Here we go again…
I’m getting word through the grapevine that the mayor is going to resubmit the Southwest Redevelopment Plan for approval soon - March 21st, actually. The last time I looked at this “plan” it was incomplete to say the least. There weren’t any impact studies done and not a single projection was in sight. I’d say it was the worst dog-and-pony show this town has ever seen.
I’m no business person so I can’t claim to be able to produce the things I’m about to demand I’m fortunate in that I’m a tax payer and can demand that of my employees (i.e. the mayor and the town council). But what I can lay claim to is the intelligence to know that the following is absolutely needed before any elected official can say yay or nay on the item.
First, there is no environmental study. We’d all be kidding ourselves if we thought Hoboken didn’t have caustic chemicals stewing underneath us. Remember, there were a lot of factories in town before the projects, row houses, and skyscrapers were built here. There are already some areas of town that can’t be developed or even walked on by order of the EPA. What makes anyone think the Southwest is going to be any different. Before we dig, someone has to look into the toxicity of the land.
Second, there is no mention of any study concerning traffic, pedestrian safety, parking, noise pollution, regular pollution, irrigation, or flooding in the area. If I remember correctly, Mr. Campos publicly declared the flooding problem a thing of the past at the last (or next to last) council meeting. I remember having to swim across first street to get to work that morning and I’m sure I’ll be doing swan dives from my apartment if the city passes their plan. But the flooding is only part of it. Traffic is bad enough and when I walk to the PATH station in the morning, I see cars lined up Monroe for what seems like three blocks - certainly past 2nd street - and all the way down to Observer Highway. And Observer Highway is more like a parking lot in every sense of the word; even on the weekends its hard to navigate around there by car. Forget about walking the area unless you are looking to die by hit and run.
Third and most important, there has been no financial analysis done. At the town council meeting where they tried to pass thing thing through the first time, the mayor claimed it could bring in 10 or 15 million a year in taxes. Besides wondering where he came up with that number (is it a real number or some pie-in-the-sky figure? did he make it up? did he strike a deal already with a developer for that much?), I wonder if all the alternatives have been looked at. For example, have they looked at the tax revenue compared by the offset from expenses; the trash can’t collect itself and the street doesn’t sweep the dog shit from the curb last I checked - the city does with my tax dollar and while the 15 million is nice, have they looked at what it costs to run those skyscrapers? Similarly, have they figured out the property taxes will go up as the property values go up when a park is built? What about the decrease in property values when the new towers add hundreds of units with all the waste and byproducts I mentioned earlier?
No… They haven’t.
They don’t even have a plan for a park or building or anything. They have nothing.
Now if I were mayor or on the town council, I’d expect to review such studies lest I be considered a fool. I’d think to myself that I couldn’t possibly serve the public’s best interests by rushing through an incomplete plan nor would I be able to justify my hypocritical actions if I said one thing and did another. I’d expect the following in my plan:
- A true environmental impact study with:
- Toxicity & contamination study
- Irrigation, sewer, & flooding impact study
- Physical pollution (land & air) study
- A quality of life study which includes:
- Traffic impact study
- Pedestrian safety study
- Noise pollution study
- Parking study
- A financial impact statement that factors:
- Infrastructure costs
- Operating expenses (annual)
- Offset income & expenses with park space
- Property value study - with and without parks & skyscrapers
- Long term financing options including bonding, abatements, PILOTs, and tax increases.
- Park budget
- A park plan that includes:
- Continuous green space
- Baseball, soccer/football, & basketball courts
- Dog runs
- Trails (running/walking)
- Playgrounds with equipment
- Trees, plants, & vegetation
- Safe entrances to facilities
Expecting at least three or four studies for each of the above items is not uncommon in the business world and we shouldn’t expect less from the city. No business would go and buy another company without first looking at their balance sheets or income projections. We shouldn’t allow that to happen either.
This plan was withdrawn at the last minute before and it should be done so again and again and again until the plan is complete with the proper investigation included. No matter what people want out of this city - park or otherwise - I hope that they want to make an informed decision when they decide how to invest their tax dollars.
I know I can’t make an informed decision on the Southwest Redevelopment Plan because its incomplete. How can the council make the same uninformed decision?
