I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all Sun announcement cam hello good evening board um today is Tuesday May 21st uh in the year 2024 and this is a Jersey City planning board meeting with a scheduled 5:30 p.m. start time and in accordance with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting has been given to the editor of the Jersey journal the Jersey City Reporter and posted with the city clerk on May 17th of this year um this meeting was also posted on the Jersey City division of city um planning web page and all distribution materials made available to the board were published and available to the public have uh yeah and uh I think your mic might not be on on now yes yeah all right so acting Vice chair prin uh councilwoman priner here um commissioner Stato here commissioner lipsky present commission green present commissioner Dr Desai present okay I'm gonna have to switch the name tags um Torres and acting chair here okay super we have seven Commissioners present we have a quorum thank you Mike you want to s in the staff yes thank you have any correspondence yeah we we actually do so we had a request from the applicant um west side AV Holdings LLC to carry with preservation of notice to June 11th so that would be item 12 under new business on your agendas and that is case p23 d32 address is 791 to 805 Westside Avenue and they have requested to carry with preservation of notice to June 11th okay thank you and that is all chairman Perhaps Perhaps in light of the fact that there's a large amount of people from the public we should just read off the adjourned matters that are listed on the agenda I will do that if the chair would like please go ahead so the following cases have been adjourned from tonight's meeting will be carried to the June 11th meeting unless otherwise noted and there will be no further notice of those matters case p2024 4- 22729 fet Avenue if anybody's here on that that will not be heard tonight it will be heard on June 11th case p2023 0095 it's 42 to 46 Cottage Street if anybody is here on that matter that matter will not be heard tonight June 11th there will be no further notice for that matter case p2023 d00 64 147 Academy Street that matter will not be heard tonight it's carried to the June 11th there'll be no further notice case p2024 d44 17 to 25 Pine Avenue that is also carried to June 11th there'll be no further notice case p2024 d455 Hudson Street carried to June 11th there'll be no further notice case p2023 d35 72 Tunnell Avenue carried to June 11th no further notice case 2024 D60 this is a view and discussion of the amendment to the PowerHouse Arts District Redevelopment plan if you're here for that that matter is carried to June 11th no further notice case p2023 D60 269 MLK Drive that is carried to June 11th with no further notice case p2023 d85 155 Newark Avenue that is carried to June 11th with no further notice case p223 d009 85 monitor to 87 Monitor Street that is carried to June 11th with no further notice case p2024 d58 780 to 782 Newark Avenue is carried to June 11th with no further notice in case p2023 d53 675 to 695 Grant Street that is carried to June 25th with no further notice so if any of those matters are matters that you were here for and would like to hear they are not going to be heard tonight they will be heard either on June 11th or June 25th as noted there will be no further notice and other than that chairman we can proceed with the agenda this evening thank you Council all right I'll call my first uh case up that is number nine on your agenda that's a review and discussion of a certified artist Ruben NRI and Tony koam uh formal action may be taken um yep so the planning staff receives the uh letter from the artist certification board um stating the criteria that the artist meet and these artists um artist Ruben met the criteria as a musician uh for 1 3 4 5 and six and Tony met the criteria for a painter uh for criteria 1 2 3 four and five and planning staff recommends approval thank you Cam um anyone here oh actually Commissioners any questions no anyone here from the public Mr chair seeing no one from the public wishing to speak I move to close the public speaking portion second okay public is closed and you recommend approval yes planning staff recommends approval thank you sir I'll entertain a motion I a motion to approve item number nine second it acting Vice chair councilwoman prery yes commissioner stamato yes commissioner lipsky I commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner green I commissioner Torres hi and acting chair Dr Gonzales I all right motion carries all in favor thank you Cam next case to be called is case number number p2024 0063 this is a review and discussion of amendments to the Luis Munos Marin Redevelopment plan regarding the uh embankment Redevelopment and other standards formal action may be taken this is number 10 on your agenda chairman I do have a conflict and I have to recuse on the matter okay thank you Council and as always I how are you how are you good thank you and as always if our Council recuses I have to ask if you're okay they recuse no problem okay Mr Pina go ahead thank you thank you um my name is Eugene poino I'm with the law firm of Genova Burns uh I'm here on behalf of the U applicant who is um the sponsor I guess of a Redevelopment plan Amendment the Lewis uh Luis youo Marin Redevelopment plan um my intent this evening is to present uh one witness just one uh that witness will address the specifics of the proposed amendment to the Redevelopment plan uh as you all know the context is is important for everything uh in this case the context has been and has spanned more than 20 years um during those 20 years which would be somewhere around 2004 2005 there has been multiple litigations in the New Jersey Spirit Court there has been a long drawn out extensive uh proceeding before the federal surface Transportation board also known as the stb that deals with railroads um there have been mult multiple uh fits and starts of potential settlement plans settlement proposals over the over that same period of time changes to Redevelopment plans proposals for changes to Redevelopment plans in the last several months um with the help of councilman uh Solomon uh we think we've made substantial progress and uh we have had many communities meetings over the course of that same period of time uh the planning division has had a number of community meetings uh at least three that I'm aware of uh the federal stb has had their own very specific kind of meeting they had enormous participation from the community um the albanes organization the sellers of the property the uh I got to get this name right because it's important for for the participants the Pennsylvania Railroad horsa stem embankment Coalition uh has been involved um and during these several months uh we have uh worked on uh an amendment to the Redevelopment plan together with the uh division of planning uh we have uh worked to obtain uh historic preservation uh office approvals uh as you may know the U HPC approved the historic preservation requirements that are set forth specifically in the plan last week and they were they were very meticulous and detailed um the same parties that I described before the embankment Coalition the albanes organization the South the city the division of planning Maggie O'Neal they've all been involved in doing that uh that part of the job um so uh if we can finally accomplish we all we have tried to do for the last 20 years it should be a considerable achievement but it doesn't uh it starts it does start with this this amendment there are number of steps that we'll have to take later on but for zoning purposes it starts with this amendment I told you I had one witness and that witness is Charles hey of Jar Robin and I'll ask him to come forward and discuss the Redevelopment plan Amendment Charles [Music] I do yes Charles height last name spelled h y DT Mr height you're not to this board I am okay you've been qualified in the past by this board I have last uh last meeting that this board uh met yes sir I recall and is your license currently active and in good standing it is okay you're qualified all right good evening board members I will uh jump into it um there has been a lot of work on many individuals um within the city outside of the city um our firm drar Robin along with my colleague Carolyn worell had had the honor of working with all the constituents on this projects over the past five years of our involvement um a lot of detail and thought went into what I'll cover with this board in terms of what's being proposed as a Redevelopment plan Amendment um the substance of my testimony will be how the proposed amendment is consistent with the master plan the land use elements as well as open space and circulation um but we did want to provide the board some benefit as to details about the subject property um and what the overall goals are in the amendment so what uh is before you are existing conditions photos we've prepared this exhibit four times and we've updated the images four times they're all relatively consistent but these were taken to today um so we are entering um we will share this with the city but this is an existing conditions uh exhibit on the upper left we have uh the photo of the embankment block which is referenced as block 11 1602 Lot 1 um this is from Manila so I can zoom in uh the focus a lot of this uh this block is about the embankment which is essentially the wall as um you see on Sixth Street this this wall of the embankment carries through to the West so this is the easternmost portion of the existing embankment today um and a lot of it you can see the the Brick of the embankment wall um which we've coordinated to be preserved in the future development um this property as was mentioned you can see from the corner of Marin and six Street um is largely un unimproved uh on the upper portions the sidewalks are unimproved there's little to no pedestrian or bicycle bicycle connectivity through this area um you do see some on Marin but as far as uh connections through East West connections through the city um there's very little little going on um one other point of reference we do have the Roberto Clemente baseball field and auxiliary Recreation space just to the north um so this is really a good resource for the area but um certain doesn't provide any connections uh part of what the amendment is to the ls munus uh Marin Boulevard Redevelopment plan is to allow for connections East to The harmi Cove area um where we're seeing some of the construction in that Redevelopment plan undergoing now that has the Light Rail station to give you broader access um but also to the West which you have Hamilton Park running along 6 Street uh as well as uh Mary Benson Park all the way at the West End so while much of the other connections to the West are uh being discussed in the Sixth Street embankment Redevelopment plan um this specific Redevelopment plan on the lisis Muno Boulevard plan only consists of four districts so it's it's a a long um uh Marin Boulevard um we're specifically targeting with the amendment District 2 so you can see that in the middle um that district is does encompass does encompass um block 61602 lot one um and we have uh proposed uh design guidelines development requirements to accommodate uh a residential Tower as well as um a large compon public component would be a 30 foot wide ride of way um that right of way will be um designed for for uh multiple modes of uh pedestrian Bicycle Connection as well as a variety of open space um in terms of passive passive areas uh when you get into the actual proposal uh part of our work was to understand what could be developed on an embankment how to develop that and locate it in the appropriate location um in this instance uh being at a major intersection of 6th Street and Marin um we did want to locate the proposed Tower of the overall development uh closer to the east uh it'll complement the block three uh tower being constructed now um which you can kind of see just to the east of of Boulevard um and really prescribe certain setbacks and stepb backs for the future development so we've Incorporated those into the amendment um the big uh the big aspect of this amendment is providing enough flexibility for uh incorporating affordable housing as well as um a couple different options for both a a residential apartment a residential units and hotel units or hotel rooms so in first option option a um we're prescribing uh a maximum count of 404 units uh with 200 rooms um so that would be the base scenario um as you move there from option b uh again it's incorporating 404 residents IAL um Apartments 200 rooms but there's an option to convert the apart the uh 200 rooms into apartments that would come with um with affordable housing in option C um we have coordinated with some of the larger um state level um organizations and and agencies to understand the parameters for what would be an Aspire program um that has minimum unit counts that are required uh so to try and uh create this option C we've had to increase the density to meet those minimum thresholds we did settle on a maximum of 750 units um and to accommodate that on a reasonably similar floor plate for any future development the number of stories increased five stories for a maximum of 50 stories um so that's all trying to be achieved on this site um that last option does come with the affordable housing component um if if we were to move forward if the any uh future redeveloper were to move forward with that um again we took uh a lot of detail and time to understand what could be achieved from a a physical standpoint with conceptual designs um to incorporate the preservation of the embankment appropriate setbacks from the right of way um a large portion of this overall block will be contributed to the right of way the six Street embankment right of way and that'll be running east to west on the Northern portion of the overall block um I'm going to shift gears into the substance of my testimony as a planner supporting the Redevelopment plan Amendment um with respect to consistency to the master plan two of the goals the general goals that I think are most poignant here are connectivity and Mobility uh PRI prioritize connectivity between neighborhoods this is a a critical component a segment for the overall six Street embankment um it's it's one that's on the Eastern Edge uh it will connect harith Cove Points West Newport Points East uh including Newport um the mall uh to all the points West and then serve as that um thorough fair for for open space and connection uh social Equity uh goal two was was identified um increased flexibility of all programmable able space um we've really tried to work with the community to understand what could be achieved in terms of a multimodal open space thoroughfare and 30 ft um we think we can do it we have a a few different alignments that uh can accomplish that um so we're definitely providing for enough flexibility uh as well as the same time with the flexibility in the de development options will allow for a reasonable development to move forward um in terms of land use principles um again we're con I think my computer went to sleep um should come up uh we are uh aiming at continued efforts to enhance uh residential neighborhoods obviously we're introducing a residential development uh on a block that is is underdeveloped uh without any any residential or other uses on it um we're insuring the city's available housing is balanced and meets the housing needs of all current and future residents again um we do have a mix of uh uses between housing and hotels in two scenarios but uh affordable housing in two scenarios as well um and lastly to improve open space assets and connect them to each other and into the community I think again this is this is a resounding goal for for everyone involved with this project um to create this as an opportunity to add to the connectivity um to to Hamilton Park and and Points West um we did did also go through the open space element as well as the circulation element I won't get into them uh tonight but um they are included in our consistency memo um there are other points that we're we're advancing in those those master plan elements um I've covered what I think is enough um on my end to present a summary to this board of all the work that's been done um again my involvement has been last five years as we heard there's been extensive work over the past 20 years uh so it's a little bit of honor and pride that I get to be here voicing some of the benefits to this but uh there are many other voices that uh have shaped this amendment so um without further Ado I kind of complete my testimony there be happy to answer any questions you have thank you Mr height anyone have any questions yeah I I I have just uh I know we still got a long way to go with this uh it's just a thing but I just wanted to be clear on one thing that you said uh the connections from east west on each embankment is we're talking um cuz you keep saying there's no connection there's no connection but the connection you're talking about the connections of each embankment correct right not a not a drive through because we we all know we could go from 6 Street East to West and an issue right yeah so thank you very much commissioner Torres um to clarify uh we are talking about a connection at the upper embankment level so we've we've planned for and designed um pedestrian access from grade through a grand staircase uh We've also designed and and accounted for uh Bridge access uh pedestrian and bicycle Bridge access from embankment level to embankment level um both on the east and west portions on the east and west portion so that would be my next question then um the um you mentioned something I just to be I want to be clear that it's only two sections of the bank that are going to be connected for now in this amendment what happens to the rest down the from one end of M Street all the way till you get to Newport uh is that considered the this amendment or this these connections so it it has been um from a from a concept plan standpoint um the location of the alignment will be consistent from where we're proposing it on again District 2 block 11602 lot one um as it makes its way west to the adjacent embankment properties um so from a conceptual standpoint yes in this amendment it's just the ls munus Marin Boulevard Redevelopment plan okay the other embankment blocks West are in a separate Redevelopment plan um so the design and organization is being conducted separately on a separate track but we've coordinated um what we believe is the appropriate alignment um to coord to to um filter in and connect if I can help you if I can help you on that the going uh going east west from Marin after you got between Marin between Marin and Manila that is the Marin uh Luis Mino Marin uh Redevelopment plan when you go further west you already passed a six Street Redevelopment plan that makes that Parkland yeah well I'm just the reason why I'm picking it up is because the I mean this has been coming to the board for so many years now and um it'll give to my next question then we talk about pedestrians going you looking at a highrise maybe if it does go through right um but nobody I I'm not hearing anything about Vehicles you know and I know in what I saw in the plan and what was submitted the parking and everything was discussed so I don't want to get into detail of that but it's just confusing that we just but I understand you're doing the Redevelopment plan that's but it does connect but um just to move on real quickly the one other question I have as you could consider um you spoke about affordable housing um in that area a highrise with a hotel um I would hope that the discussion will become more of affordable lowincome housing for that development you know um you know one thing is affordable housing but affordable housing in that neighborhood might not be affordable to a lot of other people so if that's just something that could be reconsidered inside that plan uh and and or brought up a discussion so there's two parts um to that last comment question um one with respect to the affordable housing um we did specifically write in the references to the city's uh inclusionary zoning ordinance so um that is something that we fully planned on complying with and that's coordination with the affordable housing uh liaison and and and their office so um we do aim to to meet whatever requirements are therein um the other and I could have mentioned this earlier but um in terms of vehicular parking um this was an exhibit we prepared um up on the screen it's in the uh Amendment um there is a certain amount of parking being proposed to facilitate the increase in in units um it's going to be incorporated within the embankment in terms of a tiered uh parking base uh but here it shows the elevated embankment right of way uh no no vehicles are allowed access on the elevated um RightWay just to be be clear um so the the entr the access to the parking um base will be at grade um and not not not anywhere near uh anywhere through the embankment right away 260 units I mean parking spaces according to the plan um so and and I think that's what's prescribed um but that could fluctuate I I think were they they were Concepts but um a certain amount I think we were we were at a a 0.25 ratio and that's appropriate for for this this Redevelopment area any other Commissioners any questions no thank you guys thank you thank you Mr height thank you very much I think at this time I'll open it up to the public if there's anyone from the public please comment up sure ttim tonight be the truth truth and truth I do address pleas sure Steven gardo s t p h n gu c c a r d o 302 Pavonia Avenue Jersey City Mr guo you have three minutes yes I'll just read a brief statement into the record perfect thank you um my name is Steven gardo I'm president of the um the harsi Cove embankment preservation Coalition uh the embankment preservation Coalition supports the passage of these amendments to the Lewis mano's Marin Redevelopment plan as a means to reaching a settlement concerning blocks 1 through eight of the harith's branch rail line as the zoning amendments outline the development of block one of the embankment from Marin Boulevard to Manila Avenue can only take place when conveyance of the remaining embankment parcels blocks 2 through six and portions of blocks 7 and 8 are conveyed to the city we are hoping to have a signed settlement in place by the end of this summer The Amendments outline public benefits on block one which include a 30-foot public RightWay for the entire length of the block a grand staircase and public elevator providing direct access to the right of way two restrooms and support stanions for future Bridges across Marin and Manila the Amendments also outline strict historic preservation guidelines designed to preserve the Western embankment wall on block one and two adjacent walls running East together with the Sixth Street embankment I'm sorry together with the six Street embankment Redevelopment plan already passed by Council these plans will mitigate adverse effects to Historic resources preserving intact most of the embankment for the historically compatible purposes of Open Space Trail and possible future light rail these amendments to block one represent what we hope is a successful compromise that will avoid years more of litigation what we need now is for the llc's the sellers to agree to reasonable terms that guarantee the conveyance of the remaining embankment Parcels to the city the Coalition appreciates having a seat at the table and we will continue to work with the parties so that these zoning guidelines result in the creation of a project we can all be proud of we want to thank councilman Solomon the planning department the legal department and the albanes organization for their work in bringing this solution forward thank you for the time thank you Mr gardo anyone else from the public see no one else from the public wishing to speak I move to close the public SE session okay public is closed who has this that would be me chair thank you Matt go ahead uh uh thank you uh Commissioners um thank you presenters tonight uh on this matter and and public comments from Mr gucciardo uh I am sharing my screen uh this shows a uh a memo from Margaret O'Neal principal historic preservation specialist uh stating that this uh these amend this amendment went to the HPC the historic preservation Commission on May 13 2024 and it it uh passed with a vote of 5-0 and they saw uh no objections uh to the changes proposed for this Redevelopment plan um on a technical note all these materials were posted to the the data portal um uh but within 10 days of the meeting we posted a a document that included some flooor amendments um that is document is dated 517 2024 uh it was posted to the data portal but I also would like to mark it here tonight um the the version that was posted the portal only has 22 pages but uh there are three maps that aren't being changed um in the scope of these proposed amendments so the document that I would like to Mark is actually uh includes those Maps as well as the the floor amendments okay so man just for clarity the May 17th document doesn't seem to have the documents but the May 13th one does the images that Mr height presented the uh the height the the images that Mr Hy presented were just added tonight um and yeah and are not part of they're just for background information um they they're not they're not proposed to be incorporated into the document uh but there are some floor amendments that are um most of them are uh some grammatical pickups typos uh there was uh one change to a setback from the West property line um that was uh a a good pickup to do based on some other changes that were uh in leadup to the Amendments being proposed here tonight um and if you want me to scroll through them I can but this is the document that uh City Planning wishes to put forth to the to the board uh for a recommendation to city council thanks M the as well posted on the portal is the master plan consistency report in in addition to the testimony you heard here tonight uh if there are any questions I can answer those otherwise staff recommend approval thank you Matt did we mark one question go ahead commissioner so uh to Mr Gucci ao's um Testament uh he what I understand is saying that um if approved that um the owners would have to um turn over the remaining blocks to the city before uh the plan would kick in yeah so there's this uh paragraph and and maybe uh Mr Paulino would want to answer that question but there is a paragraph that I would direct the