yeah yeah I think that's all right are we we all mostly good to go good all right Robert I'm good if you're if you would like to call the meeting to order I'll Now call to order this special meeting of the Jersey City Historic preservation commission it is March 26th about 6:35 p.m. okay please be advised that in accordance with the open public meetings act the notice of the time date and place of this special meeting of the Jersey City Historic preservation commission has been sent to the Jersey Journal Jersey City Reporter and Ellis besito on March 13th and published as a legal notice on Tuesday March 19th same notice has been sent to the city clerk for posting on the bulletin board outside of the clerk's office in City Hall and on the Jersey City website I have proofs of this notice and evidence we can mark and I will slow down great all right we will move to roll call attendance no problem okay all right commissioner samp here commissioner Gunther here commissioner Lewis present commissioner blazak present commissioner Cronin here commissioner amuso is absent commissioner griga is absent commissioner sakong is absent Vice chair gucciardo here and chairman Gordan present okay there are seven members of the Commission in attendance tonight five affirmative votes are needed for a certificate of appropriateness right there are two items on the agenda if you'd like to call the first case I believe check you're presenting as one right that's corre all right so we'll just call the first case and hear the presentation for both uh yeah so the I'm calling both cases on the agenda for the evening which are h-23 d183 and h-23 d184 the applicant is Jennifer bogdansky Esquire on behalf of Temple Beth L owner the address is 2419 John F Kennedy Boulevard okay uh thank you commissioner Chuck I'm sorry can you just turn on that mic you just got to tap it no the bottom yeah where it say push okay uh thank you Commissioners uh for the record uh Charles Harrington of Connell Foley uh on behalf of the applicant in place of Miss bonsky um and thank you Commissioners as you recall we were uh before uh the commission uh back on February 5th uh um so a little over a month and a half ago uh presenting both of these applications with regard to the proposed uh canopies and fencing on on the temple bethl uh building uh as as you may recall uh we carried uh the meeting uh because there were some open questions and and um concerns uh from the commission that that we were uh were asked to to take another look at uh we have taken this time um to make some some tweaks and changes and updates to the plans um and tonight we also have our our civil engineer uh here tonight that can address uh the the drainage uh uh and Rain uh issues that were raised uh by the commission uh I also um have Scott Doyle which is our historic expert that he can I we intend at at the end to kind of wrap it up to to kind of you know get his opinion uh he is he's the author of The Heritage report that was presented to the commission um and uh I also um will will be providing uh the testimony of steuart portney uh he is on the uh safety Task Force at the temple I think that's uh because of the reasoning um for uh what we're proposing tonight we think that's that's relevant for the commission to to hear you know real real world factual um analysis uh or um that uh Mr portney has been facing so what I would like to do initially here have Mr zinder come up he's the architect of record that was here in February uh he's going to kind of take you through again um the application not not again but kind of highlight you know what uh what has has changed and and um you know what was proposed uh some some changes have been made upon a recommendation of the commission at the last meeting and then we'll we'll move into uh the engineer then Mr portney and then uh Mr Doyle sure do you swear or affirm the testimony your B given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do and could you state and spell your full name for the record my name is Joshua zinder that's j h UA z i n d r good evening everyone thank you for having us back to provide further clarification and our fence just fell over to provide further clarification on the uh 2419 JFK Boulevard property the two applications for temple bethl um as you recall there are two projects that are needed for different reasons which are beyond the congregation's control here uh the presentation as was before will be in four parts I will try to go through some of the images quicker um the we've seen before but all of the images you you'll see here have been updated uh the first part will refer to as exhibit a which is general information the second part will be referred to as exhibit D which are the new canopies the third exhibit e which is the related to security fencing and finally we'll show you both of the elements together we'd like you to approve both projects however we would request that the committee consider them separately so one does not impede the approval of the other here you see the West Bergen East Lincoln Park historic district the property highlighted within it zooming in closer here you see it on the tax map here's the site survey of the property and and here we've highlighted those existing light fixtures that are on the building and what areas they illuminate uh for the most part they do not really illuminate the area ways themselves they illuminate the areas Beyond so uh now on page five here you see the building from above with its iconic gold terracotta roof and the open yard extending to Bentley Avenue the building as we spoke about previously was designed in 1925 in a Byzantine Revival style and built in 1926 by architect Percy bardis uh there were many adjustments to this original design from this concept but the overall uh intent was maintained and we covered those differences last time so I won't get into them um here is the Byzantine Revival building today as seen from JFK with its red brick facade contrasting terracotta accents and stone base and stained glass windows uh before we get into the specifics of the project there are a series of questions that were raised previously uh that need to be addressed as I mentioned there are two different projects being considered for these area ways uh which are eress access from the social level to allow for social eest access from the social hall level of the building um and this is exhibit D we'll be discussing um the new canopies which divert the water so um during superstorm Ida which was September 1st through the 3 in 2021 Beth L suffered extreme damage and FEMA is helping rebuild from this damage the loss of their social h space dramatically limits the space the congregation can have for classes and special events part of the work FEMA is looking for is mitigation uh to ensure that if a similar storm event happens um the building will not suffer the same type of damage uh the existing drains um as we one of the questions that came out previously was where are the drains where do they go how do they work so the uh existing drains run through the building actually uh then they run out to the sewer system uh the drain system was overwhelmed by the storm during Ida and as mentioned the congregation is receiving a grant for the restoration of their social hall um but also for these mitigation efforts and as part of this we have um theyve made sure the pipes were flushed out and they also ran cameras through all the pipes tracing them back to their their from their Source all the way to where they discharged in normal conditions another thing that was asked was the amount of water so in normal conditions there are about 145 gallons a minute that can go through these drains rains um this is from this is generated from the area above the area ways um and the rain that hits the facades and Cascades down into the areaway the addition of canopies will divert this water from the drains and away from the building the South leader will divert 68 gallons per minute the north canopy will divert 77 gallons per minute we have sized the gutters at 3 in by 5 in which should handle up to 157 gallons per minute so well above what we're 157 gallons per minute well above what the canopies will be taking the 4in leader that will be collecting the water can handle up to 144 gallons per minute these calculations are based on New Jersey plumbing code uh these elements uh will ensure the future flooding events will be mitigated uh bless you this will be further reviewed by our civil engineer later and um and just to add some of this data was providing provided for us by our plumbing engineer lauring Consulting Engineering in addition to the water questions we've also further clarified our details from the comments at the last presentation with the specific goals that if these elements can be removed in the future the architectural Integrity of the historic structure will be maintained we will be anchoring only into the mortar joints as to not damage any of the brick uh we have detailed that top portion we've detail the top portion of the canopy so that it ensures that will'll be including the flashing will be placed below a full brick course uh in addition we have inserted a hinge within the structure to ensure that the pitch of the gutter is maintained and um will allow for proper drainage of the gutter to the leaders um The Gutter is also integral to the structure um from a design point of view we felt it was it was better cleaner simpler um and it size as we previously discussed the anchor points for the cables have been located above the windows to ensure that they do not impair the structure and this has been reviewed with our structural engineer as well uh if here's the location of the first canopy on Harrison Street and the second canopy that faces Bentley here you see the canopies in plan uh the plan on the right is the plan of the Social Hall that was damaged in the flood the first floor plan on the left with the canopies highlighted in blue here are the full building elevations with the canopies shaded in blue I don't know if there it's hard to see but they are sort of shaded in blue um we plac the canopies on the facade in the Gap above the base element and below the first floor Windows please note that due to the gray change on the north versus the South Side each of the canopies are a different elevation relative to the ground despite their common height elevation on the building and this was also discussed and I'll bring up a little bit later a clarification with regard to the height versus fence differential taking a closer look at each of the canopies we can see that they are located above the stone base of the building and low enough on the facade for a complete flashing to occur below the windows and have a full brick course above of them uh the canopies are simple structures pitch to allow drainage away from the building with Rod stays to allow the structure to be thinner and lighter you can also see the difference in relative grade on the north and south side of the buildings the intent of the canopies um we plan to paint them black with um metal shingles in a lighter it's anchor gray and so here's sample of the black color and here is a sample of the anchor gray and just for a point of reference got to talk into the mic okay I'll hold them up though for point of reference we've included uh zinc sample that's just for a color we've matched that with the roofing that we are going to be uh we're going to be using and uh also on the floor here we have full sizee samples of the metal shingles that we plan to use the diamond pattern shingles as I mentioned before um it's not the right color but it does show show you how they're seamless and how they interlock and looking at the details and elevations of the canopies you can see we comply with your design standards and guidelines in addition to the Secretary of interior standards for the treatment of historic properties while still providing the necessary FEMA mitigation effort the structure is modern in form and exposed beams and pearlins and a diamond pattern metal shingles slow down a sorry the structure is modern form and the structure is modern form with the exposed beams and pearlins and a diamond pattern metal shingle there are also concealed lights integrated into the structure as well to illuminate the area ways the cut sheet is on the bottom right of this slide uh so you can see it's just a simple black colored tube uh We've brought some metal samples which are going around for reference uh the black for the the structure the zinc color is for the roofing uh the water is collected in the gutters and then down the leaders into the drainage system which the civil engineer will review shortly uh and then similar on the North side uh when looking at this at the plan on the bottom you can see the red dots uh those red dots represent where the lights will be going uh and that'll provide uh illumination for the area ways um now we have a series of images some which might be familiar to you uh this is the exterior of the building uh looking at the Harrison Street side and then with the canopy a closer condition and with the canopy it is important to note that these area ways act as bathtubs and despite the new drainage we are adding these canopies as a best practice to divert the water away from the area ways and to ensure proper mitigation from storms here you see this is a view that we didn't have previously uh but we wanted to show it to you to give a better understanding of what the count we going to look like and then you have here's the installed with the canopy previously there was a discussion about whether the existing rails should be painted black or kept as green um we are currently planning to have them in Black which we will show here and a number of other times please note our renderings and the images that we show on the north side of the building are without leaves on the trees and in winter so that you could better see our proposal however you should note that the north side of this building is screened and is shaded for much of the year so here you see some other images and then from Bentley it is actually a great distance away so the awning um would actually be quite a distance to actually see it in the shadow um now you see here's the existing north side of the building and that same view with the canopy the existing yard view from across the yard and with the canopy and then the existing area way up close and again with the canopy again these are necessary to divert the water the canopies are at a very shallow angle to allow for for prop proper pitch and at the same time um existing the gap between the underside of the windows and the base course it's also worth noting here that um that we have um well I'll come back to it in a minute about the difference between the fence and the the the canopy um now trans now we're going to shift to the proposed security fences the congregation has received a Homeland Security grant for these fences uh regretfully the world we live in today concealed locations around places of worship afford opportunities for people with malicious intent in addition the congregation has been struggling with individuals using these area ways as restrooms locations to do drugs and other unsavory activities uh now I'm going to take you through the exhibit e here you see the fence on the Harrison side and the fence in Blue on the Bentley side uh during the last presentation there were questions about safety and incidents there are frequent incidents of trash clothing singes needles and human waste in these area ways um in addition to people found sleeping there there have been numerous other incidents that have left the congregants and the community members feeling unsafe regretfully the health and crime issues are not only thing are not the only thing the congregation is facing um and contending with the world in which we live is filled with turmoil and New Jersey and Jersey City are in the middle of it the number of anti-Semitic incidents over the last few years has been steadily On The Rise including major hate crimes within a short distance of the congregation as we mentioned last time bethl received a Homeland Security Grant to strengthen the safety of the building Homeland Security provides guidelines and directions on mitigating these threats the first step in that Grant process is a comprehensive vulnerability assessment or Target hardening analysis which was completed and certified by Michael Bole uh the study it is specifically notes the addition of fences and gates to protect the congregation and the area ways uh this was part of what was submitted to Homeland Security that helped the congregation access the grant the effort has been more than two years in the making to secure this property here you can see the plans where the fences will go around the area ways dotted in red the elevation of the building with the new security fences in place here you see the closer elevations with the security fences the fences we are planning to use are black aluminum picket fence with pinched pickets and flat caps on the post so we weren't able to get a post for today but here you can see what the fence will look like as the Airways and stairs required for egress we'll also have panic bars on the fences on the gates uh this will necessitate the application of a 3/4 in mesh on the side of the fencing around the gates to prevent people from reaching around it to activate the Panic devices now if we go back to the Harrison Street View and here you see it with the fence The View up close and with the security fence you will note that the intent is to keep the historic railing uh just inside the fencing um to Main main the Integrity of that historic element and the new view on Harrison and then with the fence in here you can see the gate as well the existing north side of the building viewed from JFK please remember