City of Hoboken loses another appeal to halt Shipyard Associates’ Monarch project


The City of Hoboken has lost another appeal to halt the Shipyard Associates from building the Monarch project, which consists of two 11-story condo towers that would potentially be built on the waterfront. 

Photo via

By John Heinis/Hudson County View

The controversial project has been in court for over five years and the most recent appeal centered on if the city’s land use laws could prevent the construction of the project.

“In the current litigation, Shipyard filed suit to prevent the City from enforcing the ordinances to block construction of its project,” New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Judges William Nugent, Susan Reisner and Hany Mawla wrote in their January 7th decision.

To be clear, the issue before the trial court (as on this appeal) was not whether the ordinances themselves were valid. The issue was whether the ordinances could be retroactively applied to this project, which had final land use approval.”

In short, the nine-page ruling pointed to a previous ruling in the saga where a judge decided that a municipality could not apply “newly-enacted zoning ordinances” to projects that had already received final site plan approval, based on Municipal Land Use Law.

“We agree with Shipyard that appellants misplace reliance on New Jersey Shore Builders Association v. Township of Jackson, 199 N.J. 38 (2009), and Sparroween, LLC v. Township of West Caldwell, 452 N.J. Super. 329 (App. Div. 2017),” the opinion also says.

“Jackson approved the enforcement of a general municipal ordinance concerning the removal of trees. The Court concluded that the ordinance was a “generic environmental regulation” that was “not subject to the specific limits in the MLUL.”

The New Jersey Supreme Court declined to hear Hoboken’s appeal on the Monarch project back in February and it is seems more than likely that this is the final chapter in the longstanding court case.

In a mass email sent out back on December 8th, 2nd Ward Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher noted that Mayor Ravi Bhalla was soliciting opinions from residents to try and come up with a solution that works for everyone.

“Mayor Bhalla is actively working with Dave Barry and Ironstate/Applied, owners of the proposed Monarch site as well as other development sites in Hoboken, to identify a solution that could see the conclusion to the longstanding battle for our waterfront including vacating their interests on the north waterfront,” she wrote.

The councilwoman also indicated that Bhalla had met with the residents of the Hudson Tea Building, whose condominium association was also a defendant in the appeal.

“The Administration is working with counsel to evaluate our next steps that are in the best interests of the residents of Hoboken,” added city spokesman Vijay Chaudhuri.

The Fund for a Better Waterfront, another defendant in the case, did not return an email seeking comment.

The full decision can be read here, courtesy of

Warning: A non-numeric value encountered in /home/hcvcp/public_html/wp-content/themes/Hudson County View/includes/wp_booster/td_block.php on line 353


  1. Everyone with knowledge of the case and a brain (which excludes a certain know it all Councilwoman) knew the city was going to lose when the Council voted down the settlement in 2016 so no surprise here. Time to call Applied’s bluff and let them build the damn thing. Or take it by eminent domain and pay whatever a court says a broken down pier with those development rights is worth (hint – probably not much – too expensive to build on – but a good idea to hire an engineer to give us an independent expert opinion before we jump in).

    What we shouldn’t do is talk about dumping a massive development on the other side of town to buy the property for whatever inflated price Applied asks for (as long as we hide the price tag in a development deal) because we think its good politics to buy Monarch out at all costs. Find out what its really worth. Then if it’s worth it bond and buy it. If its not, walk away.

    • Don’t believe that a certain Councilwoman made the legal call to cancel the Planning Board meeting precipitating this sorry outcome Stan. All alternative downtown sites must be on the table. It’s our precious waterfront.

      Enjoy the view!

      • Stan Grossbard, maybe you can get a bogus job with your wife?
        Afterall you’ve been mooching off her coattails for a decade now and enjoying that free healthcare from Hoboken.
        Ask Murphy if he can find you a job selling energy efficient light bulbs too

    • Can Councilwoman Fisher hope to get reelected if a good percentage of her neighbors in the Hudson Tea building and surrounding 2nd Ward buildings lose their views of Manhattan and a few hundred grand of resale value ?

  2. My vote: Tell them to go ahead and build it. We should NOT be dumping additional development elsewhere in Hoboken and we should NOT be using more funding to take another property by eminent domain that will sit there fallow for year and years and years to come. Even if we used the open space trust fund, those monies are supposed to be used to buy and/or build parks, not to buy land that we know will NEVER become a park in our lifetime.

    Process is process. It’s a shame the planning board didn’t just hear the application 5 years ago…and vote it down….Whose bright idea was it to refuse to hear the case anyway?!? When we think about the 100s of 1000s (maybe millions) of dollars thrown into the wind on this, it’s very depressing.

  3. Hey Sham, why aren’t you and your gal Linda concerned about the power plant any longer? Did Sacco, Muniz and Bhalla inc. come to a nice horse trade?