the Commissioners to on page six of uh of of the Redevelopment plan amendments here um i' I've brought it up on my screen um and this this says uh pursuant to the settlement agreement that those Those portions of of the embankment would be conveyed to the city uh but Mr Pao I see you up at the mic yes commissioner um as part of the amendments there is what's called a note and that note says if I could summarize it is basically U that the the the zoning requirements or permitted under this Redevelopment plan don't kick in don't Ki k kick in unless there is a settlement agreement signed and property is transferred and conveyed uh specifically uh blocks two through eight seven and eight need some need some work but two two through eight so if there is no uh settlement agreement and we sincerely hope that there will be and we working every day to make that work and we're we think we're really close um the provisions of this plan default to the R4 Zone it just says you don't have a plan R4 is what kicks in okay I hope that answers your question it teaches me that I should read read notes it's in there should have learned that in school it is in there anyone else oh okay I'll entertain a motion then okay I'd like to make a motion to approve case number p224 d63 I second okay on a motion to sorry on a motion to approve for recommendation to city council uh acting Vice chair Council and prinari it's nice to see this continue to move I know many people in this room have been working on this for a very long time um I am pleased with some of the public benefits including the affordable housing and um I wish you continued luck with moving this forward I vote I commissioner tomato I vote definitely I commissioner lipsky yeah two decades in a generation is a long time so U and with Maggie O'Neal's blessing and uh the conditions stated by Mr gucciardo being built into the note I vote I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I commissioner Torres yes um thanks for the work that you guys are put in every day on us um and it's been years and years that this uh embankment um well my whole childhood that embankments been like that because I I grew up in that neighborhood so you know um and I can tell you some of the people that vote who vote on those embankments some of the artwork that was there up but um what I do what I am impressed about though is your work to the community and keep that up because when I first got on this board when we talked about the embankment there was a lot of speakers is online ready to press their opinion because there wasn't Community meetings where people didn't know what was going on today we just have one representative of a community group which shows to me being on his board for the years I've been on that's what happens when you work with the community you get an agreement you get a plan and you get something that will make us achieve a goal that's good for the whole Jersey City not just for somebody that wants to build a high RS you know and I like that and I you commandes on that one and uh with that I vote I acting chair Dr Gonzalez yeah as commissioner Torres said we're the the the oldest not the oldest members but the oldest serving longest yeah planning board members here we've seen this come up I think it's time to get it done I love the connectivity Mobility social Equity landu de uh development and improving the open space elements idea I've you know we we need to get this is done so good luck and I vot I thank you motion carries all in favor uh dror uh acting chair uh one more thing if I could uh I've submitted we we're trying uh to get this on for the municipal council meeting of June 12th I've submitted a proposed resolution uh which I think was on the portal and was Pro provided to Matt I think um so if you could execute that rather than at the next meeting this meeting so that we can appropriately get it to the municip Council I think we can do that thank you thank you very much okay uh going to call the next case up Matt we're good we're good all right next case is uh can we call our Council or he comes we haven't forgotten about it all right our next case is uh number 11 on our agenda the Redevelopment study a preliminary investigative investigation report on the proposed designation of 10 Lots containing vacant buildings as an area in need of Redevelopment uh this was petitioned by the Jersey City Redevelopment agency um staff has with them a notice package that was not provided on the data portal um for submission they're on there like is it supposed to come up all right chairman we're going to Mark the notice package as A1 for purposes of the record again this is a uh Redevelopment study so this is the preliminary investigation thank you Council yes any testimon you tonight going to be the truth the whole truth yes I do yes it's Caroline Ryder my last name is spelled re i t like and Thomas E R you're welcome good evening uh Mr chairman Commissioners my name is Caroline Ryder I'm with the consulting firm of T andm Associates we have been tasked with preparation of a Redevelopment study in preliminary investig ation report for what we're calling scattered sites in the city um it is 10 different sites that are not contiguous we did prepare a report initially dated December 8th it was amended uh excuse me revised April 26 hopefully everyone has received it thank you chairman um and I have a presentation a brief presentation I would just like to uh to give and provide a little testimony please go ahead do you want me to go into my background or anything or or no not necessary so chair chairman members of the board I am very familiar with the witness she is a professional planner she's been retained uh from tnm but if the board so desires we can have her place those on the record but I would move to accept her as an expert as a professional planner and just if you could give us the license number so we have it for the record and then we'll mark the study as A2 sure my license number is 5343 and I'm the Planning Group manager at tnm Associates I've been a licensed planner uh for more than 25 years I've been with tnm for 18 months this board accepts you as an expert thank you very much all right we'll start so the purpose of this study and what we're all here to talk about tonight is to determine if the study area or portions thereof meet What's called the statutory criteria for designation as an area in need of Redevelopment and this process started by a city council resolution number 23586 the resolution does uh specify the study area it delineates block and lots and it indicates that it may be subject to condemnation our study uh report was prepared in accordance with the local Redevelopment and Housing law quickly going through the overview 10 10 properties they are not contiguous there's no common ownership um a variety of uses uh assess uses excuse me and sizes um some of the sites are uh uh the buildings are vacant some are actively undergoing um construction as we're going to discuss later this is a listing of the 10 sites um I'm happy to go through each one or it's it is in Europe report here's a mapping of the sites there's a mapping showing flood Hazard so to really get into so to speak the meat and potatoes uh the uh law provides eight criteria for redevelopment designation they're labeled or lettered a through H and at least one Criterion must be satisfied for the Redevelopment designation and again this board's role is to make a recommendation to the to the Council of whether or not the study or portions thereof uh in your opinion qualify or meet the Criterion as an area in need of Redevelopment our analysis indicates that up to four Criterion are met or satisfied A D like and dog G and H and I'm going to go through those now the a Criterion has to is the generality of buildings where it's substandard unsafe unsanitary dilapidated obsolescent possess any such characteristics are so lacking in light air space to be conducive to UNH wholesome living or working conditions so these are the properties within the study area that in our opinion satisfy the a Criterion and I'm going to go through them the first one is 4155 monus Street this site was uh gutted um without exterior walls um potential damage potential evidence of water damage and rot 2747 Street as you can see the windows are boarded up um there was also I think one window that was missing a board damage to frames 217 pavon I Avenue um this uh has weathering step cracking uh boarded up Windows um it does appear that there's interior Demolition and renovation going on 4th Street excuse me 375 4th Street missing side facade surface um compromise protection from the elements uh you can see some buckling step cracking Etc 392 First Street this property was boarded up with facade damage um and some wiring issues as well 54 Wayne Street the property you can see the windows are boarded um and there is a need of a maintenance 155 Morgan this is also boarded up so that was the a Criterion that has to do with buildings the next one is the D like in dog Criterion um that is the areas with buildings or improvements which by reason of dilapidation obsolescence overcrowding faulty Arrangement or design lack of ventilation light and sanitary facilities excessive land coverage deleterious land use or obsolete layout or any combination of these or other factors are detrimental to the safety Health morals or welfare of the community these are the properties that we uh indicate as meeting the D Criterion and we've we did go over some of these earlier 415.16106210 in rubble um wires on the side of the building 3754 um the grounds in need of significant maintenance um there's cracking um some uneven areas as well 54 Wayne Street uneven and deteriorated concrete pavs um concrete pilings with that are protuding you can see that to the right there's something right there sticking out that's the D Criterion the G Criterion has to do with the Urban Enterprise Zone act there are two properties that qualify for that 45.5 Monmouth and55 Morgan the H Criterion the H Criterion has to do with the designation is consistent with smart growth planning principles adopted pursuant to law or regulation and then so in this situation it would be Redevelopment could provide an opportunity to implement smar growth um such as revitalizing an urban center facilitating development in a manner that's consistent with the state plan encouraging development Redevelopment and economic growth in areas with infrastructure development of a local plan provision preventing uh sprawl um increased uh social and Economic Opportunity the entire study area we note is within planning area one of the state plan it's a designated Center and a mapped smart growth area it's therefore our opinion that the entire study area meets Criterion H so this um this slide is a little checklist of which sites meet which Criterion so as a reminder all the properties meet Criterion H the smart growth Criterion um there are three properties that only meet Criterion H the rest of them meet a or D or G or a combination of a or D or G and again they all in our opinion meet Criterion AG so it is our conclusion and our opinion that uh the planning board can recommend uh to the council that um the entire study area is an area in need of Redevelopment due to um the Criterion criteria or Criterion being met um with and just a reminder again at the end that this is a study area that may be subject to condemnation and that comes from the city council resolution that started this whole process thank you so that's that's an overview of our study with the PowerPoint some pictures um there any questions yeah I have a question uh I have a question who who checked these houses and is there a owner or is there is no owner of these buildings uh I believe the ownership is in here when you say who checked the houses who check the Criterion so we we did my staff and I so just so to a little bit of background that's a great question thank you um originally exterior site um inspections were performed in October I did that with a member of my staff um we submitted the report in early December um originally scheduled for a February hearing date that got moved to March and then unfortunately the day of that hearing the meeting was cancelled I did have a staff member go out right before that hearing see that there have been a couple of changes with some of the sites so therefore we prepared as a result our amended report which is what everyone has before you dated April 26 so either my staff or I viewed the exterior of the buildings I want to be clear about oh about that um but you asked about the ownership I think I have that in here and um Comm one again I'd just like to clarify that um staff would like to clarify that all property owners were notified pursuant to the New Jersey Redevelopment and Housing law so um Property Owners as registered with the city's assessor were sent certified mail letters um informing them this hearing and this potential designation thank you so the ownership of the properties is on page three did you want me to read them publicly no I don't think that necessary we have obviously the certified list and so the way this works uh Dr Desai is you'll recall from from some of the prior study areas that we've done anybody's property that's in this study area gets the certified letter that their property is being studied obviously has just been testified to tmm's work has been over the course of many many months dating back to the fall and probably earlier than the fall as far as the field work going out trying to contact the property owners trying to gain access to the interior of the structures as we can see in the study itself from the photographs some of the of these buildings are boarded up some of these buildings are not habitable and and who knows when they were last uh lived in or had habitants so uh that was from October and as the witness testified they were out there last month making sure that the conditions haven't changed from what their findings were over the prior months and I think some of the sites maybe have have changed slightly which is noted in the in the report that's correct Mr alamp um in March when we were supposed to have the public hearing because because it was March and the original inspections were done in October I was a little concerned about the length of time and an effort to be cautious I sent a staff member out the day before what would have been the public hearing and there were some differences and I was prepared to testify to that but then your March meeting was canceled so we as I indicated prepared an amended report based on the March site visits I also will mention I sent that same staff person out yesterday and to in just to make sure that there weren't further changes since it had already been two months and um the changes that were out there were very minor I think one property had a grill in the front yard one property um uh there's one one s side very minor nothing that would change our opinion with respect to Criterion so yeah these properties are the awful condition you know how much how many years it took to be in this shape and everything you know we should have started this earlier actually well I can't speak to that um but your city council did start the process with adopting the resolution and directing the study and and um and we've been working with jcra on this so I think that the process is certainly well underway but that's a great point Thank you m Ryder anyone else commissioner Torres um just the fact that we're using the uh phase com donation on these properties um to get to that point um something I'm not comfortable with at all in any sense but um um and seeing the pictures of somebody these properties yes they you know uh um one of them I'm pretty sure came to this board a couple of years ago when they did the development in front of that property and um Mom Street uh so it wasn't too long ago that somebody was actually developing that property you so my question then is you mentioned that some property had looked like they were doing demo there was some construction going on and if that is the case that there is some type of ownership to that property where somebody still owns it might have some hardship that they're not doing the development um I understand the criteria of not being safe and looking like it's going to be you know a ha it to someone um in this process do these um my question is does um by moving forward with something like this do these people maybe inhabited the property or whatever it is do they lose the property or do they do we how's that work um so commer I don't know I'll just confuse on that part all right so I think that that is a question that is best fielded by myself it is potentially possible that the ownership group would lose the property through the condemnation process when that happens if that happens way in the future so I understand obviously the board's concern with the concept of condemnation we've had that discussion before you've heard me explain that unfortunately the way the statute was changed over the years you have to determine before you even start the process if condemnation is even possible so if you don't do it at the beginning and you move forward like we do throughout the city without condemnation power you got to start all over again in the future to obtain that power that's how the statute is written so now on sites such as these which we call scatter sites because they're not an assemblage these are one-off pieces that for whatever reason have fallen into the state that they are in and unfortunately while the city sits and waits and waits and waits they're just not being maintained developed and they're un safe so we get to the point where now the city after trying to be as patient as possible has decided to start the process but as we all know we're at the very very beginning of a very long process and that's without getting into the condemnation process which then extends this even longer and I can tell you all the condemnation matters that I've seen involved in read about fair market value gets paid for those so there's no taking without actual monetary compensation to anybody but the reality is and the question is do they meet the criteria to be designated so that the city continue with the necessary tools to incentivize these properties to become uh back online and productive proper properties so uh you have the expert telling you that they meet the criteria under the statute from their report and study and the work that they have put in we will hear from planning staff I'm sure is to their position on the matter but I hope that answers the question thank you Council thank you Council anyone else yeah so in the report you name or the report names three properties falling exclusively under category H um in Mr D Silver's report it says four you added on the Wayne Street right um so I can clarify there and you know I'm happy um after public hearing to discuss my staff report in more detail but to quickly answer your question commissioner lipsky there are three CR Parcels that only meet criteria H um which my report is recommending be excluded from the designation there is a fourth parcel which meets other um meets other criteria based on its current condition but um we based on records with the division of construction code we have evidence that Redevelopment of that property is imminent so there are three so there are four properties in total that staff will be recommending not be included in the designation three for only meeting criteria h and a fourth for having an imminent um Redevelopment opportunity becoming uh reality y okay anyone else sorry anyone else okay I'm going to open up to a public now is anyone here from the public that W wishes to speak on this seeing no members of the public I'd like to make oh Chuck go ahead Mr Harington how are you sir he's from the public this time he's a publican good evening director Charles Harrington the owner of of the proper 391 there you go um there you go uh the owner of the property at 391 First Street block uh 12603 lot 8.01 um so I'm here on behalf of of my client uh and I just asked just putting it on the record I I seen the uh planner staff report they recommend that this property be excluded uh from from this uh plan um and uh the reason uh being is that this property is actually under construction now um I think it's a few months away from completing the project that was approved by the zoning board a few years back uh and I've had Communications uh uh with Matt about this and provided pictures I believe that he he went out to the property and and inspected it as well so um just again for for the record this this is currently under construction and being r redeveloped as we speak okay thank you Council Mr dilva you're okay with that um yes and um I can vouch for the veracity of Mr Harrington's statement with regards to our discussions and my visit very well all right anybody else from the public now seeing no members of the public I'd like to make a motion to close public hearing second okay motion made and second it Mr D Silva um certainly thank you acting chair um so on your screens right now um you should see my staff report um dated 514 2024 and um I just staff would like to emphasize first of all that um while meeting criteria um makes a project eligible to be designated it does not compel the project to be designated and um the planning board does have discretion to recommend the city council um all none or some of the properties be designated as an area in need of Redevelopment um so um upon reviewing um um upon reviewing um the planner's report and visiting the sites myself as well as discussions with property owners and their representatives and um um staff is recommending that four different properties be excluded from the designation tonight as an area in need of Redevelopment um and the reasons are as this so three of the properties as the report stated only meet criteria H um criteria H which is the Smart growth related Criterion technically applies to every single piece of land in the city um based on designations in the new Jersey state plan and Jersey City status status as an urban center um therefore it is generally the practice of the division of city planning to not designate properties that only meet criteria H because there's nothing really distinguishing them from their sound surroundings that would suggest they are an area in need of Redevelopment um furthermore there is a fourth property um so those three properties only meting criteria H are um block 11008 Lot 23 for 42nd Street block 11301 Lot 2 to 33 Street and block 12603 lot 8.01 3911 Street which um Mr Harrington represents the owner of um a fourth parcel block 1291 lot 22 at 54 Wayne Street it meets the A and D criteria in addition to the H criteria however um in discussions with um the the attorney for the project reached out to staff and expressed that their client was about to um engage in um renovation of the property and returning it to a um attractive andh habitable status um and indeed on April 11th um the property in question filed for a construction permit um numbered cnst 24336 and available on Jersey City's public Tyler portal um for the renovation of this property therefore um you know the intent of the scatter site Redevelopment area is for um Parcels that have maybe fallen into disrepair or a structure had to be demolished because it was structurally unsound or for whatever reason there is a vacant or underutilized site um nestled within an otherwise intact neighborhood it gives the opportunity to um fill in that hole metaphorically speaking and rebuild buildings of similar use size and density to the historical uses on that parcel on the property we see this happening via renovation we see this happening via new construction in some cases as Mr Harrington mentioned regard regards of 391 First Street um and so therefore properties that are being sort of returned to this status and that hole in the neighborhood fabric being filled in staff's opinion um aren't really warranted for designation and inclusion into this into a potential um Redevelopment plan or other scheme to um condemn these properties and redevelop them so uh followup to that is um so if an attorney contacts your office and obviously uh represents and is proven that permits have been drawn for uh code construction officials and um historic uh designation then that parcel would be considered uh or in consideration to be removed from the uh plot um not necessarily just because the owner contacted me um several of these um in fact the only properties that contacted me were 391 1 Street and 54 way street the other two projects um we did not have any communication but in reviewing the field conditions we saw how the conditions changed and how they no longer qualified for the other criteria um and so there's objective basically objective criteria here that either only Criterion H is being fulfilled or there is evidence that it um imminently all the criteria other than H will be ameliorated on the partic particular site so once this um renovation of 54 way street is complete it will no longer meet Criterion criteria a or D and it will only meet criteria AG just like the other three properties mentioned and right and so I get the uh Equity of the application for the use of Criterion H uh but I think I heard you say that the other six parcel owners didn't reach out in any capacity to amarate uh those other criteria uh correct so we per the Redevelopment land use and housing law all property owners were notified via certified and and regular mail of this potential condemnation and of those 10 properties only two reached out to us to discuss the situation thanks okay thank you I understand Mo I'd like to make a motion to approve item number 11 the Redevelopment study and preliminary investigation report with the exclusion of 391 1 Street which is block 1263 can I have a second please second well wait I mean but are we also I mean but that's already built into staff's report so do we need to name the other three Parcels or just Vote or just saying incorporate the staff memo in Bon well let's ask the commissioner that made the motion only with respect to amending it to in remove 391 from the designation so the men the motion as made is to just remove 391 and to move forward with the other three included as meeting criteria H based on the TMM Report with the understanding of staff position regarding those three properties meeting and the discretion of the board whether to include or not to include for the council to then uh move forward with their work the only thing is is that's not particularly accurate in the sense that one the motion