these views have no foliage so everything is is exposed and with the security fence and just going back between those two it's very difficult to even see what the difference is it was noted in the staff report um online excuse me that um anyway these will these fences really have a DI Minimus impact on the overall building and the overall structure and um and they have no negative impact on the visual landscape as you can see here and safety is critical the existing view from across the yard and with the security fence the existing conditions of the building up close and with the new security fence here as well you can see that we intend to keep the historic rail as noted before locating the new fence just outside of it to maintain its Integrity also this is a good place to note the mesh around the gate here you can actually see it um when you look at the the floor U just inside the gate uh this will again prevent somebody from reaching in to activate the Panic bar we are asking you for approval of each of these individual each of these items individually as they're each tied to potential Federal funding from FEMA and Homeland Security but we recognize it's important to see them together uh we are also aware that the combination of the two designs together raised some additional concerns at the committee meeting last time so the remaining images will be composite of both elements the congregation asked Heritage Consulting Group to review these proposals um and their sensitivity to this key contributing structure their findings LED them them to note that both proposals met the Secretary of interior standards for treatment of historic properties and the local historic district guidelines as well you'll hear from Scott Doyle from Heritage shortly here we see Harrison Avenue view of the diagram again with both elements and the Bentley side with both elements the existing Harrison Avenue View and then with the fence and the canopy together and then up close the fence and canopy together please note that the leader um which will be tied to the storm water is actually at the very end of this image in the back left corner um please remember that the structure of the canopy will be black um it's shown a little bit gray here so that we can have some clarity of detail um as it disappears when we paint it all black here's a new view on Harrison Street again and with the new canopy we studied alternative colors for the canopy uh a lighter titanium surface for the roofing material in color um and silver colors to help differentiate from the historic structure um and we also looked at Red brackets instead of black and silver cables however all of these seem to attract more attention to these elements and uh we felt they detracted from the historic building so keeping them all uh muted and black and dark gray was the direction that we've gone and so here you see that um following the suggestion from the last meeting we'll also be painting those rails black to help them um better um mesh with the overall design and here you see the existing view from the north side of the building and both elements in view the existing view from across the yard and then with both elements the existing view up close and with both proposed elements please note that we listen to your concern from the last meeting and have lowered the height of the of the fence around the north areaway to 5 ft from its previous request of six increasing the gap between the two elements so they are less like a singular element and can be read independently and allow for visual um access to the brick that's underneath the canopy in conclusion we believe our proposal for the canopies and security fenes at Temple bethl meet the requirements of your local historic district guidelines and the Secretary of interior standards they will provide mitigation for extreme weather and help reduce security risks for the congregation and Community moving into the Future these projects we are discussing tonight have little to no impact on the historic district and I would suggest they have a net positive impact on net positive impact by creating a more resilient environment and a safer neighborhood in addition it is important to note that we recognize the r changes and these proposed elements are reversible if the future permits our proposal is respectful to the historic district and the legacy of this key contributing building within it thank you for your time tonight we hope you find the proposal compelling and approve it our engineer kello such will be presenting next followed by Scott Doyle from Heritage Consulting thank you um couple quick questions before we proceed um are you proposing to paint the guard rail on both the North and South sides black um based on our previous conversation we would say yes however if you prefer us to maintain the Green in either locations we would we would keep the green okay that's less of an important factor for the congregation right now than having the fences and canop in place and I believe you said that the fence would be aluminum I saw in the Heritage report that there's a mention of alternatively using a steel fence material what which one is it that you're proposing so we're proposing the aluminum um it was discussed previously that there was a preference by this committee for rought iron um and with Heritage we were going back and forth and honestly until the last minute this is sort of the way it it stayed the congregation prefers to do the aluminum fence because it is more cost effective however if you will approve the fences and the canopies if it is RW iron then they will do a RW iron version of the same fence um their preference is to spend less money you know but if it's that's what it's going to take to get the get it approved they will shift the rod iron thank you okay thank you then uh i' I'd like to move forward with uh our civil engineer Kelly ozuk raise your right hand you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to given this proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do uh Kelly uch k e l l e y o apostrophe s u c and uh Kelly before we begin can you give the commission the benefit of uh your professional and educational experience and uh advise if you're licensed in New Jersey sure uh so I have a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from Virginia Tech I graduated in 2012 uh and since 2012 I've been practicing in New Jersey as a civil engineer uh designing drainage storm water uh various land development projects throughout the state uh I do have a valid professional engineering license in the state and have had it in good standing since 2018 uh and I've testified before various public boards um in this capacity okay staff recommends that chair accept qualifications as an expert in the field of engineering so accepted okay thank you and just before you begin for the record year uh you and and your firm are the project civil engineers is that correct correct we're the applicants engineer uh we designed the drainage associated with this project okay and um and as part of that review uh you R reviewed the proposed drainage and and if you could give the benefit of the uh to the board of of Alternatives that you considered as well you're going to present that as well yeah I'll go through the presentation and kind of explain what ultimately we're proposing and kind of the things we looked at um potentially as alternance okay with that said I'll let you take the floor okay um Kelly before you start I do just want to note we forgot to I forgot to mark the their presentation um because it has changed from the last time so w Bri if we could mark their presentation as B2 one moment this will be B2 in evidence a A1 a A2 I'm sorry it would be A2 because a the last presentation was A1 okay good to go so I'll start off here just kind of give you some background existing conditions of the the existing site um as Josh noted uh the site is located along JFK Boulevard uh so if you're looking at our plan here JFK is towards the bottom which is the Eastern side of the project Bentley a is to the North Harrison a is to the South and then there's Residential Properties to the east of the the site so just kind of get your orientation on the properties um it is block 17702 and it's two separate Lots lot 26 and Lot 27 on the tax maps um quickly running through it's the site is located within the R3 rh1 and the West Bergen East Lincoln Park historic district overlay which is why we're obviously here before you um so generally looking at the the image that's before you there's a high point on north side of the project so along the Bentley a uh Corridor and the site generally drains towards the west or Southwest uh towards Harrison a um and then the the structure itself is kind of encompassing the uh Western Southwestern portion of the um entire property uh the site is served by local uh Public Utilities including um a combined sewer system um public water Gas and Electric uh so this image is just kind of blowing up or zooming in more on the um area of the actual structure of the temple um the majority of my teson is going to be regarding the the site drainage or the building drainage um directly around the structure um so we' been brought in in on the project uh with the understanding that there was ongoing dra manage issues at the structure so on February 20th uh our office went out to the site to perform a site visit and we also had the Jersey City mua uh come with us to the site since the site is within the combined sewer system um so ultimately it's it's their uh sanitary lines that we would be uh impacting or potentially impacting with any changes that we're proposing um upon reviewing the site we we really uh focused in on these two area ways as we're calling them um from reviewing the site that's the area that appears to be causing the main the majority of the drainage issues uh and namely because those area ways are uncovered and basically water can just fall or rainfall can just fall directly into those um at the bottom of the area ways there's a 2in drain pipe on either side so one twoin drain pipe on either side um and with those being completely uncovered over time um from rain events uh as Josh noted people kind of getting in there with hypodermic needles and other debris um there's been an a a ongoing issue where the pipes have clogged over time and blocked over time um and it's not necessarily a maintenance issue it's a that it's not covered and the uh the debris itself is actually getting washed into the pipes so it's not being um blocked out or diverted away from the pipes it's getting into the pipes and then eventually it starts to block up and clog up the pipes um additionally these 2-in pipes for any nominal storm event that would occur so namely what we've been designing to as Engineers lately is the 100-year storm event these 2-in pipes are completely undersized um they can handle up to uh as we measure it in cubic feet per second 06 cubic feet per second which is extremely small amount of peak flow that can go into those so basically even if the these were not clogged operating great they're still undersized pipes that are currently at the bottom of those area ways um so here's just the image along the Harrison a side of the building and the area way would be on the left hand side of the screen Harrison a would be on the right hand side of the uh screen and what I wanted to show here is it's not an issue of the sidewalk um being properly or improperly graded that water is running if it lands on the sidewalk it runs to Harrison a it doesn't run into the areaway so there is a positive drainage away from the areaway so really the only water that's going into that areaway is coming from the sky directly and you can see there's kind of a curb or a knee wall kind of built into that that also helps divert that water from falling into the areaway uh now this is on the Bentley a side and again you can kind of see there's a retaining wall on the right hand side of the property and then a vegetated planter area and again the water is diverted away from that and again the only thing really going into that area way is the water coming directly from above um this is just an image of what the drain currently looked like and that was after I kicked and scraped and exposed the drain so as you can see over time it is uh get collecting a lot of dirt debris there was needles and other things in that area as well um and I also wanted to kind of bring up kind of the roof structure of the building as well and as you can see and I'll go through kind of a 360 angle here that the existing structure does have a parit and that water is collected on the roof and then run to Interior drains so it's again it's not an issue of along the area ways of water running off the roof down into those that that water's all collected and run internally to the building so again directly at the areaway the only water coming into it is directly from overhead so what we propos to do is um propos to install two canopies one on either side that cover the area ways and the idea being since those existing drain pipes are undersized they've historically collected a lot of debris and ultimately started to fail over time we're trying to divert that water from going down to those drains the drains would still remain as kind of a fail safe or an extra measure but the water above would be diverted and run away from those area ways on any normal storm event um so specifically here on the Harrison aide um we have a proposed trench drain that would run across the sidewalk and that would collect the roof leader coming off of the canopy and it would discharge sare ft so for a 100-year storm flow event you're looking at plus or minus 05 CFS uh and then the trench train capacity itself to handle that Peak flow is sized to handle up to 2 and a half CFS so it's grossly oversized it can handle the large storm events and uh divert that water accurate or adequately without uh hopefully impacting anything um on the the structure itself sorry does that include maybe we're about to get to this the leader or is that a bottleneck the leader is the leader itself is a 6 inch leader is what we're proposing coming or I think you said 3x5 is well the leader is by I'm sorry I havei speaker sorry sorry the gutter is 3 in x 5 in that leads to a leader that is 4 in x 4 in it's a 4 in liter coming down which handles 144 gallons per minute I don't know how that translates into CFS CFS but um it's it was more than double what the canopy was going to be putting off and I believe it's a fraction of what you've calculated here correct so would that in terms of CFS accommodate dat this 100-year storm flow yeah so the 100e storm flow for that roof area is 0.05 CFS the the roof leader itself is oversized and then the trench drain capacity itself is oversized and again the trench drains running across the sidewalk so it also going to pick up some Overland flow from the sidewalk and push that back into the the road as well um sorry just before we move on can you just clarify what you're talking about as grossly over sized so yeah so we're using a the trench train only comes in a certain size right we're trying to pick something that is um size greater than the 100-year storm event because we know that we're we're getting those more often than the 1% that it's supposed to happen um so we're trying to design a uh conveyance system that has capacity for at least the 100-year storm event so we go to what the nominal size are of these trench drains and they have them in real small sizes of 2 in 3 in 4 in and the one that we're proposing is an 8 in so that it's it's more than enough for this proposed use to make sure that um we don't have any backup issues and the water can get back out to the road do that sorry I'm trying to yes I I think that explains that uh so then on see leader puts off 144 Gall per and that's so yeah so the leader itself at 144 gallons per minute is33 CFS so again at 0.005 CFS that's coming down from the roof it's again the roof leader is more than enough on the Bentley a side uh again it's a just a little bit larger it's 325 square ft of canopy area um The 100 your storm flow for that minor increase gets this up to 06 CFS um again the roof leader pipe coming down off of the roof leader so the pipe re uh running to the dryw has a capacity of 1.1 CFS so again oversized for the roof area and then ultimately the dryw design is sized for um 250 cubic feet of storage volume or 8 1870 gallons of water that can go into that and infiltrate into the ground and again this is 1870 gallons that would otherwise be going to the combined sewer system that is no longer or would no longer be going to that combined sewer system in the case of the northern drainage system going into the well Harrison a would go to the street right Bentley a would go into the ground it would come out of the the storage system so overall Harrison have ultimately once it gets to the street it's going to get back into the storm system or the combined storm system so there's no net change in what water is going to that system on the Bentley a side we're actually pulling it out of the system so there's a net reduction from the site going into the storm system so I I don't have a sense of 18 00 gallons uh for these purposes I would presume it's adequate but also I don't want to presume so can you explain yeah I'll get into this in a second here too um so more importantly we met with the Jersey City mua and uh they have jurisdiction they control the combined sewer system within the city um they met with us as I mentioned before on February 20th and went through the site with us and they agreed it appears that the area ways the way that designed and uncovered that is where the drainage issue is namely a problem um they reviewed our proposed improvements and they've approved them and I I think I've provided the board I know I sent it in