keyport to Sandy
Hook. Representative James Howard, and.later Representative James Florio,
supported the legislation. Though WRP supports the concept of another,
more extensive 'demonstration project, researchers think that it would be
far more productive and sensible to irittiate the ferry service at Hoboken,
because:

First, Hoboken's Erie Lackawanna Terminal was selected for
the initial demonstration projection 1976 because of its
sound physical docking conditions which were ready for imme-
diate use; availability of public rest room and waiting room.
facilit'ies; access to PATH, Amtrak and bus service (to Hudson
and Bergen counties as well as Manhattan); access to taxi ser-
vice; availability of 1,600 public parking spaces within two
blocks of the Terminal; interest in the Terminal as a building
on the National Register of Historic Places; proximity to a
great number of low-mobility populations. ,
4. Congressional Record Senate, June 21, 1976,'SIO024-10025.

.46

Second, Hoboken has already demonstrated the feasibility
of conducting.the servic6,from the Terminal.

Third, the Terminal is undergoing study,and redevelopment.
It is meant to house a regional commercial/cultural com-
plex-which will include shops,, food stands, museums, public
plazas, a waterfront park and a market. The Terminal has
already received federal.grants for such planning. The
ferry service would enhance the Terminal and the Terminal,
in turn, would enhance the ferry service.

It makes more sense to run Gateway ferry service from the Erie Lacka-
wanna Terminal - an in-place inner c'ity hub than from other New York
Harbor locations.

Historic Site Celebrations

Another immediate use for the waterfront area which,occurred during 1976
was the creation of historic celebrations at particular sites. Two of
these events occurred last year: one on May 13, the other on June 19.

First Locomotive Celebration.

May 13, 1976. This event was spurred by Stevens In'stitute and the Water-
front Redevelopment Project with the cooperation of the Hoboken Bicenten-
nial Committee. It focused upon the blocks between Newark and First Streets
on River Street (northern part of section A) near which site the first
public demonstration of an American-built locomotive took place in 1826..
A temporary marker was prepared and a formal public ceremony was held in
front of the Post Office Building on May 13. The tablet is pr esently
being transformed into a bronze plaque and will be permanently placed by
mid-1977.

.The locomotive event added to the historic importance of the southern
waterfront area of Hoboken. The locomotive plaque will join the ever-
growing numberof historic markers planned for City Hall and the Erie
.Lackawanna Terminal, both buildings which have been proclaimed New Jersey
Historic Sites and been placed in the National Register of Historic Places.

First Basehall Game Celebration.

June 19, 1976. This celebration was planned by the Hoboken Bicentennial
Committee in conjunction with the City and Stevens Institute. The first
professional game of baseball in the United States was played in the
Elysian Fields, Hoboken on June 19, 1846. Today's Elysian Park on Hudson

Street between IOth and Ilth Streets (Section E) is the last vestige of
those Elysian Fields, the outdoorrecreation center for millions.from
1820 to the 1880's. Areenactment ofthe original 4-inning game.was
played on the Stevens Insti'tute playing field. More than 1,000 people
attended the event enjoying the day, the festivities and Hoboken
These two occurrences.were p1easant, informative, inexpensive to run and
the source of excellent publicity.f6.r the City of Hoboken in its continuing
rise to nationa.1 prominence as an'urban renaissance community.

Tourism on the Waterfront.

The historic event celebrations opened up a new, if at first unbelieving,
source of pride and excitement for the people of Hoboken and a novel means.
of telling the world about their city. However, the events have not pro-
vided continuing tourist attractions for the cil.ty. Tourism requires a
regular schedule of displays.of specific sites,which'are prepared and
publicized, in advance, for public view. Thoughthe city of Hoboken with.
its rich history and its magnificent waterfronivistas appears to have
the potential to att.ract.numbers of people looking for something different,
that potential needs to be exploited much more than it has been to date.

Besides the Erie Lackawanna Terminal and Elysian Park, the following are
also historic waterfront areas.
Hoboken.Land and Improvement Building -, River and Newark Streets
(Section A). An 1889 example of an office structure, it housed
the Stevens' family company which developed Hoboken after the
death.of Colonel John Stevens in 1838. Its interior is con-.
structed in imitation.of a. ferry boat.
Embarkation Monument -.River Street at Second (Section B)
"The Boulder" commemorates, the area through-which three
million soldiers passed on.their way to andfrom Europe during
the First World War. On December 4. 1918 President Woodrow
Wilson sailed from this same point for the Paris Peace Con-
ference in search of a lasting peace.
Hamburg-American Line and North German Lloyd Line - River Street
from 3rd to 4th Streets (now occupie-d by the Port Authority piers).
These piers were the sites of the famous German shipping lines
which to a great extent were responsible.for making Hoboken.into
a shipping center. The heavy German population which congregated
in Hoboken beginning in the 1860's had its source of employment
from these same shipping lines. The German population showed a
marked decrease during and after.World War I when the piers
were confiscatedby the U. S. Government. The Federal Govern-
ment retains ownership to this day.

Stevens Park originally-.known as Hudson Square.Park - The
@land be@tween 4th and 5th Streets bordered by Hudson Street
was.dedicated as a park by Colonel John Stevens in 1804but
developed i-n,1875-.'It is the'resting place of the cannons
'from the.U.S.S. Portsmouth*which.participated in the battle
of San Francisco in 1848. The Civil-War memorial statue was
dedicatedin 1888 by General William Tecumseh Sherman.
Stevens Institute of Technology Original building 5th and
Hudson Streets...' The building was.designed by the famous
Richard Upjo,hn.and built in 1870. It was the place where the
American.Society of Mechanical Engineers was founded in 1880.
It housed all of the teaching and a'dministrative services of
the college for many years.

Gate House 6th Street past River Street. The oldest
building on'the Stevens campus, it was orginally the home for
..the shepherdess who tended the flocks on the Stevens.estate.
It is.made of serpentine rock and has defied the weather since

Cas tle Point River Road from approximately 8th to 9th Streets.
This outcrop of serpen,tine.rock is a* rarity'in New Jersey and
along the East Coast.. It is the formation which is described
in the log of The Half-Moon during Henry Hudson's'voya ge of 160.9.,
The log describes 11 a cl,iffe ... of the color of a whi-te greene,
as.though it were.either copper or silver myne.11
Sybil's Cave River Road about 8th Street The Cave is no
longer discernible in the face of the Castle.Point.cliff but
it could be excavated and restored'. Here in.1820, Colonel
John Stevens.had-a shaft driven intothe rock and brought up
spring water which@was to becomerenownedfor its crystal clear
,and refreshing qualities. Around the spring Stevens constructed
a Goth '.ic portal, set out tables and chairs by the riveffront
and created the mini-spa which was the beginning of the Hoboken
waterfront as a resort for millions.

River.Road and 1.0th Street Site of the first New York, Yacht
Club founded in 1844. The clubhouse built at this site.was the
meeting place for the wealthy men of the day who later were
.to sponsor a yacht in the British Royal Yacht Squadron Race
held off thelsle.of Wight in 1855. The yacht gave its name to
the .100 Guinea C,up.offered as a prize.. Because of its unex-
pected and quite spectacu,lar success in the British race., not
only the cup but the race itself bears the name of the victor
America. The America's Cup Race has been won since that time
by a United States contender and almost every time by a New
York Yacht Club member. (The original clubhouse is'.now at the
Mystic'Seaport Museum -in Connecticut.)

Bethlehem Steel,Ship Yards -,Hudson Street between l3th and.
l4th Streets. --..This was formerly the s.ite of the Fletcher
and Sons yard, manufacturers of some of.the finest marine
engines in the world.. The engines were found on Hudson.River
boats and other U. S. steamers. _T1h6 Ticonderoga, which is
magnificently preserved at the Shelbourne Museum in Vermont,
contains a Fletcher engine.

Weehawken Cove@@,- Hudson and l6th Streets The area where
Henry Hudson anchored The Half-Moon on October 2,@1609.
Later this Cove became, the northernmost point of the Elysian
Fields, the outdoor recreation area which extends from
Tenth Street northward.
This listing of sites shows how the Hoboken waterfront has'pla.yed a vital,
as well as a.creative role, in the developmental history of the city. A
tourism.plan which incorporated all of these sites into, 6 package could
be attractive. Inspection of the sites, under the direction ofa know-
ledgeable guide, could provide a weekend attraction during the' spring,
summer and fall seasons.. Stops at other buildings in town, such as Holy
Innocents Church, would enhance such a tour. The waterfront, however,
would be the focal point.

All of the above would need to be made more presentable for tourists.
For instance, Sybil's Cave would have to be reconstructed., a period redeco-.
ration of an office in the Hoboken Land and Improvement:Building would be
necessary, the headhouse at Port Authority's Pier B would have to.be:
reconverted to look like a turn-of-the-century passenger terminal, or per-
haps the 1918-20 when the U. S. troops departed and returned from WoIrld
War 1. A novel mode oftransportation would be needed to take people on,.
the tour of the. waterfront, perhaps a diesel-powered antique trolley,.
horse drawn carriage or steam engine train..

Obviously, all ofl,this requires anlinvestment in time, plann,ing and,mcney,
but it could be a means of utilizing the historic and scenic featurbs.6f
a very old city.. (See Chapter 5 Recireation,for a further d'iscussion.of
tourism.)

U. S. S. New@ Jersey

Another possible tourist attraction is presently being discussed for the
Hoboken,waterfront. It would be the placement of,the:battleship U.S.S.
New Jersey south of the Erie Lackawanna Terminal. The ship would be used
as an educational/museum center. A state Commission has been created.Dy
the Governorof New Jersey to explore the'feasibility of state ownership
of the ship and of.the costs of maintaining it. The Commission.must a1so,
determine how to finance all of the follow.ing: the towing charges from
the west coast; provision of permane,nt mooring; creation and implemen-
tation of a plan for renovation and redecoration; discovery of the nucle-
us for a museum collection and the evolution of an attractive, well-

organized and informative educationa.1/museum presentation. Competition
is keen among Jersey City, Hoboken and five other cities for t he siting of
the ship. Though this ship could add to the Hoboken tourism attractions
discussed above, once more it requires.a large investment of money, as
well as continuous operating expense by a special organization. As of
this writing, the investigation offeasibility is continuing.

Hoboken Midsummer Carnival and River City Fair

Thought should be given to the feasibility of having a Midsummer Carnival.
The carnival would consist primarily of rides, merry-go.-a.round, ferris
wheel and others, as well as prize contests, and cotton candy confections.
An appropriate site would be River Road which can be closed off for a few
days.

The feasibility study would start with the Amusement Business Magazine,
published at Ono Astor Place, New York City. This,publication, a weekly,.
gives details on travelling carnival.shows. There are numerous problems
to beconsidered: for example resources required of Hoboken such as police
protection, sanitary facilities; parking problem since people from.all
over Hudson County would be coming; other than entertainment,,wou.1d.Hot)oken
profit economically or socially?

In 1973 and 1974 there was a,River City Fair held in late July on the
Stevens' Long Dock. It did not have the rides and carnival mentioned.
above; but presented displays by local and regional.groups, an art show,
flea market,live animals presented by the Newark Museumj,live entertain-
ment, the ship Clearwater which people could board, ethnic food standsi
plant and vegetable vendors. Both fairs attracted over 5,000 People and
received newspaper and television coverage.

CHAPTER 5: POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE USES@@OF tHEWATERFRONT WITH CAPITAL
INVESTMENT

.The objective of this chapter is to examine potential indust.rial, commer-
cial, residential and recreational reuses of the waterfront.-In Chapter
6 suggestions will.be,made for locating those uses that appear to have
potelntial.

Industrial Land Use

From the 1860's to the 1940's ther[-Ioboken waterfrontwas a site for ship-
ping, manufacturing, railroading and warehousing. Today,.as the land use
chart in Chapter 3 indicates, these uses combined represent less than half
of the modes of utilization of the area. This has occurred because few
industrial firms any longer find a 'waterfront location attractive-or nec-
cessary. Urban waterfronts have.problems, as was di.scussed in Report #1:
Existing Conditions and other reports.1 Road access, to'the Hoboken river-
front area is limited when viewed by today's technological requirements.
In addition, room'for expansion is.not available. It.becomes apparent
from the limitations of access and space.that only an industrial operation
which requires a waterfront location as an integral,part of its operation
would be willing to suffer the inconveniences of the Hoboken"waterfron.t.

This trend of decline in use by industry,and frequent abandonmenthas been
seen and documented in the Harbor region itself, not,justin Hoboken. In
1949 a Port Authority survey showed that 16% of prime New Jersey h.arborfront
was used for industrial purposes, 21% for shipping, 42% for ra,il,roads and
11% was underdeveloped.2 By 1962 the New Jersey Department of Conservation
and Economic Development discovered that 23% of the New Jersey harborfront
along the Hudson River and Upper bay was undeveloped or abandoned,3 an
increase in abandonment with a corresponding decline in non-residential
uses. In .1975, the Tri-State Planning Commission performed still another
study. The Harbor area (defined as the mouths of the Hudson, Passaic,

1. Helen Manogue, Center for Municipal Studies and Services, pp..48-51.;.
Mayo, Lynch and Associates for the Hoboken Planning Board, Fiscal
Study, p. RT - 5.
2.1 The Port of New York Authority, Marine Terminal Survey of the New
-Jersey Waterfront , February, 1949.
3. New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development,
Waterfront Utilization in Northeast New Jersey, 1962.

Raritan and East Rivers) was found to be both symbol andfoundation for
the Tri-State Region's economic wealth and influence ... but large sec-
tions of its shore are unprofitably archaic *"4 The actual usage f4gures
forthe Harbor showed that there had1been a 43% decrease in industrial.ll@
shipping/railroad uses since 1949. BY 1975, one-third of the [email protected]'
undeveloped or abandoned, an increa-se of 21% since 1949. ThIs trend
would appear to be continuing as "the central harborfront shakes off
its dingy industrial heritage." 5

As early as.1966 the Tri-State Regional Planning Commission stated that
"the redevelopment of harborfront land must be directed toward residential
and recreatioryal,uses. Industrial uses are questionable due to the con-
'gestion which characterizes many waterfront areas."6

Industry in general, not just that on the waterfront, has been moving from
the city to greener pastures, where there is room to build horizontal
buildings in line.with the changed technologies of production, where there
is area to expand, less congestion on the roads, more parking space, and
where executives my have all amenities only a few miles from home and
family. The cleaner, more pleasant environment of the suburbs (and the
southern part of the Uniied States), has proved to be a mighty lure for
all types of industrial facilities.

In the case of New Jersey,there-are additional reasons for the departure
of -industrial concerns. A survey of the eight states with which New Jersey
normally competes - New York, Delaware, Ohio, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Connecticut, Massachusetts and.South Carolina - was undertaken by the
Governor's Economic Recovery Commission.7 It shows that New Jersey ranks
as follows:
2nd,most costly in manufacturing hourly wage
5.th mostcostly in building costs
3rd most costly in state and local taxes
2nd most costly in unemployment insurance and workmen's
compensation

.4. Tri-State Regional Planning Commission, The Changing Harborfront,
1966, p.io.
5. Tri-State Regional Planning Commission, The Tri-State Coastal Zone:
Management Perspectives, April, 1975, P. I.
6. OR, 6it., The Changing Harborfront, p. 11.
7. Governor's Economic Recovery Commission, Vol. I., January, 1976,
pp. 55-56.-

1st mos t c os t I yi ncoa I
3rd mos t costly in electrical powe r
4th most costly in natural gas (if available)
2nd most costly in oil

The conclusion of the Commission was that New Jersey is a "high cost"
..state. For these and the reasons of aging and the obsolescence of exist-
ing facilities. Hoboken and, its Waterfront.area.have all been losing
industry. Wil-I it come back?

That is the question which the State of New Jerseyis trying to answer.
in an attempt to overcome what has been recognized as a long-term economic
decl.ine (from 1970 onward) the-New Jersey Department of Labor and Indus-
trly,,Division-of Economic Development, has been trying to promote inter-
national trade, tourism, business advocacy and technical assistance to
business. An infusion of time and money has also been made by the Eco-.
nomic Development Authority (EDA), aga,in of the Department of Labor and
Industry. The EDA offers federally subsidized loans to finance industrial
and business expansion, plant construction, acquisition and renovation of
machinery and equipment. It also guarantees loans and provides subsidized
finance,for@pollution devices. It cannot, however, provide equity or
working capital, both elements which economists think are e'ssentia.] to the
recovery of an-Ol.d industrial state such as New.Jersey whic,h needs "diver-
sification and new enterprises, replacement industries for those it will
inevitably lose to other, lower cost,.regions.,,8

In factP New Jersey has many of.the aspects of a "one-crop economy,
an economic system based..upon one type of.activify. In the case of
New Jersey the state appears to certain planners and 'economists to be top-
heavy with industry, so much so that when a recession hi.ts,and th.elheavy
industrial.community is inevitably affected the sta-t6 has little else to
fall back upon.9 Hudson County, with 34.1% of its land devoted to indus-
trial uses, has three times.as much land in this category as the.,next
htghest New Jersey County (Union, 11.3%). This may be.one of the factors
which.has placed Hudson County in.the,position of contti.nuing and lengthy
economic decline. (Hudson County Economic Base Study notes that from 1963
to 1974 unemployment rates in the county have been.higher than in a ny
other.New Jersey County.)