no I get that but you but your explanation after about the uh other properties that are being excluded for Criterion H when 54 Wayne block 1290 one uh uh BL 22 has ad& which would will be removed as per the application to code construction and uh historic board so it doesn't just de facto U go to the age but you're you're saying is for the council woman's motion that's okay but for the other the only things I'm saying is the the third property I was clarifying the motion made but then you added commentary that didn't uh wasn't what staff memo uh represents staff's memo is what staff's memo is the comments are what the comments are the motion is what was made and your question originally was whether or not it was to exclude those three properties I was giving the council woman the opportunity to clarify what her motion was if it was unclear I thought it was very clear that it was only to include or only to exclude property 391 First Street correct and so my question to you then council is is that for efficiencies uh the other three properties that are mentioned in staff's report do we then have to after voting on the motion as presented by councilwoman uh uh prer uh would we have to make another motion to uh exclude those other three properties or could we just vote in all four in Bonk so the motion does not include those other three I completely get that if you if and I believe commissioner green seconded that motion but we'll get to that in a second if we have a second on the motion then we're going to take the roll call and you can either vote Yes or no to move the motion once the motion is on the floor for vote so commissioner green did you want to second that motion that you originally seconded I will second it okay so now commissioner lipsky if you don't agree with moving that motion which will exclude those three property or include those three and only exclude 391 First Street then you would vote accordingly I don't believe the motion is going to be changed so we need a roll call Vice chair councilwoman Prince r i commissioner Stato I commissioner lepsky so I don't think it's going to be mutually exclusive so voting on this I is fine but then after which would it be appropriate to make another motion to exclude the other three properties it would not be appropriate so but then here's my last question before I vote to you then so right now B no I I understand the notion of the motion I know clearly what councilwoman prer has made the motion what Miss green has seconded all I'm saying is then what happens to the other three properties that are in your report that you're saying that should be removed so per the terms of um Council Prince ra motion those properties are being included so if this motion passes those property will be included in the recommendation to city council well four oh no the three that exclusion of 391 the three that were not ex the nine properties besides 391 First Street if a commissioner feels that other properties should be should also be excluded um that intent could be expressed with a nay vote on this measure well I support uh our good Council woman I don't think it's exclusive but I vote I um commissioner Dr Desai I vote I commissioner green I uh commissioner Torres i v i and acting chair dror Gonzalez I vot I motion carries for the nine prop to recommend to city council that the nine properties besides 391 First Street be designated as an area in need of Redevelopment thank you Mike how you doing take a break yeah let's take a break yeah okay guys we're going to take a 10-minute break before we do that though I just want to let you know that case 12 uh on your agenda case P 23-32 that's his address has been um carried with preservation of notice to the June 11th uh meeting so if you're here for that we will not be hearing that today I just want to let you know okay so we'll take a 10-minute break now we'll be back at uh 7:13 you can't trust anybody the woman tell you that right now just wanted to to inform the public of a little uh change in the agenda we're going to be moving a case p14 and 15 on your agenda up uh before we hear uh case p uh 23- 076 that's case p13 so the next case up is number 14 on your agenda and that is case p2023 D105 this is for a minor site plan address at 511 house sayate a and I think I have uh Mr lean uh good evening commissioner it's for the record Tom lean from Connell Foley uh this is a minor site plan application uh we did notice uh even though we do not have any deviations thank you Council thank you Mr lean chairman I am and receive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application 511 Palisades Avenue this matter was originally scheduled for a prior meeting at which time I had the opportunity to review the electronic version it did appear to be in order we're going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record thank you Council uh thank you uh the application before you tonight is for a proposed four-story 4unit building it's located at 511 Palisade Avenue uh this was formerly the site of the Oasis Lounge it was a three-story uh building with a retail use on the ground floor uh we're changing that out and we're proposing four floors of residential uses one uh unit on each floor uh we are not asking for any uh deviations or variances uh the zoning here was recently changed to the rc2 and uh the building fully complies I only have one witness uh of art uh who is our architect so I will have him come up and quickly run you through the floor plans thank you the whole yes I do avar Patel a a v a r t p a t l Mr btel we've qualified you in the past uh yes yes and is your license current and yes it is okay you're you're qualified thank you uh Mr Patel uh you have provided uh architectural site pens to this the board would you mind running them through them running the board through the uh the plans and just showing that we are in compliance with uh the uh the zoning requirements yep absolutely um the current site is located 511 Palisades between um B Street and South Street along Palisades um it's uh um let me just go to the site plan there's a 25 by H lot um and uh there are buildings on both sides on the property line um what we are proposing is a is a four-story tall building uh each you know one residential unit on each level and uh uh overall the building is is uh in conformance with the with the current zoning um there are four units uh uh they're ranging from about 1230 ft to 1300 sare ft each um and uh uh the unit mixes you know some of them are two-bedroom two bath and they uh and then three-bedroom um 2 and a half bath um okay I'm going to quickly move through the proposed and uh existing in propos site plan this is the the existing site survey next slide is uh um the uh the proposed building on the on the site uh as you can see uh sorry just second the the proposed building is going to go about uh um 80 70 uh feet from uh front to back with a with a little um backyard or open space in the back um and the first floor is going to go about much's this set back uh first floor is uh has a 15t setback and then the upper floors are are set back more uh 30 ft uh in total 15t from the first level and and the building steps up uh going to quickly move through the the proposed uh building plant um the floor plan in the middle uh of the page is the the first floor um we have the the building entrance um with a with a Lobby uh and and a corridor leading to the um the elevator and then the uh staircase uh uh would be right U accessible from the lobby as well as you know it will open to the outside as required for building code um the unit at this level has uh um uh two bedrooms and a a small office uh D top of Space um entry in the the middle by the elevator Lobby uh kitchen uh and the living area um master bedroom towards the back of the building with a window and and a and a door opening to the backyard um accessible bathroom the first level is going to be uh I mean all all the all the units are are proposed as a adaptable unit uh since the building is serviced by the elevator um um as you can see that there's a window well proposed because of the uh the adjacent building has Windows and and we also need to provide uh um light and ventilation for um the office and some of the other areas so that's why this building has a notch and Sir that Notch is the only location where either building on either side has Windows exposed to your building uh correct I mean the this is because you know we have uh some of the bedrooms uh I'll I'll uh go through that on the second floor as well and uh we have an interior bedroom which would require a window and uh that's the other reason where we have the um the window well we're not covering up any windows on neighboring buildings which was the question no chairman I don't know that we got to go floor by floor obviously if the board wants to we can but I think it fully complies Mr lean it's a minor site plan is there reason why we need minor sight plan you want to tell us the the only reason is because it does not go above 10,000 square feet it's between five and and 10 it's over 5,000 it triggers the minor site plan that is correct under the local ordinance and that is correct under the local ordinance yes yeah so other than that I would say if you want to just quickly show the facade which we've worked with Mr Beasley on on and I think that'll conclude our presentation okay good thank you Mr btel um so the posst is uh mix of masonary material and uh some woodl elements uh masonry along the the first floor um and the horizontal wood look element you see is the the composite uh uh wood which is you know just accentuate the entry and then um the vertical element with the consist the wind Windows would be uh wrapped in the same material um there are sliding folding doors proposed with a with a Juliet type balcony so um that would be you know that that element around that those those windows is a uh fiber cement Hardy type panel and uh um just the at the roof level we are proposing a glass rail just to kind of create a little more transparency and uh um from from the roof deck looking towards the front of the building so I can tell you that commissioner Torres wants to make sure that there is nothing that can fall below that Rail and that we're going to make sure that we protect the bottom of that rail so that nothing Falls beneath it Council we don't have a problem with that condition right we do not have a problem with that condition it would be fully OSHA compliant we go a little further okay oh he is really further that's that's that's the issue though fully complied with the code allows you a 4in space in between the railing and the deck uh not by the oosha standards it's one inch okay not by the OSHA I hope you do it by the OSHA standards that because you see this we see this all the time my concern is right now the entrance of that doorway and the railing are just above each other so fall somebody knocks something by accident and it's it's just a matter of you know yeah one in a million chance that something can happen and we don't want to see that in the paper or in our city you know yep um and uh that's why I bring this up thank you commissioner thank you is that the end of the presentation Mr lean unless there are questions from the board we have no other testimony thank you Mr lean I do have another question one more question for you the light um on the side of the building where you put the light open the open yeah is that the same on the first floor too um no it's just it starts on what floor I think it is it starts at the first floor and then goes it does start at the first floor so let's say 10 years from now if somebody needed to clean in there through a window they can get access to to that space and clean it it won't be just become a big garbage K cor right cool all right thank you any other questions okay thank you you I'm I'm going to open it up for the public anyone here from the public that wants to speak on this application seeing no for the public I'd like to make a motion to close public comment second it okay public is now closed and we have Mr Eric Beasley correct yes um as the applicant stated the project is as of right uh staff also found that to be the case that it's an as of right project and it fits into the community um in terms of the character um of the of the building um and that being said uh staff recommends approval with uh the conditions um yes I'm in receipt of the planner's uh report and we agree to all conditions there yes yeah thank you Mr breasley yeah I'll entertain a motion okay I'd like to make a motion to approve um case number make sure I get this right p2023 d01 05 second it can motion made and second it roll call acting Vice chair councilwoman Prince r i commissioner Stato I commissioner lipsky I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I commissioner Torres um I just another quick comment before I cast my vote on this uh project is um You're Building property to property so that means you have two neighbors to to the developer and to your construction um contractors you know let's be virgent that their Foundation their houses not be disturbed um we've seen very good contractors in Jersey City where um mishaps happen you know buildings get shifted so with that and um I hope they talk to the neighbors too make them feel comfortable that something be built alongside their property is up against their property it's always kind of nerve-wracking and with that um very nice project and I vote I thank you thank you acting chair Dr Gonzalez nice project i v i motion carries all in favor thank you all right next case thank you very much next case is case P5 on your agenda remember we're moving up uh this is case p2023 0080 this is for a minor site plan with C variances address is 47 Ben rip and AV still on my spot just for a minute oh perfect yeah yes good evening acting chair Commissioners Benjamin we of prime and tuel on behalf of the applicant 47 van ripen AV LLC um I will try to be quicker than Mr lean but uh no promises as I have two witnesses this evening as we do have a couple of variances uh just for the record the property in question is located at 47 van Ren Avenue that's block 7905 lot 14 we are in Zone 4 of The Journal Square 2060 Redevelopment plan and we're here this evening seeking to construct a new four-story mixed use building consisting of four dwelling units above ground floor commercial space we are also I should note proposing to eliminate the current condition of front yard parking and a curb cut that uh that exists today um and we will be closing up the curb cut uh to eliminate that and create a parking space back in the street we do have a couple of variances for you this evening one is for the building depth above the ground floor from the right of way where 70 feet is permitted and we're proposing 80 feet which you'll see in detail is because we're being forced to push the building back which is creating that condition we also have a ground floor ceiling height variance which it it might sound funny but the minimum requirement is 12 feet and we're actually proposing 11t so we are a foot shorter on the ground floor in order to comply with the overall Building height requirement and then we have what you typically see in in Journal Square I understand quite quite fre frequently is for the bulk head height um whereby 10 ft is permitted uh and we are proposing 14t 2 in order to accommodate the elevator um going up to the roof decks so you will hear from our team that uh as I said the building depth is uh is itself actually compliant with the 70 ft it's just that it starts 10 ft back um and we do also have a relatively deep lot which will also help accommodate uh the additional uh building depth um I also want to indicate that we did have the opportunity to meet with the Journal Square construction and planning committee earlier this month and uh was generally supportive of our project with a minor request that the grass area that we're proposing in front include more than just grass and specifically include Shrubbery um I believe they requested that that be looked at by City Planning we would of course comply and we are showing it on the plans you'll see this evening but uh to the extent that the board or uh City Planning has any specific requests for plants we're certainly open to that um lastly I do want to indicate that we received Mr Beasley's report um a couple of weeks back and uh we take no exception to the uh proposed conditions should the application be approved this evening so with that um and I suspect Mr lampy probably wants to Mark uh as A1 our notice package and then I can proceed straight with my first witness thank you Council chairman I am reive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 47 van ripen it does appear to be in order we're going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record thank you Council okay so with that uh Mr acting chair my first witness is Jeff Lewis our project architect thank you sir yes I do Jeffrey Lewis J FF re y l e w i s Mr Lewis we've you've been uh qualified before in the past uh yes and my um license is in good standing perfect you're qualified thank you thank you so Jeff just before you get started I understand what you're going to show this evening is a is what was submitted previously with a minor modific to an ESS tunnel so to be safe uh if you can just identify it and I'd like to have it marked as A2 sure if we could Mark these as A2 when we get to the the site plan I'll show you exactly what changed well Markham is A2 do we have a revision date so that we can notate I believe that would be yesterday's date fair enough thank you okay for the record May 20th was yesterday thank you so 47 van Ren Avenue we ready to go yes sir go ahead thank you sorry for jumping on uh so as was mentioned this is an oversized lot we are 25 wide but 125 ft uh excuse me 112.5 ft deep um the existing building is shown on the right here uh it's a residential building as was mentioned with parking in the front uh we're proposing a 4 unit I mean a four-story building with four residential units and a small ground floor residential space um commercial space excuse me thank you uh just to go a little more into the variances uh we are asking for that first floor ceiling height variance where 12 foot was required and 11 foot is proposed if we met the 12T requirement for the ground floor we would go over the overall height requirement so we felt cutting that one foot off and staying under the overall height requirement made sense here um I'd also like to note that the ground floor uses as you'll see when we go there an 11t ceiling is completely appropriate for what we're proposing um second is again for that rooftop structure where we're asking for 14t 2 in tall where 10t is allowed uh this is because our elevator goes to the roof and we need a 5 foot bulkhead on top of that elevator so that requires the extra height uh above uh our bulkhead and the last is for the upper floors extending 80 feet from the front property line where 70 feet is allowed and the thought with this zoning was you'd have a typical 100 foot lot you'd get 70 foot of Upper Floor building a 30 foot reard setback so with this building we still have the 70 foot uh Upper Floor building we still have over 30 ft as the rear yard setback on the upper floors uh however because we have that 10ft front set back we're 80 ft from the street or from the property line okay so with that I'm going to walk through the site plan uh so first we are proposing new concrete curbs and new concrete sidewalks and as we mentioned we are eliminating a curb cut we're also proposing one new Street tray uh the one difference from the drawings proposed was right here where we have an egress Corridor and um a window well along the left side of the building here and we just had to take away a little bit of planting to have a platform so that people can get out of that egress well and to the street Frontage uh on the property the building as I mentioned has a 100 excuse me a 10t uh front yard setback and we're using this for shrubs and for walkways uh we are built to both side property lines with the exception of the window well on the left side um and we have a 10-ft rear yard with a sunken patio here I'm just showing that we have a storm waterer retention system located underneath the building this is the first floor and seller plan I want to start on the first floor um van right is on the left on these drawings so everyone knows um so starting at the top as I mentioned we have an egress Corridor it leads from the front of the building all the way to the rear after that we have a very small commercial space it's 252 ft in total with an ada8 bath we see this as a space that would be good for a single person office or something of that sort at the bottom of the building we have a residential entrance which leads directly to Stair number one and goes to the second floor of the building and then the last door is to our main entrance this leads to our lobby and provides access to the mail our elevator as well as our second stair and the uh ground floor apartment uh this apartment is a two-bedroom 2 and 1 half uh bath duplex apartment has a stair actually going down to The Cellar so it's a duplex between uh the first floor and the Cellar on the ground floor we have a living dining kitchen area two bathrooms and two bedrooms the bedrooms open out to the back where we have have um a small balcony leading to that ESS Corridor if you take the stairs down to The Cellar uh we have a half bath a laundry room mechanical room and then what is storage but would probably be a recreational room which has again sliding doors out to the back which lead to that sunken patio that I mentioned with the floor PL with the site plants the front of the cellar space is common for the building in here we have um excuse me we have our meters we have our sprinkler room as this is a fully sprinkler building we have our trash and recycling room we have a bicycle storage room for six bicycles and then we have three dedicated apartment storage spaces here we're looking at the second and third floor I want to start on the second floor at the bottom so this is a three-bedroom three bath apartment it's 1,312 ft we have the living dining Kitchen in the front in the center we have a laundry room and a bathroom and then in the rear of the apartment we have the three bedrooms two bathrooms and for this apartment we have a 386 ft roof deck which is access from the master suite looking to the third floor above the apartment is exactly the same in layout the only difference is that we don't have that roof Terrace instead we have a balcony off of the master suite here at the bottom is the fourth floor plan and again this is exactly the same as the third floor three-bedroom three bath apartment and then at the top here we have our roof deck our roof deck is accessed by both stairs uh and the elevator the space itself is divided into two uh the front is a 303t roof deck which will be dedicated to apartment number three it's the third floor apartment the rear is a 370t space which will be dedicated to the fourth floor apartment we also have some space for our HVAC equipment um this is our bulkhead above the roof deck uh so you can see this is the uh elevator bulkhead which is what uh we're asking for that height variance for it is fairly far away from the uh Street Frontage we also have a few AC condensers located on this roof here we're looking at the front elevation of the building uh the main finishes are metal panels as well as fiber cement panels so on the upper floors of the building we're using a main finish of gray metal panels and then we have this row at the top of black metal paneling as um an accent uh the second finish would be a fauxwood fiber cement panel shown on the left here we're using that at the ground floor and then we're using that as an accent on each of the upper levels at the window lines um lastly we have black aluminum frames for all of our windows and doors on this elevation here we're looking at the side elevation uh at the base of the building is a smooth stucco finish everything above is vinyl siding uh for most of the building that would be a gray vinyl siding however we are doing white for the stair bulkhead and elevator bulkheads uh and this is the other side which again the same finishes gray vinyl siding and white vinyl siding above and then lastly we're looking at the rear elevation which again uh the same gry vinyl siding finish we also do have some balconies here uh the base of the balcony is finished with a smooth stco finish and we're using black aluminum for our railings and posts and that concludes my presentation unless have any questions just one follow question for um and I think you kind of R through it but each of the own dedicated private outdoor space is that correct that is correct yes okay I just wanted to make sure that was clear so Mr acting chair I have nothing further for this witness thank you Council thank you Mr Lewis any questions for Mr Lewis okay all right so with that my next and Final witness would be Carolyn worstell our project planner good evening good evening just testim ton going to be truth the whole truth nothing the truth I do Carolyn worstell c a r o l y n worstell w r s l l and Mr RTO you've been previously uh approved by our board yes I have will yeah your current is licensed I'm currently licensed this evening it's good to see everyone again great to see you you're qualified thank you very much um so both my colleagues went through uh the variances uh fairly thoroughly um so I'm just going to follow up with the justifications for for them um so I think I'm going to start off with that rear yard um extension uh from the right of way um and as has been discussed uh several times um the standard here is that the setback or the the requirement is that you can go 70 feet from the right of way so that's your front lot line um and the Assumption I think you know when this was set up was that you were looking at a building that doesn't have a you know front yard so you can create building depths of 70 ft and that's fairly typ iCal in Jersey City and it creates that nice 30ft rear yard at the upper level on a typical 100ft lot depth so that's sort of the assumption but in this case we have a little bit of a different situation we have a very deep lot and we're creating a 10-ft front yard setback to match the adjacent building next to us um that creates that nice front yard and and eliminates some of the front yard parking um so in doing so to um still meet that 70t um uh depth for that lot from the lot line would be a bit of a hardship because it would create a much shallower uh building it