but basically correspondents from them that agreed that the proposed uh design is adequate um and that they basically said we could go ahead and propose the or start the construction obviously we would need to get approval from the board here um more importantly we also went through the Jersey City storm water Control Ordinance uh so section 345 74 um and this proposed project doesn't um disturb more than 5,000 square F feet of land or soil disturbance and therefore it's exempt from the local storm water control ordance so we don't need to do any storm water control as part of the project however within that ordinance uh it notes an objective of the ordinance to incorporate low impact development or green infrastructure devices uh to allow rainwater to infiltrate into the soil so again while this project isn't required to meet the storm water Control Ordinance of the city I think it's doing a very good job of meeting the goals and the objectives of the ordinance by proposing that dryw by taking 1,00 gallons and 1870 gallons of water out of that system ultimately and infiltrating it into the ground um providing that green infrastructure that the city is looking for in their storm water control um so kind of to conclude everything up here uh the existing area ways the drains are undersized so they can't handle the large storm events even if they weren't clogged routinely they've been clogged and will continue to get clogged if they're uncovered and the water can just get into that system along with any other debris that's going into that system and it's ult ultimately will cause another failure and potentially damage to the the structure in the future so we believe the best course of action is to propose these canopies to divert that water from ever getting down to the bottom of that pit and running out on the Harrison a side to the street and then ultimately back into the combined sewer system and then on the Bentley a side to run into a subsurface uh infiltration pit and then into the ground um so it's not just our opinion but the jcmua has also reviewed and approved this they also went out to the site and they think it's a a good solution and they've approved it um and they believe this will mitigate the ongoing issue without adversely impacting the city system that's what I have thank you um have you utilized these dry Wells at other locations yes and how does it uh you know I'm a lay person so so how how does it disperse the water into the surrounding soil without causing any kind of soil erosion or turning the area into a swamp so it's you're going to bury it at least a foot below the existing grade and then it's going to be surrounded in a pit of clean Stone and then beyond the clean Stone there's usually a geofabric that prevents soil from getting into the clean Stone and that basically acts as a barrier to allow the water to filtrate out into the subst soil and then ultimately back into the aquifer the ground groundwater beneath so much like my terracotta chipet sure thank you yep uh just a couple questions um as far as that dry well goes what's visible from the surface do you is there just a just a cap on it or the only thing you'd see is similar to like a a clean out of a sanitary line where you have like a little PVC um rim at the surface that you can open up and look down to make sure it's dry uh after large storm events to make sure it's actually infiltrating into the ground otherwise you would see just Bare Grass at the or just soil at the surface okay and the other question I had was regarding the gutter on the canopies um I was to my impression was it's a quarter inch per foot grade on that Gutter Gutter that's what they showed yeah well I'm going to defer to the gutter on them I think so yeah so the north canopy is 55 ft something like that the north canopy the Bentley outside yeah uh 300 let me get the plan it's about 60 to 70 feet long on the North side and um The Gutter at quarter inch per foot there's a single liter so it's going in One Direction 55 would drop over 13 and a 12 Ines 13.75 inches I calculated at 55 it's 55 553 in yeah so so the the gutter would drop 13.75 Ines I have to double check that the reason I'm asking is because we looked at a rendering that shows it level and I know he said that it's on a hinge and it can be lowered but it's more than a foot am I correct it does pitch down we did actually calculate there's a dotted sorry there's a dotted line that shows the lowest point of it um in the calculation at 2% um from one end to the other so we've done that calculation and the elevation does show it more or less straight but the building section that we have through there does show it at its lowest point yeah I saw the dotted line I was just I was just taking issue with the rendering that it doesn't seem accurate because over a foot in change is is a significant amount of grade that we would see from I'm not convinced that that over 55t span you would you would notice you would notice 13 .75 in I I don't believe you would you would see that on the lower end because the top edge of the canopy is level across so no I don't believe you would I don't think it would be overly noticeable no especially with how close you can get to the canopy yeah I my issue is that it's not it's not shown in the rendering that's in in the elevation of the rendering we can go back I mean if you want I can go back I don't want you to come back for that I just wanted to just point that out because I I just wanted to make sure I was clear on that and that that was correct the gutter is pitched at 2% yes we believe that the rendering is an accurate representation of what it would look like so okay that was question number two and then question number three is actually regarding security um yeah we're going to hear testimony on that so why don't you hold that okay sure that's it um while we have the engineer in front of of us I have some questions about the existing conditions um you mentioned that there are currently drains at the base of these walkways and you described excuse me the size of those pipes and you I think you said they were 2 in correct and those pipes currently connect to the common drains that are in the street no they so they Josh showed it on one of his early walkways to be uh corrected so that they could carry the proper amount of water away they could be corrected but it would be a very intrusive process so tell tell tell us a little bit about that so the area ways themselves are at least 5et below grade currently right so you would have to for lack of a better term dig in potentially to rip out those pipes then go into the structure and chase them into the structure ultimately we're trying to save the historic character of the building uh it's going to be very difficult to dig down five feet down to where the elevation is and then go down another two feet to where the drain pipe is going into the building without uh potentially adjusting or or affecting the facade of that that side of the structure okay so could you instead of continuing to tap into the drains that you say the rest of the building is you know going into the building could you go out to the street from that location from those drain locations again you're going to be digging down so you're going to be ripping out a retaining wall and that retaining wall has that historic fence on it and right but bear with me what what we're talking of doing instead of that right is building structures that are coming out off the building correct um that are quite long and and quite I know there's different opinions about how they impact the historic structure um but it's from my point of view as a commissioner it's a significant structure that's being attached to the building and if there's a way to correct the drainage in visibly so that it doesn't have any negative effect on a historic structure then I think that needs to ex be explored to its fullest before we automatically move to another solution so I'm not an engine ER I'm just trying to understand what would it what would it take it's it's a to achieve that it's a much more invasive process invasive in terms of of digging into the ground and getting to the depth required to set new pipes and potentially affecting the structure yes why would that affect the structure because you're down at the basement elevation presumably at the foundation elevation of the building so depending on how you're digging you could be undermining the structure to get the pipes in okay uh we're we're not talking about digging the full length of the building we're talking about digging how wide of an area uh well if you're just at the bottom of the area where I think it was about a 5x5 area 5x5 area so chasing it the following the pipes right so there's obviously options there's going into the building and tying in as it's always tied in to the building and then there's the alternative to go separately to tie into the city Wast lines right or in the case of the well tie into a well on the church property right with the exception of that the city would well the city mua we would have to get approved if we were going to propose a new tap into their line UND and I don't know if they would necessarily approve that when have understood but you could see why as a historic preservation commissioner I would want to know that that was exhausted because obviously that's an invisible solution as opposed to a solution that could impact how this how this uh historic resource is is viewed from from by the public and you know and my job is to protect the historic structure in any way that my guidelines uh allow me to so I would like to know that that was exhausted before again we we looked at that we looked at potentially upsizing the drains but we thought being more invasive around the structure was a worse option than having something that potentially could be removed in the future of a canopy that just pushes that water away is a better solution I I also want to address the idea of removal in the future because I know that's often brought to the commission as reasons why we should accept those options and the truth is is that once an INF a piece of infrastructure like this is added to a building the likelihood that it's ever going to be removed that we should look past its impact on the building for the whole time it's going to be in existence um it's it's really kind of an excuse to allow certain things to take place it's not coming off the building any time in our lifetimes or maybe even our children's lifetimes so I think the fact that it's removable is not something that gives me any particular piece about the about making the decision okay yeah I have a followup to Steven's question about the drains um you know we're talking about you're characterizing the replacement of those lines and increasing their capacity as sort of this insurmountable potentially you know impacting the resource um however in your you know letter about the you know drainage issues on site sort of summ the summary letter you know you're talking about the first thing that has to happen is these drains need to be cleaned because they were not maintained properly and second a CCTV inspection to determine whether anything needed to be replaced so the recommendation for replacement is already in your report and the CCTV has actually happened and they spoke to it so that was when I wrote my report that hadn't occurred since then and now the CCTV has occurred what had what did you find if I may ask I believe Josh spoke to it so okay so the the pipes in the pathway were in good condition so they they weren't they weren't deteriorated in any way and they were acceptable um also the contractor that was doing that work and that we've been talking to about this whole project we did ask them about the cost of putting in a new drainage system that would meet the requirements that we're meeting here and um I guess to be politically correct we have kids here um he said it was not possible okay in what does that mean well I'll explain hundreds of thousand dollars hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of additional cost because of the additional excavation that would have to happen at the additional depths and because of the um uh the requirements for stabilization of the structure so underpinning and similar in order to achieve the same kind of condition so what we did we did look into it but honestly we didn't feel that that um I mean the contractor basically said it was a non-starter for him for him which contract go sorry what what I'm hearing is that it is possible logistically and physically um order of magnitude he was talking about roughly additional $300 to $400,000 onto the cost logistically and physically it it could be done I suppose any amount of money you could spend on something then yes anything can be done but that doesn't mean that it's realistic within this this particular owner's ability okay thanks any other questions for the engineer thank you thank you okay thank you then um I'm G to bring up Stuart portney um Mr portney um is a con congregant of the Temple and and uh he is also I believe on is it the safety task force so is safety task force is it yes you swear oron I do sure Stuart portney St a r t p is in Peter o r t NE y Mr PNE could you for the record uh tell the commission uh about your affiliation uh with the temple bethl yes um and uh I'm up here as a a lay member of Temple bethl like many of you so um I'm I here I'm here to talk about security and give you some perspective as a security Task Force member and longtime Temple bethl member uh so I may not be able to answer all your questions but I certainly want to be able to give you a perspective perspective from from a congregant and uh a longtime resident of Jersey City I'm I've been a resident uh for in Jersey City for over 35 years I own and operate a business for over 30 years I've been a uh Temple bethl member for uh uh just over 20 years I've uh been on the uh building committee um for probably 14 or 15 years and also a relatively new although it's not so new anymore uh uh I'm a member with other congregants of uh uh Temple security task force um our responsibility is in these times and the reason I mentioned that this task force was created uh six or seven years ago is because it was uh obviously long before um uh October 7th and what we were finding as an institution that uh it was really becoming important for us to uh secure our facility uh to make it safe for congregants visitors uh obviously worshippers and um uh other members of the community um we are an institution that was established um uh back in um 1926 um we presently have over 200 members we operate year round we uh are open for worship and study we have Services Friday evenings Saturday mornings obviously Jewish holidays um during the high holidays uh attendance is over between 300 and 50 and 400 uh people our religious school operates every uh Sunday we have 80 plus students um as I mentioned we open 96 years ago um and uh I'm going to get to this uh towards the end but we are um very very concerned about maintaining the architectural and historical Integrity of a building in anything that we do we are stewards I'm going to say this at the end but I want to say it now we we take that responsibility extremely seriously we are stewards of this building because of its history um um you know obviously our our name our location is extremely prominent we're on a heavily trafficked County Road JFK Boulevard at the uh virtually a block away from the intersection of communa por Avenue we are a highly visible known institution and unfortunately a Target um you're probably aware probably the worst news that anyone could uh receive being a member of this community despite no matter what what your religious background is is the fact that that um in in 2019 Kosher Supermarket less than a mile away from our from our Temple okay was targeted by gunmen uh specifically because it was a Jewish market and four people were killed I mentioned that day because we had to start thinking about how to secure our facility several years before that and frankly there were members of our community and our Temple that said um one of the first things we had to look at before talking about targeting physically targeting uh uh hardening our facility I mean think about that we have to harden our facilities today churches synagogues schools movie theaters I mean this is what it's come to but unfortunately we are an extremely visible Target um because of everything that's happening in the world the increased level of of an incidents again even before October 7th of um anti-semitic not just incidents but unfortunately violence so one of the first things that we had to consider as a as a as a community as a temple was whether or not we were going to have armed security it was it was something that we never ever thought that we would have to consider as and and that's just one measure now that we do have armed security when we have Services other community events uh you know I think it's important to note that probably for the past 38 years we've hosted um the a memorial service annually for Dr Martin Luther King it's host it's it's um it's it's widely attended by uh by the community by politician s by activists um and it's a extraordinarily important uh commemoration for us as a community it brings a lot of other people to the temple and we are not only uh we are not only have to protect ourselves we also need to protect any visitors that come to our to our home and and you know unfortunately this is what has now come to so part of my responsibility and other members of the task force uh respons security task force responsibility has been to sort of learn as we go and I'm still learning and work with a professionals who have the ability to assess what the threats are to our building um Josh mentioned and he has in his uh in his slides that there