I pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stand one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all thank you everybody could we have a sunshine announcement please cam good evening everyone today is Tuesday March 5th in the year 2024 this is a Jersey City planning board meeting with a scheduled 5:30 p.m. start time um this planning board meeting is being held um in person as an open uh public meeting 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 March 1st of this year this meeting was also posted on the Jersey City division of City Planning web page and all distribution materials um made available to the board were published and um made available to the public I almost said that this was a zoom meeting all right could we have a roll call please um okay commissioner Torres pres Vice chair gangadin here uh commissioner Stato presid commissioner Cruz here commissioner Desai here and chairman Langston here okay we have a quorum there are six Commissioners present could we swear in the staff please Mike any testimony tonight be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes all right cam do we have uh any correspondence yes okay and then before I get into that um I do have two announcements I want to make one um comes from my director and they are asking that as a reminder please silence all cell phones and um please uh everybody remember to speak into the microphones because if we don't the audio does not get captured on the recording um and then also as a side note uh very exciting we have a new city planner with us tonight Sophia Pereira um yes very exciting stuff um and then um I did miss that we do need to Mark the uh Sunshine announcement into evidence so I guess we can Mark that whatever uh B one and um now into the uh formalities we do have um our adjournments um but in addition to the adjournments on the agenda we have [Music] um six cases actually that are requesting to carry um um so I will start with the items that have requested to carry under new business um and then we can go back and go over the adjournments but um so these are the items that dropped off um within the last 48 hours so item nine under new business this is case p2023 d009 7 it's an administrative Amendment the address is 200 Green Street um they are carrying and they are Ren noticing for April 2nd and that is the next regularly scheduled um no I'm sorry that is the first regularly scheduled meeting in April um but after that we have item 12 on the agenda um that is case P22 227 it's a preliminary and final major site plan with variances the address is 605 to 607 Grove Street and they've requested to carry uh with preservation of notice to April 16th of this year um then moving on we have item 13 on the agenda um case p say 35 Fairview Avenue and they have requested to carry with preservation of notice to April 16th um of this year um and then item 15 on the agenda case p2020 uh p 2023-24 a preliminary and final major site plan address is 30 and 40 Newport Parkway they have requested to carry with preservation of notice to April 16th of this year um two more item 16 on the agenda case p2023 -72 it's a conditional use address at a 840 commun Paul Avenue and they have requested to uh carry with preservation of notice to April 16th of this year and then very last item on the agenda uh item 17 it is case P20 23- 0062 it is a site Amendment at address 44 to 46 New Kirk Street and they have requested to carry with preservation of notice to April 16th of this year um so those are the items that have dropped off within the last 48 hours but we do have the adjournments which are under item um six and we can go through those if you like um they're listed on the agenda I don't think we need to go through them okay yeah okay so let's uh get into Old business item a under old business case p2024 -12 is a subdivision extension for 251 to 257 Grand Street uh good evening everybody my name is Jim mccan from the left arm of conell Foley appearing on behalf of the applicant um this is a very simple case um this is a minor subdivision that was approved by this board in March of last year uh the resolution was memorialized in April um the subdivision was accompanied by a final site plan both matters proceeded after approval by this board to resolution compliance um we did the resolution compliance there weren't really any big issues it was just that the time it took um I think there were some summer vacations one by me one by Mr Russo maybe uh Lewan Wang that kind of slowed us down and Loan behold by the time I got my Subdivision plat signed uh by you Mr chairman my 190 day period had expired so I'm simply requesting that the time to file the plat um be extended from the day it expired to 90 days from the date of this extension approval tonight should you grant it um as memorialized by the resolution and um Council I forgot to say that since this is just an extension of the time to file a plat there's no notice required under Jersey City's local ordinance and that's my ask thank you Council councel uh I obviously understand I've advised the board in the past that this is something that unfortunately under the statute by the time the signatures happen if you were to attempt to file that plat it would get rejected by the Hutson County registar and you'd be back here anyway looking for that same uh relief but uh do we need to put a specific date within the resolution and do we need to resign the Subdivision plat since it's already been approved or can we just do a resolution extending the time with a specific date and that'll suffice for the yes that that is my that is my request I do not believe we need to resign anything it's all everything's been signed by County Mr chairman Jersey City engineering all required officials so I think a resolution extending the time to 90 days from say today or the resolution which would be in two weeks right that would be plenty of time for me to get the plat filed we do it from the resolution you have the is it a myar you have the myar I have it all here's a copy of a of the paper one but I have two myars signed by everybody so I'm ready to record should this board give me the extension chairman quite honestly it's a administrative uh situation that given council's represent presentations to the board as to why they were unable to get it filed within that statutory time frame uh the board routinely grants those kind of accommodations just to execute what has already been decided by the board so I see no reason not to move forward understood thank you Council and uh Mr mccan obviously any conditions of approval that were on the previous application or on the application I should say would carry over acknowledged okay any uh any questions from the board anybody no okay thank you is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this application anybody from the public JY no no one from the public I would like to close the public portion second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed uh sofhia anything you want to add yeah um planning staff would just ask the that the applicants attorney agree to the existing conditions placed into effect under the old approval hello Sophia nice to meet you and yes the applicant agrees to that okay and with that planning staff recommends approval thank you okay thank you chair i' like to make a motion to approve case p2024 D12 for uh oneyear extension um together with all conditions remaining in place second second okay we have a motion made and seconded um okay so on a motion to approve uh commissioner Torres uh councel I just want to say I'm surprised and I'm very glad that you um get a chance as busy as you are to get a some of vacation you always pay you always pay for it though like that's why I'm here and with that I vote Yes commissioner Dr Desai commissioner crew hi commissioner stamato I Vice acting Vice chair gangadin hi and chairman Langston hi motion carries all in favor all right thank you thank thank you everybody good night all right let's move on to item 10 is case P20 23- 0098 is a minor subdivision for 619 Palisade Avenue good uh good evening everyone um Michael Higgins of castano qule chamy uh on behalf of the applicant um is there some way for me to plug in over here or is it um well Council I know that you've received our uh digital version of our affidavit proof of service and notices by thank you coun and Mr Higgins if you could make sure you're on top of that microphone yeah absolutely okay do you have regular HDMI or does it need a this should work chairman for the record I am to receive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application 