From: Matthew Begley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 10:15 AM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Subject: Rebuild By Design - Hoboken Proposals To whom it may concern - I am writing to express my very strong opinion that moving forward with any of the B, C, or D concepts would be a tragic mistake for the entirety of Hoboken. My young family and I specifically moved into Hoboken, due to the proximity to NYC, but also because of the beautiful, unparalleled access to the waterfront and its NYC views. We planned to stay and even decided to purchase in Maxwell Place and have chosen to raise our young family right here in town. We chose a townhome in Maxwell Place as it fit our needs and wants and specifcally thought the North Hoboken waterfront was so safe and beautiful. We stayed throughout Sandy and Irene storms, and had Zero damage to our property - the building and our unit specifically. I do not understand how 3 of the 5 proposed plans would include anything along the North Waterfront where we did not have any signifcant damage or issues with rising storm surge. My unit had water out-front, but it did not even reach the first step of our townhome during the peak of Sandy's fury. There has to be a better, more temporary way, to build proper fortifications laong the North waterfront when an expected event (hurricane, storm surge) is imminent. I agree with the Resist and Delay Strategy, and I think there is definitely more temporary walls that can be setup and fortified prior to an extremely rare surge event that would offer the same level of protection that one of these "permanent wall structures" in the B, C, or D concepts currently offer. On another note, It is very evident, that our investment and many of our neighbors in Maxwell Place would also be significantly de-valued with any restricted access to the current views and waterfront walkway. The property values, and corresponding tax revenue based upon these rising property values would be severely decreased and hurt Hoboken's currrent and future residents. I firmly believe that moving forward with any of the B, C, or D concept proposals would be a serious detriment to the community as a whole. I think we would simply move out of town. None of the designs in B, C, or D are worth the small incremental benefit to the community, specifically the North waterfront Hoboken community by building walls along the waterfront. Regards - Matthew and Carey Begley 1125 Maxwell Place Townhome #6 From: Rikke Frojk Lauridsen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 8:47 PM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Subject: Plan A - Garden Street I am a resident on 1300 block of Garden Street and to my utmost disbelief have been informed of a plan to erect a sea wall on my street. Being from the Netherlands I cannot belief that you think a sea wall can keep any surge out. You cant!! The way water is managed in my country is by directing it from populated areas to non populated areas. None of your options do this. You cannot go ahead with Plan A, as this plan erects sea walls on areas that NEVER flooded during Sandy. I lived here at the time and saw with my own eyes how far the water came up. The fundamental issue with plan A is that 1200 and 1300 block of Garden Street do not flood and do not need to be protected, so why erect a wall??????? It makes no sense and is both morally wrong and not legal. If you are so keen to put up walls then reserve them to areas that actually flood! I will fight this option A with all my energy and if need be with legal action. Rikke 1235 Garden Street 201 988 0820 From: Joe Rhodes [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 3:22 PM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Subject: Hoboken Flood Protection Draft Ideas I am writing this email in response to the various draft ideas for the coastal flood protection in Hoboken. I live on Garden street between 12th and 13th streets. I vigorously oppose Concept A which is an outrageous affront to the property owners and town esthetics/logistics along Garden Street (which is some of the most valuable single family real estate in Hoboken), and indeed a large portion of North Hoboken. Do we want to drive down the value of this property and drive away these high tax paying residents and deface what is currently one of the nicest areas in town? Deface the Northeast corridor which is enjoyed by so many. This concept appears to come at significant cost to the people that live in this area of town, which is not equitable. It also provides the least amount of protection vs a storm surge. So, why is this even on the table? It frankly seems completely ridiculous and short-sighted to build a partial wall that will simply keep the water pinned on certain residents to protect some others. Do we want Hoboken to be a first-rate town? Let’s not select a plan to “do things on the cheap” as Hoboken has done so often in the past. The cheapest is not the best way. Let’s choose a plan that best protects Hoboken and doesn’t come at the extreme sacrifice of one set of residents. Joe Rhodes Joe Rhodes 1234 Garden Street, Hoboken 201-683-9293 (o) 917-301-1308 (c) [email protected] From: Christiaan Van der Kam [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 5:32 PM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Subject: Plan A involving Garden Street I live on 1235 Garden Street and have just found about this preposterous plan. We live on blocks where the Sandy surge never hit as these blocks are above the sea level. By building this wall on our blocks you effectively push the water to an area where it never would get to. So suddenly you make it our problem to fend off areas that are below the surge level. I am shocked this option is even on the table. And we will fight this option with tooth and nail, including legally. Christiaan van der Kam 1235 Garden Street Hoboken 201 589 8636 From: Sean Kron [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 9:16 AM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Subject: Rebuild by Design Questions 1. In the 5 concepts can you provide the assumptions underpinning the approximate percent of study area within the 100-year coastal floodplain receiving flood risk reduction benefits? Specifically, the denominator (i.e. total population and the split btwn Hoboken and Weehawken, if applicable) and the numerator (i.e. those receiving reduction benefits or conversely those not receiving reduction benefits and who would not be receiving benefits). Or point me to where the documentation is that includes this information. Thank you. Regards, Sean D. Kron 917-539-2105 From: Hartmut Grossmann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 8:16 AM To: DEP rbd-hudsonriver Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Rebuild by Design/ Comments on Concept Presentation/December 10, 2015/Hoboken Dear Mr. Rosenblatt, I am a Hoboken resident, who has been living here for about 7 years and intends to live here for the very long term. I am invested in the flood reduction efforts in Hoboken and, as a matter of general principle, strongly support the project. I attended the above-referenced meeting including the presentation and discussion at the tables, which I found both encouraging and extremely disturbing at the same time. Here are my comments: 1. Delay/Store/Discharge While certain details seem to be open including potential additional sites, I found the information encouraging, especially the potential of a 1 million gallon storage tank on the BASF site. 2. Resist I am taken aback and clearly shocked where the presenters from the engineering firm in substance and tenor took this. Plans A and E were virtually dismissed as insufficient, with a bit of lip service to "substantial risk reduction". Plans C and D were a priori described as essentially not feasible for reasons of cost, complexity, engineering challenges, and maintenance. The presenters seemed to be clearly invested in Plan B. That almost appeared as a foregone conclusion. 3. Plan B is unacceptable in its current form for both residents at the waterfront and Hoboken as a whole/The walls destroy the waterfront and thus a core attraction and feature of life of Hoboken The uninterrupted (with a current small exception) waterfront of Hoboken is a jewel of the city. It is used by all residents for recreation, exercise and enjoyment and links up with the waterfront in Jersey City, Weehawken and beyond. Plan B essentially destroys access to to the waterfront in the North, where there is great activity of residents and their families including Pier 13 (food and drink). As one resident at the meeting who lives several blocks away from the waterfront put it: "We came to Hoboken in 1971 and we did not have a waterfront then. This proposal is a regression to that time". It is completely perplexing that a 12 foot wall would be built at the North end of the city under this plan when, apart from the Weehawken cove, this part of town was spared from the floods in Sandy, and most damage occurred on the south side. Questioning this at the table discussion, vague or incoherent answers were given by the engineers: "the requirements are now higher and go beyond Sandy".