In li:ght of these problems, it should be obvious. that the traditional or
historic uses of urban land must be carefully reexamined.- New Jersey is
an lold"Andustrial state with an "aging capital-stock" which has been

@8. Peter Bearse, "What's to be Done with an.Old Industrial State?';,
New Jersey Magazine, Vol. 6 No. 9, p.43.
9'. Ed:. F. Bergman, et al, A Geography of the New York Metropolitan-
'Region Kendall/Hunt Publishing,..1975, P. 130.

made so by lack of an adequate rate of investment in the manufacturing
.sector.10 To perpetuate old.uses,such as certain types of traditional
industry may destroy the future just as surely as the present is being
undermined. Economic growth1will not come with re etition.but with
"diversification, innovation and new enterprise.1117

If the state is to attract new industry, however, it is conceded by most
that therewill have to be some adjustments in the tax pos.ture of the
state, and.especially that.w'hich pertains to the cities. The property
tax is a particular problem. Tax abatements are suggested by the Depart-
ment of Labor and Industry and others as'a major factor in attracting
industry back into the cities. This 1s a problem for a city such as
Hoboken which already has many taxabated as well as tax exempt properties.
Can it afford more of the same without special compensation from the state?
It.may be time for the cities to do their own benefit-cost analysis in
order to determine if industry attracted at the expense of tax abatement
is worth it. There is some opinion it is not. It may be time for cit,ies
such as Hoboken to place a different emphasis on growth and enumerate
just what factors are essential in order to make new economic facilities
attractive and beneficial to the city.' In other words it may be time to
take a new approach to economic expansion.

Factors for Economic Growth

One of the essential features for any type of expansion (whether industrial,
or commercial) is that the facility provide jobs for residents. The un-
employment rate in Hoboken stands at 13.2% (county rate is 9.40.12 Hoboken
unemployment reflects an actual loss of 3,900 jobs in the industrial sector
from 1963 to 1972. In addition,, the population is heavily blue collar so
that,the city needs unskilled and semi-skilled obs in quantity or extensive
in-service training and retraining programs for residents to prepare them
for new careers.

Another factor which Hoboken should seek in any new industrial or commer-
.cial placement is firms which will not add to the pollution of the area.
Hudson County has one of the highest rates of pollution in the state.13
It also has one of the highest rates of cancer in a state known as "Cancer
A I I ey."14

10. Dr. Adam Broner, Economic Policy Council quoted in New Jersey Magazine,
p. 41, also see "New Jersey's Manufacturing Industries: A Long-Run
Overview," 8th Annual Report of the New Jersey Economic Policy Council.
I]. Op. Cit., New Jersey Magazine,-P.42.
12. Communication from New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry,
Division of.Labor Statistics, Ray Daly, January 13, 1977.
13. Joseph Albright, ''Jersey City air worst in state," The Jersey Journal
March, 1977, P. I.
14. New.Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,Cancer and Environ-
ment, May 25, 1976, p. 19.

Recent reports from the Cancer-institute of New Jersey have noted that
1,proportionally, New.Jersey'..s incidence of cancer mortality-is greater
than that of any other state in America."15 Dr. Donald B. Louria, chair-
man of the Department of.Preventive Medicine and Community Health at the
New Jersey Medical School in Newark has found that "the excessive New
Jersey mortality (duelo cancer) appears to be concentrated in the 13
northern counties."16 :According to the New Jersey Health Department,
Hudson County has the highest rate of cancer in the state.17 The New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has already begun to inveh-
tory and monitor carcinogens and other environmental contaminants. The
New Jersey Department of Health has received a grant from the National
Cancer.Institute to conduct epidemiologic studies which will attempt to
further define relationships between.the cancer mortality in the state and
occupational exposures. In the meantime however, it behooves Hudson County
to be extremely careful in the selection of new economic growth facilities.
New sources of carcinogenic and other contaminants should be discouraged.

Pollution also has another effect upon the county and city. The desire on
the part of corporate executives in industry and commerce for clean air,
nice settin s - in general, ahealthy, pleasant environment, - has been
documented.78 New Jersey has a poor image in the area of pollution and
congestion. If the state itself, much less Hoboken, is to attract new
industry and commerce,it must clean up present environmental problems and@
prevent others from occurring. The old adage, "which comes first, the
chicken or the egg," no longer can be applied to pollution and economic
decline. It is obvious that a dirty and polluted environment drives out
most forms of economic opportunity. Hoboken and other cities can no longer
afford to provide sites for pollution and evnironmental degradation. If
the city wants the most jobs for the most people it may have to forego
certain types of heavy industry in the interest of the over-all physical
and economic well-being of its people.:

15. Cancer Institute of New Jersey, "A Report on Cancer Mortality in the
State of New Jersey 1950-1969.11 January 1, 1976, p.2.
16. "Cancer in New Jersey: An Overview," paper presented at the Seminar
for Physicians: Cancer Risk Identification Within New Jersey,
May 1-2, 1976, p. 10.
17. New Jersey Department of Health, Hudson Health Systems Agency.

18. New Jersey,State Chamber of Commerce in conjunction with Business
.Week Magazine conducted a nationwide survey of 2000 corporate
executives. See reference in Governors Economic Recovery Commiss-i-0
Report, Vol. 1, pp. 92-3.

Still one more feature which Hoboken must find in new facilities is
intensive use of,it,s land. There is lit-tie undeveloped land in Hoboken
so that vacant areas must be used in such a:way as to accommodate as many
workers per square foot (and uses per building) of building 'space as
possible. It is not such a'surpr,i,se to see that square foot usage per
employee by,firms which.have prospered-on the Hoboken waterfront is rather
high. An interv.iew/survey of major industrial and service orga .ni7ations
was conducted by the WRP from January thru March 1976. It s'howed the
following results:

Type of facility Number of years Sq. footage per Employees
in employee per acre
2
1 ca"tion
_0

Ship repair 86 684 63
Food preparation 38 493 88
Container manufacturing 35 930 '51
Testing 49 501 84

The figure of 750 square feet per employee was the Hudson County average
in.196.3 (one of the.highest in the tri-state region). By comparisonj the
present figures are generally below the 1963 county figure, a time before
Hudson County hit its economic decline.

Firms.which already operate in Hudson County and which show intensive use
of space are:

Category Employees per acre

Leather and leather products 289.8
Apparel and other textile products 147.7
Printing and publishing 102.1
Textile mill products 98.7
Electrical equipment and supply 86.9

(Source: Hudson County Land Use Study and Plan, December 1974.).

All of the above except Electrical Equipment and Supply constitute indus-
try which maybe classified as light rather than heavy. Most also tend to
utilize the skills of local residents thus producing a combination of
merit for the area.

o 19
Foreiqn Trade.Z nes

One type of, industrial development which ha,s,been receiving increased
attention over the last several. years in urban areas is the Foreign Trade
Zone (FTZ). FTZ's were created in 1934 by :the federal.government as a
means of improving the balance of trade, as a service to the U. S. business
community and as a way of encouraging operations which otherwise would be
conducted abr6ad.due to Customs laws.

"A.foreign trade zone is an.isolated,.enclosed and policed area,
operated aIsa public utility, in or adjacent to-a port of entry,
furnished:.:with facilities.for lading, unladi.ng, handling, storing,
manipulating, and exhibiting goods, and for reshipping them by
land, waterora.ir. Any.foreign and domestic merchandise-may be
brought into:a.zone without being subject to the customs'laws of the
United States..'.such merchandise.. Imay be sorted, exhibited, manu-'
factured, mixed or manipulated.,' 2.0

Duties are paid only when the goods from the FTZ enter the domestic mar-
ket. The foreign exporter benefits from this low-cost d1stribution cen-
ter. American importers benefit from the zone by having goods from
abroad brought into, the zone where they require no duty and may be in'spec-
for compliance to specifications.

More importantly, imported parts may be converted into manufactured items
which are subject to lower duty. An example of this procedure is, found in
foreign-made typewriter parts which are subject to customs duty. These
parts may enter a Forett,gn Trade Zone free of duty and be utilized in the
Zone to make complete typewriters which may enter the U. S..duty free.21
Obviously, the importer benefits from.this operation but s6.can the local
job market if the right type of-manufacturing is performed.

In 1975 there were 11 foreign-trade zones in the U. S. (five more have,
been approved since then While.New Haven and Bridgeport, Connecticut are
currently moving toward FTZ cr eatio,n). Well over 800 firms used thezones
during fiscal 1975.22

19. For a full discussion,of this zone see Donald E. Asdorian, "A Compar-
ative Study of Special Customs Facilities: Bonded Warehousing and
Foreign-Trade Zones," Center for Municipal Studies and.Services,
Student Report, 1976.
20. Commerce and Trade, Chapter IV, Part 400, Title 15.
21. Foreign Trade Zone No. 1, of New York, S & F Warehouses, Inc.
Brooklyn, N.Y.
22. 37th Annual Report of the Foreign Trade Zones Board to the Congress
of the United Stat;s, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Washington', D. C.

FTZ 's may be involved in simply storing and processing but it is 'where
there is substitution for overseas manufacturing operations that zones
make their greatest economic cpntribution.1123 In addition, some of-the
mos .t@succ essful FTZ's are incl .uded in public indus.trial'parks., ln'@@fact
the location of'an FTZ within an industrial park appears to be an attrac-
tion to many firms.24 Many successful zones have small volume-high value
industries such as electrical equipment firms.25.

The only New York Harbor FU is located in the former,Brooklyn Navy Yard,
Building 77. Operated.in 140,000 square feet, the Brooklyn facility
served 95 firms in 1975. The goods handled ranged frOm atuomotive parts
to watches. Most of the activityin the FTZ involved inspection, repack-
ing and remarking. The facility showed a slight deficit for the year.

Before an FTZ may be created by the Federal Traide Board, several procedures
are required:,
1. an economic survey must be performed which will justify creation 'and
encourage foreign trade. Included in this is indication of how many
firms would use the facility; (15CFR Part 400.400)
2. .proof must be given of the ability to finance the zone; (400.40 1)
3. proof must be given of adequate physical facilities, i.e., adequacy,
of slips, wharves, docks; transportation connections; warehouse
availability; light, power, water, sewer facilities; fire protection;
.availability of administration and living quarters1for officers and
employees. (400.402)

Preference is given to public corporations. rather than private. (400.503)
Zones must-be planned and operated as public utilities..

The Port Authority is in, the process of assessing the nee 'd for such a
facility in New Jersey (probably at Port Elizabeth or Port Newark because
of land area availability). However, a, preliminary needs,survey has not
established a desire for an FTZ26 at this time.

The basis for the creation of an FTZ is the number and types of firms
willing to enter into agreements for use of the zone. The key to the

23. Op. cit. Foreign Trade Zone No. 1, p.l., also David Glickinan, Port
Authorit; of New York and New Jersey, meeting February 13,-1976.
24. Conversation with Mr. Simmons, New Jersey Department of Labor and
Industry, Division of Economic Development, March 11, 1977.
25. Op. cit., Glickman.
26. Conversation with J. Gorman, Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey, March 11, 1977.

success of an FTZ is, manufacturing. If the idea were to be pursued in
Hoboken,.possibly.as'part of an industrial park,the following elements
would have to be studied first:

1. survey of FTZ market
2. determination oVcosts
an analysis of benefit over regular manufacturing areas as well as
bonded warehouse (the latter also provide duty free storage but for
a limited time)
examination of potential for inclusion in an industrial park
complex.

Onshore Support Facilities for Oil and Gas Exploration

Sites on shore are currently being sought to act as landbased support
areas for the oil and gas exploration off the coast of New Jersey. There
are five basic types of support facilities:

1. Temporary service bases

2. Permanent service bases
3. Support bases for platform and pipeline installation
4. Repair and maintenance yards,
5. Pipe coating yards

The Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies of Rutgers University is
already in the process of a study which is to determine where such facili-
ties might be placed in New Jersey. Though particular emphasis is being
placed on Raritan Bay, the Atlantic coastline and Delaware River and Bay,
the Hudson River area could also be considered.

Of the five types of facilities listed above, three might be considered
in Hoboken.

Temporarv service bases

This type of base would be leased for one year or less. It would be used
for the transfer of materia.1s and workers to and from the offshore drill-
ing areas. It would need to be accessible to helicopters,% trucks and cars,
have an excellent communication network as well as ample storage area. It
would have to operate in all weather providing a 15-20 foot draft at its
docks, supplying a wharf space of 200 feet.per drilling.rig and,should
have service facilities close at hand.

The Port.Authority piers obviously have the space available for such a
base and also have the piers, headhouse and protected area already in
place. The pi.ers, however, suffer from poor accessibility for vehicular
traffic as noted in Report #1:_ Existing Conditions. They also would
have difficulty in accommodating helicopter service in the area. Being
in such close proximity to the apartments in Grogan Marine View Plaza, the
piers as such would not be an acceptable place to create the congestion
and noise that,would beattendant upon thes,e bases.

Permanent service bases

These facilities are very much the same as the temporary type except that
they would serve still more rigs and be even more intensively used over
longer period of time. Again, outside of the Weehawken Cove area, which
.needs much capital, investment since it is practically now all underwater.
Also it presents difficult access problems.* There are no places along the
Hoboken shoreline where such bases could be located.

Repair and maintenance yards

This type of facility would probably utilize existing yards which are in-
volved in hull repair, mechanical and electronic as well as,large (ocean-
going) vessel repairs. The large vessel would be serviced in places other
than the "frontier area" - presumably this could mean in the Hudson River.

The Bethlehem Steel ship repair yards in Hoboken would be ideal for such
large ship, non-frontier-area repairs. No other site in Hoboken could
accommodate these facilities.

The other two types of anticipated onshore facilities would not be appro-
priate for Hoboken. The platform and. pipeline,installation facilities would
require vast amounts of open storage, warehouse and office space@in com-
bination with ma intenance and repair facilities. Hoboken has no such
facilities nor space in which to create them. In addition the platform
and pipeline installation facilities are supposed to be as close to the
area where the platforms and pipelines are to be installed in the ocean.
Hoboken is approximately 175 miles from the nearest of these sites as they
are now being discussed.

The other type of onshore facility which would not be feasible in Hoboken
is the pipe coating yard. These yards would have to provide facilities
which contained chemical primers, and could provide concrete coating and
wire mesh reinforcement. There is no space along the Hoboken waterfront

In a study completed in May 1977, the Port Authority examined the
Weehawken Cove area as well as their own piers. Their study concluded
that both sites were unacceptable for either a temporary or permanent
base. The land areas are too sma-11 as compared with other available
sites. See Support Bases for offshore Drilling: The Port of New
York Potential.

for such operations with the pos5ible exception of the Port Authority piers.
In the instance of the pipe coating yard as in that of the temporary and
permanent service bases, theproximity of the Port Authority piers to the,
residential area of Grogan Marine View Plaza (actualty just across the
street) as well as the city's plans for the growth of a much-improved
southern commercial and residential section in this area, prohibit the in-
trusion of this type of heavy industr.ial operation. It should not occur
in this area. This third possible use bas so many unfavorable character-
istic that it is considered unacceptable.

Containerization

The Tri-State Regional Planning Commission has stated that "concentration..,
of waterborne commerce in the Region's Central harbor subzone has been and
will be the most important economic activity of the coastal zone.,,27 The,
Commission also notes, however, that there has been a "rapid shift" from
breakbulk cargo handling to containerization. The shift is expected to
continue.

In order to be part of the containerization boom a facility must provide
3540 foot channel depth (off Hoboken the channel is 45 feet), at least
700 foot wide channel for *turnarounds (channel is 2,000 feet wide at
Hoboken), and be near the open sea. Besides these waterborne access needs,
a containerport also has landside requirements. There is need for 50 to
60 acres pe-r berth (Hoboken's Port Authority piers has-abou*t 40 acres total
or less than 14 acres per berth). The cost of acquiring more land, even
i.f it were available, would be prohibitive. Because of lack of space at
conventional facilities, containerports have moved to new locations such
as Port Elizabeth.

In addition to space requirements, containerports need quick and easy
access from the landside. Trucks are increasingly the carrie .rs of con-
tainers. Some trailer trucks even go directly aboard the ships. Truck
access to and within Hoboken is difficult (see Report #I: Existing Con-
ditions). In the days before the decline of the railroad, Hoboken's
waterfront enjoyed rail access of almost unprecedented quality. Today,
even that has ceased (Hoboken Shore Railroad is no longer operable).
Containerization does not appear to be possible for Hoboken with the cur-
rent technology of strong containers.

Breakbulk

Breakbulk (the traditional way of handling cargo piece by piece) is quickly
.losing ground in New York, Harbor. Seventy percent of all shipping is,now
handled by containers. The remaining 3CP/- is being sought by breakbulk
facilities in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Port Newark as well as Hoboken.

27. Op- cit., The Tri-State Coastal Zone, p. 29.

..In 'addition, even though the Port of New York remains an important marine
terminal, "the Port's portion of total U. S. oceagborne foreign trade has
declined from 28% to 12.Sf/. (from 1940 to 1973)." 2 This indicates a
shi.pping trend to other U. S. ports.

All of these factors point to a continuing decline in the market for
breakbulk facilities in the harbor as the containership continues its
spectacular rise to dominance in shipping freight. Though the Hoboken
Port.Authority area may,.represent a fine breakbulk facility all by itself,
it remains.to be seen just how much traffic will come its way in the fierce
.competit.ion for breakbulk cargoes.which is now occurring.

Dr. Mit
chell L. Moss, assistant professor of planning and public adminis-
tration at New York University's Graduate School of Public Administration,
sums up.the situation:

The urban por 't has traditionally been defined in terms of economic
development and the contribution of waterborne commerce to the city's
economy. This rolestill exists for port facilities where shipping
is technologicall.y feasible and economically viable. However, a
large number,of port areas located next to the Central Business Dis-
trict of.large cities no longer meet the requirements of modern
shipping and transportation technology. Therefore, the purpose which
the urban port serves must be reconsidered and redefined. These port
areas located in the heart of our urban communities can play a vital
role in our attempts to deal with the social, economic and physical
problems present in our central cities.29

In conclusion, breakbulk cargo handling is desirable but it appears to have
,seen its day in Hoboken, except for occasional carg9s. This use will not'
be considered as an@available alternative.