619 Palisade Avenue here in the city it does appear to be in order we're going to mark it is A1 for purposes of the record uh thank you coun okay so this is 619 Palisade Avenue um it's right between Congress and uh North Street on Palisade um right now it's a uh 50 by 10725 lot um what we're proposing to do we're going to be demolishing the uh existing structure there filling in the curb cut putting in new Street trees and subdividing the lot into two two New Lots which would be 14.01 and 14.02 uh those will be 2,685 ft and 2,691 square ft uh respectively it's a completely as of right subdivision there's no uh variances as part of this application um and Council there's no curb Cuts involved here correct there is an existing curb cut it is going to be uh removed um that's depicted on uh right over here yes okay okay so after the subdivision there's no more curb cut correct correct okay all right that's your presentation that is our presentation all right anybody from the board any questions no okay thank you is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application anybody here from public chy no one from the public I would like to close the public portion second motion made and seconded public is closed uh this is Cameron cam I'm sorry is it Cameron or am I it is so is I apologize anything you want to add yes uh planning staff would ask that the applicant's attorney agree to the conditions outlined in the staff memo sent on March 4th uh yes the applicant agrees to the conditions in the staff memo okay and uh with that planning staff recommends approval okay I'll entertain a motion chair I like to make a motion to approve case p2023 d98 as presented to the board this evening for approve all right motion is made and second commissioner commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner Cruz I commissioner stamato I commissioner Torres I acting Vice chair gangan I and chairman Langston I motion carries all in favor to approve okay thank you okay so let's move on to item 11 it's case p23 075 is a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances for 319 to 321 4th Street um good evening everyone um that is me as well Michael Higgins on behalf of the applicant um once again we've delivered our uh proof of notice digitally but I have the original okay um this is for 319-321 4th Street um this is a building located on 4th Street between Kohl's and and Monmouth um what we're proposing to do here is to demolish the existing buildings and construct a new four-story residential building uh this building will have eight units and two parking spaces um it's in the new R thece chairman I've had the opportunity to revie the publication Pro mailing it does appear to be in order thank you Council okay great um so this is going to be an 8un uh residential building with two parking spaces it's in the new rc3 zone right in downtown um and to construct this we need a few variances as well as preliminary and final major sight plan approval uh those include uh rear yard setback um where 28.5 ft are required and 21.8 ft are proposed um minimum parking spaces where six spaces are required required um and two spaces are proposed and then uh minimum Landscaping where 950 ft are required and uh 700 Square ft are proposed um I'd just like to note before we get into our Witnesses two interesting things about this property there's one of those blocks in uh downtown Jersey City that has an Alleyway uh running through the middle of the block so uh I think with respect to the reard variance uh our testimony will show that there's no uh adverse effect on the neighbors and that you know we can qualify as under either a hardship variance or the benefits outweighing the detriments there is uh there's a 10-ft wide Alleyway uh there will be substantial and uh and uh enough light and air between the property and the neighbors to the rear uh with regard to parking which is the uh more notable variance I think here um this is really the best that we could do with uh the lot I think that this is a very appropriate area for a parking variant with it being in downtown Jersey City being close to public transit and being a very walkable area but beyond that um we were originally able to get uh four spaces of rear yard parking um we received a letter from the division of traffic engineering they had concerns about oversized uh Vehicles parking in the rear and that that would obstruct the alleyway so we reduced it to four uh in order to comply with those comments um so with that I I can get into my Witnesses uh my first witness is our architect Allan Feld if we could please get him uh sworn in I do Alan Feld a an FLD D Mr Feld good evening uh We've qualif you in the past always a pleasure to see you uh is your license current tonight in the state than okay thanks you're qualified thank you can we go you got it is that it yeah yep good yeah this is new for me using the pad uh to make a presentation so bear with me um as was stated um uh this property on is uh um 50 by 95 on Fourth Street it faces Fourth Street and at the rear is a 10 foot wide alley uh we propos to demolish two existing buildings and and um construct a new four-story 8 unit uh building um it is in the r3's rc3 district which is a permitted multifam District now now see if I can get you just press I think you're trying to get the next page yeah let's see what comes up if you just go like that oh let's just keep going way yeah okay um used to zoom you just got used to zoom Mr Feld oh okay okay so um this uh shows the existing site plan and the demolition plan um of the two um properties and on on the next page is the proposed site plan showing uh as you can see the the parking in the rear uh one space is for Ada uh compliance um and on the in the front um we have Landscaping in the front as much as possible that's one of the variances is uh landscaping and but we are uh to compensate that we're uh providing two new Street trees these are so there are there is one um two bedroom one bath unit there are four two-bedroom two baths and three three um three-bedroom two bath units in the building uh this is an elevator building so all the units are Ada accessible and uh Alan just to note real quick if you could go back to the previous sheet um those are Planters uh at the right side of the property next to the landscaped area right and is that correct yes we added Landscaping uh buting the um the parking spaces at the rear yeah and the part of the intention of that would be to prevent someone from parking on the Landscaping that is correct um this these are the floor plans fourth plan there is um a roof deck and um a green roof as well which uh complies with the requirements and on A7 we have the the front and rear elevations side relations and here we have um a rendering of the front view and uh the the canopy and signage in the front the street address and this is the sh Shadow study um Alan could you just go back to I think it was sheet A6 real quick uh showed the roof deck so right on the bottom of the page uh that's another row of Planters next to the roof deck um that was also put there I suppose with the intention to um prevent uh and Screen the the roof deck and the street from from noise that's that screens it's on the right hand side it screens us from the adjoining property um so this is a four-story building actually the the adjoining property is lower I think it's a two story two or three story building but even so we have this these Hedges along the that side property line to uh minimize any noise that may transfer to the joining property okay and how many square feet of green roof do we have I can't see that much it looks like it's uh 850 square feet of 6 in trays is that correct yeah I think so okay it's just too small for me to see okay um does that conclude your correct uh we we can take questions for Alan now or we could reserve it till after the okay let's uh let's get questions out now um so Mr Feld the Planters are 2 4 by 24 correct correct and what is the they sit on top of the Power Pit uh yes yes they they sit higher okay so the parit is what 4 foot uh 42 in 42 so you're just under six foot you're 5 foot six to the top of the hedges correct okay all right that's my only question right now anybody else Mr felt I have a question on the um looking at that the property um go and by the property um you demo and the two the two buildings that are existing yeah when we look at the property the one on the left hand side is attached to the other building that's there now that is uh occupied right yeah yeah there it you don't see it in the front