would create a 10 a 60ft uh depth versus a 70 foot which is really what the intent was for um so I think that um here you know we we've created a building um that still meets the intent we're still creating that 30 foot rear yard setback but we also have a 10ft front yard set back and the building depth at 70 ft is still what the intent um so I think that we're really not going to see any uh substantial impact from from that um and then in terms of the non-residential ground floor floor to ceiling height deviation um has been mentioned um we're proposing ground floor ceiling height of 11t or 12T is what is the minimum um this is a fairly small um commercial space um due in part to the the various um required um entrances for for fire safety we had the the rear yard and the two different stairs so um we're somewhat limited on the square footage but we are going to provide it um and the proposed 11 ft really creates uh an appropriate height for the type of weuse we anticipate being here being a solo um uh office for someone um so we we do believe that that um creates an appropriate uh height for the ground floor um it will be at appropriate height um in comparison to the upper floors and allows the building to stay within that uh maximum height that is permitted by the code and then finally is that rooftop a pertinence height um again that's for the uh 14t 2in elevator bulkhead where the 10ft maximum is permitted um and again this is um um a requirement of the Redevelopment plan um the elevator bulkhead um is necessary to provide um Ada elevator access to that roof area um but it is um the 14t 2 in is is typical and and is found through throughout Jersey City um and the the proposed bulkhead is to be set back in the center of the building where it won't have a substantial impact um it will be set back about 26 feet from the front facade so it really won't have a visual impact with that additional height um so again we we think that that can be granted um I think overall this this project itself um advances the purposes of the municipal land use law um you know guiding uh granting the various uh requested variances will help guide and appropriate use um which is consistent with purpose a um to provide an an appropriate mixed use building um within the Journal Square Redevelopment area um to uh approve this project to promote establish of the appropriate population densities um this is an appropriate so four four family building with uh well-sized units um the three-bedroom units so really creating that that um appropriate population density consistent with purpose e um and it provides a sufficient space in appropriate location um for this such a type of mixed use building consistent with perish so I think it really does advance those Municipal land use uh law and then looking at the negative criteria um I don't see there's any substantial detriment uh to the general welfare by the granting of these um uh variances and deviations um you're getting a a new four-story um for family mixed use building with new ground floor commercial space which is permitted in zone 4 um we're really you know making a lot of improvements here at the front of the building at the um to the public face um you removing that curb cut um we're going to uh eliminate the existing non-conforming front yard parking um so we're going to create a much more pedestrian friendly environment uh with removal of that curb cut um we're softening the streetscape by replacing the concrete with new front yard landscaping and the street tree um and I think you know with the the creation of this new the front yard setback um the 10 ft will match the the building to um adjacent to us it helps again create that um Street wall and create that welcoming um consistent streetcape um which is always one of the the goals of of the Redevelopment plan as well um and then the project really still is maintaining those implied rear yard setbacks um we're still providing that 30 foot rear yard setback that allows for the light and air um and I I don't see any substantial Shadow impacts um resulting from this application due to its orientation um you know the shadow impacts here will mainly fall on the roofs of the adjacent buildings or onto the street itself um and we're also we're we're well within the shadow impacts of the uh the the larger buildings that are over by the Homestead Place um so really there really won't be a substantial impact from the additional Shadows created by this building and then um we're also still providing other our benefits we're provid providing the onsite storm water management a little bit of some green roof um so I think overall there's a lot of benefits that are being provided by this application and really no substantial detriments and then I don't see a substantial impairment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance um it you know promotes the purposes of Zone 4 um provide new housing office space and other uh uses on Parcels with a 10-minute walk of joural square Transportation Center um promoting a a pattern of mixed and multiple use development um with new buildings U that appropriate comine combined residential commercial um uses um and it really helps to ensure that the city has available housing that balance and meets the needs of all current and future residents um and that's consistent with the goals of the Jersey City master plan so I think overall that this uh plan really advances um both the Zone plan and the zoning ordinance as well as the city's master plan um so I think that um the the variances uh being presented this evening are um can meet both positive and negative criteria um so that's uh my direct testimony and if anyone has any questions I'm happy to answer them thank you Caroline I have nothing further on direct for Mr thank you thank you Mr Rell any anyone have any questions no okay Mr wine Mr acting chair that would conclude my uh presentation I would like to request respectfully the right to uh sum up if deem necessary yes sir you do have that right okay I'll call anyone from the audience anyone from the public wanting to speak on this see no one from the public wishing to speak on this item I move to close the public session second okay public is now closed and we have Mr Beasley again right thank you thank you sir similar to um what the the planner here has stated the project is consistent with um with the objectives in the Jersey City land used to land use um Jersey City Land Development ordinance and the objectives within the Redevelopment plan um the staff also stands behind the the variances requested um and with that being stated um staff recommends approval with all condition thank you Eric and to be clear those conditions would be acceptable to us thank you cancel okay okay I'd like to make a motion to approve case number p223 d008 second in it motion made in second acting Vice chair councilwoman Prince ra i commissioner Stato I commissioner lipsky hi commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I commissioner Torres I acting chairman Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you very much everybody have a good evening thank you Mr Wayne okay next case uh we're going to go with case uh number 13 on your agenda that's case p23 d07 six this is for preliminary and final major site plan with C variants address is 829 Bergen a um to the chair I'd have to recuse okay so we have uh for the record uh recusal by councilwoman good Mr Harrington okay uh thank you uh for the record Charles Harrington of Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant uh for tonight's uh uh application uh this is a public notice case so I'd ask that those be reviewed and marked into the record thank you Mr Harrington I we receive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing for the application at 829 Bergen Avenue had the opportunity to review it it does appear to be an order you're going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record okay thank you Sor so um tonight's application uh before you is uh for a new 11 story building um with 77 residential units 20 parking spaces um four of which will be uh affordable units uh that's 5% of the total I note for the record that the affordable units is not a requirement um as part of this presentation that is something that has been added uh on behalf of the applicant as part of the project um the property is located in in uh the central business district those are regulations that that um govern this application for tonight because it was it was uh filed and completed at the time that that zoning was in place I just note that because the zoning has since changed uh I believe it was October of 2023 and now this uh area is is called the NC D3 so that it's very similar zoning but a little different but what controls tonight's application is CBD um as part of this application we are requesting um three variances uh two are related to the existing lot and its condition which is the lot size and the lot width uh there's a minimum lot size of 10,000 square ft and I believe uh 100t in width our our property as you'll see during the presentation is a little uh over 6,000 square ft um and there's nothing we can do to expanded um there's there's a development on on both sides of the property so and and it's the rear of the property is a cemetery so there's no opportunity to to expand it so that would be um we would consider a hardship uh condition uh the last uh variance that we're requesting is is with regard to the front yard setback uh we believe that you'll see as part of the presentation that it's a it's a positive um element um to the project we have uh large sidewalks uh fronting uh this and there's there's some reasoning that we we created the or or requesting the the front yard setback um which uh predominant applies to the to the upper floors as part of the project um I know for the record because you know there's a lot of community uh here tonight uh in the church it's located right next to the Coptic Church uh to the north uh we did uh have uh an initial meeting with members of the Coptic Church uh and then after that we had two Community meetings which were uh very well attended uh what we are presenting tonight uh is a result of us addressing some of those comments uh I think there's obviously some additional comments that the members here uh would like to to uh see change but I know for the record what we did is we we added parking to the project we initially did not have parking um that was a result of the the community uh request uh we provided for the the affordable housing as part of the project uh we reduced the uni account lightly uh and there was a a commercial retail component as part of the original uh plan that has been eliminated so you don't have that that use um uh as part of The Proposal tonight because you'll have the driveway uh that takes up a lot of the first floor uh space um so uh with that said I I have four Witnesses tonight I'm going to start off with my my civil engineer and then our architect and then our our traffic engineer I'd like him just to uh speak to the uh the parking uh condition and and the comments of the uh Jersey City Traffic Engineers and then our last witness will be Carolyn worell um so with that said I'm going to bring up uh Jacob Lukowski truth theu I do your name please yes Jacob Lukowski that's LW K wski yes Mr lowski have you have we uh qualified you in the past youve not okay maybe you can tell us a little bit about your background absolutely I'm a licensed professional civil engineer in the state of New Jersey I have a bachelor's of Science in civil engineering uh from the College of New Jersey got about 10 years experience in the field uh currently employed by Stonefield engineering where I've been for the past 6 years um and I've testified in front of such boards as uh city of Hoboken city of perthamboy burough West Caldwell and your license is current and active yes okay you are uh qualified wonderful okay I'm sorry Mr uh Lukowski uh you prepared or your firm prepared uh engineering civil engineering plans for this project is that correct that is correct okay and if you could give walk through those plans for the benefit of of the board do you have that set up yeah absolutely yeah architect here's got it [Music] okay okay so before we start uh we're going to refer to a slide deck uh that's been prepared by mvmk so I'd ask that they that be marked as exhibit A2 Mr Harrington we need to know how many slides are in the deck if there's a date title on it the usual requirements correct slide deck understood I'm I'm GNA bring up Mr vandermark briefly so that he can advise the board as of as to that information purposes of the record uh Mr vanderark is a recognized expert in architecture obviously he's your expert so we'll assume that was sworn thank you ready little intro to the project we have a very small lot on Bergen Avenue it's around 1/6 of an acre l large uh in a mixed use Corridor between Highland EV and vroom Street uh the s's across the street from the Hudson County Bergen square center the the 8-story highrise just for some visual reference uh the property is currently occupied by a former glass making facility which consists of a three-story brick building with a covered loading dock and a warehouse in the back not really visible from the street our client proposing to demolish these existing structures on the property to construct let just introduce this next slide an 11 story mixed use building with a 77 residential units and underground parking our project architect Anthony will uh get deeper into the specifications of the building itself uh I'm here to walk you through the offsite and storm water management improvements specifically so we'll start with storm water since that's what everyone wants to hear about these days uh as this lot is less than 10,000 much less than 10,000 square ft uh In Site Area we are a minor develop ment according to the Jersey City storm water Control Ordinance uh this triggers a requirement for us to provide 6 gallons of rainfall runoff storage uh per square foot of impervious cover um just a little background here the existing site is entirely impervious the whole thing's covered in roof and our site is is largely the same uh through a 2,300 Square ft Green Roof System we propose on on the roof of the building on two different levels of roofs uh we provide more storage than required you know quick math there6 gallons times the lot area which is about 6800 Square ft if I'm not incorrect uh would require us to provide 4,15 gallons of runoff storage uh via a a green MTD and GDP certified type of Green Mt uh BMP uh through our 2300t green res system we would actually provide 4526 gallons of storage so it's a surplus of 400 gallons over what would be required by the Jersey city ordinance uh Green Roof System in addition to meeting uh the city storm water Control Ordinance requirements has the added positive of reducing the overall Peak rates and runoff volumes leaving our site and entering the public system this is just a natural course of us introducing a more permeable um and rougher surface than the roof you know the roof's smooth runoff just Glides off uh a grassy surface even the sort of like not entirely permal Green Roof System um increasing your time of concentration to the main system just by virtue of it being a rougher surface with a little permeability and uh it it reduces your curve runoff number um also just serves to reduce the overall volume of rainfall runoff generated in any storm event uh entering the public system so onto the streetscape improvements we propose a full Rehabilitation of the ENT ire Frontage of the site um this is inclusive of full height 6-in curb uh repaving of the concrete sidewalk we do propose a uh attractive brick um sort of streetcape that's on the property technically not an offsite Improvement but it's um sort of part of the walkway that leads up to the building underneath the canopy of the upper floors of the building uh there's a little strip of plantings alongside this brick Runway here we propose one street tree in a uh 7x4 tree pit this is uh sort of our good faith effort at complying with the city street tree ordinance you we have a very limited Frontage here it's about 40 feet and uh you know we're sort of conflicted with various utilities out on the sidewalk uh signage hydrants Etc so we were able to fit this one tree pit in there I know there was comments in there in the engineering letter and we can work with um you know the city to uh to sort of address that and find a happy medium if anything more is required therein um to place our street tree pit away from the proposed driveway we do have to relocate the fire hydrant that's out there today we propose a new hookup to the existing public water system uh there's also a sign a No Parking sign being relocated off of the the sidewalk a quick note on utilities the building will receive gas water service electrical and sanitary discharge by the public Mains out on Bergen AV will um will be trenching into the street and uh afterwards per city ordinance will be re milling and overlaying the entirety of the street Frontage plus 20 fet on either side from Curb to curb both sides of Bergen have and unless there's any questions there I believe that's all just just one question um for the record uh Mr Lukowski uh did you have an opportunity to review the the engineering review letter from uh the Jersey City engineering department dated May 3rd yes and do you have any issues with compliance with their comments no no issues that's that's all we have for thank you Mr lowski any questions for Mr lowski anyone nope thank you sir thank you okay so next with next thank [Music] you sorry you any testimony tonight it's going to be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do absolutely that is Anthony C vandemar Jr vandemar vanan and d r m a RK principal of the architectural firm of mvmk Mr vomar before you I'm I'm sorry no go ahead Council um I'll just yeah let be qualified first perfect thank you Mr vanderark you've uh been qualified in the past uh I have yes in front of this board yes you have and your license is current and active uh that is correct chair you are qualified for this project thank you very much and just for a record Mr Mr vandar uh your comments that you made earlier prior to being sworn are still accurate yes they are slide deck Still Remains at 23 slides and they are dated today 5212 24 okay thank you take a thank you all right I do appreciate that um once again thank you board for being here this evening we are here for a29 Bergen uh Avenue uh we proposing a 11 story uh 77 unit project with 20 parking spaces um as previously mentioned by Mr Harrington uh the 11 stories is a permitted height at 110 ft we are compliant with the number of parking spaces required and there is no density requirement here on the property so therefore 77 units is permitted as our civil engineer had previously testified to that the site area is at 6,841 Square ft so it's at 0.157 acre we have a 42 ft of Frontage on Bergen Avenue um on the Northern side which is the bottom side of the yellow highlighted box in front of you here we have a side yard uh distance of 161 ft we have a southern sidey yard at 179 ft and the rear of the property tapers to 39 ft as you can see Bergen Avenue is a uh two-way vehicular uh uh trafficked thoroughfare with uh a a bicycle lane uh opposite us on the Eastern side of the street directly across the street again is the Hudson County Administration Building directly to our South is a tall five-story uh multif family residential building called to Madrid uh directly to our North again we have a toall three-story uh St George and St Cuda Copic church and directly behind us uh as previously stated we have the uh spere Cemetery looking down Bing Avenue now we're standing North looking South uh again the tall 8-story approximately 95 ft Hudson County Administration building on the left side um the red lines uh as you see here in this graphic indicate the property boundaries uh in the foreground of the uh slide that you see here is a three-story uh mixed juice commercial at the bottom followed by the Coptic Church which is set back in off of the street wall uh our adjacent Frontage at 42 ft and again the uh multif family residential building that's adjacent to our property to the South directly in front of the property there's a pre-existing uh curb cut uh that was uh used for the commercial glass company as you can see here to the left side of the property there's a three-story uh mixed juice masonry structure followed by a one-story Warehouse structure the pre-existing situation here on the property is 100% impervious uh with zero storm water detention this property does have a seller uh it has an approximate 8ft seller uh in the front and a 6ot utility seller in the back um the existing Street tree will be replaced at the approximate same location and then the fire hydrant as previously stated is going to be moved to the southern part of the property uh just to the north of the uh five-story multif family building here quickly South looking North uh again multif family building our property boundary the taller three-story Coptic Church uh followed by the zero property line Street wall of those three story uh mixed juice masonry buildings um in the foreground again the bicycle lane uh uh two lanes of north south vehicular traffic with a center uh divider uh as you can see here striped in yellow uh the overall property uh program so of the 77 units uh we are providing here this evening we have 30 Studios 27 one-bedrooms 19 two bedrooms and one three bedroom as part of this application as Mr Harrington had stated we are providing a 5% uh affordable component which is the equivalent of four units we are providing 20 parking spaces which is compliant with the uh CBD zoning uh portion of the ordinance of those 20 cars 15% are going to meet the NJ state standard for uh EV or electrical Vehicles so that's the equivalent of three one will be at the Ada parking space two will be on the mechanical racking system uh that I will be showing you in a couple minutes of the 11 stories we are proposing 110 ft of height um very simple 13 fo4 first floor height followed by 9 f8 uh all the floors all the way up to the 11th floor as part of this application uh we are providing a 550 ft rooftop amenity we're providing 2300 square ft of extensive green roofing system and that's the equivalent of 33% of the entire property area so we have a substantial change here in storm Mor management as part of this application um as previously stated we are proposing uh a 10-ft setback at the first floor we have zero and 5 ft at floors 2 through eight and a fully compliant 15 18t setback uh at the top three floors at 9 10 and 11 the uh the ordinance does permit uh 100% lock coverage however our largest floor plate is at 89.4 which is at the first floor and it gets smaller then as the building goes up again highlight in red this is the existing survey the existing property as you can see 100% impervious uh large portion of the one-story building covers the site and then you have that three-story up front facing Bergen Avenue graphic below is the site impact plan as part of this application as you can see above the amenity and also as part of the large portion of the roof we have a substantial amount of uh extensive green roof taking you to the front of the property even at curbside we are proposing uh obviously all new Curbing and all new sidewalk uh a 5ft 15t and a zert setback depending on what level you're at here as part of the building we are proposing one street tree uh as part of the uh that's compliant with the Jersey City forestry standard and as part of the application we're proposing a 14t wide um curb cut for the vehicular access that was requested uh by their neighborhood before we get to the seller proposed first floor plan as you can see here we have a pre we have a proposed curb cut an approximate location of the pre-existing curb cut we have within our property boundary a underground Transformer Vault uh we anticipate this building to be all electric therefore uh we will need a Transformer Vault um and again subject to approval by PS and however the service appears to be underground uh on all the properties on Bergen Avenue here in the stretch therefore uh we anticipate uh it being permitted very important thing to to note as part of this application is that yes the the front of the building at the residential lobby area which is highlighted in red here that setback is at 10 ft however the garage door for the vehicular uh Ingress and egress because of the taper of the property uh is set back at 16 fo4 which is to the northern side and at 19 ft8 uh which just to the southern side of that driveway apron well why is this significant so it's it's significant because you can fit an actual full car on this apron uh even if it leaves the garage entry point before it hits the sidewalk before it hits the actual Street of Bergen Avenue um I'm not anticipating any queuing on bbing Avenue because a we do have a driveway apron and then we also have a large ramp portion that's within the building volume that's approximately 83 ft long right so you know you know any cars that are leaving the property uh will certainly be able to queue um on the uh ramp that's going to the seller um and anybody coming in actually will just be able to go through the garage opening and again uh take the ramp down to the seller so we don't anticipate uh any queuing both on Bergen Avenue um and also at the driveway footprint and the apron um also as part of this application um you know because of the different requirements uh of the building type we have a fire Command Center we have two centrally located elevators we have two means of vress uh as part of this application we will be fully Cod compliant with all the fire ratings uh that would be need of a construction of this type this building will be non-combustible and fully sprinkled taking you down to the seller plan um again ramp coming down on the north side of the property uh we are proposing uh 48 interior bicycle storage spaces as you can see here as part of the cell we have two Outdoors uh opposite on the uh on The Pedestrian apron on the front sidewalk we have a proposed trash shoot with centrally located trash room one ADA compliance space that will be again uh EV uh suitable and then we have a racking system that has approximately 19 cars um that would be you know uh obviously utilized via key fob where the carousel will spit out the empty base somebody comes down the ramp and they Park in the racking system so again we have a proposal for 20 cars that includes 1da uh Ada parking space uh