was a a vulner vulnerability risk assessment I'm only going to say that once because I can't say it three times fast I'll just call it risk assessment um uh that the last one that we did was in March of 2022 uh the one that was done previously to that was in 2019 these are typically updated every 3 years um to stay current the report was actually done by um uh members of the Union County middle sex County and Hudson County prosecutor's office and I was one of the members of the task force that interfaced with them um uh for those reports I was also responsible with our security task force and securing the grant funds that we were able to uh obtain through the New Jersey office of Homeland Security um um and uh that that's actually another source of FEMA funds we actually have two pots of FEMA money one is the disaster and mitigation work that we've been talking about and the other that comes directly through FEMA and and the target hardening and security grants that come through the New Jersey office of Homeland Security um so there are very specific requirements in in in securing those funds we've been very fortunate that we've been uh awarded uh those funds twice uh on a very competitive basis I think that points out how the state sees the the level of vulnerability you know as that we that we unfortunately have as an institution and it's it's it's very difficult for me to say that but unfortunately that's just the way it is as it relates to um as it relates to this uh specific application um there are specific recommendations in the risk assessment that again Josh I I know U um highlighted in his slides but I think it's important to to bring out they spec and there's a whole bunch of other recommendations some of which we've already undertaken that have no impact on this application from from um uh secure you know having um uh controlled access uh um um uh you know other interior measures that needed to be strengthened and and hardened um but the ones that were really concerned about right now is is the um fencing and Gates particularly in the area ways um there were very strong recommendations in the in the risk assessment that said that they they should be um at least six feet high if at all possible they should be they should be locking Gates and um and uh um uh wherever gaps exist they should be eliminated so that's what really got us here to this portion of the application was those specific recommendation again this this was recommendations of law enforcement professionals that actually did a comprehensive inspection of our facility and um and you know so again we take those recommendations extremely seriously um I'm going to conclude with what I said I said before um you know we we think okay and I'm I'm when I say we all say me because I'm up here talking to you that but I know that um that our members feel the same way that our design team has done a fantastic job because we instructed them to make sure that whatever work was was going to be done on this building respected the architectural and historic Integrity as I said because this was an institution that was established 96 years ago um uh you know we we look at the fact that that past congregants who many of which are no longer with us okay took this obligation very seriously to try to continue to maintain this as a as a as a Jewish institution in Jersey City and and um you know as somebody that's a current member I want to make sure that that future generation are also going to be able to um worship here enjoy this facility and what it means to the community because we're extraordinarily proud of this building and we do not want to do anything that in any way shape or form would violate the Integrity of the building so I I you know I'm I'm happy to answer questions obviously um uh you know I can't as answer them as a security expert but if you have questions about the process and kind of what we went through I'm happy to answer them well I just had one question about um how you selected the areas that you were going to protect on the area ways you said right now were a priority and the reason I'm asking is because I was thinking is this part of um a greater um idea for more fencing later are we going to see other ations um I think that's really what I'm thinking no the applic you you you're you're actually you you you've seen the perimeter fencing which was part of the the the around the the yard which is which was also one of the recommendations but but I understand that's not today's application um so no this is this is the other the other Target Harding uh uh things that I I mentioned are are um uh uh window replacement those are those are uh uh um door replacement interior and exterior none of which is the subject of this application we're going to be providing additional controlled access um we're probably looking at also um uh um um changing even changing interior door hardware okay that that is not properly secured so it's those kinds of things right okay thank you thank you for your time thank you okay at this time we'd like to um continue and conclude with um Scott Doyle it's our historic expert you you swear or affir the testimon proceeding will be the truth the whole truth and nothing the truth I do your full name my full name is Michael Scott Doyle and m i c h a l s c o t t d o y l a and I go by Scott go ahead I was about to say uh Mr Doyle has previously been qualified as an expert in historic preservation in front of this board before okay and Mr Doyle for the record are you the author of the uh Heritage report that was submitted in connection with this application that is correct sir yes okay can so uh if you could give the the commission the benefit of of your opinions and conclusions within the report and with regard to what you heard here tonight I'd be happy to do so thank you and take any questions that you may have um thank you very much to the temple and to Josh for including me in this project I'm glad to be part of it and provide some insight on our perspective on the proposal um I wanted to go back to the standards for rehabilitation and just focus on that for a minute in relationship to the local uh guidance that you're reviewing this under as well as your ordinance includes both of those standards for the review uh the standards for rehabilitation are selected because they are they provide greater latitude than the other standards for preservation or or restoration which allow for the allows for alterations and construction of new additions to historic buildings to continue their use and the most applicable standard s for these projects relate to standard two which is the historic character of a property will be retained and preserved the removal of distinctive materials or alterations of features spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a a property will be avoided and the other one relates to exterior alterations under the new additions that will not destroy materials features and spatial relationships that characterize the proper property and that the new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historical materials features size scale and proportion and massing to protect the Integrity of the property and its environment and that's very similar to the local requirements that and most specifically the one related to the awning which states that these features should be attached to the building in such a way that they do not destroy conceal from view or cause irreversible damage to significant architectural features so there's a a really good consistency between your local guidance and the standards and um the part about the C the awnings is more specific in your guidance related to specific features of buildings and specific projects which helps Property Owners with the development and the design of their of their of their projects and in reviewing this in our report I cited on page 10 when I'm looking at when I look at projects and I look at historic buildings I often first try to assess the primary and secondary features of a building and with the temple obviously the facade that's facing JFK is the primary elevation the Harrison Street elevation I would consider that a primary elevation as well since it's a corner building and it's a prominent location it does have and it carries over the design components from at the first second and the and the roof levels that those features are all consistent with the primary character of the building and the significant features of the building and that includes the red brick and a Flemish Bond at the first floor the series of five stained glass windows the belt course of terracotta all the other terracotta details and the arch parapet and the Dome with the the patina cladding and the barrel tile roof tiles those are obviously primary features significant architectural features for the building at the basement level on the Harrison Street Avenue that's a recessed con sunken area is it it's a secondary feature in the hierarchy of the building and then if you look at the North elevation the north elevation along the lawn is much more simplified it is truly a secondary elevation um the Terracotta detailing is terminated at the first section of the building and then it transitions into the red brick masonry so it is simplified in its overall design it still has prominent features like the five stained glass windows at the first floor level and it has the series of five arched stained glass windows at the sanctuary level and the the arched um parapet with the Terracotta detailing those are clearly charact significant character defining features of that secondary elevation so when we were looking at this project and assessing the impact of the canapes and the fencing on the overall character of the building and I go back to the the evaluation criteria that's applied by the local guidelines stating that the feature should not destroy conceal from view or cause irreversible damage to the significant architectural features our point of view is that these canopies they're a new feature there's no denying that they're they are inserted on on the Harrison elevation it's it's visible on the North elev ation it's slightly less visible due to the setbacks and the vegetation of that elevation that conceals it but it's been designed to minimize its impact it's been designed not to destroy the material it's being proposed to insert the anchoring systems within masonry joints it may be reversible it's not intended to be reversible necessarily but it is being installed in a manner that does not destroy the material of the building and it's being the features of the building that it's concealing are secondary features at the basement level everything above that is of this building of the primary features is fully visible above those canopies and above that fencing the especially when you remove yourself from this as on this view looking at the the north elevation my eye is not drawn to that canopy my eye drawn to the front elevation of this building it's drawn to all the Terracotta detailing the stained glass windows and even when I look at the secondary North elevation I still see the stained glass windows and the series of arches I am not focused on that area way and the canopies that are there or the fencing that is there um my when I was looking at the standards as well the standards also site they have a section on resilience to Natural hazards and there are recommendations there and this is noted on page 12 of of our report that new adaptive treatments are to be undertaken to prevent or minimize the loss damage or destruction of the historic property while retaining and preserving significant features of the overall historic character of its site of its site and setting failing to evaluate potential impacts of natural hazards or to plan and Implement adaptive measures to address possible threats continues to put the historic building at risk and the concern is that without these measures the building is still at risk and that the standards recognize the need for addressing resilience to Natural natural events and climate related events and it also includes in the standards on building site it also addresses security purposes and providing protective fencing and other protective protective measures for security purposes um and these features have been designed to be as minimally visible and invasive as possible with performing the required need of which they're intended to do they're not there to be decorative features they're designed to be as utilitarian as possible and recede from the overall view related to and related to the canopies again they're trying they're being installed below the first floor windows and in response to a lot of the comments when I I read the transcripts from the previous uh meeting and it appears that a lot of those comments and concerns that were expressed at the previous meeting have been addressed in the design Josh went through those I point by point there was a lot of concern about whether or not the the canopy could perform the necess the required need and Kelly's overview of that indicated that it is being designed appropriately to meet those needs it's not being overdesigned to add a new visible element to the building but it's it's providing the minimum amount of visibility needed to Pro to provide this protection so in our overall estimation with recognition of site security requirements and natural resiliency requirements that are outlined in the standards we feel that this does meet the Secretary of the Interior standard for rehabilitation purposes and that it is in compliance with your local ordinance and I'm willing to take any questions or responses I'm going to step away you had mentioned um um the spatial characteristics of the property was sort of another uh standard that was uh either in our local it was either the our local laws um I didn't necessarily see that addressed in your report about that particular aspect you talked a lot about the not destroying materials um but what about the spatial characteristics well within respect to the historic district it's got a pretty limited impact on on the overall character of the historic district with the building itself there is a spatial impact in that it does project from the building IT projects the minimum amount needed to fulfill the required purpose it is not trying to present itself as it's not trying to exceed its spatial requirements So within that confine I feel that it does meet the standards okay thanks question I think you made sorry um I think you made mention of the word additions a several times when you were speaking about the Secretary of interior standards and I just wanted to clarify your interpretation of additions uh I think you're referring to additions as anything that's added onto the exterior of the building my understanding of additions is when you're adding some type of structure an an additional structure I just wanted to clarify that I I would agree with you and the issue in in standard 9 is that it starts with new additions exterior alterations or related new construction and I'm focusing on the exterior alterations not on the addition not on the addition I would agree with you that that a structure a walled system with a roof would be considered a a new addition or a structure that this is an alteration understood okay well thank you okay do we want to take a 5 minute recess um yeah we do typically take one around 8:00 all right so it's 8:05 you want to come back at 810 yep I feel compelled to remind you to not talk about this on the break no we will not thank you I'm going to call the meeting back to order okay just for the record it is 8:14 okay so um I mean that that completes our our presentation and uh that being said you know our experts are here available for any further questions from the commission but I just say you know a couple of comments that you I know this commission um this is not a typical uh application before this board um we're not asking for you know a restoration of a building or an extension on a building um we're asking to provide for canopies on the building and and and fencing um but I do note that these you know as um Mr Doyle uh referred to them as features I think these features are are extremely critical to the ongoing preservation of this uh Building inside and out um that's why we're here um this the Ida storm devastated the building these These are the um uh the elements that we want to add to the building to fix that to try to prevent it from happening again and I think as Mr Doyle and and the experts um provided uh we believe it it meets the the uh uh the standards of the Secretary of uh of interior standards and we believe that this is these features are important um for the ongoing as they said preservation but it's also for the use and the safety of the synagogue um it it it's also would be I we believe a benefit to the community because you know the stairwells you heard the stories um they're you know they're they're unsavory things happening there uh that you get rid of that you you know it helps the community as well as as the synagogue uh but um again these these are things that I believe are critical to the preservation of the building and uh we hope you agree that that we we've met those those standards um and with that said again our experts are here if you have any further questions for clarifications thank you does do any Commissioners have any further questions of any of the expert testimony you heard this evening I have one question um I have one question for Mr osuch about the numbers some of the data we were talking about um which was helpful to have um I wrote down and please correct me if I misunderstood um the two in drains that the area ways you had said they could carry 006 cubic feet per second that's correct and then in your presentation um on pages 96 97 you sort of showed the calculations of what each canopy