there's a little space but towards the back um it's going to be a it's uh the build is attached to the other Builder basically if we're going to have a uh on on are you talking about the on the left side of the property or the right side the left side is going to have a uh is going to have a side yard of about 3 feet for Windows and egress so we're not going to be touching the prop so when you demo the building then the side of his build that building whoever owns it is not going to have any side in or have we'd have to repair anything have to repair anything okay yeah correct so anything would be taken care for that property owner definitely as you demo that little section in the back that is extended to yeah I agree yeah yes okay then the next question is with the um the space for the garage I understand you know the 28 ft to 20 uh we are not um the I see that little corner planter that you have in the back of the alley way mhm nothing's interfering with the original Alleyway though is there no right okay thank you I do have a question can you show me the uh thing with the two parkings there the parking yeah how big is can you uh put one more parking in there or not so um I think I can speak to that commissioner we originally had um four parking spaces um we received uh a letter back after the division of traffic engineering reviewed and they were not okay with uh compact spaces they needed fullsize spaces um so we you know adjusted this the layout it changed the first floor layout a little bit and you know with fullsize spaces really the best that we could fit was two uh um I don't know that a third would be possible and even if it were it would it would make our our Landscaping variance um a lot more significant so we' sort of been uh balancing the different factors here you know the the you can see on the top there is a triangular and on the bottom so those two are a West space you know we we do need one parking space in there at least you know because this is eight eight apartments and there are only two parking you know at least you have to get one more parking there yeah um I would just say we I forgot to say we are uh providing for seven bicycle spaces in inside the building yeah four required correct for bicycle spaces yeah okay I think it it um reason those parking spaces are diagonal is for the uh easier access in and out of the alleyway right uh I guess it would be very hard to make a turn into a straight parking space that's correct right yeah 10 ft is very narrow yeah yeah so them Alleyways get very narrow and there's light poles in those Alleyways and telephone lines and stuff like that uh so would make it very difficult to do a straight parket spot correct there's also the um little walkway which uh is for Ada access um right for the Ada space that I don't know if we'd be able yeah I understand why you did it that way yeah I I before we go on I think we need to enter this set of plans as an exhibit that's different from what I'm seeing on the portal um this is the set that I believe was provided on February 9th um if it's different than what's on the portal we could certainly enter it as an exhibit uh yeah just do that so the last revision I see on the plan that I'm looking at yeah it's a different plan um the last revision is 1115 of 23 what's the revision on the plan that you have coun February 9th all right Mr Feld these February 9 plans were all the sheets changed on those plans yeah some of them were not all of them but but they were they're included in the package they're all in the package yeah okay so let's mark it as A2 MH and 14 sheets it's 14 yeah right there m yeah yes yes yes okay last revision date February 9th uh February 9th 2024 thank you Mr phel so Council we obviously need to go over the changes that have happened happened in the latest revision yeah there is a uh small description next the revision date that I could zoom in on there was an update to the first floor layout uh removal of a side overhang and uh some changes to the Landscaping um all of those are bubbled on the plans uh and I can have Allan um Point them out as we go through one more time yeah let's let's go through sheet by sheet just so we can see what the changes are from right and I apologize I looked at the wrong date uh the latest revision we have is December 26th of 23 thank you um okay so these are the bubble changes here Alan if you could just walk through first uh one by one so this is a change to the the floor areas correct correct on on drawing the first page um the floor areas for each floor is updated and then the unit areas for each dwelling unit has also been updated those are in the Triangle number three you can scroll down how do I get over there to Y and and then uh in the zoning chart uh again the Landscaping uh square footage was revised which is indicated in number three revision and the amount of landscaping increased correct that's correct in in the rear um that's it the other ones are bubbled but I don't believe there's any change there no there's no changes here no changes that's the side over here yeah on drawing I'm sorry with drawing page is this now this is for the record sheet Z4 um uh again it shows the increased or the Landscaping at the rear uh adjacent to the parking spaces and I'm sorry M Feld you're going over all of the changes that are correct on the February 9th set correct and also on that last way we remove the overhang uh on the side on the left hand side of the building do you want to point that out to the board Allan um that's a bubble alongside that dark um access for the ADA compliance but that shows above around the side left side and the rear of the of the building and Council that's on sheet Z4 left hand side proposed site plan correct on drawing A3 again it's the same um the Landscaping um adjoining the parking area and uh there was a small change out to the layout here um to provide access to the mechanical um spaces as well correct Alan yes correct I'm sorry okay the Mechanicals or the bike or those bike racks bike paring it would be the washer dryer here uh bike parking so in dwelling unit number one the washer dryer was changed is that correct Mr Feld yes and also the bike parking was changed and the meter room mail room change yes how about the trash recycling room was there a change to that as well the trash recycle room right here Alan yeah that's correct these are all internal uh revisions all right understood okay Allan and for the record we are looking at sheet A4 currently um A4 we remove the overhang along the left hand side of the of the proposed building so this is the same overhang that was discussed when we were looking at the site plan previously correct so the overhang was eliminated correct and this that was A4 yes A5 we're currently looking at uh sheet A5 um depicting the same thing the same the same being the removal of the overhang correct on the subsequent floor okay and uh this is sheet A6 Allan could you describe the bubbled revisions here again this relates to the overhang of on the left hand side of the building and and also adding the uh on the right side adding the the uh planting along the parit wall okay oops and uh I there's a this is sheet A7 um there was a small revision over here it looks like on the rear elevation can you describe that Alan yeah on the rear elevation again it's the same removing the overhang so the building is doesn't have an overhang on the left hand side and um this is sheet A8 uh is the same thing of removing the overhang on that side of the building that's all the revisions Alan that's correct um we'd move to introduce this as I guess exhibit 82 are we on yes Council we've marked it as A2 for purposes of record we'll now accept it into evidence as A2 okay thank you councel go and let's go back to the A9 J uh Vision picture that you have there right there 3D front view you're showing me on the other drawing on the left hand side a Alleyway with Windows on the property and then you show this drawing up against the building uh the alleyway uh or the setback starts doesn't start at the front property line it starts um oh starts only in the back towards the back yeah not in the front and the front is attached to the join why don't we go to sheet I think it was A7 A7 okay okay I see it now I understand how was which sheet are you showing I got it yep thank you very much this is sheet A3 Council all right and if we just zoom in Mr Feld your testimony is that the step back is looks like it's about nine and six is 15 about 16 feet correct back into the building correct so sprinkle room trash room up against the property line that's