with a racking system for uh for 19 cars we are proposing a pit underneath this uh the car racking system of 8 ft um the Celler itself is 10 ft in height go going back to the entry points of the property um as previously stated in front of this board we will have a warning indicating light that's building mounted um at the uh garage location that will be at eye level that is a strobe um with a audible uh uh sound device we also put an LED uh lighting strip at the front uh of the property before you hit the sidewalk for pedestrians to be warned if they're looking down at their phone walking through the driveway apron um and not paying attention to any Ingress and egressive vehicles building section here below as you can see we are providing a uh a stack system that Stacks three cars um we have the available ceiling height uh both at the first floor the Cal level and then uh within a pit this is a three-dimensional uh render ing of the curb cut of the uh garage obviously door setback off of the 10-ft setback uh main lobby entry with building letters and an erress door to the left one thing to note is that let me go back to the site plan for a second something I failed to mention is that the adjacent property we understand um is a church we understand there's a congregation there we understand there's a lot of pedestrians generated uh uh at different times um you know during CH uh church service and any of the community services that are provided we have provided a planter buffer so this provides uh protection for cars coming in and out of this uh driveway and garage opening um so that nobody directly walks in front of the driveway apron even if the door is opening and closing you would have to actually walk around this planter bed um to get to the sidewalk and get to the front of the driveway apron so we think that's important to actually provide some sort of protection and separation between the two properties there and that's in the form of a low planter so going back once again um the top of the building has various different uh design elements that change the scale of the front of the building however at the first floor we do have already a 10-ft sidewalk WID with a 10-ft setback at least the front part of the lobby so that's a total of 20 ft of sidewalk width plus the additional 16 ft and 18 ft so at the garage opening location you have approximately 38 ft um before you hit that garage door if you work your way up through the building at at the second third and fifth floor um as you can see here it's colorcoded the studios are in green uh the blue is the one-bedrooms the pink is the two bedrooms and the magenta is in three bedrooms so floors two three and five uh we have nine units per floor um and we have Studios four uh at 385 ft to 425 Square ft we have four one-bedrooms at 600 square ft to 650 Square ft and we have one two-bedroom at 820 Square ft so that's at the three floors at second third and fifth floor fourth floor is slightly different because of the building rotation in the design again we have four Studios at 385 to 425 four one bedrooms at 595 to 650 and we have one two bedroom at 825 so that's at the fourth floor when you work your way up the building Sixth and eighth floor now because of the building rotation once again uh we have a 15t setback to the southern portion of the building and again we're still at zero to the northern portion of the building at seven units per floor two Studios two one-bedrooms three two bedrooms at 6 and 8 the seventh floor again seven units per floor two Studios two one-bedrooms and three two bedrooms all at the sizes that I previously stated the ninth floor is when you have the 15t step back and also the building line comes in to 5'1 uh at the northern property line uh six units per floor on on this floor we actually have one three bedroom which will go to the affordable requirement um that will request at least one three-bedroom be part of the four affordable units being provided floor 10 and 11 uh three Studios 2 one beds two two beds and again Z three beds as you get up to the roof we have a considerable amount of extensive green roof uh we have previously stated at 2300 square ft proper storm order management we are providing a 550t centrally located uh building amenity and then we have a roof deck that's on the Eastern side of the roof as you can see here at 1,500 square ft we have two mechanical pens they're at opposite sides of the Southern portion of the roof um one to the east one to the West they will be uh both screened uh from any type of view from any direction so again we we'll provide P privacy screens around all the Mechanicals for these units as well as privacy screen for both the generator um and the um air handling unit for the lower floors going back to the building design again at 11 stories 110 ft in total height first floor uh again is at 13' 4 and 9'8 each floor all the way up to the roof we have three principal uh aluminum composite material colors plus the window um mullon color as you can see here we have a deep Bergen and the color palette was chosen really to play with the existing neighborhood and play off the colors of as you can see the pre-existing structure so the lower floor projection at floors 2 three four and five as you can see in burgundy to the South that's at a 5ft set back um and then the building rotates uh floors 2 through eight in this copper color that mimics uh the existing masonry of the Coptic church and at the 15t setback at the parallel line uh to the property line uh we have a a warm champagne color that stays within the pallet of what we're proposing here again that plays off the existing Limestone that's on both the Southern and the northern uh structures um we do have some outdoor area as you can see in the rendering uh one at the fourth floor one at the sixth floor and then again one at the top of the eighth floor um simple subdivision we are not providing Pac as part of this design competition this will have either standard split systems um or vrv or vrf systems so you will not get any uh exterior Louver intakes as part of this application on any of the facades as you can see here as part of this perspective we have a non-combustible cement board set into the aluminum Composite Materials adjacent to the Coptic Church um again these are fully non-combustible materials at zero lot line and it will be fully sprinklered in addition to that the composition of the existing elevations front elevation I just talked about uh in rendering form as you can see the rear elevation uh very simple um again cement board in the pattern to indicate window openings however there they are not window openings um and and again uh the gray area which is set back in we are allowed to have window openings facing the rear yard as you can see there shown uh set into the aluminum composite material side art elevation again um the grid that M mimics the front facade uh in aluminum composite and cement board and two different colors color pallet is directly above on the page um similar to the northern side is the southern side as you can see there's various light Wells um we introduced as part of the plan for light and air with some of these different units that work more or less front to back with the center hallway as opposed to the typical side to side that you would see in front of this board on most evenings in closing uh the shadow study as you can see highlighted in yellow would be the proposed 11 story structure we're pretty fortunate you know in the sense that you know we have a very wide uh ride of way for Bergen aenue directly in front of us we have a uh again a large 8 to9 story uh administration building uh directly to the east um as you can see the Shadows are casted uh at the beginning of the day they're casted uh to the west of the property into the cemetery and as the sun angle rotates from east to south to west uh the shadow lines will follow uh accordingly that uh there will be some to the north um and then they will work their way all the way to the east um the majority of the shadowing will be above uh the pre-existing Church structure and then the mixed juice structures that work to the north um the buildings that will be on Highland Avenue as you can see um typically will not get uh Shadow line just based on the sun angle and the time of the year so at that moment this concludes my testimony uh for the presentation thank you Mr vanderark thank you any questions for Mr vanderark anyone okay okay thank you well go ahead commissioner Torres light Wells I see you do have windows at the third floor level B that's that's correct sir that way all the way up it's that way all the way up um based on the separation distance um of where those windows are located um we have a certain percentage of opening that were permitted of build n floor area you have the rooftop units the people standing up on the roof with the glass does that glass go all the way down to the thing or does it stay off of the that area oh well that goes all the way down to the actual roof structure and gets anchored into the roof structure over it can never be knocked over or kicked in correct no that's correct okay so now the other thing is you mentioned the uh electrical F yes the be mostly electrical yes um and I've noticed is that a chance that be put in front of the building uh no it it will never be above grade in front of the building it will it will it will always be underground in a vault correct under in a vault correct in front of the building in front of the building within our property boundary not on the sidewalk yes okay so we don't have much of it so basically what I'm trying to get I know a fire hydrant yes yes you have to put that that is correct so basically you don't know where Public Service tell you what to do with it it's what you say I I I agree we're certainly at the mercy of where they location is that Tre though if they say it has to go if if it has to go in the center of the property the tree um well the tree I could certainly be able to uh maybe reorientate the tree then if need be somehow on our property if if in the event that they want to relocate that Vault to the southern portion of our property line then then I will you don't have a lot of I I I agree at 42 ft um in width the fact that we have the curb cut and we have the uh Drive o that's needed um it really doesn't leave us very much room other than that the original application prior to our neighborhood meetings had retail without a driveway in it we had a little bit more room to work however um you know we think this is the best solution for the application just based on the comments that we received if not we'll be back here uh I have a question did did you say how many bike parkings you have yes we have 48 interior and we have two on the exterior right here at the southern portion of the property within our property boundary so we exceed the requirement we absolutely exceed the requirement I believe the requirement is uh of 77 you would need 39 um and we have more than uh what is required and the disposal of the garbage yes it will be a private uh maintenance company uh in Independent Car removal uh they will provide some sort of a pickup truck or van that drives down the driveway and uh loads and unloads within our boundary uh of the seller garage and then they just drive it out uh at their own uh times though that they you won't be at the mercy of bringing dump ERS up to the curb line uh for municipal uh cting right so everything will happen internally uh within the building thank you thank you Mr romark okay thank you then at this time I'd like to move on to our next witness uh Mr John cork good evening morning tonight the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do sp your name it's John korak last name spelled c r a yeah it's making that yeah and uh Mr corak could you give the board the benefit of your professional educational experience because I I don't recall you being before this board I was before this board earlier this year um my license is current in good standing okay you are qualified thank you thank you okay thank you and for the record um Mr corak your Stonefield engineering uh prepared traffic report uh dated July 11th 20123 and revised as of January 10th 2024 are you familiar with that report yes I am okay and can you kind of walk the board through uh the the proposed parking uh on this site and and any concerns you have with regard to that yeah of course so obviously when it comes to parking getting to the parking part of the access on to make sure that we understand the full roadway Network the full conditions out here um Bergen Avenue providing one lane of travel in each Direction a full width stripe Center median and a two-way bike lane on the opposite side of our lot Frontage um that of course the the bike infrastructure bodess well with the site given the 48 uh on-site covered uh bicycle spaces which we uh just heard exceeds the requirement for this property um the site itself it's about a 5 to 10 minute walk from Journal Square PATH station uh and Journal Square itself so we're well connected from a you know Transit walkability connectivity perspective um that that bodess itself well for the unit count here and the parking Supply um we have access through a uh a a full movement curb cut on Bergen Avenue which then uh leads to the uh garage ramp down to the parking area which provides 19 stacked parking spaces and one Ada accessible parking space um the that that ramp itself is 22 feet wide uh accommodates two-way traffic well and the volumes of traffic coming in and out of this garage are going to be very minimal 20 parking spaces on a residential use um those spaces being assigned is not a uh substantial generator by any means from traffic perspective um the requirement um for that parking is the 19 spaces we do provide 20 although from the um from the city's Transportation uh review they would also be supportive of no parking on the site so it could really go either way but hearing the community feedback uh work to provide some parking on this site in compliance um we've reviewed the that traffic letter um we have no issues with the comments provided in the letter we've shown on our site plans the curve to curve Paving um on on Bergen Avenue Mr cork just for the record you say that letter you're referring to the April 30th 2024 letter from uh the division of traffic engineering that's correct um with respect to the outdoor bicycle spaces we are orienting those so that way they uh are completely outside of the sidewalk area there's the full dedicated pedestrian path still and with the setback of the building What It ultimately creates is is an extra 10 ft or so um in front of that lobby area uh that that naturally lends itself to um you know a wider sidewalk use um you know a wider pedestrian area uh that feels like it's part of the public space even if it's technically on the subject property and that's a benefit here is there's many portions of Bergen Avenue where you know the sidewalk is narrow you're close to the street you're close to the parked cars and and it's not as comfortable as you know the dimensions that are being proposed here on the ground level um overall this project from a traffic parking perspective uh would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding roadway Network I think that the setbacks and The Pedestrian features the abundance of bike parking on the site all boded well for this project of course the the proximity to to Journal Square um you know lends itself to um you know more Transit oriented development uh in this Corridor and in this area with that happy to answer any questions yeah I have nothing further for Mr corak any questions for Mr corak thank you sir thank you okay thank you then my last witness tonight will be miss worstell good evening evening good evening welcome back thank you um and just for the record Miss forell was previously sworn and accepted correct yes you have uh so evening uh members so we're here uh this evening for um three variances does that better okay yeah it Jiggles that noise was I know for vanderark was presented um so again want to remind the board that at the time that this application was submitted and um deemed complete the subject property was zon with the central business district um so um that is the zoning with which uh we reviewed the plans and that we are consistent with um so um from that zoning uh there were three variances were identified one is for the minimum lot size the second is for minimum lot width um those are sort of tied hand inand because obviously it's a very deep lot but it's a very narrow lot um and uh we look at this this is a hardship um the the requirement under um the central business district is that um no matter what use you have you have to have a lot that's a minimum of 10,000 ft and 100 ft wide um this is an existing lot that's been in the CBD CBD is a a Zone that's been around for was was around for quite a long time um and the lot itself has a little 6,841 square ft and a lot width of a little over 40t so um the existing lot is uh non-conforming um and it's a bit of hardship um because there really is no way for us to uh expand and and acquire additional property in order to meet the minimum standards under the CBD zone for any development um so uh we look at this and say you know it's a hardship because they're just there's no way to become compliant um and the subject property self is is consistent um with the character of other Lots in the CB District um the adjacent properties to both the North and South of us which are in the CBD district also do not meet these standards um so it it is a condition that is is found throughout the CB District uh in this this area uh the last variant we are requesting is for the minimum front yard setback um looking at this um more as a C2 criteria where we're looking at whether not the benefits outweigh the detriments here um the CBD district required uh a minimum front yard setback of 15 fet if a building was over eight stories in height um so this building uh we took a look at the the existing conditions of surrounding us uh for the majority of along Bergen Avenue along this Corridor most of the buildings are at a zero foot lot line the exception being uh the Coptic Church which is adjacent to us um so we took a look at um the design of this building and we tried to create a facade that um provided angles and tried to sort of transition between the uh you know the um uh zero foot um setback that that we have on uh one side and and the uh I think it's over 15t on the other so we're trying to create some some this facade that creates more of this transition between um some of the the conditions we're seeing along the block as well as providing some additional space at that ground floor um so really that was one of our main goals here was to create space at that ground floor uh for pedestrians along Bergen Avenue um and then obviously as as was discussed to create that space uh for the uh garage um so as uh Miss vanark um testified um there are uh different um setbacks um along um each of the each floor of the facade at the ground floor you have that minimum 10ft ground floor setback on the upper floors it's uh 5T for the majority of the facade and then there's an angle that comes out and it's zero foot at that uh Northern uh Corner um and then once you get up to the 9th floor then you get that full 15t step back from the lot line um so again we we hope that this design would help provide that transition um that we were seeing between um what is a condition of Bergen Avenue where you do have these zero foot front yard setbacks um and then obviously the Coptic church that was adjacent to us so we think overall that this creates a um a more lively facade and it creates um uh a a uh a very attractive uh building um along the uh the street Frontage and then again around on that ground floor really providing that additional space to create the um pedestrian Zone um I think overall the the project advances the purp purposes of the municipal land use law um consistent with purpose a um to Pro uh promote General Welfare um and to uh guide appropriate land use and development um so this is creating an appropriately scaled um building it is 11 stories which is permitted in the the CBD Zone um it's a multif family building and we are providing those four affordable um units which are not required um there are a direct benefit of this application um consistent with purpose C we're providing adequate light air and open uh space um again trying to create and maintain those setbacks that are consistent with the character of Bergen Avenue um and create the space at the ground for for those pedestrian Zone um it would create a sufficient space and appropriate location for residential use consistent purpose G um and then I think it's really consistent with purpose I to create that desirable visual environment um you know it's a a development that's replacing sort of an underutilized um industrial and and Commercial structure with a new multi-story multif family building um that is going to um create this uh improve the the streetscape with the street tree um you know the Landscaping at the ground floor um and creating the the the new pedestrian Zone there looking at the negative criteria um um I think that the granting the requested variances would not result in substantial detriment to the public good or general welfare um as I said you know we're we're sort of uh replacing that that three-story commercial and industrial building uh with a new attractive multif family development um we're providing those 20 off street parking spaces we're providing um more than uh the required minimum required um off Street uh bicycle parking spaces we're adding the four affordable dwelling units um we're providing the curb cuts and sidewalks um uh that will uh uh increase the the improve that pedestrian Zone um you know the proposed building will meet all uh building and fire code uh standards um and we're providing um onsite uh storm water management with over 2,000 square feet of green roof um so I think all of those are really some substantial benefits of this application um and would not be substant would not be viewed as a substantial detriment um and I think granting the variant will likewise not result in a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of Zone planner zoning ordinance um the project is consistent with the purpose of the CBD district which is to Foster development of a vibrant and accessible Citywide activity District that is centered of Commerce and Civic activity um and functions as local Regional destination for business retail education government services entertainment Transportation these are very sort of similar to what you would expect um you know it's it's near uh Journal Square um we're creating that sort of um uh cluster of uh residential development that helps to support the the character and the liess of um those types of uses and of the Journal Square U Community as a whole um and I think it it proses it proposes a permitted multif family District uh with an appropriate bulk uh bulk um with um compliant uh maximum Building height building coverages side and rear yard setback so I think overall the application uh can be uh can be granted and that it meets both those negative and uh positive and negative criteria um and that's my direct testimony unless anyone has any questions any questions for Miss worell no okay thank you thank you okay then that uh completes our presentation um I just like to reserve the right to have a closing statement uh if desired at the end of public comment yes Council you have that right thank you okay at this time I think I'm going to open it up for public um just uh a couple of housekeeping for the public who's here we we love seeing the public we love hearing your comments um but there's just a couple of uh housekeeping issues you each will have three minutes uh and we're pretty strict with the three minute line as you could see there's a lot of you and um it's it's late so we want to make sure that we get to hear all of you who want to talk today but it's going to be 3 minutes for each of you um we also ask that you you know don't repeat the previous person's uh remarks if it's the same thing you know we'll at some point we've we've heard it so if you have something original please please come up um okay I'll open it up to public chair just three more additional instructions for everybody so everybody understands the height of the building proposed is permitted the number of units being proposed is permitted the number of parking required has been met so if you have an issue with the height of the building the number of units or how many parking spaces there are or are not those comments are not appropriate at this time those are permitted under the application so bear those in mind when you come forward with your comments and with that please come forward with your comments Tru I do sure father Thomas Ned F r. Thomas t h o m nashed n a h e d uh church address 835 Bergen Avenue your thank you thank you Father you go ahead and have three minutes sure good evening members of the board my name is Father Thomas Nash as mentioned I'm a parish priest at St George soptic Orthodox Church on 835 Bergen Avenue for the past 15 years I'm here I present myself as well I believe the majority of our members in not only our Parish but in the neighborhood um and the majority of our members who also live in Jersey City we here to raise our concern to you about the huge 11 story project as a very in a very small lot which is proposed to be built right next door to our church on 8:35 Bergen Avenue I grew up in Jersey City all my life went to schools in Jersey City worked in Jersey City before my priesthood and currently as I mentioned continue to um work as a parish priest and um the in for this community as this neighborhood and this city means a lot to many of us very briefly I want to mention some of the current challenges and how this project a project like this will make these challenges a lot more and very difficult to bear um first challenge is the traffic if you drove on Bergen Avenue between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. or 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. you will know exactly what I'm talking about um that um it's very hard to maneuver or to go around even for around the block takes good 20 minutes just to go around the block if you're looking for parking uh two blocks north of 829 Bergen Avenue we have PS number 11 and Hudson County Community College a block South um we have uh we have Hudson Catholic High School um and one block west is St Peter's College and of course three blocks