Attitudes of Existinq Waterfront Firms

A natural question to ask is why more industrial firms like those presently
on the waterfront could not be induced to come to Hoboken.. Of course one
answer is that suitable ' available land is limited. If by some means
such sites would become available at reasonable cost,. what might be the
attitude of firms like thosein Hoboken to settling here? To help answer
this question, the WRP conducted a survey among the existing firms on the
waterfront, as to their problems and needs.

28. Mitchell L. Mosst "The Urban Port: A Hidden Resource for the city
and the Coastal Zone," Coastal Zone Management Journal, Vol. 2,
No. 3, 1976, p. 232.
29. Ibid., p. 240

One of the major findings of this survey was that the existing waterfront
firms which were included in the survey did not intend to leave Hoboken
in the immediate futureP However they had no intention of.expanding or
relocating in the city.

In an attempt to discover why this was the cas.e, the survey asked about
the disadvantages of a Hoboken waterfrontlocation.. The results are
as follows:.

Of 9 firms interviewed

Disadvantage Number of firms which listed as a disadvantage

Property taxes 4
Condition of nearby buildings 3
Condition of streets 3
Assessment policies
Local zoning
Inability to expand

An assessment of factors necessary for the operation.of the firm was
also elicited.

Need Number of firms which listed as a need

Electrical supply
Security
Water supply
Auto access 7
Truck access, 6
Gas supply 6
Police enforcement .4
Labor supply 4
Good streets 3
Public transportation 3

Of the nine firms interviewed, three felt that their. layout was efficient,
three did not and one felt that it was "acceptable." Two had no response
to the question (at this writing one of these two has already ceased oper-
ation). The "no" answers could be troublesome for the obsolete and

30. See section on Factors for Economic,Growth.

inefficientJacility isthe on-e.from which fi,rms tend to move. The
creation of.t,he,Hoboken Economic Development C,9.rporation in January 1977 by
the city of Hoboken has taken as its first objective that of working to
keep the firms which are in the city. Time wilitell whether the new.
Corporation can overcome the effects of inefficient layouts, high'taxes and
poor streets4n order to retain these firms. Itis., however, a sound
decision for the Economic Development Corporation to, 'work for retention of
existing firms@for it is uncertain with today's financial and.technological
restraints just@what new industrial operations will cometo the city..
Thus it appears not to be a question of being able.to induce like firms to
come to the waterfront but to retain those that are here.

The Record

in 1966 a TH-State Regional Planning Commission study concluded that
the Hudson.Rivier and upper bay had been experienc ng a change in activities
and land use. "Promotion efforts to replace (old) activities with industry
have beenmarked with little success. In some cases the land has reverted
to municipal ownership through non-payment of taxes.,131 This statement.
could be classified as a prophecy in 1966 of what was about to happen in
Hoboken.

The actual performance record of the Hoboken waterfront over the years in
attracting new industry could be taken as a fulfullment of the Tri-State
forecast as well as proof of the thesis of industrial decline. Parties
interested in settling along the Hoboken waterfront have not been great in
number. There has been no rush for vacated areas.

'Fifth and Si xth Street Piers When Holland Ameri.ca Lines left
Hoboken in 1967, the area was purchased by a speculator. It.brought
in.no ratables and was soon foreclosed. In the early 1970's Mervyn's
Midnight Waterfront Beauty Inc. .(later to become MMWB) purchased,
the piers. It failed to pay full taxes and the property is now
being foreclosed once again.

Ninth Street Pier - Sound Ship Building rented theformer Penn
Central marine repair piers after lighterage-disappeared from the
harbor. The ship building company soon left, however, and taxes
accrued., Recently the property was sold to Union.Dry Dock and
Repair Co.,Inc., of Weehawken.

Weehawken Cove Tood Shipyards left the area in 1967 ending almost
a century of ship building and repair on the site. In 1969 Todd
gave the property to Hoboken in payment of back taxes. By 1971 an

31. Op.cit., The Changing Harborfront, p. 11.

oil desuphurization plant was proposed for the site. Public out-
cry stopped the project on environmental and safety grounds. In 1972
an oil tank farm was suggested and the site was purchased. Again
the environmental and safety problems associated with such a facility
came to the fore and after three years the project was refused per-
mits by the state. As far as is possible to ascertain, no interest
has been exhibited in the site since then,

It becomes obvious from the history above that the only potential developers
have represented petro-chemical interests. Oil and oil related refinery
facilities tend to endanger the environment as well as the lives and safety
of those living nearby. In addition these facilites tend to be inordi-
nately low in jobs per acre of land. These types of heavy industrial
facilities are not suitable for consideration for location in such densely-
populated areas as Hoboken.

Commercial Land Use
Since clean, acceptable industry does not appear to be flocking to Hoboken,
it may be time to think in less traditional ways concerning land use on
the waterfront.

Within this category of land use lies some hope for the urban waterfront.
Aesthetically the riverfront is ideal for offices, restaurants, shops and
a complete spectrum of recreational activities. The Tri-State Regional
Planning Commission recognizes the fact that redevelopment of the urban
waterfront for industrial purposes has distinct limitations because of the
"congested harborfront sites which must compete with the suburbs broad
expanses, The Commission sees that there is, however, an opportunity to
capitalize on the scenic assets of the port for commercial and residential
purposes. "On the New Jersey side an alternating pattern of residential
and commercial can be foreseen starting at Edgewater and extending to
Bayonne. "32

The water side location and the view create actual economic value which
needs to be brought to the attention of developers. Water is a major sales
factor. However, the amenities of the waterfront such as views, bike
paths, walkways, parks and river access must be assured before commercial
ventures can be expected to seek placement in Hoboken. There must be a
policy of development (by master plan and zoning code amony other methods)
which assures a long-term commitment on the part of the city to clean,
attractive economic riverfront growth. If such a guarantee is provided,
the chances for economic development will improve. In addition, a general
____________
32. Op. cit., The Tri-State Coastal Zone, p. 1.

cleanup of-the waterfront.1would help attract new, pleasant land uses.,
.The present.condition of the waterfront with its.broken down piers.and
abandoned.raiii1road is not conducive to.investment.. Hoboken has the,
oppoetunity.to achieve a,cleanup by pa.rti.cipation.in.the Corps of @Engi-
neersi New.York Harbor Clean-up Program which provides. two-thirds federal
-1s.
money for demolition of decrepit piers and remova.] of derelict vess,e
New York,State,hasalready:p6ssed a bill which picks up 50% of the local
cost for its@waterfront cities (see New York Assembly 13009). ':Simi.lar
legislation sbould.:be sought.in New Jersey. In fact, a proposal for a
conference of cities.involved in the'New Jersey portion of the Clean-up
Project area was put forward by the Waterfront Redevelopment Project,,last
fall- Though interest was evinced by other cities and the state, no action,
has been taken to date.. WRP strongly suggests that Hoboken and the . Center
for Municipal Studies and Services follow through on this matter as a means
of obtaining financial help for,,a better-looking waterfront. The cleanup
project is essential for the type of economic growth which could enhance
Hoboken's future.'

Commercial growth is also a well-suited companion for the residential
rebirth which the city is experiencing. The brownstone revival is expected
to continue to bring more educated, middle class people to swell the numbers
already in the city. The demand forspecialty shopping, restaurants and
recreationalfacilities will increase. Already Hoboken is experiencing an
influx of restaurants (four within the last year). This trend will con-
tinue especially if Hoboken's potential for tourism is exploited at the
same time.

The Erie Lackawanna Terminal, a national historic'site since 1973, is being,
planned as a site-for offices, recreation, shops and community activities.
With the successful competition for Public Works money the
Terminal's commercial deve-lopment could.begin-in 1977. Such'.an occurrence
will provide the southeastern part of town with a new vitality. The entire
area from the PATH station on Hudson Place to Second and River Streets could
encompass a fine commercial complex.

Mixed-Use Development

This concept is considered to be the single most important innovati.oln.i.n
urban land use during the past two decades comparable only to the shopping
center.1133 It provides for intensive use, of urban.land by bringing to-
gether a number of inter-related land uses (such as offices, service facili-.
ties and retail outlets) in either a single vertical megastructure or a
coordinated set of complementary buildings interconnected by walkways or
court yards., Midtown Plaza, Rochester, New York is an example of a Mixed-
Use Development. It incorporates well-coordinated retail shops, office

33. The Urban Land Institute, "Mixed-Use Developments: New Ways of Land.
Use," Technical Bulletin 71, 1976.

areas, restaurants and motel space. Rockefeller Center in New York City
is the prototype of this kind of land use. In Chapter 6, Section B,
specific suggestions are made for mixed use development in Hoboken.

Office Space

Office space is a limited commodity in Hoboken. Several old buildings
have been renovated for office uses but more might be worth looking into.

Recent indicators and projections bode well for office demand. A current
issue of a municipal government,publication noted that a Chicago real estate
firm had performed a survey which showed that in 12 cities polled (New York
City was one) there will be a shortage of office space within the next two
years. The survey also claimed that office space shortages were already
occurring in New York City. 34

Besides the prediction of office space shortage (and therefore the need to
create more), office-related jobs have been projected by the Regional Plannirn,
Association (RPA) as nearly doubling by the year 2000 in the New York
Region. By 1985, RPA has projected that "office buildings will house * of
the Region's employment... merely 18% of the jobs would remain for dispersal
among industrial sites." Though three-quarters of the.office jobs were
projected by RPA to be drawn to the Manhattan Central Business District,
still another 40,000 should find their way to areas near Manhattan such as
to Brooklyn, Jamaica and New Jersey.35

The Tri-State Regional Planning Commission agrees with the projected rapid
growth in office-oriented employment. Service occupations such as those
found in banks, government offices, public utilities, personal care facili-
ties (barbers, and so on) should also show great gains. In addition,
sales workers and managers' jobs should also increase in number.

Projections made by the New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry to 1985
indicate the same job growth patterns. According to the department the
greatest numbers of jobs by 1980 in Hud'son County s .hould be in the clerical
worker category. Over 60,000 of the total 236,832 jobs in the county will
be held by workers in the clerical field. The state projects as many as
3,,463 job openings per year in this category alone. The growth in this
field is projected to be the highest of any category.

Other growth areas of employment will be service or office/retial oriented.
Professionalt 'technical jobs show the second highest projected increase
for the county with 1,204 job openings per yea,r.. The third level of job
increase should appear in the managers, officials and proprietors category

34. "Office Space Shortage in Big Cities Predicted," City Hall Digest,
Vol. 2, No. 2, February 1977, P. I.
35. Regional Planning Association, "Projections for the New York Urban
Region's Sf Counties 1985 2000," July 10, 1973, PP. 34-36.

(in bankin, retail) and fourth largest growth should be in the service
workers category (cleaning, Health, personal and protection services).
Operatives, laborers, craftsmen and foremen categories of employment all
show declines in Hudson County.36 These projections indicate the need in
Hoboken for new land uses and for the training and retraining of the work
force in order to meet future job opportunities.

It is time to change. The new Jersey Department of Labor and Industry
notes that "the recent turndown in the economy, and analysis of the long
term deterioration of the state's manufacturing base, plus changes in the
employment structure, all point to a definite shift from the old patterns."37

Convention Center

This type of land use requires large amounts of square footage, something
which Hoboken does not have in its waterfront area. The New York Coliseum
with 300,000 square feet of exhibition space is considered to be too small
(also it is arranged on 5 floors whereas convention space is preferable
all on one level.)38 The convention center which had been proposed for
the West Side of Manhattan, was to have had a single level, 560,000 square
foot center with seating for 50,000 a meeting room for 6,380 and four types
of restaurants. A new site is being explored at Battery City. The other
prerequisite for a successful convention center besids space is easy vehic-
ular access and parking facilities.

There is little hope that Hoboken can find enough land to create a large
convention center on the waterfront. In addition, vehicular access to the
waterfront, as has been mentioned with regard to the Port Authority piers
is inadequate and for Weehawken Cove, non-existent. Inasmuch as easy
trucking access to convention centers is a major success factor, the Hobo-
ken waterfront probably could not support such a venture.

The only possibility would be for a small conference and exhibition center
catering to specialty shows and large meetings, such as regional sales and
training meetings. This facility could be incorporated in a hotel-marina
complex.
_________
36. New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry, Division of Planning and
Research, New Jersey's Manpower Challenge of the Eighties, March 1975.
37. New Jersy Department of Labor and industry, Division of Planning
and Research, Office of Business Economics, Official State Projections:
New Jersey Population Projections 1980-2000, 1975,p.2.
38. Carter B. Horsley, "Convention Centers: Another kind of Show Business
New York Times, Section 8, Sunday January 25, 1976, p. 1.

Retail Trade

in 1972 Hobooken had 430 retail establishments with sales amounting to
$52,076,ooo. Of these, 142 were eating and drinking places, 108 food
stores; and then come 49 apparel and accessory stores.39

Even though Hoboken has as of 1969, 64.8% of its families in the $0 to
9,999 income category, another 22.8% were in.the $10,000 to 14,999 range
and 12AX, were above $15,000. It may be safe to surmise from these and
the above figures that shopping aside from food - especially on the part
of the 35.2% of families above the $10,000 income range - is occurring
--3utside of Hoboken. Whether there is adequate demand for more shops -
selling fashion and big ticket items would have to be the subject of a
market study. With the information at hand, however, it could be suspectea
that the new shops anticipated for the Erie Lackawanna Terminal will
probably attract more of the 35.2% of Hobooken families in the middle and
higher income brackets. I

Future increases in retail opportunities in Hoboken should not be dismissed
and could be located on newly developed waterfront sites as part of other
developments. The U. S. Census showed in 'County Business Patterns - 1974
retail operations provided 21% of the county 's employment with only manu-
facturing ahead of it at 23.5% of total employment.40 It is of interest
.to note that service operations rank third with 18.60% of county employment.
Thus, retail and service operations combined to provide 39.6% of all
county employment in 1974. Though manufacturing still orovides employment
for a great number of people in the county, its continuing decline should
;ead planners and decision makers to seek out other sources of employment.
Retail and service industries may provide some of those sources.

Residential Land Use

Waterfront proper ty is always appealing as a handsome place for housing
oecause of the attraction of being on or near water, and particularly in
Hoboken because of the incomparable view of Manhattan and access to the
City. There is some vac 'ant waterfront space namely the Grogar Marine View
Plaza, (Section B) where more housing is planned, the Union Dry Dock
property (Section E) and Weehawken Cove (Section G). Other than the Gro-
gan Plaza, waterfront housing would have to be planned so that other
nearby land uses would be compatible with it.

There must be a word of caution adoed here regarding housing. Whatever
of a residential nature is built along the waterfront must not be allowed
to obstruct the public view of or access to the river. In particular new

39. Bureau of Census, Area Statistics, Retail Trade P. 31-771.
40. U. S. Census,. County Business Patterns 1974, N. J. CBP-74-32.

housing should be set back from the river edge in such a manner that public
access to the river would be possible. The zoning ordinance should make
this clear. Residenti-al, as well as office and commercial ventures should
all provide riverfront access for the people.41

Recreation Land Use

Recreational facilities are closely allied to the amenities which make
housing and the quality of life not only bearable but attractive in urban
areas. Hoboken, unfortunately, has a minimal amount of recreational
facilities. Merely 2.1% of Hobokenl.s total land area is available for
open space use. The city,owns and operates three parks: Church Square
Park 3.14 acres, Stevens Park 2.80 acres and Elysian Park 2.37 acres. The
remaining open space areas are found in five school yards, a football
stadium and four vest-pocket type parks ranging in size from 5,000 to
15,000 square feet (on Monroe and Madison Streets and Park and Willow
Avenues). Columbus Park is owned and maintained by the county. It has
7.23 acres which contain tennis courts, children's play equipment and.a
sitting area.

The above list of outdoor recreation space represents a total of 0.37 acres
of open space per 1,000 of Hoboken's population. The Hudson County Planning
Board recommends 5.6 acres per 1,000 while the state standard is set at 8
per 1,000. With 245 people per acre of land in Hoboken, the need for out-
door and all types of recreational space should be given top priority.
The waterfront may well be the area where some of this need can best be
met.

The Tri-State Regional Planning Commission noted as long ago as 1966 that
the redevelopmQnt of harborfront land must be directed toward residential
and recreational uses.42 The Hudson Basin Project seconded this by stating
that the riverfront was ideal for recreational facilities. The New York
City Planning Commission in 1971 deplored the "elongated barrier" on the
west side of Manhattan which prohibits people from gaining access to the
riverfront. The Commission dedicated New York City's waterfront to beauty ai--d
accessibility by creating strip parks, waterfronts for people, and a river
fit for fishing.43

41. Industrial facilities, particularly of the heavy variety, seldom can
allow public access to their grounds because of the safety aspects of
their operations. This is one more reason why heavy industrial and
other hazardous operations should not be placed in densely populated
areas. They prohibit public access in their area to the riverfront.
42. Op. c:it., The Changing Harborfront, p. 1.
43. New York City Planning Commission, The Waterfront January 1971, PP.
49 and 78.

Virtually every planning agency in every waterfront community in the coun-
try is now advocating recreational facilities on their waterfronts. Hobo-
ken has not one square inch where its people can gain safe and legal access
to the riverfront under either public or private auspices. This should be
rectified at once. The needs of the future cannot be met if Hoboken does
not move today.

The shores of the United States are a part of the common heritage of
all the people,...they are impressed with a long-standing public
interest, and...new means must be found to protect this great re-
source and make it available to the public. Senator Henry Jackson,
chairman of United States Senate Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs, May 7, 1974.

There is little doubt that there is demand for outdoor recreation. A
U.S. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation study44 showed that by 2000 the popu-
lation of the U.S. will have doubled while the demand for recreation will
have tripled. the trend is toward more frequent participation in outdoor
recreation as well as the creation of activities close to home.45
A walk along the Hoboken waterfront any summer day shows children swimming,
people fishing or just lounging on piers upon which they have illegally
entered.