correct and the step back yep okay any other questions anybody no that's for me all right thank you Mr Feld appreciate it down okay um my uh second witness is uh Michael Nona who uh will very briefly present the uh civil plans we're presenting him as a professional civil engineer are you plugging in yours or you uh I can oh laptop oh I could I think I could pull it up or if you were just going to go by your report that's fine too I can just go by the report the plans match these are pretty closely truth the truth I do my name is Michael Nona n o n uh I work for Stonefield engineering and design I'm a project engineer there uh we're located at 92 Park Avenue in Rutherford New Jersey um I am a licensed Prof profal engineer my license is current and in good standing okay thank you Mr non you're qualified thank you um I'll try to keep it short and sweet here um basically we had um some conversations with adjacent property owners that had some concern about the storm water um we submitted in our storm water report as well as in all the provided plans that we are compliant with all JC mua regulations uh we are providing as Mr Feld mentioned 850 uh Square ft of green roof this 850 Square ft um will store 1,88 oh I'm sorry 1,975 gallons of water or 1,887 gallons are required um due to this green roof we are reducing the peak storm in the 2year 10 year and 100e compliant and we are compliant with all jcmua regulations um all the utilities of storm water Gas and Electric are being connected in the four Street RightWay through the front of the building and um if there are no questions I guess that concludes my testimony no I have no questions anybody else okay thank you sir thank you thank you um my third witness is uh John korak he's a professional traffic engineer if we could please get him sworn intim tonight the truth the whole truth truth I do sure it's John korak last name spelled c o r a k Mr corak good evening uh I believe we've qualified you in the past haven't we yes I've appeared before this board and uh your license is current tonight as a traffic engineer yes it is okay thank you sir you're qualified great thank you okay John so um just briefly describe your findings from your report to the board yeah of course so so we were retained to undertake a traffic study uh in accordance with uh your city ordinance regulations for the 8 unit multif family building um of key note here of course the traffic component of it eight units is not a very significant traffic generator especially when we're replacing multif family with more multif family it's it's almost a one forone swap very minimal traffic impact if you will we do have a parking variant on the site where the two spaces are required uh I mean two spaces are provided but six spaces are required here we have excellent uh connectivity to Transit being in downtown Jersey City um short walk to multiple buses along Newark Avenue about a half mile from the Grove Street PATH station uh bike lane along Fourth Street which coincides nicely with our indoor bike storage on the first floor and all those things help reduce vehicle ownership and uh and parking demand associated with the project additionally uh one of the two lots uh currently has a curb cut along for Street uh we're closing that curb cut that's going to one give back a parking space in the on Street network two that's going to help comply with uh various Master plans of Jersey City Vision zero bike master plan pedestrian enhancement plan School travel plan all those things by reducing uh curb Cuts reducing vehicular conflicts with pedestrians uh and and bicyclists um along our site Frontage so you know with that we feel comfortable these two parking spaces sufficient to support this project um um a particular note it's nice having that uh accessible parking space for these accessible units and that second parking space that that is provided in the back could also be an accessible space say we had two units which required um you know accessible access uh you know via a vehicle we have that we have that space and capacity to do so in the rear with those angled parking spaces um the the reason as set before where we can't cram in more parking spaces has to do with the angling the the alleyway back there it's only 10 ft wide um and and a right in parking space that's not enough space to make those Maneuvers so that's why we have the angled spaces and the two parking spaces in the rear thank you John does that conclude yeah that I think that concludes my testimony okay okay thank you Mr corak I have no questions anybody else okay thank you thank you okay and just one Final witness um I I have uh John MCD as our professional planner uh we could have him sworn in as well sure yes I do sure hi everyone John McDon MC Capital do OU project planner Mr McDon good evening pleasure to see you in person finally andse your license is current tonight yes it is okay thank you you're qualified okay John so um from your report uh are your findings that the variances are appropriate for this site this is a good application it aligns very nicely with your new rc3 Zone District substantial compliance with both use and all of the bulk criteria uh no heavy relief here related to density related to height related to coverage or the like the relief that the applicant is seeking is relatively modest here we've got the setback in the back which again is for 21.1 Ft where 28.5 would be the the minimum required a negligible deficiency when we look at the fact that we have the alley in the back to offset that and as you've heard at the outset to mitigate and provide adequate light air and open space likewise we got the Landscaping relief for 72.5 square feet where 950 would be the minimum required again that's mitigated by the very nice landscape plan here including the green roof the roof Terrace the two shade trees the 15 shrubs all of which will meet the spirit of the ordinance if not U hitting the literal requirement of the ordinance and then you've got the predicate for the parking relief through Mr corx testimony where we have two spaces where six would be required again the supply will meet the demand given the amenity Rich area that you have in this uh in this location of the community uh with Transit amenities a walkable area bikable and the like so we think on balance this is reconcilable under the C2 test whereby the benefit of the application as a whole would Advance any detriments or outweigh any detriments substantially we're looking at a permitted use here we're going to deliver new housing stock uh that replenishes your older housing stock advancing positive Aesthetics efficient land use and variety of uses in appropriate locations uh all of which would outweigh any impacts associated with that relatively modest relief this is good INF fi development it's going to integrate well with that four-story new building right next door this is is a four-story building so good compatibility and good alignment with your ordinances here in town okay thank you Mr McDon I have no questions anybody else no sir okay thank you okay um that does conclude our direct testimony uh we're happy to answer any questions okay thank you Council um at this time let's open it up for public comment is anybody here from the public that wants to comment please come on up and we have three minutes each for you I do David soltero um 313 and a half 4th Street and um first I want to just make a comment generally about how these proceedings go we've been waiting six months the better part of six months to to to to have this come up we've been here at every meeting and boy this that a pain in the neck for everybody to do um understood so uh in regards to the um the building itself the neighborhood is largely two and three story buildings the four story building that they just referenced went up we never got notice of it we've been at 313 and a half for over 10 years now never got notice of it there's a building up going across the street I don't know how large that building is but they're now constructing it we didn't get notice of that either I think that's 36 16 or 384th that doesn't look like it has parking this one only has two parking spaces unless they're going to Bar their tenants or their owners from having cars they can have up to two cars per unit you know if you have a husband and wife husband husband wife wife whatever um so we're talking about 16 potential cars in a small block with lots of cars on it already two parking spaces are not enough I have a a drive a garage in the back I manage to pull in straight into my garage it might be a pain in the neck but that's