89 Responses to “Pedicabs - Good or Bad?”Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] Show All
81. bartmann81 | April 7th, 2007 at 8:49 am Quote
Shame shame shame. What a hostile forum this turned out to be. Just 2 briefly voice “MY” opinion on the principles behind this topic. I “personally” could NOT care less about pedicabs, BUT, im not going to knock them. Live and let live, isnt that what life is about? Capitalism? Free enterprise? This company, im sure invested a lot of time and money into chasing their American dream, LET THEM! They have every American right to. “Certain” people are crying and causing a stink about safety issues. Are you serious? EVERY enterprise in America, and the rest of the world, at that matter, is a safety issue. Every plane, train and automobile that has ever been built is a “safety issue.” That is where LAWS come into play, and help minimize, not outlaw/ban, the safety risks. They do so by enforcing speed limits, require seatbelts, require multi-safety inspection checks, etc., etc., etc. The list for safety risks that operate in this world can go on forever, including the fast food industries which contribute to many health sicknesses that ultimately lead to DEATH. You cannot “BAN” the fast food places for having such a safety issue. People are allowed to make their own decisions. If they feel they are not safe on a pedicab, DON’T RIDE on one. It’s as simple as that. I don’t feel safe being on a plane, so I don’t fly! I do not, and should not have to protest against planes. I think I made my point clear on the bogus safety issues, and did so without having to mention “cigarettes.” Imagine that. Now to touch up on the bogus congestion issues. Pedicabs will cause more congestion in the town of Hoboken? Once again, are you people serious? Ladies and gentlemen, is that the best you can come up with? If you people where that overly concerned about congestion, where were you when they proposed to have multi-residential complexes built, ALL OVER your small little town, which along with that, will come 100’s of gas guzzling vehicles? I don’t think I have to go any further into that topic. I think I clearly made my point on the bogus congestion issues that “certain” people are so concerned about. Once again, I am not for, and definitely not against pedicabs, but the whole principle of people being so rude and intentionally harmful to a young company that is not even on their feet yet, is down right disgusting. There is absolutely no reason why people in this land of opportunity should be forcing an abortion on a company that is thriving to live and survive! These are my personal opinions on this topic. Wishing all you folks, a very merry and prosperous life. Sorry for taking up too much space. Take care. Just your average Joe.
82. cdezel | April 7th, 2007 at 8:53 am Quote
Dr. Midnight, I am by no means intending to be rude, and if I appear to be, please forgive me. Please tell me that you just did not insinuate that the pedicab industry should be punished and outlawed because of all the blatant LAW BREAKING motorists you mentioned, which im sure include the taxi cab drivers. No offense, but I sure hope people that read your post, have a lot more sense then to give your statement more than a seconds worth of recognition. It is a totally absurd statement to make, and should hold absolutely no weight. Im sure if you take a second to think about what you stated, you will realize that I am right.
83. hbknkid | April 7th, 2007 at 9:02 am Quote
I am a resident of Hoboken and supporter of Pedicabs. I have two chidren 3 and 7 and I really do care for thier future. Peedicabs offer a green alternative to automobiles. I am all for it. This is what I have to say. I CHALLENGE ANYONE ON THIS FORUM : To bring any evidence then the five articles that are so often circulated through the hands of people who oppose pedicabs that show Pedicabs to be a documented contributer to congestion and traffic , furthermore I CHAALLENGE ANYONE to show me evidence of a fatality cause by or on a pedicab. Happy hunting because you will not. On the contrary you will find more evidence that these work in evry communtiy they are currently operating in. Denver, Dallas, Tennesee, New York, San Diego , Boston , Detroit and I can go on. DId you know that most of these cities have sought after pedicabs for a means of a solution to aleviate traffic? and double parked vehicles. I leave you this to ponder.Have a beautiful morning fellow Hobokeners and a happy blessed Easter.
84. sah | April 7th, 2007 at 10:21 am Quote
Sure, pedicabs are enviro-friendly and all that, but they’re not right for every town or city. Big cities have wide open avenues with lots of space. Hoboken has small narrow side streets and it’s one main avenue is a congested nightmare.