could carry which was respective like depending on which one it was was 0.005 cubic feet per second and 006 Cub cubic feet per second correct so it's right at that capacity so in theory the drains are cleaned they could meet The 100e Storm Volume assuming they're clean but again and it's going to be routine that we're going to have storm events if they're uncovered it's ultimately always going to have debris in those pipes and can cause a problem um and again the proposed canopy is more a uh diversion of that water because ultimately if that thing backs up in a 100-year storm event or an Ida event and uh that access way is really an emergency egress and that thing's backed up they can't get out of the emergency exit from the basement and now it's also a safety issue for the people in potentially in the building okay but like as you know but under ideal circumstances under ideal for your calculations yeah under ideal circum for 100 Year storm fin so so ideally in an ideal scenario in perfect working condition the current drains in theory could carry The 100-year Storm Volume in perfect condition and that's you know akin to what the canopies are diverting correct um so then okay I just want to make sure I had those numbers correct okay thanks yep are there any additional questions I know we have members of the public here for public comment so if there are no additional questions we can move into public comment um and then of course we can continue to take any questions after that if you guys would like to do that okay yep so um we can move into public comment and if there are any members of the public who want to speak on this application you can approach the podium and um just a reminder that public comment is limited strictly to three minutes so please keep your comments brief and um uh we'll you know take them into account and redirect your questions as appropriate and uh when you approach the podium please also State and spell your name and am going to correct you we are using the separate mic rather than the podium in this case Okay so first time we've had public comment in the new room for everyone um do we need a motion we we will do a motion in a moment um I will be keeping time on my phone and I'll give you a one minute warning if you're approaching the 3 minutes okay so um typically we just have everyone line up but if You' like to remain seated and just go one up one after each other that's also perfectly appropriate um okay we can take a motion to open public comment motion I all in favor I okay it's all right so good evening good evening my name is adid Russ can you spell it it's spelled ad e l a r a i d e and my last name is spelled r u SS e k said how long have you been a temple beel member since you were one years old since I was one years I've been in Temple P ever until I was 1 years old would you like to say what do you do at Temple B um we want better security um what do you do there do you go to Hebrew school we go to Hebrew school and we wish that we could go downstairs not just parents we wish that we could help work downstairs but we need to do Hebrew school good thank you you good evening my name is oh sure you I do Megan Dolby russik m e g- n d o l be E R Us SS I am Adelaide's mom I've been a temple bethl member for two years for several years for about five plus years six plus years um I wish five or six foot fences were not necessary in this day and age I converted to Judaism I went to church every Sunday never had a armed security guard in front of my church but now that my family and I attend Temple bethl armed security is necessary as are fences as are other you know things that we need to sustain the beauty of Temple bethl um we also I just want to reiterate that we're open and enjoy all members of the Jersey City Community we also service um members of the community through a food pantry every Wednesday um that's open to anyone we don't ask for any kind of identific if you're in need you come um so I just want to reiterate to the the council here this evening we appreciate your time and we just ask for the same kind of security that you all enjoy as a council that you come into a building with security out front you have fences around your building and we would appreciate the same kind of courtesy and security that you can enjoy here thank you thank you Adelaide ad d l a i d great job I do Megan mea Gan Cano C an CIO thank you for your time may I proceed yeah yes my name is Megan Cano a Westside resident residing on JFK and Kensington uh Temple bethl member full-time corporate worker and my most important job as a mother um I'm here today my husband and daughter and fellow Temple members um Temple bethl was part of the reason we moved to the West Side a place where we can Thrive as a family as a reformed Jewish mixed race family who lives who believes in tun Alum making the world a better place I'm standing here with the plea uh to please help us out um help make this a safe place for people um of any ethnicity religion or race um to survive um Our Fate is in your capable hands um it's Jersey City's duty to protect its people and their cultures making safety a top priority especially with a vulnerable population that is dealing with a lot of hate crimes across the country in in the state of New Jersey and in Jersey City it's not easy being a Jew in this current climate um and it takes courage to even come here and stand up and speak to all of you um we as a temple have hired historical experts we listened we acknowledge we revise designs based on your feedback um which is pretty tactical that just goes to show how much we really do care um we did our part by collaborating actioning on your concerns and now it's your turn to please approve this our congregation is a relatively small one that is only possible by sustaining ourselves with a safe envir our conation is a relative small one that is only possible by sustaining ourselves with a safe environment and use uh of a social hall space that doesn't flood um we do not have unlimited funds to pick apart the proposal in every which way what would happen if our congregation wasn't able to sustain ourselves and not be in this space you will not find any other group that cares about this building's historical significance than us we're accountable considerate we're keeping the building maintained and afloat we are Protectors of the building and it's because of us that this building is in as good of a shape as it is and without us it would be abandoned and left to rot like other large structures in the area hello big mansion across the street on JFK um or even worse torn down for a new modern cheap build like we've seen across the Westside region um we are lucky as a community to be deed to this beautiful facility um and also the community is very lucky that we're here to upload the charact to uphold the character of the neighborhood with its magnificence um help us continue to let our Temple be a shining Jewel of the neighborhood as the protectors um don't get caught in the weeds and get distracted with what we're here to do today and our purpose the circumstance of the location of the synagogue being in a bustling City and a busy intersection near communo PA makes it extra vulnerable anyone who lives near Westside would understand that um you know I know I'm in this local Facebook community group and and I see people posting about it that aren't even members of the temple such as this one there needles and caps to Needles spread out in JFK in front of the temple and on their stairs you could just wrap it up please sure thank you um there's been drug addict shooting up within the stairs corridors children could easily access to pick up a needle I'll be done in 30 seconds anti-semitic attacks on our Temple has occurred such as vandalism sorry you're going to have to slow okay kind of contradictory I'm I'm trying I don't understand I know I understand um anti-semitic attacks on our Temple has occurred such as vandalism there are floods that make the space un unusable susceptible to un healing unsafe mold for children take um help us protect the Jewish kids of Jersey City by being our Ally and making this a usable space to protect the reformed Jewish community and allow us to have an existence within Jersey City and we need your help in order to do so please thank you hello my name is Ethan ashra while e an e an we l I go to Hebrew school I'm 10 years old and I really I just joined this Hebrew school I used to go to the uh Hoboken synagogue and I joined and I just this year I just joined my this synagogue it been very fun I learned a lot of new stuff and I'm learning Hebrew my mom is Catholic my dad is uh Jewish and we're very welcomed and we want to be very safe we feel the fence will be very help helpful we done thank you thank you for your comments you swear orir I do Marian Ro m a r i o n last name r o g e r Marian Michael's gonna come help you with the mic quickly yeah thank you my husband French we pronounce it Ro but it's r o g r i go by Marian Ro thank you I am one of the was one of the most vocal proponents of this particular historic district back in 16 and 17 I spoke down at City Hall when the vote went I was involved with jod drenan and Charlene Burke and everybody when we were trying to get our part of town made into a historic district as president of the condo association of 260 and 270 Harrison I'm an internal Champion anytime anybody wants to do anything in our building I'm like right there here's Maggie's email you got to get a certificate of non effect pay your $25 let's go you guys have been great um I salute everything you do and um I know that what it's like to be on a committee and a board so I am semi-retired and I'm a prisoner of my apartment because I work from home when I'm not working I'm not doing anything and I have a dog so I walk up Harrison Avenue down West uh across JFK down Bentley and back but most of the time I get as far as Bentley halfway and turn around and come back and I probably do that eight times a day sadly because I do it at 7:00 a.m. I do it around 11:00 I do it around 1 to move the car do it around 4:00 I do it around 700 I meet my husband when he walks home from Journal Square sorry trying to get it all in you get the point uh the reason I came to know Tom Rosen site and the community at the temple besides knowing people like Alan Mena and barov and some of my other really dear friends who are community members is because I am the neighborhood pain in the neck nudge because I got his phone number and I sent and I have all the pictures on my phone I brought them tonight if anybody wants to see them I would send him a picture every time I'd walk up Harrison whether it was 7: a.m. or or 10 p.m. at night of various individuals down there defecating having same menonmen having needles thrown on the sidewalk I have pictures I don't have them men on men but the point is we have an unsavory neighborhood due to the fact that that fence was not locked and he would consistently say can't lock it because it's an egis and it has to be safe and you have to be able to get out of there so thank y it was flooded because they put a lock on it because nobody is going to be in the basement trying to get out so they were able to put a lock so we haven't had the degree of and literally crap that we had there 30 seconds so you know I am a big proponent of the fact that you need to have a higher fence if you are going to restore access to that basement for an Eris because you need to be able to make it lockable so the people from the outside can't get down there and while I can talk about the quality of life and needles and fecal matter and sexual activity a bad actor could pretend and not be seen because you can't see from the street if you don't look down there it's deep enough someone could walk down there and place something on the pretense that it's just a shopping bag full of Cocoa Puffs and Yahoo when it's not and as the fact that my father was Jewish and I have a lot of Jewish friends I think of that just as much as the Fe matter and the needles so you can do all you want to protect the historic visible but if that thing blows up there is nothing left and I hate to say it like that but I like to call a spade a spade the security is super important for all of us in the neighborhood we all know we live near that Target all right thank you for your comments yes ma'am I do my name is Jill Kushner k h n r no relation to any of the famous cush want to make that clear I have been a temple member my husband and I have bethl for 14 years since we moved to Jersey City from South Orange since I have been a member I have seen the temple clergy staff and members deal with the building's age and the need for repairs and preservation if we are really concerned about the historic aspects of this building remember that the building can be potentially destroyed by both weather events and people we are asking for help to preserve and protect the building so it can serve us and others today and in the future because our Temple is actually open to everyone thank you thank you for your brevity yes Jeff capz Kap lit TZ I'm a lifelong resident of Jersey City I've served like you on many boards and I still serve on boards one of the most important boards I've served on was the Jersey City planning board as chair I appreciate everything that you do and the time that you take and reading the stuff understanding it listening to it one of the testimonies tonight which I found the most important was a statement U that said significant alterations to Historic property and and that's what you're concerned about you also are known as the historic preservation commission key word preservation that is meaning to save to preserve and to make sure that it continues into the future we are at a point that we have not been able to use our Temple for a couple years for full Services you've heard the children which is wonderful to hear that children are learning about their religion and their Community the adults who come to services who can no longer break bread at the end of the service because it can't be used we also know that FEMA gives us a donation not a grant to actually fix this building because this building is is important congregation's important we know that security is important because Homeland Security gave us a grant a statistic that I just looked up from the ADL anti- defamation League says that from October 7th to January 1st 3278 acts of anti-semitism we're living in very very difficult times and everybody's subject the to these acts of terrorism because that's what they are what are we doing here we're preventing the building from flooding again where it can't be used 30 seconds just please give me the moment okay this warning is not a significant change to the historic aspect of this building the security unfortunately in our lifetimes moving forward we have to deal with it it's important to save a historic building but the brick and mortar is not as important as the lives of our residents who go to these houses of worship also I know that shouldn't come into course should not come into the aspect of what it means to preserve a building but it has to I just found out today the Jesuits of St Aiden it's giving back the building to the arch dasis Newark because they can't maintain the building we're seeing this throughout our community the most vulnerable associations congregations can't maintain their buildings we will lose those his historic buildings if we go to the absolute bottom of not allowing some small minor additions to a a building all right thank you for your comments thank you thank you yes yes I do my name is Irwin iwi n Rosen R oen first of all I want to thank the Commissioners for uh sharing their time with us and allowing us this opportunity to present our feelings about Temple bethl and I ask and I implore the Commissioners to draw a distinction between historic preservation and historic perfection Temple bethl is one of Jersey City's greatest examples of historic preservation founded in 1865 we continue to serve the Jewish community of Jersey City that's historic preservation our current home at Kennedy Boulevard and Harrison Avenue will be 100 years old next year the Cornerstone says 1925 our doors continue to to be open to all who come to pray and to share and to worship and to learn it's open to our neighbors we have a weekly food bank that is so important when you see people lined up to enter that building the importance that we bring the importance that we serve cannot be overlooked what we do when we take pride in the building that we we and we do take a great deal of pride in that's historic preservation if you come and visit us if you walk around that building the exterior or the interior you will see the level of pride in historic preservation different than historic Perfection we Against All Odds we've held on to this building and we keep it and we maintain it and we use it its doors are open to the to all who choose to enter that's his toric preservation in keeping the doors open we have done a great deal to maintain the Splendor of the building come visit us you'll see but hurricane Ida devastated us the ills of urban life are creating a problem also what we're asking to do is to make a relatively minor change to the exterior of the building that will provide much needed security and also will uh will allow us to secure the building so that these children and and the senior citizens and everybody else will feel comfortable in the building 30 seconds thank you the greatest act of historic preservation is not the creation of a monument to the past which un fortunately we just heard about St Aiden's uh it is recognizing that allowing minor practical exterior alterations will help ensure that Temple bethl can and will continue as a home to the Jewish community of Jersey City long into the future and that's the difference between