just the way it is everybody on that alley has their parking right up against the the alley so two spaces is definitely not enough especially one is a handicap spot um uh so yes so I I think that we need to you know they went from six which is required to four now down to two I think we need the six uh but you certainly can't give them less than four spaces it's they can redesign the house so that they can do it they just designed it to take up most of the property so you can't put in the spaces um another thing the building is a block building totally uh is not consistent with except for that one four-story building right next door to it which again got approved without us knowing about it all the other buildings like I said two and three story kind of like townhouse house type buildings these buildings that that are now going up is destroying the character of the neighborhood and uh you you're just going to have these massive buildings that go almost up to the the street and that go back all the way to the end of the property it's it's really inconsistent I know that apparently they've had a change in the um uh the regulations for our area but it's it's going to change the character of the uh block as it is that's all I have to say thank you thank you sir I do my name's Christopher chali it's uh k r i s t o b h e r and my last name is t Ru n c a l i and I'm at 317 4th Street site 1 good evening sir we have three minutes for you okay thank you so um I have a number of concerns so the building obviously is going to go very far out in the back and it'll cast a shadow on our building and obstruct our view but if you look at the way the buildings are laid out now there's probably room for at least 8 to 10 cars in the back as of the way it is right now um the alleyway has issues with drainage there's no drainage pipe back there I've been trying to get the city to do something about that it's an ongoing effort but what they're doing is essentially making a bunch of area where um there's nowhere for the water to go cuz right now it's going to just get soaked up in the ground there I have concerns with the planting uh The Green Roof that what if the plants die and then we just end up with Muddy Water all flowing in and flooding my um essentially my kids' bedroom so the way the buildings are set up we have a three-story building but there's actually a story below ground which is like the fourth story which is finnished space that I live in and um they're building this building a story higher so they don't care if water goes up but it's going to flood right into my kids's bedroom um with this setup the reason these spaces are diagonal is to build as far back as physically possible we have four spaces in the back I have a three-unit building that I live in and there's five spaces for my building um the four spaces in the back are straight on they're not diagonal and it's not enough parking even with the five spaces the other two units are actually renters and at different points the owners have not offered the renters the spaces and I've seen renters parking on the street as well so to cut this down to what may be one space if there's no handicap uh partk like if no person is using the handicap space it's ridiculous and it's going to cause a huge impact on the parking on the street and as of now I often get my driveway blocked because people will just park right in front of it and when you have another you know 10 cars parking on the street it's going to be a nightmare for us um and then also throughout I have concerns about the demolition because it's connected to my building they've done a number of things that were downright dangerous um including throwing debris out of a third story window without you know any sort of safety measures they never boarded up the building so then homeless people started living there they had multiple violations they left trash everywhere they don't maintain the landscape they put attack dogs loose in the building with um someone checking on them once every 24 hours it's been a number of crazy things where I'm terrified that they'll go to demo this building and it'll cost massive damage to where I live so I I think I mean that was pretty much everything I had to say okay thank you sir and obviously the planning board can't can't do anything about you know attack dogs in the building but I you know on a personal level that's if that's true that's crazy um absolutely and uh I agree it would it's highly inappropriate um it was a previous property manager that um unfortunately it's true um but uh wow they were removed and um the current owner found out about it removed them immediately and I believe boarded up the property um confirmed same with me um so everything was taken care of uh I'd briefly like to note a few things um there were some comments about the height um Council can we get through public comment first still in public comment I'm sorry anybody else from the public if you'd like to comment please come on up anybody else chair hearing no more would like to close the public portion second it okay motion is made and seconded uh Council go ahead if you want to give a closing statement yeah I I'll be very brief um so there were some comments uh in the public comment about the height and new development being out of character with the neighborhood uh our testimony did cover this previously from our professional planner but this is a new Zone it's the rc3 Zone it has different purposes the Height's permitted and the density is permitted we believe it's in the character that's intended uh under the current zoning and I believe our testimony has shown that um and there were also some concerns about storm water um as our uh civil engineer testified um storm water is significantly approved from what there is currently there will be less runoff um it's it's an improvement to what's there currently and uh once again parking I think very briefly this is really the best that we could do um to ensure access with angled parking spaces to re ensure there's room for an ADA walkway uh and to address the comments from traffic engineering which I believe is a new concern from them I certainly haven't heard it in the past but they they seem to be worried about preserving these Alleyways uh in the rear of these properties um so they they they want to make sure that there's full siize spaces and uh compliant parking there um I think it's also worth noting uh under the rc3 zoning um the applicant elected to do it this way it's it's one combined building so parking is required it's based on the number of bedrooms uh if it was two separate developments there they're actually would be no no parking requirement here um but uh that that's pretty much all I'd like like to note um that concludes Our Testimony this evening okay thank you Council um cam this is yours I believe yes chairman okay do you uh do you have any comments yes so as just procedure we ask that the applicant agree to the conditions in the planning staff memo dated January 4th of this year are those conditions acceptable those conditions are acceptable okay um with that out of the way uh the professional planner did address all of the variances associated with the property and Justified them through the C1 and C2 criteria um and planning staff agrees that this does meet the objectives and goals of the Redevelopment plan without having any detriment to the zoned plan or master plan and um the variances um I I can say without a doubt we we worked as hard as possible to get rid of them um and in fact actually parking was one thing that we did want to see increased here but um the engineering department said no way they wanted the diagonal spots so um we we couldn't get the parking that we wanted um the lot is undersized by Nature it's 5T shorter and all of them are 5T shorter on this block which um contributes to the rear yard setback variance which is indicative of this block um the adjacent property to the West has a similar style height setback and um is almost a carbon copy of this development here um the landscaping again we tried painstakingly to get rid of that variance um but we just could not find find the the ways to fit in more green area um so with that um planning staff uh feels that the variances here are Justified under the C1 and C2 criteria and um in this case would not have any detriment to air light space The public's General Welfare or well-being or negatively impact the Zone plant and the master plan um and ultimately um planning staff feels that this would be Improvement to the site and um would uh planning staff would recommend approval