In addition to the obvious demand, the provision of outdoor recreation
facilities could prove to be lucrative for private entrepreneurs. The
growth rates projected for boating (4% annually) and fishing (1.8%) indicate
substantial numbers of users and the resultant opportunities to make some
money on facilities which provide such recreation.46

Though private commercial facilities may be possible along waterfronts, it
is the local government which should make sure that some areas are pro-
tected for free public access. The present plight of Hoboken vis-a0vis
its waterfront stems from the fact that in the past the city has allowed
the entire area to become overcommitted to private uses. This is not a
situation unique to Hoboken. It has happened in almost every other old
waterfront city in the United States.47 What is visible now along urban
riverfronts is the result of the failure of the private market process
___________
44. U.S. Departmetn of Interior, Bureau of outdoor Recreation, Outdoor
Recreation for America, 1962, p. 21.
45. Dennis W. Ducsik, Shoreline for the Public, The MIT Press, 1974, p. 22.
46. Ibid., p. 27.
47. Ibid., p. 69.

to provide for even minimal public use. Today municipal government should
intervene in the name of its people.

Recreation in general, and certainly that which could exist along urban
waterfronts is something which all people should have an opportunity to
enjoy and utilize. "Shoreline recreation for the public has every right
to be considered a 'public good."48

Texas A&M University recently developed criteria49 for recreation in
urban river settings. Hoboken is highly qualified in every criterion.
they are as follows;
-Within 5 minutes walk of downtown or shopping facilities
-Stability of the waterfront (no flooding, controlled water levels)
-Good local perception of the waterfront as a place for park/office/
recreation
-Good general access (by foot or by car) in hoboken parking is
available in the Grogan garages just blocks away.
-Historical value
-Recreation need

Park Settings

Park settings provide benefits in many ways. They create clean, attractive
surroundings which enhance the entire city, thus attracting more investors
Parks along Hoboken's waterfront would be visible to the millions of people
who live, work and visit in Manhattan. A lovely, revitalized waterfront
could be Hoboken's most spectacular lure for new business and tourists.
The "Hoboken Welcomes Industry" sign which glares out at manhattan from on
top of the Standard Brands building should be dismantled; it has not lured
industry to the city. The best advertisement for investment today is the
provision of pleasant surroundings.

Parks and attractive open space uses affect the value of properties on all
sides. Stevens Institue might very well be able to attract a developer
for the long-discussed research and development building along the Long
Dock. As the property stands now, there are no guarantees of compatible
uses on either side since the present zoning code allows any type of indus-
trial use. The zoning code should be revamped so that heavy industrial
operation are excluded from Fourth to Tenth Streets. The new master plan
should make it clear that only uses compatible with a university setting
will be permitted in this area. Colleges need amentiy-oriented surroundings
___________
48. Ibid., p.41.
49. Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas A&M University, Development
of Criteria for Evaluation Urban River Settings for Tourism-Recreation
Use, Technical Report No. 56, June 1974.

in order to achieve the potential they could provide to the city in
which they exist.

Marina

A marina for the anchorage and repair of small boats (approximately 60,
or less) would be a desirable commercial use for a part of the Hoboken
waterfront. It WOUld be compatible with almost any use of the adjoining-,
property. From a few inquireis on marinas mad by WRP, their appears to
be considerable unsatisfied demand.for a marina in the Hoboken area. For
example, WRP was informed by the owner of the Richmond Marina in Edgewater
that 40 boats are waiting for space in his marina. He also stated that
the purchase of a boat in this area depends on whether there is space to
tie it up and store it is available.

CHAPTER 6 INDIVIDUAL SITE ALTERNATIVES

This chapter it dedicated to an.examination of the individual sites
along the waterfront. The physical aspects.of each.si@te are recorded here
in as far.as it is possible to know them without in-depth en
gineerl-ng,
studies. the tax status and ownership of properties are also examined 6s
well as the cultural and aesthetic aspects of each section.

For convenience in presenting this material, the waterfront has been
.grouped into.se.ctions. Figure 1-1 at the end of Chapter I gives the overall
.plan of Hoboken's waterfront.

Section A contains the Erie Lackawanna Terminal, its ferry slips and piers,
and four blocks of commercial and residential structures as far west.as
Hudson Street and as far north as First Street. Potential rehabilitation
of this area is the keystone to the entire wa.terfront area. Support and
funding are already partially inplace for the Terminal project.

Section B consists of.the-Port Authoritypiers and the Grogan Marine View
Plaza complex which is bounded on the west by Hudson Street and on the
north by Fourth Street. A grea,t'deal ofthe attraction of the latter is
due to its magnificent View of the New York skyline.

Section C extends from Fourth Street to just about Sixth,Street extended
to. the River.. The western line, is on Hudson Street.

Section D contains most of the,Stevens Institute property, pr1marily the
Long Dock along the waterfront from Sixth to Ninth Streets extended.

Section E runs from Ninth.Street.cto just about Ilth Street. Itincludes
a portion of the Stevens campus, a block of single family residences next
,to Elysian Park, and on'the waterfront, the Union Dry Dock property
(formerly Penn Central) and the Hoboken Shore Railroad property adjacent
to Maxwell House.

Section F includes Maxwell House, American Can and Bethlehem Steel with
the western boundary along Hudson Street.

Section G comprises the area known as Weehawken Cove and four large indus-
trial buildings as well, as four blocks of commercial faciltties bounded
on the south by l4th,Street and on the,west by Park Avenue.

Washington St.-

>
JERSEY L_
CITY Ocu
-0
0 -@ 0 E
0 , ___M
Huds n St.

L------ L___j
U
(DRiver St.

Bulkhead

Terminal

HUDSON RI VER Pi erhead
7.

S E C T 1 0 N A

Section A

This-area@ is: a, portion,of the. s u bj ec.t of extensive study catled, "The
'Hobo,ken`-Transportation Cen er" under, the direction of t.he,.Hoboken Com-
munity Development. Agency, The purpose of the study has been to
explore the feasib.iliiy of the renovation of the Erie-Lac'kawanna complex
as a transportati:on center and community center. Plans are being for-
mulated for both,upgrading transportation facilities (train, subway, bu,s
and taxi facilities a]I center on this area) and forenhancing the
commercial and entertainment capacities of the Terminal,area. This pro-
jec t has active support of the New Jersey Department of Transportation,
and partial funding is in place.

The impact of the successful rehabilition of this transportation complex
is potentially immense. Plans for an,active farmers.market inside the
ferry concourse, and a pedestrian plaza,in the street area adjacent to
the train concourse would attract much more activity from the City to the
area. If the mini-malls with trees and benches are construcIted as
planned it would enhance interaction'with both City Hall and the Grogan .-
Marine @iew apartments. The added attraction of movie theatres in the
interior underutilized space as well as other cultural activities would:
enhance the value an d potential commercial uses for the entire 1. aIrea In-
cluding the Hoboken business.district and the adjoining Port Authority
piers.

Finally, the floating office of the foreman in the film, "On The Water-
front," presently at the Fifth,Street pier should be rescued, renovated
and permanently floa*ted'to.the Terminal as a living memento of-thIs
famous, precedent-sha,ttering,film.

1. See Raymond, Parish, Pine Weiner, "Hoboken Transportation Center%, I
Report IT-09-0014 (February 1977.)

Sec tion A
Fact Sheet 2

Area. _.(Acres)
.Block Lot Popular Name. Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater
139 A Erie-Lackawanna Dept. of Trans. Exempt 7.1
(Piers 1-2-3) State of N.J.
A-] Erie-Lackawanna Erie Lackawanna Exempt 9.295 4.1
Ferry Terminal

Water Depth Bedrock Conditions
Built E vironment

201 App. 100' to 170' U.S. Mail pier-c .opperclad concrete covered steel frame,
wood floor.
Imm. 231 at western end Termi.nal -structure on piles of yellow pine.
Pier 311 at eastern end. Waiting Room - brick stone faces curtain walls. 6" concrete wall
with wire lath copper clad over the concrete.
00 Pier I-Repair si 4ip unused by ships
Pier 2-Deteriorating
Immigrant Pier- construction on wooden piling- usable

I nf rastructure
Gas Electric Potable Water Wastewater Public Services
Fire Police

139/A Yes 811water pipe Pipe which single hose
6 11 Main to 'from Jersey City leads to river. connection for
Terminal Bldg. fire boats.
139/A-1 Fire boat station
611 Main to in Manhattan less
Terminal Bldg. th.n I mile away.

Aesthetic & Cultural aspects

Historic site view of Manhattan from piers
21. All-information regarding tax status, ownership and physical characteristics was compiled
by George Banta and Thomas Kohli, student.
-assistants, Waterfront.Redevelopment Project.

-Hudson St.
4_j -Lj 4j
en Ln

4-J _0
V) GROCAN M @R I ]NE
River St.

Port Authority

p p p
i i -i,
e e e Bulkhe.ad
r r r

A B c

Pierhead

HUDSON RIVER

S E C T 1 0 N B@

00
0 vigil
7-7=
'Air.

;Zu

ble!ltm K
%=Mimi

7-7 -@-t-lalajj
fail,
T it
nit

F", L

@2
-77777777777

S@-

Figure 6-1. Upland area and pierhead buildings (left) of P. A. Piers in Section B.
Grogan Marine View Plaza (right).

Section B

Sub-Section I

Port Authority Piers

The Port Authority piers as noted in Chapter 3 are underutilized and yet
are committed by law to usage as a marine terminal until the opening
@years of the 21st century. Chapter 44, Section 3 of the Laws of New
Jersey reads in part as follows:

The following terms as used herein shall mean:
"Marine terminals" shall mean developments, consist-
ing of one or more piers, wharves, docks, bulkheads, slips,
basins, vehi.cular roadways, railroad connections, side tracks,
sidings or other build.ings, structures, facilities or improve-
ments, necessary or convenient to the accommodation of steam-
ships or other vessels and their cargoes or passengers.

Uses that appear to be compatible with this definition are breakbulk
cargo handling, an onshore service base for outer continental shelf gas
and oil exploration, and possibly a marina. As was pointed out in
Chapter 5 breakbulk cargo handling in general appears to have little, if
any,future in New York Harbor. Hoboken as a competitor is weak for the
remaining and declining breakbulk cargoes judging by the occasional ship
handled at Pier A in the past year or two. In conclusion, the future of
Hoboken's waterfront cannot be based on breakbulk cargo handling.

Temporary on Shore Service Base

.It was indicated in Chapter 5 that the Port Authority property from the
viewpoint of facilities (piers, headhouse and protected areas) appears
suitable for a temporary service base.

Such a base must supply the following.
1. berthage for supply and crew boats.
2. dock space for loading and unloading - 200 feet
per rig; 15-20 feet minimum depth at all tides.
3. warehousing and open storage areas (warehousing- 2
acre per rig; open storage: I acre per rig).

4. a helipad: 1 acre.
5. space to house supervisor and communications per-
sonnel plus parking space.

The following amounts of material would have to be transported through
the service base by rail and/or trucks:

mud; 2,568 tons per rig per year
cement: 1,260 tons per rig per year
fresh water: 5,200,000 gallons per rig per year
tubular goods: 1,820 tons per rig per year
fuel for drilling: 13,272 barrels per rig per year
fuel for transportation: 12,800 barrels per rig per year
food, tools and parts'.3

It is apparent from the above that the streets of Hoboken would be heavily
used for this volume and type of heavy duty traffic. In fact a feasibil-
ity study would appear to be in order to determine if Hoboken's streets
would be adequate; also whether the Hoboken Shore Railroad can be reac-
tivated.

.The Port Authority property has no space for a helipad, vital for a base
Noise generated by a helicopter near residential buildings M uld be a
serious drawback for this solution.

Other negative factors with respect to locating a temporary base on the
Port Authority property is its poor accessibility for vehicular traffic
as noted in Report #1: Existing Conditions, It is also inappropriate
for such a @acility to be in.close proximity to residential housing and
possible-office use in Grogan Marine Plaxa because of the attendent
congestion and noise. We have already stated in Chapter 5 that we be-
lieve that the more intensive industrial use of the piers for a permanent
base would be incompatible with the present and proposed uses of the
Grogan Marine Plaza.

Marina

At present a study is being conducted to determine the technical feasibii-
ity of converting Port Authority Piers B and C, and perhaps the northern

3. All information about Service Base requirement has been taken from
Factbooks: Onshore Facilities Related to Offshore Oil and Gas
Development, New England River Basin Commission, November 1976,
Section 1.

TABLE 6-0

SERVICE BASES*

SUMARY OF REQUIREMENTS AND IMPACTS

Temporary Bases* Permanent Bases

Land: 5-10 acres on an 50-75 acres on an
all-weather harbor all-weather harbor

Waterfront: 200 feet of wharf 400 feet of wharf
15-20 feet water depth 15-20 feet water depth

Fresh Water: 5,200,000 gai/ri'g/year 8,200,000 gal/platform/year
during drilling during drilling

Fuel: 26,000 bbls/rig/year 54,000 bbls/platform/year
during drilling during drilling
19,200 bbis/platform/year
during production

-Labor: 45 jobs/rig 50-60 jobs/piatform
during drilling

Wages: approximately $734,ooo approximately $],,000,000
per year per year

Capital
Investment: $150,000 to $250,000 $1,000,000 to $3,000,000

Air Emissions: hydrocarbons from fuel storage tanks and
transfer operations; carbon monoxide and
nitrogen oxides from machinery and vehicle
exhaust

Wastewater hydrocarbons and heavy metals from bilge
Contaminants: and ballast water. discharged by boa.ts

Noise: up to 85 decibels on a 24-hour basis
solid Wastes: up to 6 tons per day during drilling opera-
tions, includir.g hazardous, oil-contaminated
wastes

Requirements and impacts of bases supporting platform and pipeline
installationa are similar to those of temporary service bases. For
details, see pages 1.35 - 1.37.

This page taken from source quoted in footmote 3, page 81.

part of A, into a recreational complex with a marina as the center-
piece. This recreational facility would includeamong other things:
mooring slips, repair and service facilities, a boating supply sales
,shop, and a,restaurant-lounge. If technical suitabil.ity is established
at this stage, a more detailed analysis and plan will be necessary to
determine its economic feasibility. To insure year-around use, the
feasibility of a commercial recreational complex to assignment the
marina should be carefully examined.

A very favorable aspect of t.his site is that a recreational complex and
marina would not only be compatible with the uses of the Grogan Marine
Plaza but would enhance its (and Hoboken's) desirability as a place to
live and/or to work. As mentioned above, legal problems may exist but
they should not be beyond solution over a period of time.

Manuf actur i ng

The piers and structures are favorable for manufacturing, but other space
for this use exists throughout the County and region. However, the manu-
facturing of small, recreational boats on this site has been discussed.
It may eminently suitable for this use on part of the site.

Movie studio

The idea that the waterfront area, in particular, the Port Authority piers,
be used for movie studios has been suggested many times. The Community
Development Agency explored the possibilities. Its report produced the
following findings:

All three piers are unsuitable for movie studio location
because they are too large, there is uncongrollable space,
questionable plumbing and electrical facilities and no
possible way to exert sound control.4 Other sites along
the riverfront would have to have special construction
done for movie studio use.

The New Jersey Motion Picture and Television Development Commission has
just been created (March 22, 1977). Hoboken should be certain to make
contact with that Commission. Even if the waterfront area is not suit-
able or spacious enough, perhaps other sites in Hoboken would prove pos-
sible. Hoboken itself is one of the most picturesque cities in the New
York region. It could be the location for many movies in the future, if
not for the movie studios themselves.

4. Internally circulated memo, Hoboken Community Development Agency,
May 26, 1976.

Section B

Sub-Section 2

Grogan Marine View Plaza and
Adjoining Properties

South of Grogan Marine View Plaza are blocks of buildings which lend
themselves to mixed use planning, as discussed in Chapter 5. In general
the concept would need to be scaled to the block level. For instance the
blocks from Hudson Place to First Street between Hudson and River could
benefit from such treatment. One block of compatible uses interconnected
with walkways or surrounding a central court would seem feasible in the
block from Newark to First Streets between Hudson and River Streets
(the Clam Broth House already exists). On the same block are retail shops
(a tobacconist and an office supply/stationery store) as well as a tavern,
an old hotel, a printing firm and a small restaurant featuring food very
different from that offered at the Clam Broth House. If the block were
to be rehabilitated as a whole rather than by individual establishment, it
could be interconnected interiorly and possibly expanded upward to four
stories thereby creating more selling, eating and hotel space above. Any
one of the.blocks in this southern section could be treated in much the
same fashion.

Grogan Marine View Plaza

As in the case of the Erie-Lackawanna Terminal, planning for further de-
velopment of the Grogan Marine View Plaza is largely determined by the
existing structures. The apartment buildings and the garages are shown
on the right of Figure 6-1. Some ideas for future development follow@

A great:opportunity exists for office construction located in Hoboken
due to:
1. Its excellent connections to Manhattan and highways.

2. Rentals per square foot can be lower than Manhattan-
Hoboken's Grogan Marine View Plaza is projecting at.a.
cost of $7.50 per square foot as compared to the cur-
rent rental of $11.00 per square foot in Manhattan.

If New Jersey keeps its posture of no stock sales tax,
no 25% surcharge on stock and bond sales and no stock
transfer tax, the State should attract many office
activities.