historic preservation and historic Perfection we should not be seeking historic Perfection let's be happy with historic preservation thank you thank you I do I do Aaron brotman a a r o n b r o t m an I have been a member of the temple for about seven years now I have two young children uh one is in the Hebrew school the other soon will be and I have um I've been a member of the building committee since I joined and the I've been the chair of the security task force since it was founded about six years ago so while Sue was more in the Weeds on things like this for the Target hardening and the and the uh physical aspects of it I am the synagogues liaison with uh jcpd our private security uh JC public safety and the Homeland and um Hudson County Sheriff's Office I also have had a a good insight and have seen the numbers um there a loss of revenue for not having the um uh the Social Hall space down in the basement you know up until Ida we actually had a weekly tenant of a church so we while we are we pride ourselves in being a home to the Jewish community of Jersey City we also are a home to all others others and other face um so they we can they can use our space to to worship as they see fit um what I'm looking what I'm asking you for is to consider the whole of this application and what we really need um as a community so I'm the one who sees the initial calls from our security private security folks who tell me you know we pulled somebody out of the uh the the the area way down there um who was asleep uh at 7 at 9:00 in the morning maybe they were a drug addict maybe they're a homeless person maybe they were harmless maybe they were looking to hurt someone who who pushed people away who are um eyeing the temple in a suspicious way I'm the one who speaks with um uh Captain Uki the West District uh and interacts with the sheriff's office when there threats and concerns the temple uh you know who's been interacting with them and with JC public safety since 107 um so I understand intimately the need for this this need here and this security um and I you know I I I am invested as as many others are in the future of this Temple um I'm hoping that the space downstairs becomes classrooms for my daughters and becomes a space where we can welcome another church to use our space on Sunday afternoon so they can worship and that can be a space where we can have the the Kish after my daughters B Mitzvah um so this is and that is that is dry and is safe and is welcoming to all because that is who we are and as as saddened as we are that we've had to have private security the last few years and work more closely with uh the sheriff's and the jcpd 30 seconds um we do believe and it is our mission uh that is are who we are to be open and to be welcoming and uh we're looking for help to continue to be so thank you thank you there yeah I hope it stays me too I do Barbara B r b a a waloff w l k f f i Am uh I have been in an around um Temple bethl for about a decade but I've only been a member for just under a year because I finally got to the point where I realized that the importance of this community and this building to endure and survive meant that I couldn't just take it for granted and that I needed to contribute more than just my presence a few times a year um it's an amazing Community it's a welcoming Community you've heard everybody talk about all those things and while everybody's talked about safety and all of those thing I'm not going to repeat those concerns because we all have those concerns or we wouldn't be here what I will say is that as sad as it is that we have to talk about the fear that we have from a security standpoint we have a fear of the building deteriorating we have a fear now because of Ida that the whole basement which adds the layers of of community that the use of that space adds are incalculable and I respect all of you and your time and your commitment and clearly your attention to all of the detail uh I'm grateful even when I disagree that there's a commission like this and what I'll say to you is that you have the capacity and the ability to take at least one of the community and congregational fears Away by approving this application because that would be one less thing we would have to fear that we would have another flood that would devastate a part of our um building and community that means so much to us so given all the things there are to fear um I ask that you consider that when you considered this proposal which I've been impressed by all of our um all of our experts who I've only met tonight so thank you very much for your time and your attention to our proposal thank you okay are there any other members of the public who wish to provide public comment seeing no one else I'll make a motion to close public comment second all in favor I I I um do we have any additional questions for professionals or should we move I actually did I had a sure I had a couple questions actually um one second I had written a note um this is for and I I forget the the preservation consultant I'm sorry I forget your name it's been a long night um my question is if you you reviewed the and you did talk a lot about the secretary of the Interiors guidelines um I know there is a more recently published in 2021 uh flood mitigation or flood adaptation guidelines I was just wondering if you reviewed them or familiar with them the sustainability guidelines yes yes I'm it seems like it's more generally geared towards like uh ocean and River flooding than it is maybe this particular case but I think some of the maybe some of the recommendations in there could apply here um you know it talks about um you know site and Landscape adaptations which I think we're kind of mixed on here you know it recommends altering the site and setting and location is not critical to the significance of the historic character of the property I think your testimony talking about especially the north facade being a secondary facade did kind of shed some light onto that it was a little Illuminating for me um but I think one of the things that and I don't know this perhaps the architect and engineer can talk to this as well but if any other adaptations like flood um excuse me flood Shields or anything were uh looked into you know that they could install there as well um I think what I've been struggling with and this question for you or the architect and engineer as well but has this type of canopy to kind of Shield the um Shield the area ways from rain have have they been successful in other locations you know is this something that's been done and has been successfully done and the rain kept away from the area ways well traditionally I I see a lot of buildings that have canopies at entrances a lot of buildings that have canopies at se secondary entrances rail sheds all sorts of buildings that have exposure have canopy systems and awnings to protect people and buildings from environmental from rain from torrential downpours and things like that uh we often see in buildings that are converted to Hotel use that awnings are part of that reuse of the building to provide a drop off and a um departure point point and shelter for people coming in and out of the house uh out of those buildings as far as I've seen on residential buildings and secondary elevations of other buildings where there have been awnings over these types of recessed bulkhead basement entrances and things like that often they're a lot simpler they're smaller in in scale and they often use metal brackets with corrugated metal roofing or even kind of kind of translucent plastic corrugated materials there is a desire to have something a little bit more permanent and a little bit more aesthetically pleasing here um while still being utilitarian in character so there there are utilitarian features there are spaces that get that receive these type of utilitarian canopies that I've seen I know there have been other Kelly mentioned some other things about the positive drainage of the sidewalk that would have been something a site related thing I would have recommended but he documented that that still exists and other features like that to keep rainwater from washing in and and going into the area but the concern is the the rainfall now I'm sure is so with the the grade we didn't look at um sort of other grade diversion elements um we identified that the water that was coming into here was from above and from impacting the North and South vads and running down so we identifi that was where the issue was and in our first conversations with FEMA you know the first recommendations with the FEMA team we were meeting with was you know can you cover it can you box it in can you know and and those were the recommendations from them and you know they were looking for us to divert the water away from this areaway and and um you know our our solution was to put the awning on in large part because we felt it was going to have the least impact you know on on the facade you know and on the on the architecture um that was the path we we took you know um some of the earlier designs we had were fairly substantial were bigger took different approaches to to the the structure and um and in reviewing those with some people with and some people locally um you know it was you know felt that those were going to have greater impact and potentially gave us false sense of history on the on the building so we wanted it to be something that was separate unique and we believe it is the best path to divert the water and is is there any uh is there any regrading on the site I think I think one of the reports maybe by the engineer did mention some limited regrading and I'm I'm not sure if that was talked about or not and just maybe just talk about that for just quick moment yeah so I'll answer first going back to your flood wall/ flood vent I think you said question Josh kind of touched on it but typically those implementations for flood walls or flood vents are near bodies of water that during a storm event the banks come up and that water is running into a structure whereas the issue here is not water coming out of a body of water it's rainfall going directly into the area way so a flood wall on the outside or at the sidewalk is virtually going to do absolutely nothing so it wouldn't solve the ongoing issue um the regrading on the north side of the temple in the grass area I kind of mentioned it originally that the high point of the site is up along Bentley a and everything drains towards the Southwest what we're doing is we're in the grass area we're also proposing like a minor little drainage ditch to kind of redirect some of that water from going towards the structure and pushing it away from the structure as well okay thank you yep sorry any other questions I just have a question for you to refresh our memory about the staff level fence sure just to clarify because it's not part of this proposal that fence fully encloses 26 where the historic home was demolished and as well as the side yard of the synagogue fully to the facade is that is that property fully contained with the fence so contained with the fence like by the fence that proper so that fence application was approved under a certificate of no effect that fence stretches from the side of the building around the block but it does not fully enclose the property with just that fence there is a neighboring fence on an adjacent lot the first property on Bentley where they reach to their fence and that property owner's fence goes the remainder of the property line to the adjacent building in reality the full grass area is enclosed in reality the full grass area is enclosed and we could consider the fence at the North areaway as a redundancy yes okay thanks yes for like just to clarify further if the applicant wanted to um continue their fence and have two fences against each other that would be fine they chose not to because as is standard with fences when someone else has a fence there you generally just put your fence up against it and you rely on their fence to enclose your property there any other questions for any of the witnesses tonight if not we can move into staff comments okay Chuck any I know you did some closing remarks anything else you want to close with or just jump you don't have to if you don't want to okay don't want to make you get up if you don't have to okay all right so we can move into staff comments um you already uh received a revised staff report um admittedly we did not spend too much time revising the staff report because the documents that were requested by the commission after the last hearing um not that they did not necessarily impact the staff report but they were items that we could discuss as a commission after hearing testimony um and did not change the um bulk of the staff recommendations which in this case there were two sets of recommendations there were recommendations um on how if the commission thought this was an adverse effect the commission could deny the applications or if the commission thought that there was not an adverse effect they could approve so we did not change those recommendations because they didn't need to be changed based on the documents that were submitted um however following testim there's a couple of things I just want to raise as discussion points because at this point I do believe that that's what this is right it's a discussion for the level of intervention that we believe that this building requires and how it fits in with our existing standards and if it's something that we can approve under our existing standards um so the first is that um Stephen I know there was a lot of testimony back and forth about what else could be done to the drainage system of this building and why the canopies were there and I agree with you I would have from a staff perspective preferred to see the drainage of the building be the first thing that was addressed um that we always try to go for the least amount of intervention um that being said though one of the things I look at with the canopies as a potential positive for the canopies comparatively to altering the drainage for the system is with the increasing amount of storms and the degree of those storms altering the canopies in the future to accommodate those storms would be a lot easier than altering the building for a second time it's something that I was thinking about during testimony where each time we talk about a hundred-year storm the frequency of those H 100e storms is increasing so if the alterations that they're proposing here allow us to better adapt in the future than making changes to the building that might actually be a better recourse than changing the drainage system for the building it's not something that we typically see um as a commission it's something that I think we're going to see a lot of in the future and it's also something that our guidelines really don't do a great job of addressing I know that's one of the things in our master plan element that we'll see next meeting um one of the recommendations is to make our guidelines more friendly towards these adaptations um but it's just something to think about where the least amount of intervention right now which would be or the most consistent our existing guidelines would be to alter the actual building is that the best option for the future um and then the second point that I wanted to make is I within Scott's report the Heritage report he actually cites the same set of standards that I do that I say you could deny it under that he says you could approve it under which is that the staff opinion is that while the the I'm sorry the staff opinion is that the addition of the canopies really does alter the historic fabric as it Alters the way you view the building and Scott's interpretation was that the bulk of the historic fabric the primary historic fabric is All Above these canopies and the canopies isn't altering any of those and it the reality is is those are just two competing perspectives I don't I profession do not professionally believe that either one of us is wrong it's just two different opinions and that doesn't make your job easier I just want to note I just want to note that the that's kind of the reality of this application is that there are a lot of components of this application that are not something that we typically see not something that might neatly fit into our guidelines as we're used to it's just the degree of adverse effect um that we are willing to accept for this building to address some of the realities of this building um in the last meeting I had expressed some concerns about the fencing um I do believe that the changes that the applicant made to the fencing specifically lowering it on the Bentley Avenue side and creating more of a visual Gap there do help that they don't alleviate all of it but it does help um and I am based on the updated documents less convinced of the degree of adverse effect that the fencing installation will cause um so those are my primary updates to the oh I'm sorry I do have a couple more primary updates of the staff report um so that discusses kind of some of the earlier part of the staff report I do just want to address one change to the staff report um in the second portion where we talk about if the HPC does in uh approve this application or both applications um we do want to note that uh condition three where we had said there are no lights in the canopy we have updated that condition to reflect that there are lights in the canopy the lights are appropriate we don't they are downcast which is generally the only condition that we'll put on lights um so I do just want to note for the record that that condition would be eliminated and I'm happy to answer any questions well I'm confused now I I'm sorry so are you uh Rec recommending approval or denial of the application I am saying that I think the commission could relatively easily approve the fence and I