cam what's what's the predominant setback for the neighborhood I I see the building if I look at your staff report on page two um so the property to the right that has it looks like a red fire escape okay do you know what the setback is on that is that fire escape so you're you're looking at the rear yard um sorry yeah so that one is significantly less than what you see throughout the rest of the block um and yes currently the property to the Southeast their neighbor 317 um yeah that that has a significantly um smaller uh there's no deviation there set back there it's got to be like 35 ft I'm ballparking it I don't I don't know off hand okay um and just just to pick your brain a little bit on the uh the angled parking that City engineering wants that's you know new for us we've never seen seen them really go after angled parking like that um I if this is a compliant rear yard at 28 foot 286 I should say I guess is uh required can you park head in is that the is the setback the 20 foot setback is that what's driving the angled spaces as far as in City engineering is concerned no they they wanted the angled parking no matter what they wanted the full size 9 by8 vehicle angled parking in the alley and yes this is new this is something new that we've seen It's a combination of uh new staff Lindsay scoffield and lishan so yeah so any I mean what's the width of the alley is it 10 ft it's a 10t alley I I believe yeah and is there any directional traffic in the alley is there any control of that it's just a either way either way however you can Co Street or you come from Street do matter Eddie just turn your mic on when you speak no the alleyway is set up that you could come from either side of the street it's not a if you were on Cole Street it came into the alleyway or you're on momy street and went into the alleyway it it it doesn't matter but it's an Alleyway so it's regulated in that regard and the PO that I mentioned before on W are not all over the alleyway so it depends on depends on the maintenance of the people that took care of the property back there of how much space there really is when you're trying to turn but most cars have uh most of those Alleyways have garages and they do go go straight in right they don't uh I I don't know the reason why engineering is doing that but I know going down the alley and both of this in Jersey City and for the record I want to do I'll say it right now I think there's a lot of character to Jersey downtown Jersey City and history in those Alleyways you know I mean it's a been a part of my childhood you know playing in those alleyways and um that's why I always asked the question is nobody going to do anything to change that it should always stay that way but at the same time um most cars all go straight and to and but if we were to ask City engineering or planning nobody would design the Alleyways that way in 2024 we've had projects come to this board before with the alleyway and we questioned and they were never a diagonal pocket I'm talking about creating the alleyway 10 ft wide yes but I'm saying in the past projects we never had an Alleyway that was diagonal parking yeah this is the first one new city engineering this is a whole new request from them yes I mean to me that's the angled parking is is creating more of a a deviation here you know I I don't know if you can fit four cars back there parking head in if there's a handicap spot I think the handicap spot is important um but I I don't know if you fit four wide rather than coun do you know the answer to that question did you did you guys have a design with four head in spots we had a design which was four spots I believe they were heading on the old plan I I might be able to pull it up but but I I I don't know off hand um I recall that was the design it was it was four compact head in yeah full compact yeah so no handicap spot at all no okay no handicap sorry guys we we can't have testimony coming from there may there may have been a handicap on that design but it must have been flawed I mean yeah I I I don't I I don't recall apologize um I I mean what's in front of us tonight is two yeah but the um you Di we think about going back to engineering and see because I know the reason why we have this little landscape back there with the planter and stuff is to meet your landscape fams yes yeah yes that's why we're taking that space um that's nobody nobody's going to see that's part of it um I don't know that you'd be able to fit the two additional spaces either I mean I might be able to pull a architect again to testify to that if if that's the question I don't think we could fit four angled spaces period with with or without uh Landscaping well like chairman like the chairman just stated that this is not what's put in front of us today well but let's be clear what's put in front of us is in direct response to City engineering yes saying those spots should be angled it was not as I understood a council and correct me if I'm wrong it wasn't your client's idea to angle the spaces it's only through your interaction with City engineering that you've angled the spaces is that a fair statement that is correct yes okay so City engineering is uh advocating for angled spacing but it the building is set back 20 feet from the alleyway line based on what was testified to As I understood and I think I can State my my client would certainly rather have Force bases it it adds more value if he could have gotten that he he would have preserved that I appreciate the honesty Council um yeah but uh Council if your client rather have four spaces and he didn't do a setback of 20 feet he would have three at least three spaces for size a setad of three compact right cuz he wind up with four compact spaces because he's only allowing a 20 foot setback if he would have designed it no that's think that that doesn't make it a compact space no it's in the width it's in the width not in the l 9 by8 is a I'm sorry yeah so chairman obviously the board is got to come to some sort of a decision uh obviously the application is based on the comments and concerns of City engineering and this board obviously deals in planning and has to make the decision uh and consider City engineering's position and its own planning decisions so obviously what's in front of us tonight is two angled spaces um that's what we're voting on tonight we you know we're not being we're not being presented with a Force Space plan so we're voting on two angled spaces tonight so take that into consideration in your vote and I guess with that said I'll entertain a motion chairman just before we make that motion I do want to add to the conversation council's representation that the applicant would be willing to consider the four spaces is if the uh four spaces would be entertained versus the two angled spaces that City engineering is pretty adamant about so uh I think it's only fair to the applicant that if the board has an issue with City engineering's recommendation then the Board needs to kind of address that issue I'll address that issue then um yeah I'm I'm much more comfortable with four spaces four head in spaces yeah um agreed again that's you know I haven't seen that design yet I I can't say right now that I would be a yes vote for that or not I'd have to say it it have have to be presented to me y but I I'm certainly more open to four head- in spaces than two angled spaces four head in spaces um even with that would be even with I assume traffic engineering saying we can override traffic and Engineering if um if it makes it a better project then you know but we got to see it is board's kind of position Council so I understand I think uh perhaps you want to carry the application and see if you can make that revision is there any way that I could have a brief recess to consult my client before I before I do that um I don't know if Mr Feld can draw that quick in the back um I I mean we'd have to see a drawing of it the public would have to see a drawing of it it would have to be up on the portal for okay the required time um we we can't just design it on the spot tonight as much as I'd like to okay I I I think I see the uh give this a conclusion tonight I see the writing on the wall here so I I guess we'll uh yeah I just think it's a much different project with double the number of spaces and um if that does come back to us with that change um I I think it would be wise to get a an inventory up and down that alley of the other properties are the other properties all head in how many spaces do they provide is this keeping you know head in parking is this keeping with the nature of the neighborhood