away is the joural square so you can imagine how many children how many people pass by on daily basis mornings and and after school and evenings uh few years back Bergen Avenue was changed from two lanes to a single Lane each way to accommodate for a bike lane just last few months ago all the parking front of SE town and removed from the corners of Academy and Bergen Avenue extended the sidewalks into the streets which eliminated a very busy intersection for buses on both on both directions and now when a bus stops IT blocks all the traffic on Bergen Avenue last week um someone that I know friend of mine drove from 8:35 Bergen Avenue to Manhattan Avenue in 40 minutes CU it was at 3:30 imagine you live in that area or the building next door any of the the houses is um next door simply takes anywhere from 20 to 40 minutes just to go around the block Second Challenge is the parking is that the three minute mark That's minute but forry I'll sure I'll trying to make it a quickly as possible for the Parking Challenge it has been always a challenge in Jersey City we're willing to bear with it as we love the city and the people of this city and this neighborhood but to add uh 77 units even if it's allowed um on 829 Bergen Avenue and currently on 855 Bergen Avenue there's 55 units being constructed add those together the amount of traffic and parking on Bergen Avenue um um it will definitely be very hard to Bear think of the neighbors that live there next door how difficult it is with traffic and their problems compounded by with parking how they drop off their groceries with their kids and their cars and how they take their kids to and back from school it is a breaks my heart to know that parishioners attempt to come to the church services with their children and to find out afterwards that either they went back home or showed up very late because they could not find parking again I cannot imagine after adding all these cars to an already very congested area concerns with the projects um the close proximity of the building to the property the plans does not show the close proximity of the of the building to our fire escape to the south side of our building which is very concerning it's only a hand reach but it does not show on the plans because from the second floor higher it does not show the proximity to the fire escape the windows are less than 5 ft away from the fire escape so I'm not sure if this is according to the code and it's code compliant or not due it a close proximity and its height it will block the few windows that we have in the church sewers are concerning because from my understanding the Jersey City in that area does not separate um storm water from sewer and that's why our basement are constantly uh flooding uh through because of the rain I can imagine a sewer adding load of 55 units half block this way and 77 units just next door with the building being directly on the property line I'm not sure how they will construct the north facade of the building without any scaffolding or some kind of protection that will be overhanging our over our property the traffic study did not include the Sunday uh Sunday in their study which is our busiest day of in traffic um for us as a a church but maybe not for the community as a neighborhood this is we heard the hardship project multiple times why did they not propose a project with no hardship that can sync with the neighboring Buildings Construction period is very concerning we have simply we are simply terrified two or three years period of construction being one of the largest coped community in the northeast of America we have a very active church services we have service six days a week my apology but if I may take a few other people's times sure thank you I'm almost done my last couple paragraphs we have Services six days a week I mean six days a week we have Services multiple times a day so foot traffic and dismissal traffic will be very dangerous when we have when you have construction deliveries I can imagine with a lot size the width of 42 ft any typical trailer is 72 ft that means our church or the neighboring building will be constantly blocked by all the deliveries and you can't imagine how many deliveries you get through two or three year period so our way to the church will be constantly blocked by deliveries to the construction um will there be a crane that will be swinging over our heads and over our building or we will be forced to have a scaffolding front of our church I have a simple question what is the benefit of this project to the community to have such a project that is above and beyond of what is the neighboring uh buildings are and the harm it will cause to the community I have a lot of respect to the government of Jersey City and its branches and I trust that it will do what's best for to the people of Jersey City this project is definitely an attractive project but maybe not in this location therefore it is not what's best for the people of Jersey City thank you for listening and thank you for the time tonight be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I swear the your home address please yes Shireen Kella s h e r i n last name k h l l a 50 Day Street Jersey City New Jersey okay ma'am you will have three minutes okay thank you I will do that good evening planning board appreciate your time I am a lifelong resident of Jersey City um in the greater joural square area I currently reside as you heard at 50 Day Street Cano you guys might know it um I'm also a public servant for one of the largest uh Transportation agencies in the region um so I get the positions that you're in right now it's hard to say no sometimes um I'm here to express my strong opposition to the development plans as proposed for 829 Bergen Avenue um I strongly oppose the variances that the developer is seeking um again I understand very well the need to say no as a policy maker um but this is one of those times the Jersey City preservation commission specifically Maggie O'Neal senior historic reservation specialist in its response on January 11 2022 to the applicant's request for determination of significance recommended that any new construction at 829 Bergen Avenue be designed with materials scale and I will emphasize scale thank you Kim um and and setback that that's compatible with the surrounding area I want to emphasize scale because as you saw from the pictures that uh were shown today the um residential buildings on that block are maximum six stories five to six stories high understanding that the height is as proposed is allowed um what it doesn't fit within the the the build the the U within the block within the the uh the larger area um and also just does not fit with the historic preservations uh committee's uh recommendation uh the variant saw today just totally goes against those recommendations by your own peers um and it really does set bad precedent for the future of Jersey City its residents in the neighborhood's fabric the argument that this is a hardship to meet the minimum requiring lot size is a bit of a stretch um the minimum requirement were set for a reason uh the owner of the site knew what the those limits were before purchasing it so I asked the board what is the true hardship here it's maximizing profit that's at the cost of the citizens of Jersey City in addition the assessment that the development proposed with its variances will not cause major disruption is again flawed as father Thomas mentioned already concerns about fire safety traffic uh issues and and uh wreaking havoc I'm going to add a few things also for you all to consider new developments on Aging Jersey City infrastructure has wreaked havoc for other communities um this is a very old site the church is a very old site we you know putting it there um then you know we also have to consider unsafe construction debris coming down from the UNC unsafe construction water main braks that are happening um and then again the unmanageable traffic I I believe the community deserves better just I'm sorry really quick um I please please I I ask that you listen to your Jersey City constituents the residents here and vote no for the proposal as it was proposed today and and I appreciate all your time thank you yes address pleas my name is Mary and fam m a r y a Ann last name fam F like Frank am am like Mary my home address is n Elizabeth Court Seahawks New Jersey formerly a resident of Jersey City um moved on because my father was disabled and Jersey City's not accessible for those who are disabled very well so ma'am you have three minutes okay yes go ahead sir thank you so um I like those who spoke before me was born and raised Jersey City my three brothers and I were all schooled here graduated schools here and um were commuters to schools in the neighboring cities and areas and have always um been largely public servants of the community here um so I know Jersey City I love it it is it has made me who I am we grew up on the south side we grew up in the Heights and we've always attended this church um in fact it was started by our parents who first immigrated here um 50 years ago so I'll many of the points were already covered but I will um add to the points that were not um regarding traffic and parking um there are statistics that do show the number of cars and vehicles in the state of New Jersey as published by the US Department of Transportation Highway Administration and perfors advisor is that for every thousand licensed drivers 918 have registered Vehicles that's 91.8% of people have cars in the state of New Jersey I do not believe that Jersey City falls out of that statistic it follows within that same state statistic with regards to the traffic and Engineering study I do not believe that it suff effciently accounted for the way that the state um Ma you know is populated also the data did not support in my opinion or prove in my opinion um uh the lack of hardship or um that there was going to be no negative impact as a result of this particular project so um I would recommend that they either rerun their study or that they provide additional evidence to support um a more positive outcome as far as far as infrastructure goes um I reinforce the statements that father Thomas and Shireen has made um we are on the south side and I I ask that the board here evaluate this project as a whole and not just as a single building we have projects that were recently approved 859 is going up there is a project that was approved across the street on the corner of Ren Bergen Avenue we have the three largest buildings in Jersey City going up just blocks away in Journal Square we are south of all of that and all of the water runs South that's per their engineering study so given that and given the fact that the infrastructure is going to be PL the the building is plugging into the existing infrastructure the existing grid the existing Plumbing um we we must account for the fact that these other projects are also plugging into the existing infrastructure we haven't created did anything new to support and now we're adding 77 more units within that small area um ma'am that's your time thank you sir thank [Applause] youu truth I do Michael my last name r EZ K and my home address is Terry Broadway uh Jersey City Mr rizik go ahead 3 minutes yes thank you um I just want to speak in my professional capacity today I'm a structural engineer Licensing in uh uh New Jersey and I want to um I have just some concern about uh the construction for this project I'm not sure what's the the construction type the the building system will be is it going to be uh concrete building or it's going to be steel construction because the construction will have like big impact on the church because uh during the so investigation process you know from digging and draining piles and getting all these result that would impact the church um very uh big time and also um I see that they're proposing uh two sellers at 18t below the grade all this excavation we need need um they they will need uh support of excavation right and draing vies next to the the church the church building will impact the church um uh IM merely and um uh also we would ask if they will provide um continuously monitoring for the church building during the construction so all these concerns because you know this is a a big con instruction it's 11 story and it will have uh the foundations right so all these concerns we need U uh answers for all of that uh and we need to take this in consideration thank you thank you sir it's okay with the uh can we say together because we'll save your time that way as well you'll have three minutes just together together yeah all right no problem right yes thaton truth Tru truth yes I do sure my name is minus uh home address 74 Freeman Street Jersey City New Jersey your name last name is t a n y oos yeah Mina abider um originally from Jersey City 49 years here but I just moved um about 11 years ago to uh Weatherford so uh but my mother still lives in Jersey City actually being impacted by the developers herself next to the C buildings um on the lot street right in front of the courthouse sorry you just got to give us your address s yeah just address Street Weatherford New Jersey thank you so based on uh my uh engineering background experience and a public servant as well um looking into um the traffic um packed L here and the existing level of service of the Highland Avenue is um level of service D which is on the edge of the traffic analysis um anything if and Below consider a congested um building um doing a tra turn movement counts um collected only on Saturdays ignoring Sunday where a lot of uh trip generator um will be caused by the church uh traffic so absolutely this um count from the church will bring the level of service as an f and Below um considering as um father Thomas um cited um from the traffic uh L report as well we have 51 dwelling um recently on 325 um on 855 to 857 Bergen Avenue and we have more development of R Street and uh 150 room Street 3o Academy Street imagine all of this um traffic generator how how how myself now I'm speaking as a c as a citizen as a member of a church I to look for parking every Sunday morning 30 minute to 45 minute or I just go home because no parking so how like adding a 77 um dwelling unit to this existing condition I would say um this is too impossible for our community is a very hardship um to um to add um safety of my kids or I don't have kids now but my future kids so safety of those kids safety of everyone kids how is how how how this will be granted um during this um hardship so we have hardship we have hardship here so why not again um we consider a a compliance property um redesigned to to meet to meet our um big community and thank you yeah just to just to add a couple of things extra um basically the variance itself I mean you're putting a square in a circle um you know within the variance themselves um this is quoting the um Jersey Journal um they just made a a public they're keenly interested the media is keenly interested in this because there's a population in that street and impacting St Aiden our church s the number 11 School number 11's um also Hudson Catholic so there's a lot of foot traffic there um the couple things is the variant themselves uh granted without causing substantial development uh sorry determent to the public good and I appreciate with tus mentioning to the uh um embarkment the other proposal that you care about the community at this point so more you know not the investors you do okay that's that's even excellent that's more gives me more Comfort there but um you know with the uh the community itself I mean the impact of that we had two Community meetings um not only our church attended it's the whole street it's the community in that street and many of them have impacted to ask these questions particular about um you know how do how do you how are you going to propose these things um the the developer mentioned to us well if we don't get the variances we have no other options so these variances are extremely extremely I mean you can't just like the other father Thomas and mentioned you know you can't just force something because CBD zoning sir that was your time the time already you yeah you three minutes I told you together right yeah I I'm just bringing the the points across that what you call I mean I mean just one more minute all I'm saying if that's the case uh the other question more minutes okay two more appreciate that the developer in the community meeting asked we asked a question to him about basically um you know what what's going on with this what could we do what can't we do and why are you doing this he said well I'm a developer I had I built so many developers in developments in Jersey City I've given $5 million uh to the uh the community you know with the taxes and everything but that does not that does not give us as a community um you know we all pay taxes uh in this city over 5,000 if you can see how many people here raise their hands this is just a litmus test of how many people are represented so it shouldn't be determined just for the the few or the developer all these things so there is a hardships there it's also a hardship basically on the um the street itself I mean we're going to close the shadow I've been over 50 years in our church that's anniversary this year they're closing the uh with this 11 stories it's going to be closing the the basically there's no light coming in which is a determin another thing is the unloading and loading doc we asked them if there was going to be a loading un load unloading do dock for the you know for the residents well said we don't know where to put them so between these three variants and these unloading zoning bools it's it's it's it's unacceptable I mean we it up to you guys to make that decision thank [Applause] you truth the whole truth the truth I do address pleas John aack last name is is h a k home address is 113 Leonard Street Jersey City New Jersey thank you good evening planning board members Jersey City resident all my life of 42 years my parents immigrated here from Egypt to settle and reside in Jersey City since 1972 first on Lynden Avenue and then on woodon Avenue I attended grade school and high school in Jersey City I currently reside with my wonderful wife and two children in jury in the Jersey City Heights area on Leonard Street been a member of St George and St the Coptic Orthodox church at 835 Bergen Avenue directly adjacent to the proposed building at 829 Bergen Avenue I want to say that this is a Coptic Orthodox community that is deeply rooted in our faith our religious values and our right to worship are extremely important to us we hold lurgical Services daily youth meetings adult meetings Bible study hymns classes choir and various other services that help support and serve the community in all of Jersey City almost 22,000 residents alone reside within the general square area as of 2023 and with the addition of the general squared building units there's an additional 1840 units this area is more densely populated compared to other areas within Jersey City the approval of a 77 unit high-rise 11 story Residential Building will create Mass congestion traffic and issues with parking in an area where it's already very very difficult to park your car and to come to church services to with your right to worship there are at least two other neire churches on Bergen Avenue as well that will be affected uh this is not adequate space uh for 77 unit building I want to point out that page three of the traffic impact letter created by Stonefield which has the analysis of the existing traffic volume was observed on days such as Thursday February 9th 2023 and Saturday February 11th 2023 these periods are not considered Peak periods this analysis omitted the Sunday traffic periods which includes pedestrian traffic and parking patterns during the lurgical services for the church and the other two churches located on Bergen Avenue this Omission is detriment to the building of this 77 unit building if this is not conforming to the CBD Zone and known as a hardship maybe not build a 77 unit building the approval of this high-rise Residential Building in certain areas of Jersey City might make sense in those areas but it doesn't in this case without the proper regard to traffic congestion and parking issues in an already densely populated area a vote to approve this application for this building would disregard those issues I am not against Redevelopment and I appreciate the board members and the efforts they have made to Aid in proper Redevelopment of jury City such as the Sixth Street embankment and these scattered sites that we heard about today I will complete sir that's your time thank [Applause] you any testimon get tonight truth the truth truth I do address Patrick Bab p a t r i c k b e b a w y and address 881 Summit Avenue Jersey City New Jersey okay minutes yes sir yes sir so not only being a member of the congregation in this church but also uh as a lifelong resident in Jersey City parking has always been a struggle to me um given the nature of Jersey City like not all houses or apartment buildings have driveways so we usually have to look for street parking um it's going to be also harder not only with the 77 unit apartment building but also five skyrise buildings that are being built in like the vicinity of their Church it'll be like a lot harder to find parking statistically in Jersey City there are only 085 they 085 um cars per household so let's say that's one car per household approximately Point approximately 26% of of this building alone they'll give like um a parking spot to and in the house so get uh the other 75% will have to look for parking in the street uh another thing is that ps11 the the school a couple blocks away which many children in our church go to um it's already very heavily densely populated with children and given like this uh apartment building um they'll bring in families which well there won't really be space for um our schools to accommodate the the incoming children uh and also Jersey City is also one of the most densely populated uh cities in the in the country being that um there is uh per square mile it's about 19835 inhabitants according to the CWS of Jersey City uh and in Jersey City in New Jersey there's about 1,200 uh 1,259 PE uh people per square mile in New Jersey alone so giving that ratio Jersey City is already very densely populated so uh adding all these apartment buildings especially this one 77 units will give heavy strength to the traffic thank [Applause] you no no ma'am you do have to come up one sentence Tru I do s 349 Kor Avenue Jersey City 07305 spell your name g a h a n y last name s e a my pleasure three minutes ma'am go ahead one minute I with all what everybody said you didn't count or expect about how many child and senior citizen will be hit every week by her with the entrance going out going in with with all the traffic coming to this building you didn't count for these dead people that's it thank [Applause] you I do abos ABA n o t o Us address is 44 Brunswick Street S 3 minutes okay thank you MH good evening I just want to briefly speak to the parking situation in the area I'm a former resident of room Street which is just around the corner of this proposed development I lived there for 12 years and still continue to travel there to attend church amongst other things I also attended PS1 as a result I know just how I know very well just how difficult the parking situation is and and only continues to worsen I believe that this 77 unit proposed unit the proposed development with inadequate plan parking will only further exasperate this parking situation what is permitted is not always what is right I hope that the board will do what is right for the community by voting against this application thank you thank [Applause] you hello truth Tru I do Miriam tulus m i r i a m t a w f i l s a East Street Jersey City New Jersey thanks m'am three minutes go ahead thank you good evening members of the zoning board as many people have stated before me they have grievances with the parking but what they haven't told you is that many of the devoted members of our congregation travel from various cities across New Jersey to worship with them with us and for them alternate methods of transportation are simply not feasible and disregarding this reality would not only amplify the existing parking challenges as everyone has mentioned but also severely inconvenience and isolate members of our community who rely solely on vehicular transport to attend our worship it was mentioned during the presentation that additional parking was added as a result of community complaints I urge you to look around this room now multiply this number by five and then do it by 10 and even by 20 and that is our church congregation every single day you mentioned that the number of parking spots is legal due to building's proximity um to Journal Square but what this fails to consider is that many of our parishioners do not live in Jersey City as I previously stated and thus this proximity to Journal Square is irrelevant for them Jersey City is often cited as one of the most diverse cities in our country if not the world Jersey city has always been welcoming to everyone and I am proud to call Jersey City my home but I would be remiss if I did not mention that the proposed expansion fails to recognize the historical and cultural significance of our church St George and St shinuda on Bergen Avenue this church stands as a testament to our community's Rich Heritage serving as more than a place of worship but as a symbol of our Collective identity neglecting to address the parking concerns associated with the expansion threatens to erode this vital connection to our past undermining the very essence of what makes Jersey City so unique and vibrant so in light of these considerations I imploy the board to carefully weigh the impact of the proposed expansion on the accessibility and preservation of our cherished church let us please work together to ensure that any development honors our community's past while also meeting the needs of its present and future in doing so we should prioritize solutions that respect our communities rather than value just monetary um monetary advancements I apologize thank you so much for your attention and consideration tonight thank you anyone else from the public anyone else want to speak come on come on up oh sorry yes I do okay Maran Mansour m a r i a n m a n s or R uh 821 Bergen Avenue Jersey City New Jersey 07306 M for 3 minutes okay go just one minute oh thank you okay um I live the next door for that building that is coming up it's a21 the fivestory building um I'm here like over 13 years