For all of those who think this is such a great idea, try riding a bicyle around Hoboken for a day. I use my bike to ride to and from the PATH every single day and the ONLY safe place for a rider is on the sidewalk. The side streets are too narrow and one open car door and you’re dead. And Washington Street on the street itself is absolutely impossible. Between the buses and the double-parkers, the street simply isn’t wide enough to accommodate everyone. If we can’t even properly accommodate cyclists, I don’t see how Pedicabs, which are even wider, are workable.
85. bartmann81 | April 7th, 2007 at 10:44 am Quote
So Sah what you are saying is they should ban all bike riding in Hoboken , and that because people who break the law and double park should continue to take up the space that potentially can bring and alternative transportation service to Hoboken. Ok your point is well made.
86. bartmann81 | April 7th, 2007 at 10:47 am Quote
Ps so because all the other elements in the city of Hoboken are unsafe that gives the town the right to ban something that has nothing but a safe record. Thankyou for being another person in this forum for reinforcing all the negatives that Hoboken has continued to allow over the years.
87. Cartman | April 7th, 2007 at 12:19 pm Quote
You are forgetting the real point is. Has the streets reached max usage? Maybe tear some buildings down to make more parking lots. So….. all the businesses can’t have any more people to at their restaurants, stores, offices because there is to many cars, no parking, no pedicabs, and it’s just way too unsafe…… Just fold up your downtown tear down all the buildings that make it special, and build strip malls with only drive-ups.
Is that a hole in your foot?
Wake up City and think who do you serve the people and the stores, restaurants and the businesses? Pedicabs WILL add to what makes you special and WILL bring people. Maybe there be less cars, more business and more tax for the city to do good things to make better to live and shop there. Block off the narrow streets that are unsafe, plant trees, get pedicabs, and make it a walking mall like forward thinking cities are doing.
Get out of your CAR.
I bet you are some of the same people who complain at gas at over three a gallon. To much pollution too. You must be a urban planner from the 70’s. MORE cars wider highways, more strip malls, teardown the old buildings and build shopping centers. It does NOT work. I bet you want a Wal-Mart too…
88. mshellhbkn | April 7th, 2007 at 1:16 pm Quote
HELLO MR. HOBOKEN411
DO YOU REALIZE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? PRECISELY EVEN MORE REASON TO PERMIT THESE BICYCLES. YOU AND MOST OTHERS IN HERE CONTINUE TO EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT ” THE SIDE STREETS ARE TO NARROW FOR THESE BIKES AND IT WILL SLOW DOWN TRAFFIC. SO BASICALLY ITS PERFECT. AS A COMMUNITY WE SHOULD NOT PROMOTE FAST DRIVING OR SPEEDING ON THOSE BLOCKS . PEDICABS WILL ENSURE THAT THE TRAFFIC IS KEPT AT AN APPROPRIATE FLOW . I KNOW I WOULD FEEL A WHOLE LOT SAFER KNOWING THAT ON A FEW BLOCKS, A FEW TIMES A DAY THAT BECAUSE OF THE FEW BIKES THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO BRING TO OUR CITY THAT OUR STREETS WILL BE THAT MUCH SAFER. I MEAN ARE YOU SAYING WE SHOULD ALLOW THOSE NARROW BLOCKS TO BE EMPTY SO THAT AUTOMOBILES AND TAXIS ALIKE CAN REACH OPTIMUM SPEED ENDANGERING OUR CHILDREN AND OUR ELDERS . MY FATHER WHO HAS LIVED IN HOBOKEN FOR 59 YEARS USED TO WALK TO CARLOS BAKERY REGULARY AND USED TO WALK TO THE PARK AND NOW BECAUSE HE HAS A HARD TIME WALKING DUE TO ARTHRITIS HE SAID HE WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET A FREE RIDE TO THE PARK.
89. hbknkid | April 7th, 2007 at 1:21 pm Quote
Get a load of this. This is direct news coming from the council. Hoboken is far to congested to permit a 48 inch wide bike on its street , but there not to congested to sell 5 to 10 more taxi medallions that cost hundred of thousands of dollars. Now this is starting to make sense.
Something to ponder.