um I I think on on a legal thare not an alley angled parking makes sense I just don't know if that fits in this scenario I think if all of a sudden we changed every spot in that alley to angled parking I think we lose half the parking spaces in that alley okay so I you know i' I'd be much more apt to to consider head in parking if that was the flavor of the neighborhood okay umod Council if um if the board's okay with it then I I think we'd have to request to carrye and uh address this for uh let me think for the next hearing would be April April March 19th I think uh got to go to April 2 April 2D I think we'd have to do right cam yeah because the change has to be made and submitted to so obviously we have members of the public that are interested yeah I'd rather give them a solid date tonight too not that we have to this way we don't give them the 19 them yeah okay so uh Council I would move to carry to a date certain April 2nd at this point with testimony taken uh April 2nd you could come in give us revised plans we wouldn't be hearing previous testimony we would just be hearing the new testimony on the the changes to the rear yard parking okay um we we agreed to that is that going to be with the um to with engineering too on board or is U is that going to be possible I they can try to talk to engineering but it sounds like engineering is not on board with the concept head in parking I just want to make sure that when I look at it I know what I'm supposed to see yeah yeah okay we can't yeah we can't see it until we see it um so yeah I at this time I would entertain a motion to carry uh this matter to April 2nd with testimony taken chair i' like to make a motion to carry case p23 075 to a certain date of April 2nd with testimony taken um acting Vice chair a motion I need a second second second okay we have a motion and a second to carry to April 2nd acting Vice chair Gaden yes commissioner Dr Desai cared commissioner Cruz yes Carri commissioner Stato yes Carrie commissioner Torres to the people that came out and spoke today um I know it's it's hard to come here we do this all the time and it last is a lot longer um thank you for being here thank you for letting us know your concerns and um with that I make a I I vote Yes out a motion and chairman Lon we're in a we're in a motion at uh David um I to carry motion carries all in favor to carry with preservation of notice to April second okay thank you thank you Council thank you everybody um we're going to take a 10-minute break and uh we'll be back at might be more like 13 we'll we'll be back at 7:20 everybody over Joey Torres youe you want be Le e 1100 for yeah just wasn't showing up called so industrial from massive warehouses and all need special if you're buy Amazon it needs to be stored at a certain temperature so the W to have that I think this is where she go say right you ready Chris she's got to give a speech toight introduce herself and everything else Sophia it's got to be at least 20 minutes you go up to Chris and he'll guide you come sit sit right next to Chris ice what college you went to what your grades were you know did you pass your exams or not of us so what college you went to Sophia good oh you gota wait you can't tell everybody now you gotta wait till it gets fed up they should be coming in and we are ready with questions yeah we did we called everybody we have questions for her there's going to be yes believe me that's that's a good point there's going to be everybody one question everybody has one question for you 2 3 4 we start with the try nine questions all right can we come to order please everybody let's call uh item 14 is case p2023 d74 is a site plan Amendment for 239 to 259 Cole Street uh good evening Commissioners Tom lean of Connell Foley here on behalf of the applicant uh this is a notice case and while an affidavit was provided I've been asked to provide uh originals and hard copies you have Council thank you so Mr lean the question that I have to start is this is lot 3.04 only that is correct as far as a tax slot designation there are portions of the application before the board that deal with proposed rights of way that have yet to be dedicated to the city um that PO the portions of the property that are owned by the city and I don't think would fall under the requirement to notice from the bounds of them the actual application before the board affects only lot 3.04 as far as a designated tax slot but the prior approvals included other Lots they did they did um this was originally known as block 693 Lots one two and three it was subdivided from there the approvals dealt with a four-phase development uh there are no changes to the other phases other than phase three which has been designated now as lot 3.04 but I guess my other concern concern is with regard to the other phasing improvements is I understood the notice and that's really where the question comes from right so the notice had indicated at least when I reviewed it that there was the other phases did I misread the notice in that regard um I I provided you with my only copy so I I would have to review it unless you can point me exactly to the language that you're concerned about I'm concerned about I guess it's number seven changes to the previously approved Road Improvement phasing plan as it relates to delivery of phase four roads correct and again that goes back to my what I previously said that there are deliveries along with each phase of this project that relate to public roads nothing that is before this board today is a designated parcel as of right now they are all public roadways that are to be completed and delivered along with each phase of the project and eventually will be rights of way they're not blocks and lots before this board today and not something that I could have requested a 200t list to notice from the boundaries of those areas because they are their roads and All Phases one through four are part of lot 3.04 now or no no no so where is phase four specifically so phase four and I'd have to refer to the actual tax map on here if you'll just yeah three out three okay so lot 3.03 is phase four which is a project that has been approved by this board there is phasing that was meant to be delivered as part of phase let's just go through the phases so we're all clear sure 3.04 is what everyone has understood to be phase three of the project that is correct 3.03 is what everyone understood to be phase four of the project that is also correct I'm looking at the 200 foot buffer map for lot 304 I see lot 3.02 I see lot 2.01 lot 3.01 in Block 693 where is Phase One and where is phase two okay so it would be helpful if I had that in front of me if you if you wouldn't mind and I'll I'll try to hold this up so everybody can see what I'm referring Council perhaps can we put it on the screen or it was attached to the digital copy and Council the only reason I have to do it this way obviously is you understand is for jurisdictional purposes I want to make sure that we don't make a misstep right off the bat okay let's go to arit if we have that one staff um that's what you wanted you're welcome the the other thing we did post this to the portal I don't know if it's possible for staff to put our two Under Foot list up wait look right here 693 do you see this top left it's the scarf um Mr lean just to clarify you're asking that staff bring up the open data portal listing that's correct yes yeah can look right here uh but this will work this will work okay um for for the record what you have displayed above you is an aerial 200 foot depiction of uh the Emerson um District of the Jersey Avenue light rail uh excuse me Jersey Avenue Park Redevelopment plan area uh to the South all right so let's Lo let's zoom in on block 6903 because that's what we're exclusively talking about correct M thank you all right so 3.04 is the 1 point is that 48 acre that that is correct yes and that is the subject of the application before the board this evening and that's phase three correct 30 3.03 immediately to the left 200 by 77 that is Phase 4 that is correct okay 3.02 we see let's scroll down I think right 2.01 and 3.01 and 1.01 and 1.02 the the what 3.02 is the former 15th Street 14 yes 15th Street that is private property now and is eventually to be dedicated um 3.01 is phase one and it is the completed and operational building that is known as 315 15th Street phase two is 2.01 to the west of phase one 3.02 is going to be the extension of 15th Street that is correct okay and is unaffected so here's my problem Council my problem and clarify it for me is we only have one approval with phasing