A critical element of the meeting was the expert testimony provided by Mr. Simoff, a licensed professional engineer, who expressed concerns about the project’s potential impact on local traffic. He critiqued the applicant’s traffic analysis for not considering pedestrian and bus interactions, which are vital for assessing intersection service levels. Simoff highlighted that the proposed site plan could lead to queuing at Newark Avenue, potentially backing up into Maxwell Street, contrary to the applicant’s claims of minimal traffic impact. Furthermore, he pointed out that the bus turning radius from Newark Avenue onto Jersey Avenue could encroach into oncoming traffic, necessitating adjustments to signal pole placements to ensure visibility for both drivers and pedestrians.

The discussion of traffic concerns extended to the proposed valet operation, which would involve vehicles backing out onto Maxwell Street. Concerns were raised about the practicality and safety of this arrangement, particularly during peak times when the street could become gridlocked. There were also questions about parking capacity, with only one car able to be dropped off or picked up at a time, raising logistical challenges during busy events.

Building height was another contentious topic, as the proposed development includes a nine-story, 120-foot-tall structure, exceeding the five-story maximum typically allowed in the area. This discrepancy with the local zoning regulations prompted debate over the building’s compatibility with surrounding architecture. Critics argued that the proposed height was not in line with the master plan’s designation of the area as a small-scale neighborhood center. The proposed structure’s height would make it the tallest in the vicinity, double the intended limit, which raised concerns about the neighborhood’s character and the established zoning framework.

The meeting also addressed the historic significance of the building site. The planner noted the project’s efforts to preserve the façade of the historic Trust Company of New Jersey Building. While the building itself is not currently designated as historic, it is considered a contributing structure to the nearby lower Newark Avenue historic district. The plan includes retaining and adapting parts of the building’s architecture, such as its Spanish Renaissance style, while integrating modern elements for the new development.

Further complicating the project’s prospects are the logistical challenges associated with deliveries. Concerns were voiced about the maneuverability of large trucks on Maxwell Street and the potential impact on traffic flow. The applicant’s suggestion that a valet would assist in guiding trucks out of the site driveway was met with skepticism, as the process could disrupt traffic on already congested roads.

The conversation also touched on the potential impact of the proposed hotel on local property values. An expert questioned the validity of an appraisal report presented by the applicant.

As the meeting progressed, discussions turned to the project’s implications for public space and community safety. Questions were raised about the practicality of the proposed traffic and valet operations, and the potential for increased congestion and safety hazards due to the development’s scale and design.

Ultimately, the meeting concluded with the decision to reschedule further discussions to allow for additional public input. The next meeting was scheduled for March 6, with a focus on public comment and no additional experts present. The board expressed the need for continued dialogue with applicants and counsel to address the community’s concerns and assess the project’s alignment with Jersey City’s zoning and planning objectives.