now do you imagine how like we suffering our daily lives how we suffering like just to drop off my kids and try to find the parking and how to bring our shopping do you think how many and or you imagine how many trucks for loading and unloading in this street and especially in this area every day and every hour especially if especially we have like the very big building across our like uh building that big building loading and unloading truck trucks and like you you can't imagine like the the traffic how how bad is it I live in this area like over 13 years and we're suffering every day and it's getting worse every day and it's our daily lives it's it's horrible now so I see this building is not fit for this area especially I see it's it's like a visual pollution do you see it's like a historical block I see the old Bergen Church on the corner the other Church St Eden and very historical buildings around and I see this like the modern or whatever like you call it like a modern like with glass I see it's not fit on this area you can do it anywhere else like next to Costco or maybe I don't know why it's especially in this area so no one like imagine how we suffering like when you put like 11 stories with 77 like 77 units in this place in very small place I'm not talking about like the like the Coptic Church I'm a resident on that building 8 when or like just attached to this place so how we going to live like over two years or maybe more to finish up this like like building or what the what's like the the project and that's it thank you thank you yes Bonita YF b o n Bonita YF b o n i t a y o u s s EF and my address is 93 Fairview Avenue do I have to give you the apartment oh Jersey City New Jersey okay 3 minutes ma' okay oh can you okay um when I was younger after starting school in New Jersey in Jersey City New Jersey I remember going to a supermarket with my friends that I used to pass by sometimes when our parents needed groceries it was accessible for my mom who at the time was the only parent taking care of us and when we landed in Jersey sorry after Hurricane Sandy that Supermarket shut down it used to be um right next to my house after some time a radio store opened up two dollar stores on either side of it and the amount of dollar stores in mcin McGinley square with one on every corner made it easier for many low incomes income families to buy Necessities which resulted in these small businesses thriving by helping their Community the same cannot be said about the building that is being built which which will cause congested traffic and eventually kick out tenants and communities nearby and make that space inaccessible for many the city has allowed the building of the city has allowed building of many modern and contemporary buildings around Jersey City just because they look nice and they make the city look more appeasing to the eye this has made streets narrow which are not only used by the people of our community to attend church services but also by the other drivers who drive to their homes nearby and even to hccc ps11 and the C Central Supermarket formerly known as SE town which are only a couple blocks away along with the newer buses and the trucks that are there to stock up and Supply the nearby stores along with like the farm markets you have already made it harder for us to access to church and nearby institutions with the narrow streets you say you plan on making more affordable housing but you have not shown us this year that instead we have only seen housing built for people who may have not even step foot into Jersey City yet we have abandoned the city and focused on building new newer more modern apartments while now clearing up the critical issues in Jersey City this issue is called gentrification which is defined by Banica as process in which the wealthier privileged typically white individuals move into neighborhoods that are largely populated by poor and working-class citizens residents who are frequently and predominantly people of color the newcomers ultimately displacing the original residents this new building will eventually kick out Community out of Jersey because we don't fit in like our fellow neighbors you intend on inviting and making space for our church has a welcoming community of people of for people of many economic backgrounds but your new but your new building will only make it harder on our community to attend church services like the kids in my Sunday school class that I have to see every week but also for many other tenants who live nearby who will eventually have to move out to find more affordable housing which caused displacement of people who were born here and have lived here for most of their childhood this church has made us has made place for us who are economically disadvantaged by by hosting soup kitchens dinner parties Church festivals where we celebrate our heritage and Community together as a group thank youon truth I swear uh p h i l o p a t e e r is my first name IB r a h i m is my last name 27 East 50th Street B New Jersey 07002 is where I reside 3 minutes sir thank you mhm while I am a bon resident I have been going to St George St sh Copic Orthodox Church my entire life for at least three times a week and I cannot be the person I am and everybody behind me without the assistance of this church and its members I first uh want to say that I find it inappropriate to be asked not to voice my opinion on something that negatively impacts me my family and most importantly the community that's behind me and the ones that you do not see specifically about the parking spots and I'm going to continue with a few points I want to bring up the first point is concerns construction noise from building an apartment complex can disrupt church services and activities affecting their tranquility and spiritual atmosphere of the church the second point is the traffic congestion increased traffic from residents of the apartment building could lead to congestion around the church making it difficult for church goers to access the premises easily the third problem as we said before is the parking problems additional parking needs to be needs to be there for the apartment residents to restrain this existing Park spaces around the church and it inconveniences the church members and V and the visitors and the last point is the aesthetic and spiritual impact the presence of a large apartment building next to a church could detract from aesthetic appealing of the church and its surrounding impacting the spiritual experience of a worshippers I hope you guys consider the points that I have brought up and everybody else and please say no to the building of this project anyone else from the public oh y thank hello I do all right my name is Miriam m a r i a m Sher beim s h a r o b as and boy i m um address is 16 Culver Avenue Jersey City New Jersey you sh been three minutes all right thank you good evening I grew up in Jersey City and do still live here we truly love our city and I speak on behalf of the youth when I say there probably isn't a single call college or grad program that we have applied to without mentioning the diversity that Jersey city has surrounded us with and how it makes us well around individuals and we come to you today asking you to hear our voices and concerns it's time to see if Jersey City really cares for all of its residents as it taught us to do I knew the argument of being original with our points was going to come up which is why I prepared for it and really wanted to say a lot of us today have shared our stories with parking many of us might still bring it up up too and I'm sure the message is clear that it is a problem logically that's very clear and it's well understood but I still want to emphasize it because if we don't repeat this point over and over again we will never be able to fully Express the gravity of the concern that's only something that's going to get through um through repetition there is the argument of the availability of public transportation but it's not as available as you may think I grew up taking public transportation in middle and high school watching buses at a time pass me because there isn't even standing room available on those buses this is why my siblings sometimes don't even go to church if there's a weekend where I have to stay at school and I'm unable to drive them when I do which is almost every week I always have to drop them off and spend at least half an hour or more going around to find something we have multiple blocks around that do have parking but as auna as our priest mentioned sometimes it takes just 20 minutes just to go around one of those blocks traffing and parking has continuously been reason for missing masks or leaving my Sunday school kids with no teacher in class because I've wasted over half an hour looking for parking even worse it's been a reason for my kids to miss class the when they miss class they miss a chance to learn about their history a chance to laugh with their friends and a chance to have a space that week which is sometimes the only chance that they get thank you thank [Applause] youth I do speak name and give us your home address please m i r i a m b a s i o y a East Street Jersey City ma'am 3 minutes Jersey city has been my cherished home from a very young age my parents brought me to church on Fridays for Bible study and Sundays for a liturgy and Sunday school services that play an integral role in my life and ones that I would never want the kids that I now serve to miss due to their parents looking for parking the issue of traffic in Jersey City has become an increasingly detrimental problem over the last few years and will only wors worsen with the construction of this new building part of our property of our Coptic church is a spot reserved for clergy members which is located right next to the church occasionally there were times where our clergy members would not be able to access that spot due to a car blocking it this is just one reserved spot that is very important especially to the elderly clergy who are physically unable to walk long distances from a street parked car to the church if we can't even access the property we already own prior to the construction of the new building it will become an exponentially greater problem with this construction the Machinery that will be utilized for this project will take up additional parking spots that our congregants could use the use of this Machinery will also be very loud and disrupt several services that we have throughout the week and this noise will continue until the construction of this building is complete it is critical to prevent the construction of this building in order to prevent further problems with parking thank you ton truth Tru truth I do address uh Meg hansar m a g d y last name h i ns a r 98 Freemont Street three minutes sir gotcha uh as stated before these are rental units as opposed to units for sale which will increase the short-term users and decrease the pride care and investment to the community that owners would bring renters have no stake in the community and therefore no reason to care for the neighborhood around them which is bad for the city and for the numerous long-standing Church communities and Pro in close proximity including St George and St shinuda St Aiden's old Bergen Church among others as well as Primary Prep Elementary and Hudson Catholic High School we need people in our community to invest and care about the history and future of Jersey City and every decision this board makes needs to take needs to take this into account thank you thank you ttim tonight going be the truth the whole truth truth I do first name Mario last name s spelled s a l e h and I live on one uh7 West 10 Street Bon three minutes sir uh I just wanted to emphasize an issue I have with the building of the SP complex uh as someone from Jersey City I uh resided in Jersey City about until a month ago around 10 years um parking has always been an issue no matter the time of day and especially on Bergen F every week I have struggled to find any parking in the area hold on one second please sure everybody could quietly please leave if you're leaving where you are in the middle of public comment and we want to be able to hear everybody's comments every week I have struggled to find any parking in the area and with the recent renovations to Academy Street Parking has been cut down even more uh with the new building only offering 20 parking spaces for their 77 Apartments there will definitely be a surplus of people in need of parking spaces uh I believe this will cause even more Chaos on Bergen Avenue and heavily impact the flow of traffic uh traffic on a regular basis also I wanted to add that 620 Montgomery is proposing a similar building with uh one parking spot per apartment um this is also an issue uh providing either more parking or less Apartments would really help resolve this issue thank you anybody else from public the truth truth yes councilman Frank Gilmore f r a n k Gilmore g i l m o r e um good evening everyone good evening councilman U sir I'm just let you know you don't have three minutes uh go ahead okay um so I I was uh actually just in my office kind of like minding my business and then I looked in and just the advocacy in me always trying to see what's going on um but I did speak with my Council colleague and he did inform me that uh the developers did have a community with another one of my colleagues and himself in the community and that said developer was supposed to come back around to meet with the community um so just s the record reflect that the councilman is unaware of them not meeting back with the community um and just my take on on the whole project um I mean I don't know I guess they say I'm anti-development um but I guess I'm I'm really pro- responsible development and I know many of you have R rolled through this city and I don't know what traffic is doing if they're saying that the traffic is not this new development is not going to it's hard to drive up there now so you cannot convince me that 77 units with probably two people in each unit is not going to further congest that it's a nightmare going on up there so um I'm just actually uh urging uh Chuck and who uh the developers if they can continue to have the dialogue with the community because ultimately we want to make sure that everyone ver voices are being heard um we understand that developers are in it to um to make money and we're not you know um well I'm not you know mad at that I just ask that it's done in a responsible and a respectful manner um and I just wanted to say that because I do have to get home to my kids for I don't have nowhere to go um so I just want wanted to put that on the record thank you thank you councilman coming up yes yes my name is antoniio daras d r y s 40 East 39th Street Bon New Jersey good evening uh Commissioners uh I always prepare to say if I speak to be prepared but I did not prepare tonight but uh the only thing I want to mention uh first of all I am a board I'm a I'm a a member of the church as everybody he and also I I I work across the street from the church the administration building so every morning we have nothing to say only about the traffic I always head with the traffic like 30 minutes 40 minutes just around the block here uh also my wife work here in Jersey City so it's it's like we struggling also for the last couple month since the make the streets one ways so in order now to do any U-turn you have to go to Kennedy Boulevard to just come back to sip Avenue to just make a U-turn and um it's it's very difficult now in imagine you add uh another 77 units and this multiply if let's say like every uh unit has like couple of cars imagine how many cars they going to add uh this is the the only thing it's all about traffics and parkings this is what we struggl in right now thank you ton my name is Juliana basili j l i a n n a b a s i l y and my my address is 21 Lawrence Drive in Berkeley Heights three minutes ma'am I travel over half the week for my 20 years of living to Jersey City to just attend my church services and exteme and it's extremely discouraging to travel sometimes due to the traffic that I only experience in Jersey City I also wanted to um address that the street adheres to a distinct architectural layout and the addition of this this apartment building would disrupt both the flow and aesthetic Integrity of the area moreover my church the church of St George and St shinuda stands as a cherished historical landmark holding immense and cultural and historical significance introducing new construction that interrupts this historical continuity would be highly inappropriate and disrespectful to the heritage of our community the street follows a meticulous created building structure that harmonizes with the surrounding environment embodying a unique Car charm and character introducing this new apartment building would not only disrupt this carefully cultivated Ambiance but also undermine the cohesion of the neighborhood additionally my church stands as a testament to our shared history serving as a Beacon of Faith and cultural heritage for Generations any new construction that threat threatens to overshadow or detract from its significance would not only be aesthetically jarring but also disrespectful to the Deep rooted tra traditions and values of our community thank you anyone else from public please come up I do yeah my name is fedy Dean f a d y last name d m i a an I live at 27 Avon place in North Arlington New Jersey I'm a former resident of jury City in three minutes sure I lived there for 17 years where I was within a block walking distance to uh my church St George and St shinua me and plenty of my friends I spent our childhoods walking to the church now when we close a street or very much block off an entrance because we are delivering things to a new construction site we're going to cause a very big problem for our child popul where our parents usually drop off the kids very safely right in front of church or not even just our children our very large elderly population where we also have a large population of people that are disabled it is very hard time for them to get to church if the streets are blocked just last week or a couple days ago Bergen Avenue was closed I travel and many of my friends also travel to church it was a big headache to get around with these streets closed now when we add a large construction site over there I can't imagine how much worse it's going to get it's going to be very hard for our child population and our elderly population to get around and to get into church and I think it's a very large harm and something that we should really consider when it comes to constructing this site like we said it's about a 40 foot building wide and we're going to have 70 foot trucks coming through Bergen avue that's about this big we can barely get two cars through one way each I think it should be really reconsidered what we're doing with this construction site thank you anyone elseu I do k y r i l l o s last name g i r g i s home address 22 broadman Parkway in Jersey C having an 11 story building next to a four story church can uh can be tough and rigorous for the churches to the following reasons construction right next to church can and will disrupt the Peace of and sacredness of the church whether that be the noise of construction or the traffic that it will cause which will disturb the worship services and other church activities as previously stated we are open like all every day or six days a week throughout multiple times we have a lot of Youth in the church and a lot of disabled people that's a majority of our population and having construction for about the next two to three years can and will increase um risk um of injury or any harm whether that can be from debris or construction as previously stated ber and a is a oneway uh is uh just one lane per side constructions will have to go through in the building to deliver whatever they're delivering which will um block off the whole entire sidewalk and a part of the street which will cause a whole blockage um ban a um the Copic church has a very rich history we've been open since 1974 for about 50 years now and having such a large building right next to us within 3T away from the church building which the priest previously mentioned about the fire escape it's within a hands reach um uh that's not safe at all and will disrupt the sacredness of the church and the prayers the need to respect the religious and cultural practices of the church and its congregation will be disrupted by the presence of this building um increases safety issues risks accidents and just a few feet away um the church is a place of worship people go there to worship any any other Church in the area in Jersey City or any other city and they have a uh large um area where it's not surrounded by any large buildings except for our church which is being proposed to an 11 story building which it's not it's not fairly right blocking off basically everything um this area is already a prec conjested area with traffic um that would be all thank you hope you all have a great night anyone else from public anyone else com on up guys I do Father David khabib ha B thank you everyone for your time three minutes okay please as quickly as possible born and raised Jersey City um the reason why many of us are living in Jersey City is because they come to live where the church is that serves them the elderly the young and all the activities that go with it this is the the reason why these are all Jersey City residents and the complains about the traffic and obviously nothing against any development in Jersey City everybody who lives in Jersey City wants their property Vol wants to live in a a flourishing City the issue is if the more difficult it is to navigate Jersey City what will happen is they begin to move away from Jersey City and as churches open up everywhere else they will go to those churches and little by little the significance of Jersey City and the services that we provide for them and for this community well it's we can't father it can't I can't drive an hour looking for for parking just to attend your service I'd rather drive somewhere and park in a parking lot and go to a church in the suburbs and then little by little people will begin to exit the community of Jersey City I now live outside of Jersey City it takes me at least 30 minutes to get from New York Avenue to to the church 30 minutes on a on a a weekday morning and this is for me to serve my community all we're saying is the the zones zoning The Zone the the city's rules and Zoning planning boards have rules for a reason you have a 6800 ft lot what can be built on a 6,800 ft lot okay that meets the rights of the person who buys and wants to develop and make money and we're okay with that and yes the architector met with the the community and we're very grateful and they they're trying but again we're trying to fit something that is meant to fit on 10,000 s foot on something that's 2/3 of that and saying make it happen there's a reason why whoever came up with the rules said these are the rules but if every if I have a 25 by can I say I want to build a 10 story unit and say I want a variance and I have neighbors on every side so please give me a 10 story unit is that how we going to function so there's rules for a reason let's stay within the rules everybody thrives we all live together in one Community but every time every time we make an exception someone is going to suffer every time we make an exception someone's going to suffer it is very difficult to navigate Jersey City I've lived here all my life it is very difficult to navigate Jersey City and it's only going to get more difficult when the towers are done and when people move in and they have to eat and sleep and move around please consider what we're saying we have nothing against our neighbors we want them to make money and be successful there's nothing wrong with that but within the boundaries that the city has allowed for all of us that's all we're asking thank you very much is there anybody else from the public come on up please there one moreu yes I do it's Shireen mcmack It's s sh i r i n m a c c o r m a c k those karmic three minutes thank you my address 130 Glenwood thank you for the three minutes to speak tonight I come uh as myself tonight uh resident of McGinley Square I am uh the head of the president of McGinley Square neighborhood assoc um community board mseb but tonight I'm speaking um just as a resident I did meet with the developer arender and the team and I also met with Community we helped host some of those meetings and we appreciate that they were had um we appreciate the changes that arender had worked on in light of the two Community meetings modifying plans to re-include parking to include the 5% affordable and create the tiers of setbacks we have proposed here at building 11 story 77 units it does include those 20 parking spaces and four affordable units however the lot is under sized at 6941 Square ft where 10,000 is required that's about 70% which is significant as well the property abuts the spear Cemetery there's concern for potential environmental disturbances to the vulnerable historic American cemetery um as well as other people mentioned the hpo office recommends that the church and its surrounding neighborhood be considered and that matters uh parking a lot of people went into the parking some people have asked for one for one well that might seem extravagant there are some buildings nearby currently being proposed with one for1 parking and um that might seem generous compared to the city's Point 2 requirements um however with the smaller lot size here um and the proposed height and density of the building is something to consider others spoke about the added added stress on sewers in schools um I also had a question about if there's any safe lighting being included in the plans for pedestrians to cross safely um at the area of uh you know where the cars will be coming in and out um just a question about the plans and the last thing I would say about this is that we have 80 people 80 or so people here that came out from the community from the congregation tonight and um that is what impresses me the most about this project um a fundamental need within any Community is the ability to gather and practice religion and Faith So Many religious structures in our city and elsewhere are having a hard time financially to retain their community and if people can't get there the houses of the Holy close and they eventually become condos we talk about hardship whose hardship is it perhaps it's a bit of both the congregations yes the developers maybe one hardship is