An office building has already been suggested for the Grogan Marine
View Plaza area at First Street as part of a motel/office megastructure.
The 17 story building which is being discussed would provide four floors
of office space - about 80,000 square feet. Using 250 feet of space per
worker as suggested by the Urban Land Institute, this space would accom-
modate at least 320 employees.5

The office use could be combined with a 13 story construction that would
accommodate 198 motel rooms, sauna, health club, swimming pool and gym-
nasium"as well as a conference hall, restaurant, cocktail lounge and
coffee shop. It is unclear from publicity releases and other materials
in what order the office/motel structure will be set up. The
order should be as follows:

First floor retail stores, if any - bank, if any.
Next above hotel or motel space
Above that offices
Next - apartments, if any (these could be intermixed
with hotel)
Top - club and/or restaurant 6

The only problem with the multi-use building at First Street is that it
might be too high. It could be made visually more compatible with the
low-rise structures of southern Hoboken if it were an eight or ten story
structure rather than 17 floors. There would appear to be a need to
create a gradual rising of buildings toward the 25 story apartment build-
ings which already exist between Third and Fourth Streets. * In addition,
the office/motel building could interrelate better with southern Hoboken
if it were to be joined by walkways to any rehabilitated complex that
might occur between Newark and First Streets. Such a connecting link
would not only provide continuity but also increased market synergy.

The Grogan area on the north side of Second Street is being considered
for still another 25 story apartment building. This section might be
served better visually with a smaller structure (perhaps 18 stores) and
utilizing, once again, the multi-use approach.

The Grogan Plaza developers have already stated that there will be 18,000
square feet of neighborhood-type convenience shopping in the apartment
buildings. These types of retail operations could be placed in the first
floors of the existing buildings and the one projected for Second Street
as well. However, the second floor of the new building at Second Street
might be designed in such a way as to accommodate a twin-movie theater.
This type of theater has two auditoriums served by a single lobby and
ticket sales area. The twin theater approach has been highly successful
in shopping centers.7 A 260 seat twin theater would be small enough to

5. The Urban Land Institute, The Community Builders Handbook, 1968,
p. 242.
6. Ibid. p. 244
7. ILCId. P. 334
These recreational facilities would be an anternative to the Port
Authority piers recreational complex, not a'competitor.
86

be manageable. Hoboken does not have any movie theater (though one is
projected for the Erie Lackawanna Terminal rehabilitation). The twin
theater would not have to present only first run films; classics and
second runs (as well a foreign language films) would suffice. The
Second.S.treet area would be a fine location for such a venture.8 The
remainder of the building could house more office space and apartments.

Still another building has been planned for the south side of Third Street
in the Grogan Plaza complex. It is to be all apartment space. There
may.however,- be other uses which could be profitably mixed in with
residential uses.

Medical Office Complex

Hoboken does not have a professional medical office complex. Doctors in
Hoboken have a 8i.fficult time finding office space that is reasonably
priced, of good.construction and with the provision of parking facilities
nearby. An attractive site and neighborhood is also a requirement.9

St. Mary Hospital, the only Hoboken hospital, is trying to attract many
new physicians and technical personnel to the city. The problems of office
location and res,idences are frequently one of the factors in a doctor's
decision not.to locate in the city. A medical complex at Third and Hud-
son Streets in the Grogan Marine View Plaza with offices and laboratories
below and apartments above would provide office and living space opportu-
nities within five blocks of the hospital, which is at Third Street
and Willow Avenue. The new structure at Third Streets and Hudson could
be constructed in such a way as to incorporate the necessary plumbing and
electrica.1 design which special medical apparatus require 's. The first
floor could provide space for a pharmacy-and laboratory, as well as a
coffee shop. Radiology treatment areas could be placed in this area as
well., Doctors.who rent offices might also wish to participate in a pool-
ing of expens.es and resources. Joint waiting room facilities on each
office floor (similar to that found in the Columbia Presbyterian office
building in New York City) could be shared. Obviously, there could be a
sharing of expense as well as better utilization of floor space with such
an arrangement.
Today there are 42 physicians who work at St. Mary Hosgital. At least six
to eight new medical people are being southt as well.1 In addition, there
are 17 dentists, four podiatrists, three optometrists and two chiropractors

8. Lawrence P. Bayern, "Hoboken's Waterfront Commercial Redevelopment,"
Center for Municipal Studies and Services, Student Report, 1976, P. 5.
Conversation with Mr. Manning, R.K.O. Stanley Warner, July 20, 1976.
9. Conversation with Edward Hinden, Associate Executive Director, St.
Mary Hospital, July 22, 1976.

10. Ibid.

plus other medical service.groups in the city. A total of 81 medical
offices may be found in Hoboken outside of the hospital. Even though
many of these medical people are already situated in offices, a new,
facility, designed to meet their specific needs, which provided ample
parking nearby as well as attractive surroundings might find sufficient
interest to make the venture worthwhile. A demand feasibility study for
such a facility is a necessity.

Section B
Fact Sheet Area (Ac es)
Block Lot Popular Name Current Owner Tax Status Ur) Ian= Underwater

231 1 U.S. Post Office Postal Serv. Wash.D.C. Exempt .789 0
2 Garden'St.Nat. Bk. Garden St. NatI. Bk. up to date .115 0
3 Port Authority Piers U.S. Maritime Comm. Exempt 24.0 15.8
U. S. Dept. of
224 pIt-I Vacant Agriculture Bld �*Kenny-Bekay Eng. Arrears .771 0
& Devel. Co.
Plt-7 Hoboken Parking Auth. Hob. Parking Auth. Exempt 1 .180 0
225 pIt-1 Vacant Hob. Hous. Auth. Exempt .611 0
pIt-2 H.P.A. Garage P.A.-City of Hoboken Exempt .758 0
plt-3- Vacant . - Hob. Hous. Auth. Exempt .597 0
226 pIt-I Grogan Towers Marineview Hous. Co. Arrears .597 0
plt-2 11 It It 11 11 11 Arrears .597 0
Plt-3 H.P.A. Garage Parking Auth.-City of Exempt .759 0
Hoboken *(11.2 upland; 12.8 piers)

Conditions
00 Water Depth Bedrock Built Environment
231/3 301 Pier A 100'-170' 700-L Brick wall - Excellent
291 Pier B 251-163' 9001L Bank -fireproof construction-1st floor 24" walls-2nd 1211 Walls
37' Pier C 30'-160'on Pier A-Steel frame, concrete floor, metal deck roof, iron walls
224 01 southern side 700' Pier B-Steel frame, wood floors -roofs, wood piles, iron walls
225 01 72'-147'on Pier C-Steel frame, concrete floor, metal deck roof, iron walls
226 01 northern side Headhouse-exposed steel column with reinforced masonry walls,
concrete floors, noncombustible building
U.S. Department of Agriculture-fireproof, 12"-16" brick tile.

Infrastructure
Gas Electric Potable Water Wastewater Public Services
Fire Police
611 Main under Yes 61, water pipe Intercepting Pier A-10hydrants station 2 blocks awe
River St. Pier A- 1211 11 sewer on River St. Pier B- 8hydrants stevedore protectior
Hudson St. Pier B-611 11 It Pier C-10hydrants
Newark.& Second St. Pier C- 1211 11 11 Headhouse-ghydrants
Fire boat station in
Manhattan less than I mi.away
Aesthetic and Cultural aspects
Tr,aditional.marine use area should retain marine atmosphere-Protect views for Grogan buildings. Permit access to pier
ends.

4'j J-j
V
Stevens
4-)
Pa rk Lr
Stevens Campus

5th 6t[
S .t
P P
e Bulkhead
r r

Pierhead

HUDSON RIVER

S E C T 1 0 N C
flo

9.0

Lim

7
". Mll

Figure 6-2. Section C View to South showing Sixth Street Pier,
Fifth Street Pier, and Port Authority Pier C.
(in order front to back of picture)

@z 7rt n

!IA

Iij.

4 pow

ztz
an,
R
W-W �R T#v

aim.-

Figure 6-3. Section C showing Stevens Park and
Grogan Marina Plaza, multi-story buildings on right
(Section B-Subsection 2).
4iff
NK

MIN

Section C

This arIea contains property owned by the City of Hoboken and Stevens Insti-
tute. The waterfront area from Fourth Street to Sixth is city property.
It wou.1d be an ideal spot for a r.ecreation area, as mentioned in Chapter 5.
There is not enough upland in this city-owned section of slightly less than
two acres to do any constructionwork such as apartment or office buildings
without extensive and expensive filling and bulkheading. Sewerage and gas
lines do not exist in this area so that any future uses must include cre-
ation of these services. The use of.this section for recreation would
minimize the need to provide an extensive infrastructure.

In the main, however, the lack ofadequate upland and infrastructu te pre-
vents the in.stallation of a facility which would be large enough and suf-
ficiently productive economically to support the investment. In addition,
the location of Ws area, blocked as it is (on the south) by the Port * ,
Authority pie rs, is not cinducive to profitable large scale commercial uses.
High.rise housing here would also be unacceptable for it would ruin the
vista from Stevens Park and River Road. The' piers are, therefore, a prime
contender for recreational use provided they are structdally sound. As has
been mentioned elsewhere in this study, the City now owns the Fifth and
Sixth Street piers due to foreclosur(@.. The costs of acquisition are, there-
fore, not a problem. Money is available from Green Acres and the Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation for clean-up and creation of a magnificent park for
both passive and active recreation.

The Stevens' portion of this section contains a campus ma-intenance struc-
ture.(the Griffith Building) and a parkinglot. It is hoped that the park-
ing area could be used in summer for recreational purposes untilsuch time
as the Stevens Long Dock becomes available for such a short-term usage.

Waterfront Parks - There is a small amount of upland just north of the
Port Authority piers which appears to be suitable for, a boat launching facil-
ity. The "public good" in Hoboken could, at its least expensive, be served
by a sittingand fishing park constructed on an existing pier (for instance,
the Fifth Street pier which will be owned by the city due to foreclosure.)
This should be tied in with the existing Stevens Park (See Figure 6-3). A
slightly greater expenditure of money could bring a 6,000 square foot basket-
ball court as well as four tennis courts (7,200 square feet each) to this
pier which has about 112,500 square feet i.n area. There would still be
room for bocci ball and volleyball courts plus horseshoe wells. The basket-
court could be used in winter for a skating rink utilizing plastic ice.
The manufacturer of this ice is looking for outdoor location in which to
test his product. Hoboken might want to volunteer. (Exhibit 1) Design
which promotes flexibility of use should be built into such a park so that
it could be used for concerts, dances and outdoorperformances. In addi-
tion, Hoboken could gain 909/o funding for such park development. New Jersey's
Green acres program offers 509% funding with an additional 403X available
from.the United States

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. The final la'/, could come from the city,
Community Development funds, or the County. During a recent visit to
Hoboken by Green Acres person-nel, encouragement and a strong indication
of future cooperation were manifested if such a park were to be suggested
by the city. Fi-rst, the physical condition of the pier must be deter-
mined before viable alternative use can be proposed from an investment
viewpoint.

The Sixth Street pier does not appear to be in as good a condition as that
at Fifth Street. It is also smaller in size (approximately 37,500 square
feet). It could be used, if repairable, as a fishing and sitting area
with some play ewuipment. This could be combined with a mooring place
for party fishing boats such as the Palace, now moored at the l6th Street
pier. The City might also consider a short term rental of the underwater
area at Fifth and Sixth Streets for a floating restaurant. Over a longer
range of time, the City could develop either a publicly owned, or grant
a concession for, a recreation boat to be moored permanently at the site.
In the boat could be a dance hall, bowling alleys, pinball rooms, or
perhaps a mini theme park operation, as an alternative. If the City it-
self chose to operate such a facility, it should charge entrance fees,in
order to provide for maintenance and supervisory services.

User fees, in fact, should be considered for special types of publicly
owned waterfront uses, such as a boat launching faci'lity. Maintenance
and supervision.are the biggest problems for any type of urban park.
These problems must be addressed at the very start of the planning process,
and answers should be incorporated into the operation of the facility.

Section C
Fact Sheet

Area (Acres)
Block Lot Popular Name Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater

232 1 Stevens Park Mayor -Council- Exempt 2.996 0
City of Hoboken
233 1 Parking Mayor -Council- Exempt .689 0
City of Hoboken.
2-5 Underwater Mayor -Council- Exempt 0 6.026
City of Hoboken
258 1 B & G Bldg. Stevens Institute- Exempt 2.o66 3.731
2 5th & 6th St. Piers M.M.W. B., Inc. Foreclosure 1.75 4.24

Conditions
Water Dept BedEock Built Environment
232 Of 6th St. Pier -Wood piles, wood floor & sheet iron
233/2-5 35' 5th St. Pier -iron steel floor, wood piles, Ist floor-concrete
258(piers)30'-401 451 Building & Grounds Bldg. (Griffith Bldg.)
;10 Stevens - brick, good condition plumbing testing bldg.-Stevens-
%-n good condition (closed system)

Infrastructute
Gas Electric Potable Water Wastewatgr Public Services
Fire Police
No mains in Yes 6" Waterpipe no sewer lines Fire' boat station C.ity Hall
whole section into piers (storm sewer) in Manhattan less Stevens security
Stevens Bldg. than I mi. away
c8mmeitjoh' to upper
c mpu ine.

Aesthetic and Cultural Aspects
Vista from Stevens Park should be protected. River Road should be kept open here for the view..

EXHIBIT I

INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION

STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

TO: Dr. Peter Jurkat DATE: January 18, 1977
FROMs Dr. Gerald M. Rothberg SUBJECTs Plastic ice

Peter,,

You asked me to find out about plastic ice for possible
Hoboken use, and I want"to tell you what I have learned.

I spoke first with Gene Plattner, president of Skate-On Inc.,
the manufacturer. He is an entrepreneur and bought the patent
not knowing anything about the nature of the plastic except it is
basically polyethylene'plus some additives. The first commercial
rink of his plastic ice is in Bemidji, Minnesota (temperature
Sunday, January 16, was -40*F) and is a little more than one year
old. I spoke with the owner, Gordon McClellan, also. The follow-
ing is a composite summary of hbth conversations.

(1) A rink 60 feet x 40 feet will comfortably hold 20-25 skaters.@
This is the minimum size. Costs a little less than $15,000.

(2) Present plastic must be used indoors only because it is
adversely affected by rapid temperature changes. It would
also require more maintenance to keep clean; dirt interferes
with smooth skating and might get embedded. An outdoor -
rink has been under development. If Hoboken would like to
test it, some kind of deal can be worked out. It has not
yet been tested.

(3) only required maintenance is cleaning with soap and water
and spraying a couple of.times per day with a lubricant.
Cost about 35-50 cents per day,

(4) A patent has been applied for. I don't know what is actually
being patented.

(5) Plattner estimates the ice will conservatively last 2-5 years.
McClellan claims-his'rink will last 10-15 years. He'actually
weighed the plastic that was scraped off onto the skaters'
blades. The brand new plastic wears very rapidly by getting
lots of fine scratches. After 3 months the sur-face was uni-
formly scratched and since then there has been practically
no wear. There are no deep grooves or gouges. About 50% of
his use is by hockey players and the rest by general skating.

The scratches actually speed up the skating slightly. Wear
is uniform.

Dr. Peter Jurkat -2- January 18, 1977

Plattner's estimate of wear was based on a new rink that
wears faster. The testing was done by,the St, Louis Blues
professional hockey team. Straight hockey use is very
tough because of the sudden digging in for fast starts and
stops.

Plattner estimates the wear amounts to 5 cents per person,

(6) McClellan has had no problems at all. His customers are
satisfied. Skating is very-much like on real ice except
it is harder than real ice to push off. Skates should be
sharp. On real ice blades can be duller.
(7) If someone working in plastics at Stevens can be interested,
Plattner would-like to work with us to improve the rink.

(8) Gene Plattner, President
'Skate On, Ind.
4350 Riverline Drive
St. Louis, MO
(314)291-7720

Gordon McClellan
Bemidji, Minnesota
(218)751-2355

A rink was just opened in Woodbury, NJ. The owner is Jack
Gahran, (609)546-9099. If you pay for the trip, I would be willing
to visit it.

In my opinion the experience of users is more significant
than what we could determine here by any simple testing methods,
but if you can get some of the plastic and have some money, we
should be able to do some wear testing eveq though I am lukewarm
about the value of it.

Please let me know what finally gets decided.

Gerald M. Ro hberg
I M "-Ro 11

Hudson Street

Castle Pt

STEVENS

CAMPUS

Bulkhead

Lonq Dock
Pier head

HUDSON RIVER

S E C T I O-N D

%.0

a
RAM
"n, 0-
It
A",.Mmi gmbl"W,5
-111-3

ANA

QM"�
IF! m,
N
M,
Y ;%R,27, 3

Figure 6-4. Stevens Long Dock (South end)

Section D

This area holds potential for mixed use. The serpentive rock out-
cropping of Castle Point forms a backdrop for the area which ought not
be obscured by future development. Castle Point is, without a doubt,
the most distinctive feature along the Hoboken waterfront. Any future
building ought to be relatively,.:,Iow or be a single columnar structure
which would not rise above the Point.

The Long Dock has been subjected to a preliminary engineering study and
has been found to need extensive repairs. If the long range plan for a
research and development building is to come to fruition, repairs must
be made as part of the preparation of site for the new uses. Alternatively
the Institute may elect to have the Long Dock removed as part of the Corps
of Engineers' Dri,ft project. Any future use would require bulkheading
and fill. The new uses ought to be placed in a park setting and allow
for public access to the river edge.

As has been mentioned elsewhere in this report, it is essential that
the Institute work closely with the City in the evolution of plans and
the acquisition of funding for long range foundation preparations. The
federal and state Economic Development Authorities should be approached
as a first City/institute task.