think that um we can have a discussion about the canopy and the staff recommendation for the canopy is that there is a two equally relevant professional opinions on it and it is your duty as Commissioners to assess those opinions and make a determination on it so M Maggie if if the canopies would interfere with significant architectural features but are required in order to preserve the building then how how do we resolve that concern because we don't want to sacrifice the entire structure in order to avoid putting canopies on it well that's why that's why we decide if it's appropriate inappropriate is can be subjective so I I I think the other piece of of the analysis is are the canopies really necessary to prevent uh a flood um event from causing severe damage to the structure and I know that we had spend quite a bit of time exploring one of the Alternatives um I mean do you have any opinion on that my opinion on well first of all I will I would like to note for the record I'm not an engineer so I simply have to go on the figures that they've provided to this commission I think that they do balance out I think that it makes their what they're proposing makes sense um I also acknowledge that I mean as much as any of you walking down the street you can talk about keeping drains clean that it it just doesn't happen in reality unless you like quite literally have someone going out there and and to be fair it's not keeping a drain clean is not as simple as having someone go out to the drain once a day and sweeping it right it's keep the the important part of keeping the drain clean is keeping the drain clean during the storm event well and the proof of the pudding is in the eating and and here even though on paper those pipes could theoretically accommodate a storm they didn't in in during Ida so we know what can happen if corre if some kind of action isn't taken to address so again like the the task before the commission this evening is do the installation of these canopies which the applicant is saying will prevent future harm to the building is that is that can we reconcile the appropriateness with future harm to the building understanding that these canopies meet or are stated to meet the Secretary of the Interior standards they might not in the city staff's opinion meet all the sections of our ordinance can we reconcile that into believing that they are approp appropriate installation for the building one one of the things that I'm I'm thinking of now is that you know one of the first things in the Secretary of interior standards is is that a building should be used for its originally intended purpose it's so rare to see a religious structure anymore being being being used for its original purpose we've approved a lot of condo conversions recently of of of a lot of churches Downtown St Bridget's uh I can list them all but I don't know them all off the top of my head hen yeah Baptist um you know First Street Pavonia Montgomery Street we've allowed interventions on all of those buildings in the change of use this is a significant this is a significant intervention I I I I know a lot of people said this is a minor change I think that's part of what we're struggling here is that I think we all think this is a significant intervention in this building but I was struck by um Scott yes I was struck by Scott in his testimony and saying how and it's one of the things this image us up behind us and on our screens now is that I am drawn up on this building when I look at it across the street and from uh the other view that we're seeing looking South I'm I'm struck to the parit to the Dome to the upper floors of the building um and that this canopy is mainly going to be covering brick masonry which there's a lot of on this building um and it's not going to be covering terracotta so I think that's a lot of positives that it has going for it I still don't know that this is exactly the best um strategy for it but it's it's what it's what's in front of us um the fencing I think Maggie said said uh I was always kind of okay with it on the Harrison side I think on the other side I think agreed the reduction by foot has helped it um I I still think um steel would be better than um whatever is proposed aluminum Alum aluminum so I think that would help um you know us experiencing as as you walk by it a better stronger material um and there are a lot of buildings with copes on them I the placement is odd and I think that's what's we're struggling with the placement is odd and usually you see them over primary entrances hotels apartment buildings um secondary entrances sometimes I think the other thing too that I'm thinking of is that is is it a design defect that there are these area ways there and there are these large facades were all the in in the original design of the building should they have never have put an area we there because it's going to lead to flooding I don't I don't know if Ida was the first time it ever flooded but you have these large unbroken facades above all the water rushes down and collects down there you know is this kind of a trade-off for what maybe shouldn't be a sunken areaway there that was one of the things that that I was thinking about as reviewing this application is if we were taking the flooding part out of it if we were treating this as a different way of enclosing this egress stair and Harrison abide would a brick addition to enclose that area be more or less palatable and have more less of an impact on this building and I I think that would be worse than what they're proposing here I think that would be a large intervention than what is being proposed and that's kind of one of where I mentally settled with is this the best the least amount of impact based on what they're at like of the applicant did not come to me proposing that by the way that was just something circling in my head right like what happens if we stick a box on the side of this does that solve their problems no it doesn't I'm not going to bring it up but here I am bringing it up um so I I get what you're saying where it's it's it's is a solution to a problem it's the solution that's in front of us and and this is a big building this is a really big building so I think um as part of it you know sometimes you look at these interventions and you say Can can a building take this intervention um and there can be differing opinions but I think I think part of is you say this building is really kind of massive especially in this view if you're screen Salon behind us or are in front of us and may you know maybe it's the rendering maybe you know it's it's they're giving us the least you know obtrusive rendering that they can give us but I I I think you know considering all the other facade the square footage of the building the amount of brick masery that we're going that it's going to be behind I think this is a building that can can take this intervention and I still don't think it's IDE deal and I think I think the placement of it is what we've really struggled with this whole time it it just seems kind of off in a way but I I would say few of these applications are are ideal or what we would want in in a perfect world but again commissioner blazak you I think you were right to point out that um this is what's before us and I think we heard um a member of the public Mr Rosen if I'm not mistaken talk about the perfect and and you know I think that couple of the Commissioners asked some very good probing questions about alternative ways of ameliorating the flooding issue and I think it was important that we explore that and that we undertake that exploration as a as a commission to discharge our our obligations but having explored that while we don't take financial hardship into account I think we also are bound to take the application as we find it and where the alternative is not really practicable um I I don't really think that it's necessary to go there um it seems like there's a general consensus based on the expert testimony by the civil engineer and all the application submissions that some sort of intervention is needed here it's just a question of what it is and the Really the question for the commission is does this satisfy the the design you know the historic preservation standards and it seems to me taking certificate of appropriateness at face value this is appropriate yeah I uh I I have to disagree on a number of points um you know this is the last application I I would choose to deny you know um given all the issues at hand it makes it extremely difficult um but at the same time I have to look at the building the significance of it um it's there's been plenty of testimony minimizing the effect of what the canopy and the fence will have on the building but in essence they create two sheds visually you're going to have a shed on the south side of the building that's created by the tall fencing and the canopy it completely interrupts the horizontal base of the structure and I I don't agree that the horizontal base is less important than the windows or less important than other parts of the building it's critical to the foundation and everything that comes above it um so from and and please understand where my comments are coming from I don't mean to be um un unempathetic to all the issues that were raised but as a commissioner I have to look at the guidelines I have to look at how we've carried out the guidelines in the past as much as I'd like to have my decision based on financial issues safety and all the things that have been mentioned in this room that are extremely important issues I can't make my decision based on that and and the other thing that makes our jobs complicated is other a agencies are making recommendations on their guidelines and their parameters so if FEMA says put a cover over it that's what's best for them it doesn't make our job as historic preservation Commissioners any easier because it's certainly not the best solution for us um and we brought up the issue of solving the drainage problem at its source and I don't believe that that was completely resolved I heard that one contractor said it would be very difficult and expensive well contractors say things for all kinds of reasons um so I understand that this is difficult and I understand that it would be easier to approve this application but but Mike I have to I have to go with my conscience and what my understanding of the historic preservation guidelines are and I feel that we continue to take other considerations into a in as almost more important we can't operate as the least important agency we have to operate as an agency with commitment to our guidelines and to what what we think is correct and as much as that pains me to say and I will I take no pleasure in taking this position I have to go with what I feel is is correct okay and we're not depriving the the uh synagogue of all of the things that it offers and and provides to the community there are other solutions to these problems this is not the only solution to the problem I'll say that I um I'll say that I agree with my fellow commissioner um I do feel this applic is essentially adding two sheds or you know it may as well be two enlargements or two additional enclosures uh if this was a glass box maybe that would be a little bit more you know appetizing and a little more appealing to the eye and would actually solve the flooding problem because now it's a full enclosure in my mind area way is always flood it's just like a bucket float you know sitting out there waiting for water to collect into it there are um many ways that you can get water out of a bucket the same way there many ways you can get water out of an areaway I'm also not an engineer but you know in my mind have they considered a sump pump that pumps the water out of the areway using the same drainage mechanism that crosses over the street and into the you know the main sewer line and you know I guess for the north side of the building the fence that was approved you already have an enclosure there that provides security why do you need the redundancy of a lower fence in front of an existing fence I'd say maybe just for the fencing I I don't think there's any I think part of the fencing too is the addition of like the Panic buttons and and and and that as well so I think that gives an extra level of security that the existing exterior fence doesn't give so I think that's maybe the one difference in terms of that extra fence around the existing area ways and and also what the activities that they've seen going on there I mean the kind of activities that they're talking about people doing drugs drugs people going to the bathroom people having sex they're not going to have in that open area that's fenced in that's why they want that specific fence there at that point I think that and you know look the this isn't perfect it's not but these problems aren't perfect either right I mean we're dealing with climate change we're dealing with you know arising homelessness and crime and things like that and and attacks uh unfortunately driven by anti-Semitism and so we're trying to deal with them uh I mean it's not perfect but I think it's it's an improvement yeah yeah I have to add that you know these problems that the synagogue is having we are all facing the same problems we deal with it on a daily basis we deal with flooding how to resolve drainage how to solve crime issues uh uh that are happening on our streets we if anyone owns a home or lives in a building the same issues exist throughout the city um what do we do when a uh a resident comes and said I need to enclose my front yard because I can't stop illegal behavior from taking place in my front yard what do we do then um so I think there's limits to what historic preservation be a can be asked to do as as a as a commission we can't take on all of the issues and be asked then to resolve all the issues I mean it's not our job to resolve all those issues as much as I feel for them uh the historic preservation commission has a job to do which is to protect the building and keep the building's Integrity have materials be compatible and to find Solutions uh that don't affect the building before we accept solutions that that do affect the building so are we at an impass or is there some way that we can say that Commissioners could say these are the things that I take issue with I don't want penetrations of the building I don't want blah blah blah you know because if let's say for instance the awning was done in a way that it didn't touch the building what if it was just adjacent to the building what if it was a couple inches from the building but wasn't actually touching it would that affect commissioner's opinions or would um I would point to um and I was just remembering when we were talking about this and as a mitigation effort was um the Westside Avenue Charter School building if any of you remember that we allowed 20 downspouts some of them over 8 in in diameter yes that ran the entire height of the building yes all the way around the entire perimeter I I do just want to clarify that was uh leing Community Charter School on the boulevard a couple blocks up from this okay yeah and we we permitted another one of the more painful applications we' heard apparently all our isues are drainage issues that was in that was incredibly uh um you know high profile no question every bit of it um in my opinion this is much much lower profile if we're just going to talk about um what's permitted in the past um I would say this is a most higher level of design as than that was yeah I would say that I that I I take much much less issue with two applications that are probably um approaching a problem in a way that I probably wouldn't myself I would do it another way but as Brian said before and I agree with that that this is the application we have before us right it's just two awnings I mean I can think of how many buildings we've allowed awnings on how many storefronts we've allowed outings on um and I would say as far as I'm concerned if it solves a problem and it's reversible albeit maybe as as you had said before Steve it's likely never to be reversed corre however it is in as a preservation expert testified before us it is in the less the least part of the significance of the structure and it is a mitigating structure to solve a problem that in other ways in other ways maybe wouldn't be solved as Maggie had said herself what if we have 100e storms every year which is I mean we're trending that way if not currently um maybe maybe it is you know something that we're going to look back on and say wow we should have we should have said that was all right I think of that that charter school now is a few blocks from here it is yes and we permit did that we also I can't I can hardly say myself that I could say that that I think I was the only one that voted against it I don't remember off the top of my head to be honest with you I agree that that was not a fun so I would say it was not something that I wanted to see and you know and now I have to see it when I drive down the boulevard so um this one when I look at that photograph from you know even closeup I still don't really see those sheds I don't really see them so I I feel like it's something I could vote to to approve so I I I don't know if this is the right metaphor but the the phrase like rearranging the deck chairs and the Titanic comes to mind when you know we're talking about trying to avoid uh affecting the the way that the building reads or the appearance of these canopies creating this shed-like appearance I you know I don't view this as us intervening or interceding to help them with this problem I kind of see it as is stepping out of the way and letting them resolve the issue themselves I mean they're undertaking this massive effort and expense in this sincere effort to preserve the building and we've heard some real um you know kind of emotional testimony