financial the other is logistic in relation to their faith maybe the best plan would be to meet again with the community as councilman Gilmore and boano recommended and figure out that special Sweet Spot the compromise maybe the best is to match the Sur ing height and um the best plan would be to listen to the community thank you thank you anyone else from the public anyone else see no more people for the public I move to close the public portion part of this meeting a second public is now closed you want to break yes can we take a five minute break yeah we're going to go ahead and take a five minute break come right back all right give our guy here a think chairman is there please counsel I thought you were going to ask us to stay till midnight no oh I know the rules I'm asking for the first application available the next date to be carried to though I am asking that just for the record sir if you can just sure elardo Webster con Foley neq AA LLC 20 long slip two long slip Washington Boulevard River Drive block 7302 lot 3.05 316 318 and 319 so this is case p2023 d0102 and I suspect that it's also case p2023 0103 cam what date can we carry it to we can definitely carry it to June 11th that's the next regularly scheduled meeting um I cannot promise it to be the first item on but second third um I I know there's one item that was listed prior to you that was carried to that date as well so it it can be second or third cam i i i i as long as you're confident that I'm going to get Hur I'm okay with that thank you Council if Mr Harrington didn't keep showing up no com no com no comment no comment sir no comment thank you mrster we'll do that anybody here on case p2023 d102 or 2023 d01 03 20 long slip if you are here on that application it will not be heard tonight it's being carried to June 11th you will get no further notice back in 5 minutes guys good nighto oh my God how do you do it dude no I'm sorry yeah I was I was thinking maybe before yeah been enough planning board me actually my first mhm okay now we are you [Music] said Mr Harrington we're just Gathering bring the troops yep okay I see that I can do a lot of doozies lately okay I think we have everybody we're back uh in order um Mr Harington okay thank you so uh I think kind of maybe a bit a little bit of a combination of addressing some comments and maybe a closing statement to kind of uh not be redundant here um you know we've heard you heard the presentation tonight you heard our our proofs um Mr Harington I thought you were going to address some of the comments and if there was anything specific that you wanted to clarify obviously we got to hear from from Liz first okay so you want me to address that F yeah I thought that's what you were going to do I want to make sure you get I was going to do maybe a combo like you know address and closing but I I'll address the comments you know made from the public then um uh so you know my first order of businesses is the variances um the the variances we're requesting the lot area and the lot width are classic hardship variances under the zoning ordinance we had a zoning ordinance that was created and created regulations um while this this lot existed um so when you're under size uh you know can you expand it we can expand it there's there's a building uh to the north uh to the South and in the and and you have your your church uh to the North and the cemetery uh to the east so there is no opportunity to expand this so that is your classic hardship uh variance and I I think it's interesting too to that the the actual um Church lot is similar uh in size so you know if that were a vacant lot they'd be facing the same exact variances in that anything developed on this site would require uh the applicant to seek that relief from this board anything one story two stories 10 stories 11 stories so um so I think that again it's classic sir you can't speak out please please you can't speak sir sorry Mr Arington thank you uh so that's your classic case for a hardship uh variance um and in the front yard setback uh relief uh we think stands on its own and that you're you're providing for a generous sidewalk in in in the front a much larger sidewalk than than is existing uh the former industrial use which was was probably a dangerous condition going in and out um but so we are creating a much safer condition there um and there's there's been a lot of Park a lot of parking a lot of talking uh about the parking and the traffic issues um um our traffic expert prepared the report he also testified before you that that it does not create uh uh an unsafe condition or have an impact on the area and and you I note again for the record we are compliant with the parking um requirements we're not we're not uh asking for for for less than and I think it's it's important to note that when we first did this uh project and we presented to the community we didn't have any part and then the response we got was where's the parking so we redesigned uh the project specifically to provide uh for the parking to be compliant so it's kind of a cutch22 do you want the parking or not and in in that regard there's you know there there's concerns and you know I'm not dismissive of their concerns about traffic in Jersey City we all we all deal with it uh and and parking issues but what I'm hearing uh is it's not an issue related to this project before this board that is a a parking issue that quite honestly uh is sounds like it's related to to the church uh that's not going to change with this this project um in fact we' got you know proposed 77 residential units that is uh 77 residential opportunities for people to move into this uh this uh project of which some could be congregants of of the church uh you're you're right next to so it's not uh the parking and the traffic are not issues that are going to be solved nor should they be solved by this project um there were is uh questions and issues about the construction and how they would have an effect on on the church uh in the neighborhood well that again any project here is going to have construction issues those are regulated by the building department in the city and how how you you you take care of those uh that's is I'm sure that you the Commissioners know that's not an issue for this board to consider that's something post uh approval um uh there was a question about Maggie O'Neal's letter uh you and just for the record this is Maggie O'Neal's letter deemed this not a historic property um so that the buildings could be taken down it's not a historic district you know what you know I'm not sure what probative value Maggie's recommendations have because of that but never less we have a building proposed that is similar in scale with the administration building across the street and some of the larger bulky buildings uh in this this area so I I think it is consistent with with what the intent of the the zone is uh and and um in the scale of the neighborhood and you have you know I had there were some comments about you know historical buildings there there there there seem to be some the building directly to the South seems to you know have some historical resources if you will to steal a term from Maggie uh but uh you don't want the new construction matching the old you want to separate it and distinguish it from uh from from the older properties and that's exactly what's happening here and that's why it's a we think it's a a great design um to and and meets the intent of of the uh of the zoning um there are some questions or or or concerns about loading and unloading um yeah I think you're going to have the people who do have car cars and park on on site they would they would unload within the garage um I would anticipate you know others would either if they have a car and want to park elsewhere they're going to walk up to the to the building um but more importantly uh in the Jersey City traffic memo they specifically acknowledge that there there seems to be a need for a loading zone uh in this area um for not not just for this property but for for the whole street and and they have made representations that they are going to address that and that that would be their you know their um purview to present that to the council and that that loading zone um on the street is available to everyone not not a specific project um uh let me see all I do want to address in the record I mean councilman Gilmore comment that that M councilman boano told him that we would meet again with the community uh I respectfully you know disagree that I don't know where he got that information from but as noted we had three meetings here and when we left that last meeting we we addressed additional changes and we kept councilman Boo's office uh uh in the loop on those changes so I just want to clear that up um and I think I think that's really I know there's a lot said but I think a lot of it was was concise uh or and and the same issues um you know we just think this this is a you know a terrific project it's going to eliminate this isore uh and the former industrial use goes away uh this is a residential use that's appropriate uh for this area for the square uh and um we think it's an opportunity for you know residents in the area um and congregants to to to move in you know to um and uh you know where my my client intends on you know he's he's a developer in the city he he builds he's invested in Jersey City he wants to be a good neighbor he's he is a good neighbor uh and uh you know all construction that he does he's he he works with the community and he wouldn't you know not that that's relevant to to the application before you but there were some you know comments made with regard to him so um you know we're we're looking forward to this we think it's a terrific project thank you Mr Harrington okay so uh Liz yeah it's all you um okay uh Mr Harrington have you had a chance to review my staff memo and um conditions proposed conditions I have and and those conditions would be acceptable okay thank you um yeah so I'll just quickly testify to some of the variant es required um the lot size and lot width variances um these are variances that are commonly heard before before and approved by this board um and as as stated anything developed on this site would require relief from that um from those those minimums and then with the front yard requirements the front yard setback requirements um they're meeting the intent by creating a wider sidewalk at the ground floor um and then also just the the variation of the setbacks moving up um just to repeat again uh many buildings on on the street do not have a front yard at all so um it's kind of meeting the intent of that condition and the the 15ot required condition um yeah so with that um staff would recommend approval following the conditions thank you Liz and if you have any more questions for let me know thank you Mr Herrington anything else that you'd like to say no I I I think I pretty much covered what I wanted to say thank you okay uh Council lambi you want to say a few words so chairman as always uh you know I'd like to thank everybody nice to see all of these new faces I haven't seen any of you before so thank you for coming uh chairman and board we sit here every two weeks we hear hundreds of cases a year when we talk about the hardship variance we're talking about a C1 variant so the term hardship comes from the ml the municipal land use law as you all know that's the statute that governs our board and our responsibilities there are hardship variances and then there are what is called the flex variance under subsection two of that part of the statute the hardship in a case such as this is the fact that the minimum lot size does not meet the requirement under the zoning that in and of itself per the statute and case law qualifies as the hardship uh that's what everyone is talking about when you hear the planning expert testimony the engineer Mr Harrington's using the phrase obviously planning staff is using that phrase this is a buildable lot but it does not meet the minimum requirement this is a buildable lot it does not meet the minimum width those are two of the variances sought the other one is the front yard so there is no height variance there is no density variance there is no parking variance we have to be guided by our oats and the law and whether or not there is justification to deviate from the regulations when reviewing the application as this board knows people are pull pulling building permits in the city without coming to this board or going to the zoning board which is another body that he is different types of development applications we are the planning board we are Guided by the statute and it requires us to weigh those factors and whether or not the variance can be granted based on the testimony presented so with that chairman I will happily answer any questions that any board members have if they have any questions any questions Council I think just for the general public what you explained is excellent and I and I think the based on hearing testimony uh what does that do in terms of saying you know 6,900 square feet versus 10,000 uh meaning I guess or more directly is uh if the owner and the developer were to build at the 69 100 square ft and they have that you know is it 110 ft in height um what does that do in terms of uh numbers of units or parking you're saying is that there's nothing with parking no variant requir right so the minimum lot size and the minimum lot width is a condition of the actual lot it cannot not be made to conform in order for it to be made to conform there would have to be available land for purchase so if they can't purchase land and make a 10,000 SQ foot lot they have an undersized lot under the zoning schedule when you have an undersized lot that you can't make conform to the zoning that is what is referred to in the case law as a classic hardship case with that being said in answer to the direct question the unit count and the height would not change that's permitted on this footprint of a building the parking complies that would not change that fits on the footprint of this building based on the number of units so the only variance that is potentially uh I don't want to use the term questionable because it's not questionable but the only variance that is something that perhaps the applicant could address is the front yard setback that variance the testimony and the justification and the street wall and the streetcape was testified to and explained as well as explained both by uh the applicants planner and planning staff with respect to how we deal with the front yard setback both the requirement and where it lands and the design of the building so that's what the board has to weigh and finally with respect to the detriment the detriment is to the zoning plan it is not to the neighboring property and whether or not this building is going to impact their parking and what's going on on their lot the detriment is to the Zone plan and the question is whether or not it is substantially outweighed anyone else okay I'll entertain a motion acting chairman Gonzalez I'd like to make a motion to approve case p23 - 076 address 829 Bergen Avenue as presented to the board tonight second it okay um so our acting Vice chair councilwoman prener is recusing on this application so I'll go to commissioner stamato I approve it commissioner lipsky this is tough um I mean given what council explains um the number of units I mean it it it will get developed one way shape form or the other um and I completely empathize uh with the impact on the Copic church I I can't imagine given the traffic patterns that have already been established on Bergen Avenue that make it single Lanes how complicated to um celebrate a wedding to bring in limousines and cars on that block to uh commemorate the life of somebody who departs this Earth in a funeral service to bring a hear in front and family um it it you know and then what Shireen said about the hardship on uh tradition I believe in holy tradition um and you know hearing the uh legal part um I uh I'm again I'm I'm tortured I I want to if the rules would allow us was to say no that would be you know by law but this is a classic hardship case and one shape form of the other it's going to get developed I think part of the fight for the our Copic community at this particular location is to try to see there's other parking but the other thing I would uh look to do and working with the church is and the developer of this particular property is a man of Faith um I I know him um and I don't think he would be opposed to see if we could get uh a w there designated a loading zone that or a um um a designation for parking for church services um I'll give you one just last thing and then I'm going to make my vote um that on Bonia and Summit there's a big highrise going up and it's right next door to the Greek Orthodox Church the Greek Orthodox though have plenty of parking across the street with a path and they have at least 75 ft where they can have herses and limousines go in we don't have that luxury on Bergen uh and that's something I think we have to do so um I my heart says to vote no but I know that that uh it wouldn't be sustained at some point it's going to get developed and we've got to make accommodations for parking but more importantly for the services that take place at this church so um I vote I commissioner Dr Desai um you know I'm really uh happy to see the whole community over here and of course all those young PE young people who gave their opinions that's a heads off to all of you and of course this is a community uh church and everything and everybody was here so I was really impressed by all young people's opinion but the thing is that they have followed all rules and regulations and you know even 11 story is allowed there a residential parking is there and they have 5% affordable units also so according to the rules and reg regulations we cannot say no but from my heart I would like to say no but still I will say I uh commissioner green I sympathize with um I sympathize with the congregation um I too appreciate um the the members coming out as well as the fathers um I always refer back to counselor we have to abide by the Lords and and the master plan and it will be there I only hope um something good will come out of it I mean it will be it will be rough during construction but I'm hoping when it's all said and done that half the members will be part of your congregation I mean I'm just hoping something good will come out of it I don't want to um I encourage everyone to stay positive about it um and I to vote I uh commissioner Torres um I just want to thank everybody for coming out here um and I think uh something we should learn here at the planning zoning and maybe with the city council that our places of worship in the cities all over uh um see it at my place of worship um people don't it's no longer people from the neighborhood they come from all over the place there's a history of generations of families and they might not live in Jersey City no more but they still come to that place of worship um and I think we need to we need to look at that you know sometimes um I think the young people very impressed with that for coming out and speaking your minds you're very clear you're very educated um and uh it show uh the church should be proud of you um we get these plans and we got to follow the rules of the plans and stuff but um sometimes a developer needs to see what fits in an area as sometimes the intent of that plan maybe this doesn't this doesn't fit in that attempt um I think that the building is a nice building but I don't think they consider the neighborhood and the people that walk around it when they um built the balconies that they built the rooftop that they have all facing the front of the building um I don't think it's um safe for the neighborhood and I um think that that design should be changed so um with that I don't I don't see how um yes was I I'm supposed to vote Yes on this one but I don't see how I can vote Yes on this project that doesn't take consideration with a rooftop unit with a thing and a Congregation of a church and his neighbors in that area and um the fact that for the CH the amount of children when I go down Bergen Avenue and I'm in front of school ps11 are in front of those schools and walking around that neighborhood um there's a lot of children on Bergen Avenue and with that uh with the balconies and everything I'm going to take a stand of voting no for this project okay and acting chair Dr Gonzalez so I'm going to Echo a lot of the uh the comments already made by my co- Commissioners um you know uh commissioner Tes and I have been on this board for probably longer than anybody actually we have so it's been a long time and I don't think that we've ever had maybe we have but not this strong of an opinion this strong of a community the the the hope for the future in this community is is huge with those young kids that came up I mean very very eloquent and how you were talking I was very I really was very impressed and you have a beautiful community and you have a beautiful Church the two churches I was a big follower of Po shinuda before he became a saint uh and so you know this is it's one of those things where you guys have to realize that I you we are in the community with you we live here um and I've actually been into your church and um it it's really difficult when we're on this side I wish you guys would sit here once in a while cuz we're here all the time and and it it's never really it gets a little tiring but it never gets boring because it's very um impressive when we have a community like yours that comes out I I'm very hopeful uh and very happy that you guys came out and then at the end you know you have to just see uh what we have as our Council uh told us you you look at a black and white sheet of paper and there's really no substance for us to deny an application like this um and it's going to be I think it's going to be tough when when construction happens but I also think that uh and I always say this uh that that I I hope and I wish that the uh developer continues to work with the public and I know uh Council uh Harrington uh very well and I know that he you know he he can be a conduit for for that communication to continue um and uh I am going to have to vote Yes for this thank you for coming out okay uh motion carries five in favor one against and one recuse thank you thank you thanks can you call uh councilwoman we going to get ATT Maybe You're So Cal do you you and I are so like man you should see my exact same can't hand all right we're gonna um all right I'll uh go ahead and entertain a motion for the memorialization of resolutions I'll second it oh we have to read them in well we make just got to read them all in yeah first it's okay who's reading them I think uh councilwoman is do you have them Y no no make the motion go for it she's waiting for read them maybe you want to clear the room there's an 11 oh there's an okay oh yeah that's the one for today RDP Amendment you good to go Mike so yeah I I could read the that's this right yes yes she's I got it yeah she got it all right so yeah I'll make the motion to read the resolutions into the record okay can I start okay all right so we have 10 resolutions for the memorialization tonight resolution of number one resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City approving a conditional use applicant greenstop Wellness LLC for preliminary and final major site plan approval conditional use approval 516 tonell Avenue block 3302 lot one case number p2023 d86 number two resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant Mata vavi sip LLC 232 238 Sip Avenue for amended final major site plan approval with C variances 232-238 Sip Avenue block 1052 Lots 15 16 17 and 18 Jersey City New Jersey case number p2023 0111 number three corrected resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City extending preliminary and final major site plan approval by submitted by Newport Associates development company 535 MMA Street AKA 35410 street block 6902 Lot 27 case number p2024 d37 number four resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City approving a one-year extension of the approved preliminary and final major site plan and deviations case number p2024 - 0045 416 Hoboken Avenue LLC 414 432 Hoboken Avenue block 6701 Lots 6 through 12 resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City approving preliminary and final major site plan for 30 and 40 Newport Parkway block 7302 lot 60 city of Jersey City planning board in the matter of 17-19 Berkeley LLC applicant number P 223-0034 decided April 2nd 2024 memorialized May 21st 2024 application for major site plan approval seven resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 70 Fisk LLC for extension of amended final major site plan approval with a deviation 70 Fisk Street AKA 1 mallerie Avenue Jersey City New Jersey block 22 202 Lot 27 case number p2024 d39 number eight resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 165 New York Avenue fee LLC for second extension at preliminary and final major site plan approval with deviations 163-165 New York Avenue Jersey City New Jersey block 12704 Lot 1 15 case number p2024 009 number nine city of Jersey City planning board in the matter of 35 Fairview Avenue LLC application p2023 d44 decided April 16 2024 application for preliminary and final major site plan approval number 10 resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 21421 6 Palisade Avenue LLC for preliminary and final major site plan approval with a c variance 216 Palisade Avenue Jersey City New Jersey block 6001 Lot 8 case number P22 d189 and uh number 11 resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City for recommending um to the municipal Council approval and adop of certain amendments to the Luis Muno Mar development plan or Redevelopment plan applicant Jersey City embankment Associates LLC for resolution of the city of Jersey resolution of the Jersey City planning board recommending to the municipal Council approval and Adoption of proposed amendments to the Luis Muno Marin Redevelopment plan in accordance with njsa 40a col12 a-7 case number p2024 d63 thank you can I have a second second thank you okay do we need Executive session anyone oh we do roll though vote roll for the memorial oh sorry okay so acting Vice chair uh uh councilwoman prery hi uh commissioner Stato hi Commission lipsky I'm really tortured by this I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I commissioner Torres and acting chair Dr Gonzalez all in favor to memorialize resolution okay do we need an no executive session motion to perfect adjourn thank you guys I know