100

Section D

Fact Sheet

Area (Acresl_
Block Lot Popular Name Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater

259 2 Stevens'Long Dock Stevens Institute Exempt 6.86 5.338

Water Depth Bedrock Conditions
Built Environment
259/2 261-301 451 Long Dock deteriorating concrete decr,
wooden piles

Infrastructure
Gas E.Jectric Potable Water Wastewater Public Services
Fire Police
no mains in None On site water is Storm sewer into Fire'Station in City Hall station
whole section piped from upper river.No sewerage Manhattan I mi.away and
campus by piping l,ine. water hydrant on Stevens security
over River Road. River Road

Aesthetic and Cultural Aspects

8th & River Road -site of Sybil's Cave (1820's); River Road in this area was a promenade.
Castle Point rise of serpentine is an unusual geologic feature which should be protected from construction and left open
to view. Area should have an open space sense; view should be protected.

Hudson St.

Elysian
Park

C.P.T.

Bulkhead

Pierhead

HUDSON RIVER

S E C T 1 0 N E

102

Tr
CA-
At
- 4r

AA
Irv,

K
IX

q
J41

710

Figure 6-5. Section E. Former Penn Central Piers.
Showing North end of Stevens Long Dock at lower right,
Section F, General Foods at center left and former Standard Brands
Building upper left.

Section E

The former Penn Central area, now owned by the Union Dry Dock and Repair
Co... appears to be suitable for commercial, recreational, or perhaps
residential use.

Industrial use as an onshoreservice base for outer continental shelf
gas and oil exploration woul&`b. e costly and environmentally unde-
sirable. Recreational uses might be a marina for small boats with an
adjacent private recreational,club,.rps@aurant or public park. Commercial
use could include a recreational complex'with restaurant, cabana and
similar activities.

All references to an onshore service base with regard to the Port Authority
piers (Section B) apply here with important additions. Expenditures will
be necessary for the following for onshore service to be considered here:

1. Provision of presently non-existent infrastructure
such as sewerage lines, electric lines and gas lines.

2. Possible need for repair of damaged and deteriorating
piers in order to handle the weight of the pipes,
machinery and equipment used for drilling.

.3. Reinstitution of rail access to the pier which does
not appear to be feasible or desirable.

4. Resurfacing of.River Road in order to accommodate the
the large amounts of heavy material which would have
to be delivered. Such heavy materials need a different
road surface from that presently provided.

5. Construction of building for warehousing and personnel.

6. Cost of potable water might prove prohibitive due
to present high rates. (460,000 gallons of the
5,200,000 gallons of.fresh water required would
have to be potable.)

As a postscript, the only feasible use of this property for a service
base would be a temporary one for a year or two only. As will be noted
in the Summary of Requirements and impa,cts for Service Bases, a permanent
base requires 50-75 acres of land (Exhibit 11). Union Dry uock's pro-
perty is slightly less than five acres including two acres of piers, which
is the minimum needed for servicing one rig. However, since such a base
is essentially.a small marine and a helicopter terminal, this location
would have to be rejected, if for no other reason, than that of excessive
11. See note 3.

io4

noise adjacent to the Stevens Institute campus and dwellings in -the area.

Marina and-club/park

There is adequate upland area as well as dock space for the creation of
a small marina in this area. There would also be adequate space for
restaurant, cocktail lounge and Yacht Club headquarters. The revival of
a Yacht Club on.this site would recreate a portion of Hoboken's notable
past. At Tenth Street extended to the river, one of the most famous and.
prestigous yacht clubs in the world, the New York Yacht Club, established
its first club house in 1844. Since the present New York Club is now
headquartered inland on Manhattan (and thus deprived of a docking area),
it may be interested in mooring some of its boats at a newly-created
marina at its historic site. Even if the Club does not wish to partici-
pate, the need for a marina a12 well as a fine restaurant or private swim
club in this area is obvious.

Such a use would not only be compatible with any Stevens plan but would
be enhanced by the R & D center in the future.

Thought should also be given to the inclusion of the tracts of land
(Block/lot 2'60 - I & 2) just north of Union Dry Dock as part of the marina/
club complex. Even if not developed as a single project, thought might
be given to the creation of a private swim club or cabana in this area.
Alternatively, Elysian Park could be expanded, thus becoming a waterfront
park, a most.attractive prospect for the people of Hoboken.

A study is now going on examing the feasibility of establishing a marina
here. Just as in the case of the temporary base, sewerage, and gas
connections need to be provided. The City should make a concerted effort
to contact the New Jersey Economic Development Authority to discuss the
inclusion of@ water and sewerage from Fourth to Ilth Street where they are
lacking. In addition, future Community Development and Revenue Sharing
funds ought to be considered for provision of these needs. The new,
local Economic Development Corporation should look to these improvements
as a first order of business. It will be exceedingly difficult to develop
the under-utilized areas of Sections C, D and E without provision of these
basic needs. No further t.ime should be lost in meeting these requirements.

12. Demand studies are incomplete at this point ascertaining types of
facilities most attractive for'new marina installations. Although
plans have included a launch-type marina for Liberty State Park,
no detailed studies were done to determine geographic extent of
the attraction for such a facility. Conversation with Hamilton Ross,
Associate Architect for Geddes, Brecher, Qualls, Cunningham: Architects.
Mr. Ross' firm is responsible for the physical master plan for
Liberty State Park, Jersey City. (April 1977.)

105

Residential Housing

The Union Dry Dock property and the area just north of it have some
attributes which would be desirable for housing. It is directly on the
Hudson, accessible by River Road and adaptable to a park setting. There
also a number of problems associated wi'th housing in this area. There is
potable water but no sewer lines. A multi-story building would no doubt
require piling. Furthermore, a building(s) would be limited in height
so as not to obstruct the view from Elysian Park. The potential for
garden apartments such as those recently constructed on filled land at
Edgewater would have to be explored.

io6

Section E

Fact Sheet

Area (Acres)
Block Lot Popular Name Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater

259 1 Penn Central Piers Union Dry Dock Co. Up to date 4.584 3.665
260 1 Vacant Hudson Realty Co. Assessed by 3.27 2.755
c/o E.R.R. the Director of
Div. of Tax.

2 Parking Lot Hoboken Mfg. R.R.Co. .591 0

Conditions
Water Depth Bedrock Built Environment

259/1 28'-401 Unknown but probably PC Piers-Wood Piles-Some burned
similar to Section D R R Property - stubs of pilings, rotting and rusting rails
or 45'

I nf rastructure,
Gas Electric Potable Water Wa5te at;r Public Services
Fire Police
No Mains Available 259-31; 411,5," & 811 1411 section 24 hydrants
in whole water pipes Fire Boat station
section IUI water pipe in Manhattan less
260-1 41, & 61, water pipe than 1.4 mi.away
2 61' waterpipe

Aesthetic & Cultural aspects

10th & River Rd. site of first N.Y. Yacht Club; entrance to Elysian Fields Excellent view of harbor,-should.continue
.protection of view from Elysian Park no building over 2 stories to be allowed.

Hudson St.

Bulkhead

Pierhead

S E C T 1 0 N F
7

Section F

This area has been traditionally dedicated to heavy industrial uses
(predominately that of marine repair) since about MO. Today ship
repair stil occurs at Bethlehem Steel. Maxwell House and American Can
Co. (which leases its property from Maxwell House) complete the present
day industrial complex.

The area provides a mixed land use in that across from the industrial
complex are hundreds of residences, some just recently rehabilitated.
Noise and occasional odor plus truck traffic and congestion provide a
prime example of the incompatibility of industrial and residencial uses
in such proximity. The amount of taxes which come from Maxwell House
and Bethlehem Steel, make it difficult to entertain ideas for different
land use for this area in the immediate future if only for economic rea.-
sons. Hoboken residents account for about 13% of the employment figures
li.sted so that it would be economically devastating to remove these jobs.
In addition Maxwell and Bethlehem require waterfront locations as an
integral part of their operations. Environmental problems should be
addressed in this area. These include: reduction of noise; continued
efforts to control odor; need for a new plan for truck movements at non-
peak hours: and need for an employee parking program. Inasmuch as both
Maxwell and Bethlehem have exhibited willingness to be considerate neigh-
bors, these problems would appear to be candidates for discussion and
rectification over the years. Furthermore efforts to solve these problems
by joint means may go a long way to improve the operating environment for
the companies in Hoboken.

The new Hoboken Economic Development Corporation can help these businesses
to address these environmental problems as part of the Authority's pro-
gram of keeping industry in Hoboken.

log

Section F
Fact Sheet
Area (Acres)
Block Lot, Poeular Name Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater

261 1 Maxwell House General Foods Corp. Up to Date 10.199 9.125
262 2 Bethlehem Steel Bethlehem Steel Co. Up to Date 18.853 32.235

Congitj?n
Water Depth. Bedrock ul @nvironment

261-141-201 45! M'axwell - Wood & Steel Bulkheads; Piers-Steel Frame, corrugated
262-24,-4o., asbestos sides, 'concrete floor on wood piles * In general
buildings have concrete floors & Roofs with steel Frame constr.
Beth. - Piers on piles
- Stee,I frame & glass

Infrastructure
Gas Electric Potable Water Wastewater Public Services
Fire Police
261/1 611 Yes 261-6,10, & 1211 waterpipe Yes M. 16 Water
Main under 262-3,4,5,8,& 1211 waterpipe B.-29 Hydrants
Hudson St. 4 hand hose reels
262/2 5 fire alarm boxes
61' Main Under chemicals & fire pails
Hudson Sf. Fire boat station less
than 1.4 mi. away in
Manhattan
Aesthetic and Cultural aspects_

This area was once know as Elysian Fields (1820 to 1880). It was also the home of the Fletcher marine engine builders from
1880's to the early 1900's. The old l4th St. Ferry to Manhattan once left from this area.. This section could serve
as a tourism factor if it would be possible to cre .ate a set of tours which would not only show Hoboken's Ihistoric
buildings but include an industrial tour of manufacturing and. boat building techniques (See tourism discussion in Chap 3.)

WEEHAWKEN

Weehawken

Cove

s
t

Bulkhead

Pierhead
En

S E C T 1 0 N G

Section G

This area could be considered as.a marginal industrial area. It has
been zoned as General Industrial since zoning was introduced to Hoboken.
The Weehawken Cove area, which serves as the core of thistsection, was
devoted to marine repair uses siInce the 18801s. It is a difficult area
to deal with in that it has little upland (10 acres) most of which con-
sists of decaying concrete decking in need of repair or demolition. The
piers which are within Hoboken (Piers B, D and part ofF) were subjected
to a preliminary visual investigation by Dr. William C. Kerr, P. E. for
the Waterfront Redevelopment Project (see Exhibit TT for report). The
report notes that only Pier D, which has a reenforced concrete platform
on steel piles, can be considered for repair. The other piers, which
are wood have suffered wood-rot and fire damage and need to be removed.

It can be seenV thereforeP that the Cove area in Hoboken needs demolition
work and filling in order to create an upland area sufficient for reuse.
Also like much of Hoboken's waterfront,, specifically between Fourth and
Eleventh Streets, Weehawken Cove is lacking in an infrastructure.
It needs potable water, sewer connections, power and now most of all, a
.public road to it. It is safe to say that substantial investment, most
probably public, must be made in site preparation to attract private
development.

The Cove area, should be subjected to an in-depth engineering study in
order to ascertain the approximate costs that would be involved for filling
in a portion of the Cove, providing an infrastructure and an access road
to prepare it for possible commercial and/or residential uses. Such a
study could be partially funded by the New Jersey Economic Development
Agency which has already expressed an interest in working on a study of
this area.13 The city's future Economic Development Corporation should pur-
sue this possibility at once for the future of the area is dependent upon
the physical characteristics and improvements of this Cove.

On the southern rim of the CoveP the former Standard Brands Building with
660,000 sq. feet of floor space,, has just been sold for the proclaimed
purpose of creating a vertical industrial building to house small indus-
trial operations. This use may be the only one feasible at present.
However, ideas should be examined for the creation of a garment center
with day care facilities, restaurant and park in the southern portion.
Even longer term, the building could be a prime location for mixed-income

13. Meeting of WRP personnel, CDA personnel (Sally Aaronson) and
Carlos Villamil, New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry
Economic Development Agency. (Fall 1976.)

112

housing This eventuality will be dependent upon the city's ability to
continu; its present trend of becoming a fine residential area as well
as the gradual departure of the other industrial uses in the immediate
area. If over the next 10 years the marginal firms leave, the area
would become available for a mix of commercial and residential uses.

An area of multiple use might be created.on the property formerly used
by the Hoboken Shore Railroad just north of 14th Street at Washington
Street. A park and parking section could be instituted here. There
could be paid parking initiated during the weekdays while recreational
uses could take over during the weekends and on holidays. Basketball
and baseball could be played here while concerts and dances could occur
in the area during summer weekend evenings. The fees collected from the
parking would provide maintenance and supervision funds for the recre-
ational uses. The Hoboken Parking Authority would be the already-existing
institution to make such a facility work.

The Fifthteen Street pier is in very bad condition. It is courrenlty used
by the two Palace party fishing boats. No better use for this facility
is in sight. However, this is one of the piers which would be eliminated
if the Corps of Engineers Project to clear the Hudson of-decaying piers
ever becomes operational in Hoboken. This report has already suggested
that the Palace boats be moored at either the Fifth or Sixth Street piers.

113

Section G
Fact Sheet

Area -(Acres)
Block Lot Popular Name Current Owner Tax Status Upland Underwater
266 Plt-l Weehawken Cove Basin Land Co. Foreclosure .710 9.889
Plt-2 Weehawken Cove Seatrain Realty Corp. Up to date .237 1.625
264 2 Weehawken Cove Basin Land Co. Foreclosure 2.531 5,349
267 1 Todd Shipyards if 11 If Foreclosure 8.265 15-746
268 1 Standard Brands Wm. De Goode Up to date 5.230 0
2-A Larry Luxenberg Larry Luxenberg Up to date 1.138 0
2-B Sullivan Co. Sullivan Co. Up to date 1.102 0
269 Plt-F Vacant l4th St. Pier Corp. Assessed by Dir. 2.166 0
Div. Tax.
135 Hoboken Shore Road Hoboken Mfg.R. R.Co. Assessed by Dir. .086 0
Div. Tax.

Conditions
Water Depth Bedrock Built Environment
Wee. 15-20' 351 - 401 Upland - Concrete decking on fill - elevation + 10' ms],
Cove below m.l.w. Weehawken Cove - Pier D only concrete platform on steel
Area piles; has minor damage and is repairable. Piers B
& and F should be removed.
Todd.

Infrastructure
Gas Electric Potable Water Wastewater Public Services
Fire Police
266 No Mains 2.64 Kv Line 12" Main beneath l5th St. Sewers lead Station within 700'
264 along Willow 611 connector beneath to primary treatment in Weehawken, Hob.
Ave. plant. station is 10001 away
267 l8th St. from a 1611 Main on Wash. Fire Boat
268/1 4" Main beneath Park Ave. Station in Manhattan
269 No Mains is 1.4 mi. southeast
135 of site.

Aesthetic and Cultural Aspects
Henry Hudson landed in Weehawken Cove on October 2, 1609. The area was also the northernmost part of the famed Elysian
Fields from 1820 to 1880. The view from this area should be utilized much more than it is at present...

Exhibit I I

WILLIAM C. KERR P. E.
CONSULTING SOILS ENGINEER
404 Lyons Road
Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920
Tel. (20 1') 647-3129

A visual inspection of the pier structures-in the Weehaw'ken.Cove
area has been completed. Due to the fact that written permission to
enter the,property was denied, subaqueous inspection was deemed ill-
advised. Both deck and pile components.were inspected.
An attempt was'made to obtain diving records, however, none could
be found if indeed they ever existed.

Our findi.ngs are summarized as follows:

1) Platforms Most of these are wooden and they have suffered
extensive wood-rot and in some cases, fire damage. These
are deemed totally unsafe and not suitable for use. They
would have to be removed. The one exception isAhe rein-
forced concrete platform supported on s teel piles. Although
some concrete has deteriorated, as evidenced by missing
chips, the damage is minor and could easily be repaired.

2) Pile Bents For the most part, these consist of timber piles,
1511 to 1611 in diameter. These appear to be reasonably in-
tact below MHW level. Originally these bents were braced,
laterally by diagonal members, Many of these are missing
and the ones that remain are damaged and unsecurely held
iri place. The steel 11HP11 sections which support the concrete
platform alluded to earlier appear to be in sound condition.
Some rust scaling is visible on the Slurges but if the
sections are burned off at MHW level, the rest should be

useful as is.

Without closely supervised load tests it is impossible to say what
the pile capacity really is. Timber piles normally are designed for 15
25 tons. Steel ''HP' sections should bear on rock and may be expected to
carry 40 tons and possibly a great deal more. It is my strong recommen-
dation that no us of these foundation units should be seriously considered
with out load testing of several pile units.

low

'4N

fll
i_z

A
@ @iw
2W

*4@

Figure 6-6. Condition of Piers in Section G, Weehawken Cove

7 7. 7,7@
p
T

-.2 .2.

CNP F, @@C w,

i 416 A

R F.,
mq

al
91

.; lp

g
No

W-F

5- Is"
NA Z".N-

EM A @MAPOX

;Al
4,

T1,

vA
.. .... ....
01"', -m ?
-Nz
aw_
@731W;.,
Ugg'."N
M

J
5-

Figure 6-7. Condition of Piers in Section G, Weehawken Cove

CHAPTER 7: IDEAS FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND CONTROL

Introduction

In order to explore possible modes of implementation' for waterfront re-
development in Hoboken (and elsewhere in New Jersey) it is necessary
a) to look'at thelegal and ma,nqgement structures which are presently
used to enforce land use'planning and
b) to determine how they could,@-.be utilized for control of redevelopment.

These structures exist at several levels of government from local to
federal.