      • Nancy, obviously your hate and obsession is rearing up here as it does on your batshit crazy cave photoshop website. broke a big story today on the voter fraud in Hoboken. He’s busy but obviously deep inside your head. People like and respect great work against corruption and voter fraud. They subscribe and fundraise for that website’s breaking news and exclusives. Try not to be so jealous. You signed up and are paid to protect and defend Ravi Bhalla, Hoboken corruptocrat, Russo bud and best friend to developers. Oh and he’s in bed with Nick Sacco and Joey Muniz. They cut a lovely deal with a contract. So no more chatter about that Jim Doyle anti-power plant resolution from here on out. Keep quiet and add it to your coverup list. Enjoy!

        • Im not Nancy, you horse manure peddler. Whos jealous of your dead site? Nobody!!! You have no subscribers except for sugar mama… keep sending that premium garbage to people who havent paid you a penny for 2 years… they share it so we can laugh at you.

          • Yeah, who thinks anyone is that crazy with that comment other than Nancy? She is going more loco if that’s possible. Keep lying filth alive in Hoboken. That’s important evil work you’re doing for Ravi!

          • Im not Nancy you horse manure salesman. Boy shes living in your empty head…. Lol!!! Sure you send your premium garbage to people who stopped paying you 2 years ago and we laugh at you. Want a sample? I can copy paste the whole thing but the funniest part is the bottom where you beg for money! Lol!!!!!

            Please support the Mile Square View, a Paypal button is atop the right side of the homepage at or at the link:


            Pleeeeeeease pay me for my premium horse manure!!! Lol!!!

          • Premium horse manure!… who subscribes to this crap??? NOBODY!!! Lol!!

            Date: January 2, 2019 at 12:22:30 PM EST
            Subject: MSV Premium: It’s Jennifer!

            Happy New Year! I loooove yooo Jenniferrrr BE MY GURL ❤ ❤❤ 🎠🎠🎠🎠🎠

          • Oh that’s jealous Nancy again. Who else would act so jealous? She sure is green with envy. Hobokenhorse breaks big stories and she has to carry Ravi’s feces. Why does a fat old yenta think it’s her business who has a subscription to Horse?

            Go ahead Nancy, share the issue Horse put out today. I heard it’s really good. Doesn’t sound too good for Ravi & Russo. We’ll wait while Nancy covers up the Ravi Terror Flier! Hey how many HudCo contracts is Ravi sucking on today?

        • pssshawww… Im not Nancy you nut. nobody jealous of a horse manure peddler with man boobs!!! Lol… keep sending your worthless premium horse dody to people who havent paid you in years and never will.

          Youre the Norma Desmond of Hoboken!! “I used to be big…” 😂

  4. “Or take it by eminent domain and pay whatever a court says a broken down pier with those development rights is worth (hint – probably not much – too expensive to build on…”

    Wrong. Courts have traditionally indicated in eminent domain cases that just compensation is the fair market value of the land. Hint: it’s NOT going to be cheap.

    “but a good idea to hire an engineer to give us an independent expert opinion before we jump in).”

    I think you mean appraiser. And don’t forget an attorney to estimate legal fees of an eminent domain taking.

    • The only person who I wish would sell their condo is Dawn Zimmer and her bossy husband Stan.
      He’s like a one of those bad stain on his dingy old Zimmer campaign T shirts he still wear that won’t wash out.

  5. Why is it that one thoughtful post begets so many doofy ones?

    In case anybody is reading this who is not a Doofus, let me explain. It is not land. It’s a broken down pier with established development rights. Because it is far more expensive to build on a pier, you cannot meaningfully appraise the property without an engineering analysis that allows an accurate assessment of the costs of building the project.

    For example, let’s say the project on land would yield $100 million in revenue and the associated costs to build and sell are $70 million if the property were on land. The value would be $30 million minus a reasonable rate of return given risks etc. So for the purpose of argument let’s say the value would be $24 million about a 20% rate of return.

    Let’s say the associated costs to build and sell on the pier are $15 million higher. Given the same rate of return the value would be “only” $12 million.

    Simply put, an appraisal done without an engineering analysis is worthless.

    Indie makes good points about the need for a serious public discussion about how much the pier is actually worth to build on, how much it is proposed that we pay for it (either in $$ or the value of development) and whether the price makes sense for the City to pay.

  6. Even corrupt Anthony Russo understood state zoning laws and that cities must act within 30 days on an application.
    Team Zimwit ignored the deadline and “somehow” failed to have a quorum for a meeting?

    Thanks to inept Dawn and “nobody is smarter than me the non practicing attorney” ShawdowStanGrossLou we have the first building east of the walkway.
    Hope the lightbulb business is going well.
    Dawn made history alright… Thanks dumbbells.

    • Speaking of lightbulbs – how many doofuses does it take to change a lightbulb?

      Answer – no one knows which is why the three Real Doofuses of Hoboken live in perpetual darkness. Won’t someone please help them!

  7. Prices already dropping for Hudson Tea building and surrounding riverfront units that presently have unobstructed view of Manhattan. If they lose that view due to proposed construction the value of their units will be drastically diminished. It would be prudent time to discuss your position with a real estate professional.