we've had families come out and speak about trying to preserve this important historic resource and I can't help but think in this increasingly digital age when everyone's hiding behind their phones these are people who are going out into the world they're doing as as commissioner blazak pointed out you know the best possible use for a historic structure like this is its original use and they're going there and and they're doing that and they're bringing other members of the community into there and and they're feeding their neighbors and those who are in need and and you know not to be just sort of emotive about it but to to hone in a bit on our historic design standards the prefatory language does refer you know provide some general standards and it refers to you know every reasonable effort being used to provide a compatible use and um every reasonable effort being made to predict and preserve archaeological resources so again I I feel like all of this is being undertaken out of a good faith effort to preserve and a historic structure and keep it in being used for its original purpose and that's that's worth doing I think about St John's and you know think about joh torturing us oh c can can I also suggest that I if we are at an impass that maybe we try to hone in on one of the applications and take them in turn and see if we can reach you know yeah plurality on at least maybe the fences that seems a bit less controversial that was going to be my recommendation is maybe we talk about the fences first um and if there are Commissioners who have outstanding concerns with the fenes I mean I'm in a position where I point I'm sorry where I believe I can make a recommendation for approval on the fences with conditions um if there are I mean I'm of course I'm happy to talk through any concerns I do I mean in terms of when we talk about like impact on the building and installations on the building um offens is kind of as low stakes as it gets um I know Stephen you were concerned about will things put in place actually be reversed fences come down pretty often I'm not right like I'm in terms of long-term impact to the building I think that of the two in front of us the fences is significantly it's not as big of a deal as the canopies um I it's hard for me to separate and I'll tell you why I know AG because they they we're asked to look at this and in the total impact the there's some specific issues that I'm trying to square in my own mind and that is the fence that's being proposed covers over existing historic fence right it's going to exist behind it I I can't recall when we've ever agreed that that would be an acceptable solution so you know I'm struggling I I would love to approve all of it but I'm struggling with my ility to justify uh what's happening uh if we're talking about something that could be reversed why isn't uh temporary fencing being considered as an option this is going to be a fairly permanent uh uh piece of infrastructure that's as I pointed out never going away anytime soon if there's a current need then address the current need um um that would be easy for the the commission to approve but given its permanency it makes it so much more difficult for me um and I say me because I I'm a commissioner just what I think isn't necessarily how this is going to go but I'm letting the commission know where I stand about it why it's so difficult if it was a temporary fence would you want the design changed I'm I'm squaring in my head what a temporary fence because I mean the temporary fence to me is a construction fence I'm sorry a temporary fence to me is a construction fence obviously and I and I recognize that that's like the other end of the spectrum right but the definition of temporary is forever minus a day right like temporary unless you put a specific time period on it so what does when you talk about a temporary fence what does that look like because maybe that might be something that I I didn't take the thought that far the idea that this is not affecting the building and could be easily removed made me think well then why isn't it why why isn't temporary fence being uh an option um I didn't think through what the design of that fence would be or how it should be implemented right uh but it's one of the concerns on the on the North End the fact that it's behind a an already approved approved fence um also feels you know we're all about as little as possible that seems to be what our our mission is so in that case it seems like you not for me to say Overkill this is people trying to feel safe so I understand that it's not me for me to say it's it's safe enough but I have from as a historic preservation commissioner I have to look at what's appropriate from that perspective um it it makes it very difficult and and I've never I've always felt keeping the existing fence There Will putting the other fence in front of it was was an odd I remember that from last time I thought that that was odd they did they did offer to paint them both the same color which I think helps but in in the report it it says in an effort to reduce the cluttered or haphazard appearance of the new fence and historic garville both will be painted black but I still think it's a little haphazard I I can't think of any um situation where you have two fences right right next to one another like the reservoir that's the only one I can think of yeah perhaps yeah White House US capital all over Washington DC Maggie what did you say we did it at the reservoir which I recognize you haven't seen yet because you can't can't hopefully soon um but that's the and I I agree with you it's it's clunky um but it's one of those in for my purposes for this because we are adding so much to the building I didn't want to combine adding things to the building while also removing historic fabric so you asked the question about a temporary fence and I think Vice chairman gardo at at the last meeting uh where we discussed this application said that if we had an aluminum fence it would fall apart in 10 years so if we just let them build the aluminum fence they wanted in the first place that's temporary modern materials yeah I falling apart doesn't mean that it goes away it just stays there in in disarray yeah that yeah anyone else have any comments concerns about the fence I know I mean we can also do an informal poll before roing if we want to I I think that would be helpful for the fence M um if you think you're in a position to approve the fence do you want to just give a light hand raise with conditions with conditions yeah okay just in general all right so we would we do have enough votes for the fence to pass um Janelle were there any conditions outside of what's in the staff report that you would like to consider I think last time we talked about just that it needed to be I can't I'm sorry I think I didn't I don't remember what the conditions were but last time we talked about the materiality that it not be aluminum so that the two fences that are going to be sandwiched together are like maintained the same like they're finished the same they're both metal they're both painted they're both Brad iron so that we don't see the like aluminum fence aging at a rapid a more rapid rate than the steel rod iron I'm sorry Mr zinder did did you say R iron that's what what the information we have from the contractor is that the actual material is technically RW iron um as opposed to Steel um I can't say what the difference is but RW iron rails the existing ones are RW iron you know so they've certainly lasted for close to 100 years already um I think the question whether it's aluminum or RW iron right I think what's being proposed is alum is an aluminum fence correct yeah well I I think there's a consensus aluminum wouldn't fly but um I'll leave it to I I just I believe I stated earlier that if if switching the materiality of the fence would allow for the approval of the fence then we'll switch the materiality of the fence yeah and maybe in the conditions we just leave it as iron cuz I feel like it's probably cast iron not rot iron it's going to be solid steel yeah it's going to be solid steel pick it right the same pattern the way you're the the way it is now the same pattern as it is now the same pattern but steel yes IR solid not hollow steel not Hollow can we maybe phrase that as iron Endor steel at the determination of the contractor after working with HPC staff yes yes okay um and what where do we stand on the painting of the existing historic fence well if it's going to stay it should be painted black or the same color as the as the steel or iron new iron fence okay okay so in that case the conditions on this would be um the conditions in the staff report to revise the areaway fencing material to be iron or steel at the determination of the contractor after working with HPC staff and for the historic fence that is remaining on site to be painted to match the new fence and the The Proposal is still both area ways yes sorry the proposal is still for both both area ways okay yes okay all right Chuck do you guys this would be so we're we're hoping to vote on one now and then we can continue talking about the canopy so this would be on the fencing application 0184 with the conditions that I read into the record those conditions would be acceptable okay I'll make a motion to approve the fence application with the conditions as set forth by staff second okay all right commissioner samp I commissioner Gunther nay okay this is for the fencing okay we do we need a citation or yes we do need a citation so the just to clarify the condition is we are not reducing the number of area ways it's still both area ways it is still both area ways yes okay okay so yeah just if you wouldn't mind the staff report here I you fcing have a copy or Stephen does as well um It's all under fencing yes I see that I'm I'm trying to figure out do I need to read both of them or pick one you can site both you can site one I think um I'm going to site section 345-7120 of apperances okay thanks all right commissioner Lewis um nay analysis site 3 4571 h2i and h2a okay commissioner blazak I'll vote I okay commissioner Cronin I okay commissioner amuso is absent commissioner griga is absent commissioner sakong is absent Vice chair guiara yes I'll vote nay on 345 71 h2i and h2a h2i and I and chairman Gordon I okay so there are four votes in favor and three Nays um five affirmative votes are needed to approve a certificate of appropriateness so the vote on approving this fails um do we want to flip the motion to so in the past when we have not approved a COA based on numbers we have um sometimes reversed the vote and someone has made a motion to deny it would the applicant be interested in pursuing the application for offense only on the southern side of the building we might have enough support for that would would anyone flip their vote I would agree to that too all right so that's that's it then okay well no we yes yeah check that's do you want all right Chuck do you want five minutes we can take a break yeah if if if that's still an alternative if we could just have the fence on the street side um and eliminate the the interior on the North side uh that that would be something that we would ask this board to to vote on okay and then move a locking uh gate for the north side to the perimeter fence well we're gonna have to figure that out yeah so that could be reviewed with staff just yes the location of the gate and how it would function right and that's something Maggie you'd be comfortable with working with them on and that something you could yeah I would we can definitely approve that at the staff level I think that's something that we regularly approve under certificates of no effect within the historic districts all the time alongside the sides of people's buildings that's the again this came up in the previous hearing um the only time you really see a six foot high fence in someone's front yard is when it's adjacent to their building leading to their backyard and we approve I'm sorry and we approve six foot high gates in that case so I would see this as a similar application of that and it's something that I could approve at the staff level after working with the applicant and I I think one of the issues we're going to have to review is is whether the that exterior fence on a North Side uh at the perimeter is secure enough all the way around um because I think at points it it's a neighbors fence that completes it um so we're essentially relying upon the neighbor and they're you know they're uh maintenance of their fence so that's something that we'd have to review and maybe review with staff further as well and I think that's something that we said last time that Maggie could approve extending it against the neighbor fence as well so yes okay so does that does that give us the votes we need yeah okay so again the conditions on this would be the conditions in the staff for report um to paint the historic fence to match the um new fence to revise the material of the areaway fencing and to eliminate the fence on the north side of the building I'll make a motion second with those with those conditions okay have Celly all right um commissioner Lois hi commissioner Gunther I commissioner blazak I commissioner Cronin I commissioner samp hi commissioner amuso is absent commissioner griga is absent commissioner sakong is absent Vice chair gucciardo uh nay for 345 71 h2i and 71 uh h2a okay and chairman Gordon I okay there's six votes in favor one against no extensions the certificate of appropriateness for h-23 0184 is approved okay okay should we uh go back to the canopies yeah I was and I I feel that there's three Commissioners who are a definite no on the canopies so you know seeing what happened and I can Chuck it's up to Chuck he's the attorney but it doesn't seem like there's the five yes votes do the only do can they only put up one canopy I don't know if that helps the issue a joke folks just a joke so I don't know if the applicant has any thoughts on that since there's doesn't appear to be enough votes for a yes vote at this time yeah and if I could then because I'm kind of reading through the te leaves here then if I could uh request to uh adjourn to another meeting for a uh a vote before the full commission of nine members okay I well the only thing I would suggest before we get to that is is there anything for the tentative nay that could you know be a game changer or is it the whole thing is just not acceptable okay proceed okay so I will I would recommend we'll carry to a date unspecified um understood it wouldn't I I mean we're here because you didn't want to be in April so it's not going to be in April um but we can work together and figure out date that we'll have more Commissioners available oh quick question are we is the issue with the fences that's been settled f are we're only talking canopies we're only talking canopies yep just make it make sure we bring that up again with the new you know when everyone's back so right and I don't think there's likely to be much more testimony so I was about to say the so the without if the applicant chooses to carry um and does not provide additional documentation or does not choose to reopen testimony it quite literally will be a brief appearance by Chuck saying please vote on this yeah just that the the Commissioners who are not present tonight would have to read the transcript and with and I also would just like to note for the public as well um without reopening testimony or without the reintroduction of new materials that does mean that the public comment period on this application is also closed um if there are new materials introduced we would reopen public comment okay okay um anyone want to make a motion to carry to a date uncertain I'll make a motion to carry to a date uncertain at the applicant's request second all in favor I okay I'm sorry this is an unidentified speaker on I'm sorry um I yeah it sound like the person from the public is asking if there's mitigating circumstances that might help for the next meeting yeah we can see if chuck would like to relay any of the conversation with this client I guess in in general it's uh the question is similar to the chair's comment is is there anything uh comments recommendations that that the commission may have for us to look into to make uh the canopies more palatable uh between now and the next meeting my my client is you know looking to work with with the commission um continuing to work with the commission and that's that's where ask if there's any guidance uh any comments we're we're open to them before we leave tonight so I could say that the issue of resolving the problem with the current drains has not been sufficiently addressed for me to vote Yes on the canopies there's so many open issues there I I still strongly believe that the drainage could be resolved without the canopies and believing that it's it's hard for me to vote for them so there'd have to be some new testimony that made it extremely clear that there was no way to go forward in the other direction I'm not sure what that testimony would be that would convince me uh but that's my issue that that that was not pursued as a as as a solution strongly enough uh for me to be able to support the canopy okay and I would agree that I have the same concern that you know the canopies may not actually mitigate the flooding concern I think it'll help a little but I don't think it's going to fully mitigate it okay thank you that's helpful and I would say I am on on the yes side but I think something that would convince me if I were a no would be to show examples of where this has worked and precedent examples at other institutional buildings I think that would help thank you M okay thanks Jack all right um because this is a special meeting the only thing left on the agenda is adjournment I'll make a motion second okay it is 9:48 p.m. all in favor I I