A note of caution must be added here lest,the impression be given that
governmental structures alone can bring about redevelopment. The approaches
which government takes in controlling land use and insisting on quality are
performed as a response to the free enterprise system. In that system
where, how, when and what development occurs is dependent upon "the general
state of the economy, people's preferences and values and the costs of,
development to the builder.". Though governmental actions can influence
decision-making, it is the pri.vate sector in most cases which must dedicate
money to the project. r

.Any progress toward better land use must therefore be
measured not in terms of the sophistication of legal
devices or the complexity of approval mechanisms developed
by different levels of government. What i.s important is
how such controls and stimulants can be used to influence
the private sector in its decisions about how to use the.
land.

(See Table 7-1 for Impact of Government Action on Property Values).

Local Level Zoning and Planning Implementation General Remarks

At this basic stage for enforcement of land use.cont,rols, the police power
invests zoning and subdivision with major importance. Zoning is essen-
tially utilized to create districts or zones within a legal jurisdiction
in which regulations are set up as to density of population, land uses
permitted in each zohe,height and bulk regulations as well as lot coverage
and open space requirements.

In general, subdivision requireme.nts are aimed at proper specification of
streets, minimum lot sizes and adequate provision for infrastructure.
What both of these tools.have traditionally done is to place the focus on

118

TABLE 7-1

IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT ACTION ON PROPERTY VALUES

Impact on Values of Relative Importance of
Impact on Values of Neighboring or Net Effect on
Type of Action Sublect Property Competitive Properties Specific Actions in
Property Values Deterininitik Impacts
Restrictions on land use Value declines Value rises Redistributional Very Important
Developer required to inake Value declines Value rises
improverneriEs or pay fees Slightly negative Unimportant compared to
other public actions
Resource amenities protected Value rises Value rises Slightly positive to very Very Important
or restored by goveminent positive
action
Share access by the-public Value declines Value rises Slightly negative Less important than use
maxiinized and prutected restrictions or amenity
protection
Concentrating development If still undeveloped value Value rises
Positive Very important
in existing communities declines; If already Im-
proved, value rises
Providing infra5tructwe, Value rises Values unchanged Positive Important
public facilities, and
services
The md"c-Licri or deFerral Value rises Values unchanged Slightly positive Less important than use
t6rm.gulatgd, restrictej,
or encourdEcd uses of restrictions or'amenity
coAstal properties protection

Source; Real Estate Research Corporation.
"Business Prospe'cts Under Coastal Zoq.e Managenient, U.S Department of Commerce, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Adm i n i s t ra t i on, Office of Coastal.Zon'e. Management, p. 9.

attaining the most liveable conditions for man; no t on protecting the
land. The carrying capacity of the land involved has not been the con-
cern of zoning or subdivision. In fact it can be said that "conventional
zoning and subdivision regulation assume that an essentially unlimited
supply of land suitable for urbanization exists."I This assumption is
now making problems for modern society. However, it is not the only
difficulty with zoning and subdivision regulations.

The Council on Environmental Quality has reported that "zoning has certain
inherent problems as a land use control." It can reduce property values
and confuse land redevelopment by prohibiting mixed use; it "provides
neither stability of use nor a logical mechanism for definition of use'12
due to the frequency with which amendments and variances are granted. In
addition, the way in which zoning is administered at the local level affects
the direction which zoning takes. It can produce most uneven results.
Many actions undertaken with the best intention may, because
of the way they affect the land, result in land use changes
that are perverse in terms of the original goals.3

Attempts are being made in New Jersey to rectify problems created by
zoning and its administration. The new Municipal Land Use Law (Chapter
291. Laws of New Jersey 1975, approved January 1976) enables municipali-
ties to bring their zoning codes into conformity with the land use elements
of a master plan. Though the act appears to have been passed primarily in
order to,xrovide ''expeditious handling of applications while ensuring due
process, it also focuses some attention upon infrastructure, environment
and the land itself (Article 3-09) (2); Article 6 (29 b). Though this
may still not be deemed adequate emphasis upon the carrying capacity of
the land, it. is a step in an environmental direction.

In essence, the "zoning ordinance or any amendment or revision thereto
shall either be substantially consistent with the land use plan element of
the master plan or designed to effectuate such plan element." (Article 8
49a.) A master plan must provide land use and development proposals which
examine infrastructure, as well as recreation and conservation possibiii-
ties.

At this time it can only be hoped that the waterfront areas of New Jersey
will be given special attention in the new master plans and zoning codes
which are to be ready by February 1, 1977. As in other cities, in Hobo-
ken there will also be a new master plan since the one now in effect is
about twenty years old and out of touch with the reality of the city.

1. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Ronald H. Rosenberg, "The Legal Implementation
of Coastal Zone Management: The North Carolina Model," Duke Law
Journal, Vol-'1976 Number 1, March, p. 13.
2. The Fifth Annual Report on Environmental Quality, Council on Environ-
,mental Quality, December 1974, P. 52.
3. Ibid., P. 71.

120

There will also be a new or amended zoning code which should be consis-
tent with the findings of the master plan. In order to have this happen
there must be sensitive and knowledgeable approaches taken so that the
long-term effects of zoning will work to'further development goals and
policies rather than hinder them.

As suggested earlier, the legal and management structures for planning
and zoning exist at several levels of government from local to federal.
Thus it is essential these influences on the local level be recognized
and evaluated.

State and Federal Influences on Implementation

The New.Jersey Office of Coastal Zone Management (N.J.O.C.Z.M.) has been
given the task of creating a management policy, and mechanism for imple-
mentation of the policy, for the coastal area of the State. To date it
is not clear just how the State will deal with the urban coastal zone.
However, statements made by O.C.Z.M. personnel tend to indicate that the
.existing Riparian Law of New Jersey will be the means of control for the
urban area of the coast. This may not be adequate due to a lack of plan-
ning and implementation capabilities under that law.

At a meeting held at Stevens Institute in December 1976 which was arranged
by WRP at the request of N.J.O.C.Z.M., citizens of the urban coastal zone
area were given an opportunity to be heard. The general consensus was
that the existing state controls over the urban waterfronts, i.e. the
Riparian Law, we're not enough. The citizens asked for a plan for the
Hudson River region. They asked that the O.C.Z.M. provide a boundary
designation which would allow for effective land and water protection.

After the above-mentioned public meeting, the WRP submitted, at the request
of the N.J.O.C.Z.M., an urban waterfront policy statement. (See Appendix
A.) In essence, the policy suggested that the urban waterfronts of New
Jersey be principally dedicated to the uses and concerns of the public.
This was recommended as the primary urban waterfront policy goal. All
uses whether industrial, commercial, residential or recreational should be
measured with that goal in mind.

The institutional mechanism for planning management of such a specialized
region as the urban waterfront of New Jersey does not now exist in the
State. The. Municipal Land Use Law permits a regional approach in planning
but only when the municipalities give over their planning powers to a
regional or county planning group. Ideally, for the waterfront, a region-
ial mechanism should be created which would have inputs from effected
communities. It is essential that localities participate and have a say
in planning and policy decisions concerning landIwithin their jurisdictions.
However, local governments ought not to be "the sole or principal party"
in such decision-making according to mogulof.5 New legislation would be

5. Melvin.B. Mogulof, Saving the Coast, The Urban Institute, Washington
D. C.$ 1975, P. 78.

121

necessary for the creation of regional planning and impleme.ntation groups
in the State.

The use of an existing legal mechanism has become attractive to the N. J.
O.C. Z. M., for it obviates the need to go to the legislature and work through
a special bill. For this reason the Riparian Law has been contemplated as
the means for legal implementation of the State's coastal zone management
plan in urban areas. The usage of the Riparian Law may not achieve what
the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 appears to require of the
State.

The policy set forth in the U. S. Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
(P.L. 92-583 Section 303 b) states that:
The Congress finds and declares that it is the national
policy .... to encourage and assist the states to exercise
effectively their responsibilities in the coastal zone
through the development and implementation of management
programs to achieve wise use of the land and water re-
souIrces of the coastal zone. (Emphasis added.)

The Riparian Law of New Jersey requires that the State examine the'uses
to which riparian properties are put. The riparian lands are those which
are or were washed by the tides during any period since Colonial times.
The New Jersey Natural Resources Council oversees the granting of riparian
grants and permits. Even though the Council has been sensitive to the
needs and desires of the thousands of people living in proximity to the
riparian lands in Hudson County (i.e. Bayonne, Jersey City and Hoboken,6)
it does not have the power to plan for or implement programs for this area.

The Federal Act also requires that the states include within their manage-
ment boundaries those "shorelands, the uses of which have direct and signi-
ficant impacts on coastal waters." A boundary which merely includes the
bulkhead line (that area affected by the tides in most urban areas), would
not control the impacts on coastal waters. As with land everywhere,
impacts from runoff, sewerage plants, construction and manufacturing pro-
cesses frequently originate far to the landward side of the bulkhead. To
be consistent with the Act, it would appear that the entire property which
abuts the water's edge 'should be included in the urban coastal zone bound-
ary. Not to do so will mean ineffective control over direct and significant
impacts on the waters.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the U. S.
Department of Commerce, which has been given the responsibility of over-
seeing the Coastal Zone Management Act, repeatedly recommends in its

6. Council decision in December 1975 regarding Cosmopolitan Terminal,
Inc. and in December 1976 regarding Steuber Chemicals.

122

guidelines that control over land use policy be given to regional entities.
The Center for Research i'n Water Resources notes that "the intent (of the
NOOAA guidelines) is to focus on the problems peculiar to individual
regions.''7 The Natural Resources Council of the State of New Jersey is
not a regional entity. It deals with the entire state. In addition, it
has no powers to plan for or implement plans for the coastal regions of
the state.

If dependence for coastal zone management in New Jersey's urban areas is
placed upon the Riparian Laws,of the State, the pressures for development
in the urban areas will be intense. The ''shore area" of New Jersey, - the
section from Cape May to Raritan Bay - is protected by a permit system
created under the New Jersey Coastal Area Facilities Review Act of 1973
(CAFRA). This law requires the N. J. Department of Environmental Protec-
tion (DEP) to regulate major current development and prepare a plan for
the area's future. It is reasonable to suppose that, other things being
equal, the more "i,ntensive" uses which are excluded from the CAFRA area
will seek out the urbanized sections of the coastal zone in the Raritan
.Bay, the Delaware River, New York Bay and the Hudson River. The Real
Estate Research Corporation in a study for the U. S. Office of Coastal Zone
Management notes that restricting land use options on certain properties,
will "transfer any unsatisfied demand to other competitive sites not sub-
ject to use,restrictions.'' Though this may sound desirable at first, the
end result could be detrimental to the urban waterfront areas.

Without a specific plan and permit system for land uses along the water-
.fronts of the urban areas of the State, 'lengthy and expensive legal battles
over what facilities should be permitted will undoubtedly continue. In
order to do away with perhaps destructive competition, resulting in un-
certainty and possibly in sizeable monetary losses for developers as well
as considerable loss of time, a regional solution, as opposed to town-by-
town zoning control, appears preferable for land use management and cont-
trol over.

Governmental Mechanisms
There would seem to be three possible governmental entities8 which could
take on the regional responsibilities which NOAA recommends in its guide-
lines. They are
1. County governments
2. Councils of Government

3. New regional governments

.7. Kingsley E. Haynes, Methodology to Evaluate Alternative Coastal Zone
Management Policies, The University of Texas at Austin, 1975, p-33.
.8. Ibid.,

123

Countv Governments

In New Jersey the county governments already exist and many, such as
that in Hudson County, have recently gone through charter changes which
consolidate and improve performance. However, even with these changes
the county government structure may not be the proper vehicle for coastal
zone management purposes.
a. Currently in New Jersey counties have no zoning power. The county
planning board is advisory in nature.
b. Economic and environmental issues and concerns do not stop
at county lines. Water courses flow through many counties.
A -rational regional, not county approach, appears to be a
necessity in the case of waterfront management.

Councils.of Government

Councils of Government do not exist in New Jersey but in states where they
do they are normally considered to be confined to planning duties and are
not involved in implementation.9 To be effective a coastal zone manage-
ment must deal with implementation as well as planning.

New Regional Governments

A new regional government structure would appear to be the most promising
mechanism for New Jersey's urban waterfront management. Such an entity
would have to be created by act of the legislature. Though this may be
considered an obstacle politically, and bureaucratically, it also provides
an opportunity in that a mechanism could be specially created to cover the
geographic area's and the needs of specific waterfront regions which share
a degree of compatible uses (such as urban core areas with built environ-
ments). Since planning and implementation appear to be the objectives of
coastal zone management, these two functions should be performed by one
group, preferably on the regional level with criteria for operation and
recourse from regional decisions provided by a state-level commission,.
similar to that used in California, as indicated by Mogulof.10

As stated earlier, if the State of New Jersey doesnot create a management
mechanism with'regional jurisdiction, it would seem that the objectives of
the U. S. Coastal Zone Management Act will not be met in the urban areas
of the State. The Riparian Law in New Jersey allows local governments to
plan for and make decisions about waterfront uses. Though the State may
override usage decisions made at the local level, the regional planning

9. Ibid., P_
10. Op. cit., Saving The Coast.

124

is lacking upon which such perm'it decisions logically should be made.
Without such planning and the ability to implement it with a permit and
review system, the urban coastal zone will continue to be surrendered, as
it is today, to local development pressures and the inevitable chaos of
parochial land use decisions which do not take into account regional, state
or even national concerns.

Specific Mechanisms for Implementation

In Chapter 6 a number of suggestions for alternative uses were made for
developing Hoboken's waterfront. In order that these or other preferred
alternatives have an opportunity to become implemented, we recommend that
the unsatisfactory laisser-faire policy of the past should be abandoned.
Unless positive steps with respect to waterfront redevelopment are adopted
things are likely to go on as they are today. These steps include the
devising of a framework within which development will take place within
desired lines. This framework will outline what role Hoboken wants the
waterfront to play as part of the overall goals for the city (masterplan).
For example, the Hoboken Urban Preservation Study completed in November
197511 asked for a r1refocusing" of attention to the waterfront. It recom-
mended ways of doing this by:
1. Reorienting the City's focus toward the waterfront via
walkways, paved streets, signs and public transportation
rerouting.
2. Acquiring property or easements for use and access, and
clearing for reclamation of even a small parcel for
public use.
3. Locating major recreational facilities at the water side
of the City in order to reenforce the recreational aspects
of that area and support waterfront related commercial
facilities.12

The second part of the framework is a zoning code designed to establish
the rules so that goals may be attained, not thwarted. Often this would
be sufficient, based on the expectation that, but for requests for vari-
ances from the zoning base, the code would largely administer itself.
However, the waterfront is unlike the rest of the city, being unique in
its physical layout and potential uses. Thus it would appear to follow
that flexibility, expertise and a certain amount of boldness will be re-
quired in overseeing the re-development of the waterfront.

11. Hoboken Urban Preservation Study, prepared for the Hoboken Community
Fevelopment Agency by Pokorny and,Pertz, November 1975, P. 12.
12. Ibid.$ p. 40.

125

One way to approach this objective is for the master plan to consider the
waterfront as a special place, environmentally, socially, economically and
historically where mixed uses will be encouraged. Useful as this would be,
it is passive. It is imperative that there be supplemen Ited a more active
component. A means for doing this would be the creation of a funded
Waterfront Development Council, a sub-unit of a city-wide Economic
Development Corporation referred to in Chapter 1. Among others, it
duties would be to plan, manage, promote and control waterfront usage.
Some ideas on planning and control with particular reference to Hoboken's
needs follows.

Ingredients of an Urban Waterfront Planning and Control System 82plied
to Hoboken's Waterfront 13

Whether the local Waterfront Development Council is at work and/or the
regiona'] government with responsibility over the coastal zone, the
following matters, should be considered in a work program:

1. The planning element should include the services of a
land scape architect and a planner experienced in
waterfront work. An engineer should be consulted on
methods and costs.

A useful way to develop a plan in Hoboken's context might be to break it
into linear zones, possibly along the following lines similar to those
used in the highly successful Chicago Waterfront area. 14

1. a Water Zone - Extending from the shoreline property
to the pierhead line. This could be an "opportunity
zone" for future filling in. Controls over this area
would protect other water and land uses. This would be
a primary impact zone for coastal zone management.

b Park/Commercial/Research Zone - This area would extend
from Fourth to Eleventh Streets east to the river and west
up to and including the top of Castle Point. This zone
would allow for uses compatible@with a park setting
while encouraging multiple uses of the land. Access for
the public to the river's edge would be a basic require-
ment in this zone.

C Community Zone - This area should include all of the
sections not mentioned in the Park and Water Zones. It

13. C. Norcross, Open Space Communities in the Market Place, Urban Land
Institute, Technical Bulletin 57, pp. 60-61.
14. The Lakefront Plan of Chicpgp_,__Chicago Plan Commission, December
1972.

126

would extend west to and include Hudson Street
thereby controlling development which could impact
upon the waterfront area.

2. Special attention should be given to underutilized
and ugly areas of the waterfront (in Hoboken this
would mean the Fifth and Sixth Street piers, the
Stevens Long Dock, Union Dry Dock, the railroad
properties at Tenth Street and Weehawken Cove).

Thought might be given to filling in of certain
portions of the waterfront in order to create addi-
tional space. (Hoboken's present waterfront is
lacking in space.)

Waterfront recreational facilities should be planned
wherever. possible. It is generally conceded that
waterfront areas lend themselves to recreational uses.
Waterfront areas are good to look at but twice as
valuable if there are facilities,for use.

Where feasible, community facilities should be placed
on the waterfront; it is a natural- congregating spot.

6. Planning review and permits must make certain that
private facilities provide for some areas of public
access.

7. The waterfront should be beautiful. When this happens
the full potential of the waterfront will be realized.
Lovely land uses increase the property values in the
surrounding properties.and also improve the reputation
of the city as a whole. The waterfront should be
viewed as one of.the finest amenities in a municipality.

