This article originally appeared in the Jersey City Times on February 17, 2026.

Last week, Ordinance 26-008 (establishing regulations on bird-safe materials that would apply to all new construction, rehabilitations, and additions citywide) was added to the Jersey City Council’s agenda. The reintroduction of the exact same ordinance that Mayor Fulop vetoed last year due to its costs on development seemingly took advocates, the city’s planning department, and the city council by surprise.

Better Blocks New Jersey has advocated for a more tailored version of a bird-friendly environmental ordinance that would apply bird-safe materials standards to buildings near parks and high-risk areas like the waterfront. We even suggested the council go further than what bird advocates had proposed and remediate any buildings with a high number of bird strikes. Unfortunately, this bird glass ordinance was reintroduced unaltered, and no one has been able to explain why.

We heard from planning at the council caucus meeting that they would prefer that the ordinance exempt buildings that do not need a site plan. Ward C Councilman Tom Zuppa, a staunch ally to union workers and a champion of affordable housing projects like 701 Newark, also raised concerns about the unintended costs of the ordinance. And Ward E Councilperson Eleana Little, an advocate for environmentally sustainable cities and transit-oriented development, suggested a compromise may be within reach between housing affordability advocates like Better Blocks’ members and the ordinance’s advocates who are members of JC Birds.

I, personally, would welcome a compromise to get a version of this ordinance passed. Based on what we have heard from the planning department and members of the city council, here are our suggestions for amending the ordinance.

First, ensure that “low cost” methods for preventing bird strikes are explicitly permitted in the ordinance’s language and are allowed for all window openings where transparency is required for residential and commercial uses. These could be simple fixes, such as interior solar shades, rather than costlier exterior architectural elements or specialized windows.

Second, lower the height applicability from 100 feet to 75 feet (although most bird strikes occur within the first 40 feet of height) to align with New York City’s standards. The main issue with higher height requirements is that smaller home builders are disproportionately burdened with compliance costs when compared to the larger, richer housing developers that build along the waterfront. Compliance for a 50-story high-rise building might equal 1-2% in added costs, but for a smaller mid-rise, soaring glass costs could add 5-6% to the total budget.

Third, grant the planning department’s request that projects that do not require a site plan be exempted. We should also consider exempting any five-over-one “stick” construction, as these buildings are the most affordable type of new housing produced in Jersey City and often have smaller windows and a lower threat profile due to a higher opaque façade-to-window ratio. As written, this ordinance would place a tremendous burden on the planning department to review all new construction, rehabilitation, and additions, and would strain an already busy department by adding a new administrative task.

The proposals put forward by various groups to amend this ordinance are reasonable. We are in favor of all of these amendments and members of the city council have expressed support for a compromise. We invite JC Birds and its allies to recognize that many groups have legitimate concerns and that these changes will protect avian wildlife without sacrificing future housing affordability. We look forward to their support of these amendments so the city can get a good ordinance on the books.