If housing is planned, it should not be placed too close
to the water. "More people want to look at the water
than want to, be right.on it.'- 15

Maintenance is one of the most important features in
any waterfront plan. Methods of maintenance should be
required as part of any review process of a proposed
facility prior to approval. Absence of maintenance
information would warrant refusal.

15. Ibid.,-p. 62.

127

10. Safety features must be part of every wateredge facility.
Fencing, provision of life preservers and the like are.-
necessary considerations for waterfront installations.
Adequate liability insurance should be required as part
of the total cost package of a facility. No permits
-should be granted without such insurance.

11. A review of environmental impact should be a commonplace
in the procedure prior to issuing permits, for development.
Any facility which impedes the use of the waterfront by
people or which does not require a waterfront location should
be excluded.

Control

There can be developed a procedure to review new projects or reuses of the
waterfront before they are given permission to proceed. A method to ex-
pedite such a review procedure is to require preparation in advance of
a Community Impact Assessment Report which would provide extensive infor-
mation along the following lines:
Legal des'cription

Current uses

Fire protection

Traffic control

Sanitary sewers

For a more comp-lete list see Paul A. Bergmann, "Assessing the Consequences
of Development," Environmental Comment, October 1976, The Urban Land
Institute.

This approach leads to what is known as ."impact zoning" 16 in which the
capacity of the.land and the ability of the area to accept the proposed
facility are of primary concern. Obviously the potential user can also
employ the eeport as a check list to ascertain what the location provides
and what it does not in -respect to his needs.

Promotion

Without promotion, it seems safe to say that there will be very little
new activity on the waterfront. There are too many alternate waterfront
sites in Hudson County with-which Hoboken must compete.

16. Roger Wells, "Impact Zoning: Incentive Land Use Management,"
Environmental Comment, The Urban Land Institute, January 1977, P. 13.

128

Thus it is imperative that special attention be given to this
aspect of waterfront redevelopment.

Conclusion

This report has taken an approach different from the usual planning re-
ports. I.nstead of an integrated plan, this report suggests, where
possible, alternative schemes together with their advantages and dis-
advantages. Again taking a different tack, the report acquaints the
reader with ideas that were researched and rejected with the reasons for
the rejections. Thus the readers of the report, including general pub-
lic, in studying the report need not speculate on whether this idea or
that idea was considered. If it was, it is listed for the record. Thus
certain obstacles in the'way of public acceptance may be removed. F;nally,
the report considers not only what may be done, but suggests means of
implementing the ideas.

The limitation of this approach is that when desirable alternatives are
agreed upon,, specific details and costs will have to be determined. It
is suggested in the report that this should be one of the tasks of the
proposed Wateffront Planning Council, a suggested sub-unit of the exist-
ing Economic Development Corporation. Another possible title for
the Council would be Waterfront Planning and Promotion Council. At
this point in time, there does not seem to be much chance of waterfront
development unless there is vigorous and imaginative promotion spear-
headed by an agency chartered to do this job. With this thought the
report closes.

129

APPENDICES

130

APPENDIX A

CENTER FOR MUNICIPAL STUDIES AND SERVICES
STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

January 1977

AN URBAN WATERFRONT POLICY FOR NEW JERSEY

Introduction

The Center for Municipal Studies and Services (CMSS) first began its
review of the Hoboken waterfront in 1975, with the intention of being able
to specify a general set of redevelopment objectives. Since that time
and more than three man-years of effort we have come to appreciate
that certain activities are environmentally and socially impractical and
irrational. Additionally, our study has shown that there are some activ-
ities which are also economically and physically non-feasible. We have
concluded that the@e are and must be limits to and restrictions on develop-
ment. This conclusion, though aimed'at Hoboken, may be applicable to
other urban waterfront areas as well.
The following policy, then, is presented as an outgrowth of the rumi-
nations and work of people who have studied a particular area. Although
the views presented here are not the results of a study based upon the
desire for policy, we think that they are valid and urge that further re-
search directed toward these ideas be pursued.

What is meant by an urban area?

In order to understand what an urban coastal zone policy should be,
it is necessary to comprehend just what constitutes an urban or urbanized
area. According to the U. S. Census of 1970, specific criteria for the
delineation of urbanized areas include:

I a. A central city of 50,000 inhabitants or more in 1960,
... or in the 1970 census; or
b. Twin cities, i.e., cities with contiguous boundaries and
constituting, for general social and economic purposes,
a single community with a combined population of at least
50,000 and the smaller of the twin cities having a popula-
tion of at least 15,000. @

2. Surrounding closely settled territory, including the
following ... :
a. Incorporated places of 2,500 inhabitants or more.

131

INITIATED UNDER THE URBAN OBSERVATORY PROGRAM OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES

b. Incorporated places with fewer than 2,500 inhabitants,
provided that each has a closely settled area of 100
housing units or more.
c. Small parcels of land normally less than one $quare mile
in area having a population density of 1,000 inhabitants
or more per square mile ....
d. Other similar small areas in unincorporated territory with
lower population density provided if they serve'
to eliminate enclaves, or

to close indentations in the.urbanized areas of one mile
or less across the open'end, or
to link outlying enumeration districts or qualifying
density that are not more than I -L miles from the main
2
body of the urbanized area.
(Source: General Social and Economic Character-
istics, U. S. Census, 1970 Appendix A-3)

When speaking-of urban.populations the census means "all persons
liv.ing in (a) places of 2,500 inhabitants or more incorporated as cities,
villages, boroughs..., and towns .... but excluding those persons living
in'the rural portions of extended cities; (b) unincorporated places of
2,500 inhabitants. or more; and (c) other teritory incorporated or unin-
corporated, included in urbanized areas." (Op.cit.)

Of what does an urban area consist?

The urban areas along the coastline of New Jersey offer.'a many-
faceted picture.. "Urban" means many things to many people, as cities were
intended to do, but above all it means a people p,lace. It is in urban
areas that a major portion of the economic and cultural desires of human
beings come together. Urban areas are:

Residential areas

Commercial and office locations

Retail cores

Industrial sites

Districts connected by transportation networks
Communication systems
Recreational opportunities

Cultural centers

132

Because there are so many needs and desires to be fulfilled in
the finite extent of urban areas, these.areas must provide
efficient use of.land along with ease of acce 'ss within their boundaries
and to the outlying regions; they must also contain opportunities for
jobs, homes and recreation. In order to provide all of the foregoing in
a way which is beneficial to all, urban areas must be clean and safe as
welli In other words, titles tend to be looked upon as areas that should
be-all things to all people - certainly an impossible task and perhaps
one of the reasons that the urban,areas of the United States have been
considered by many to have "failed."
The urban waterfronts of the state of New Jersey now increasingly
abandoned and thus open for speculation - share in the expectation of a
city - all things to all people. Often forgotten however, is the fact
that the urban waterfronts, as well as the cities, are built upon land
and in air. In rural areas the land is not as intensively used as in urban
areas and environmental concern there is primarily concentrated on its
assimilative capacity which is involved; in urban areas-it is the carrying
capacity of the land that is of major concern.
The carrying capacity of the land and the air limits to a great
extentJust how many societal expectations may be fulfilled in the cities
or urban regions. Capital investment increases this carrying capacity
which then, in turn, allows the land to fulfill desires to a greater de-
gree than nature alone may have permitted. However, it may be questioned
whether current economicactivities which seek urban waterfront property
.can repay the enormous investments required to both repair and increase
the carrying capacity of such areas. Furthermore, in the case of the
urban waterfronts, the carrying capacity of that sensitive boundary of
land, water and air limits even,more the types of activities in which
humans may engage. Though urban waterfronts have been given the label.
of "built environments," they are still part of ecologically fragile sys-
tems which need to be utilized with care.
The coastal zone in urban areas also has, over time, been many'things
to many people. A great number of New Jersey urban waterfronts have proven
to be all of the following: military defense locations; transportation
centers; resorts and recreational areas; places which provided for ship-
ping and commerce; depots of military importance during wars; manufacturing
resources;.and at the most recent stage, underutilized and frequently
deteriorating areas.
As can be seen from the listing above, man has intruded all manner
of activity at the urban water's edge. However, this does not necessarily
mean that it was either wise or beneficial to have done so. The fact
that certain things happened in the past does not mean that they should
happen the same way today. There is a danger in the philosophy which
makes historic uses or even existing uses the criteria for placement of
future development in urban areas where thousands of people live. Simply
beca-use the land, water and people have been exploited in history does
not mean that this.should continue in the future.

133

-4-

Objective of the Policy

An integral part of the concern for the carrying capacity of the
waterfront is its people. People live and work in the immediate sur-_
roundings of an urban waterfront and their quality of life, their envi
ronment and their sources of homes..and jobs must be protected. People
and nature are being asked to live compatibly in urban waterfront areas
and therefore, the objectives of an urban waterfront policy should be
to make certain that the area is given over to public use and benefit,
and to restrict that use so that it is within its assimilative and
supportive capacity.

The Policy

The "Guiding Principles'' delineated in the N.J.D.E.P. publication
Alternatives for the Coast, 1976, have been utilized as the rationale
for this policy. Where found necessary comment is made by CMSS.

1. Principle Activities that increase public access to the coast
should be encouraged and existing public rights of
access to the coast should be protected.

Policy The urban wate.rfronts of the state of New Jersey
should be dedicated to.the uses and concerns of
people; all other activity should becompatible with
and secondary to that goal.

2. Principle Orderly, balanced, residential, commercial, and indus-
trial development should be accommodated in the coast,
in settlement patterns that are economically efficient
and respect the natural environment.

Comment It is odd that this principle which carries the title
of "Built EnvironmentV and thus must be especially
aimed at urban areas, mentions only economic efficiency
and the natural environment. There is not one word
about people and their rights and needs as living,
breathing be ings. People and their rights should be the
primary concern of every urban area.
In addition, urban waterfront areas are generally parts-
of already highly developed regions. The fact that the
land area for future development is scarce makes it
essential that any urban waterfront development be
reviewed as to its ability to promote compatible people

134

-5-

uses of the waterfront. Commercial and residential
activities - which are people-oriented - are blocked
out of existence when juxtaposed with heavy industrial
facilities.

Policy Commercial and residential uses of the urban waterfront
should be encouraged where they provide public access
as well as tax ratables and jobs. Heavy industrial in-
stallations (as defined in C.A.F.R. A.) should be dis-
coura.ged from locating in urban areas where they will
.intrude, upon present or future possibilities for com-
mercial, residential and recreational uses as well as
upon the lives of the many people nearby.

3. Principle Thp design of land uses should respect and reinforce the
visual characteristics of diverse parts of the coast.
The mix of scenic resources of the New Jersey coast,
including large bays ... and mighty urban rivers with
built-u.p waterfronts, should be maintained.

Comment There is a special, esthetic quality to the view from
the riverfront in most urban areas even though that
quality may be provided by still another urban area
across the expanse of water. Esthetics is one of the
most important aspects of the urban coastal zone. It is
one of the factors which makes a waterfront valuable to
commercial and residential entrepreneurs. In as much as
the traditional uses of urban waterfront have greatly
decreased in the last two decades - due to advances in
technology and changes in transportation - urban water-
fronts must look to commercial, residential and recre-
ational uses in order to help depressed economies.

Policy Views and vistas, along with the sense of openess found
near water, should be preserved or created. A strip of
land for public access.should be provided as an assur-
ance of this view.

4. Principle Development of hazardous areas should be avoided.

Comment LNG facilities, oil refineries, tank farms, petro-
chemical installations, etc. are industrial uses
which are volatile and hazardous. Because of this
fact they prohibit access to the waterfront by the
general public. In addition, such facilities demand
the creation of buffer zones is an extravagant and

135

costly use of a very scarce commodity.. In an urban
area a buffer zone is little more than a.no man's land
creating.a wasted and highly inefficient use of this
valuable asset.

'Policy Any industrial facility which attempts to locate in
an urban waterfront area should provide a harmonious
land and water use with its neighbors. Facilities
which are known-to be volatile and hazardous should be
excluded.

Principle The productivity of existing marine resources should
be maintained or improved.
Land and water uses should be allowed only to the
extent that they do not exceed the capacity of coastal
resources to assimilate the adverse effects of these

uses.
The water's edge where the land meets the sea -- the
urbanized waterfront and the less developed and rural
shoreline -- should be devoted only to activities that
depend upon direct access and required a shoreline or
waterfront location.

Comment The last principle listed above can adversely affect
planning and land use in every urban waterfront area
in the state. There are few public recreational facil-
ities in the urban areas which "depend upon direct
water access." If this principle is not made explicit,
there could be no parks, no walkways, not even general-
use sitting areas at the water's edge in the cities.

Policy Industrial, commercial and residential development
should be permitted at an urban waterfront edge only
when the development is truly dependent upon direct
water access foe fulfillment of processes or operations.
Even when this is the case, other criteria - such as
guarantees of carrying capacity, air and water pollution
,code enforcement, the creation of an esthetic atmosphere
and the policy that public access comes first - should
be given higher priority.

6. Principle Decisions on coastal land and water uses should be made
at the lowest practicable level of government, consistent
with resource management principles, so that more
people may be involved in the decisions that affect
their lives.

136

Policy Each community along the urban waterfront of the state
should be allowed to designate its own "geographic
areas of particular concern." These areas may include
parkland, unique geological or environmental features,
.or views and vistas. They may also include commercial
or residential areas, or even light industrial growth
sections in which special development criteria would
be enforced.

137

APPENDIX B

ATTITUDE ASSESSMENT SURVEY

In an effort to ascertain some basic things about the waterfront area
in Hoboken, WRP performed a survey of attitudes by Hoboken residents and
employees as to their-desires for and thoughts about the waterfront. Eleven
organizations responded to the survey and four members of the city govern-
ment responded. The rate of response was 62 per cent.

Organizational Responses*

Generally all of the respondents thought that the waterfront should be
protected. Each group thought that present views should be kept intact
because the views,and the locat.ion of the waterfront opposite New York
City were Hoboken's and the waterfront's biggest assets. There was also
general agreement that the waterfront should be planned for public utili-
zation of a free variety. Parks were mentioned first, then bicycle paths,
then fishing access. Everyone tended to want ratables also but in such a
way as to be compatible with and sensitive to the unique environment of
the waterfront area. Following are the actual questions and tabulations.

Question Number responding

What should be on the waterfront?

Parks 11 out of 11
Need for guards 2 out of 11
Public use 1 out of 11

Private use 9 out of 10
Shrubbery and trees a priority 11 out of 11

2. Business 9 out of 9

Restaurants 10 out of 11
Marina 9 out of 11
Shopping center 9 out of 11
Housing 7 out of 11
Set back required 7 out of 7
Height restriction 5 out of 7
Theater 5 out of 11
Shipping 7 out of 11

Material in this section of Organizations' Responses and Govern-
mental Responses was tabulated and prepared by John Prescott,
Research Assistant at the Center for Municipal Studies and Services.

138

Light industry 7 out of 11
Office building 5 out of 11
U.S.S. New Jersey 2 out of 11
Parking I out of 11
Warehouse I out of I I

Mini amusement park I out of 11
Night club I out of 11

Question Number responding

Should there be a review committee? Yes 10 out of 10

Should the committee have power to control? Yes 10,out of 10

Questions raised by the respondents:

Who would be on the committee?
What would it actually-do?
Would the members be paid? By whom? How much?
Who would be "qualified" people?

Should the waterfront be a specially zoned district?
Yes 10 out of 10

Comments were that the views and environmental aspects of the waterfront
,should be protected. Any endeavor on the.waterfront should be made to
enhance the beauty of the area andnot.change the features of merit which
exist now.

Governmental Responses

The governmental respondents thought that the docks, deep w 'ater facilities
and views were the waterfront's biggest assets. There was-agreement that
the area was underutilized and that it should be in better use but pro-
tected at the same time. Most agreed that the main thrust of redevelop-
ment should be the acquisition of ratables. All agreed that there should
be a review committee with power to act. All wanted a systems approach to
the waterfront. Most of the governmental respondents thought that parks
and other recreational activities would be nice but gave them low priority.

139

Survey

Question Number responding

What should be on the waterfront?

1. Business 4 out of4
Jobs 4'out of4

Ratables 4out of 4
Industry 4out of 4
Commercial 3out of 4
Shipping 3ou tof 4
Restaurants 3out of 4
Housing Iout of 4

Should there be a review committee? Yes 4out of 4

Should the committee have power to control? Yes 4out of 4

Comments on the committee:
Should be made up of city officials and representatives
of the business community.
Should be made up of city officials and citizens.
Should be a mixture of the two above.

Should the waterfront be a specially zoned district?
Yes 4 out of 4

The general thinking was that the waterfront should provide a mix of
all activities.

The governmental respondents thought that an overall plan was essential.

A general misconception which was brought out by the present survey con-
cerned the actual size and usable area of the waterfront. In general, it
was thought that a great dea.1 more land exists than actually does.

140

Since the survey was conducted from two different yet not independent
groups some similarities and differences between the groups arose. Below
the similarities and differences between the organizations and govern-
mental groups are summarized.

Similarities between organizations and governmental groups

1) Area is underutil.iz ed
2) Special zoning should be made
3) Some form of activity should begin
4) Review committee with power to act is essential
Composition should be a mix of city officials, business
men, and citizens.
5) The potentiaj of the area is excellent - the facilities
and view are magnificent

Differences between the organizations and governmental groups.

1) Organizations place top priority in public recreation
and utilization. Government sees the top priority
In ratables and business.
2) The organizations seem.to have a narrow view of what
should be done and how to do it. The government takes
a broader approach to the problem.
3) Organizations would like businesses but the types
are somewhat different from those desired by gover-
ment. Government feels that parks are nice but first
the area should bring in tax ratables.
4) Organizations are very ecologically minded. Government
is somewhat less ecologically minded.

141

COASTAL ZO',.'IE ER
INFORMATION CENT

0 0"-
apu

36668 D0003 0116