is that accurate actually I guess there were two resolutions there was the original approval in 2018 there was there was if I to go through the history phase one was approved preliminary and Final Phase two three and four were approved only as preliminary in 2018 in 2018 we came back to this board in 200 I'm going to say 19 but I want to check the resolu 21 I'm going to double check the resolution actually 20 memorialized in January of 21 I believe yes there was an application with a 2019 p number it was submitted to us in 2019 but the board heard it in 2020 approved in 2020 memorialized in 2021 that was for final for phases 2 three and four we then came back with an amendment to the phasing schedule affecting the entirety of all four phases in 2022 right 2021 the end of 2021 correct okay I agree but we always took everything from all the Lots did we not we did because all of those approvals affected all four phases the application before the board tonight affects only phase three so then how do we deal with the request as to phase four I think we can deal with it because it deals with deliverables that were associated solely with phase three that you want to make part of phase 4 correct so chairman and board the question becomes whether or not notice has to be from the lot that is part of phase 4 if the deliverable is going towards phase 4 I don't find an issue with an infirmary in the substance of the notice the question is whether or not the 200 foot notice has to be from and including that lot 3.03 uh I think it may be a question council is pretty confident in his position that it is not the concern is always jurisdiction in nature and if council is okay proceeding his own risk then chairman and board I think that the board can move forward with the application if the board's comfortable understanding that the applicant would be moving at their own risk understood Council let's mark it okay 81 for purpose of the record is the notice thank you thank you Council thank you Council um Can the packet be provided to staff for the board's recordkeeping and just go ahead and Mark it as A1 please um not to recreate too much of what we just uh discussed but uh this was a phased approval approved by this board uh in the fact that we came before the board and asked for final approval on phase one we came back and eventually asked for final approval on phases 2 three and four and uh phase one is now completed phases two and three are currently under construction phase two is another tower that uh is currently under construction uh attached to phase one and phase three is the rehabilitation of the existing Warehouse that was found to have historic fabric uh in the phase two uh historic study of uh downtown Jersey City um the application before you tonight seeks to amend that approval uh it was approved for a basement uh parking area or a half basement parking area of 94 parking spaces unfortunately when we sought D approval uh to construct that basement the DP denied uh the use of that area for a parking area um we appealed that as high as we possibly could the DP eventually issued a determination that parking would not be acceptable uh in the half basement area of the warehouse building accordingly uh we are requesting to remove the 94 spaces that were approved uh we do have adequate parking for phases 1 two and three which are one completed two currently under construction um and we do meet the parking requirements under the Redevelopment plan uh we have our architect here to uh go over those changes and in addition as discussed there is a request to shift some of the deliverables as far as the phasing uh specifically as it relates to uh 14th Street and MMA Street and that is largely because of the existing conditions on MMA Street which make trying to do the project and complete that in conjunction with this project uh very difficult given that it is not under control of the developer so with that I'm gonna ask that Mr Ron Russell come up and go through the proposed changes yes Ronald J Russell R SS l l with Urban architecture in Jersey City oh yeah thank you Mr Russell good evening uh always a pleasure I've seen you in person in the past uh couple years but the board hasn't um we've qualified you in the past your license is current tonight yes it is okay thank you you're qualified thank you very much good evening everybody uh so I'll go through all of the drawings there's uh we only we're only presenting the phase three drawings that's all the amendment has to uh as part of so the first drawing is uh go back what happened there is g00001 which shows the site plan and again nothing changed on this sheet except the sheet numbers only pertain to phase three the project is located uh on between 15th and 16th Street and Cole Street it's the old original Warehouse to the original Continental Can Company the remaining buildings were torn down after the Continental Continental Can Company was used and then became the Emerson radio Factory the all the buildings are surrounding the original 1920s building were torn down and so here is the one remaining building which does has a historic Fabric and that's the only building we're talking about tonight so we can go to next page please uh this sheet has the zoning table and the unit counts so the Redevelopment plan requires allows 1100 units the original uh uh approval had 1,99 with the deduction of 16 units in this part of application we have now have 1,083 units for the overall project the project had 156 residential units and now it has 40 we also uh Inc by reducing the unit counts which were on the first floor some the the 16 Apartments we increased the retail space from 19,000 Square ft to approximately 38,000 Square ft next page please this is the basement plan which had the 94 parking spaces uh up on the upper leftand corner uh is where we had a ramp coming down from 16th Street that ramp has now been deleted and uh as as well as the 94 parking spaces the basement will not be used for anything it's been has to be closed off in accordance with njde standards because we're in the flood zone next this is the first floor plan and on the bottom right corner which is 15th Street we have uh retail spaces that front on 15th street that once had residential work work live unit they have been deleted and again now we have approximately 30 8,000 ft of retail space that will be subdivided into various sizes and we do have some tenants for this now the other change to this plan is on 16th Street where we had a ramp up on the upper leftand corner of this P this is Page a 115 by the way uh on the upper leftand corner which is the um northwest corner uh we had the ramp coming down that ramp has now been deleted since we there will be no longer access to the basement and that is now going to be a retail space and that retail space will have an ADA ramp leading from 16th Street to the space as well as we we also remove the bike parking from the basement and that will be to the west of that new retail space that'll be 96 parking spaces of bike parking spaces in accordance with the Redevelopment plan um next page please uh this is the typical residential plan uh there is is really no changes to this minor changes to the apartments but the unit counts basically stay the same next this is the roof plan not really no changes to this the only thing we're asking for on this plan is that we like to delay the use of the roof plan uh until the completion of phase four which is to the west of this building that'll be a 26-story building and it is very hazardous to have this roof occupied with a 26-story building under construction next to it uh we just did that with phase one and phase two and it was very problematic having people up there so we don't want to have that same condition on the roof of phase three the other issue reason is because the we're required to have multiple means of regresses on this roof and one of them is directly adjacent to phase four so again it's very hazardous to have people up here while we're constructing the adjacent high-rise building so we like to delay the use of this roof until the completion of phase 4 So when you say the use yes all the improvements would be constructed yes you just would not allow occupany U no let me let me sorry let me correct that uh we will construct the elevators to the roof we'll construct the um elevator uh lobby but the improvements to the roof will not be done and we can't because again damage to the improvements will happen because with concrete splatter uh debris coming off we just don't want to destroy the the Improvement up there so we're bringing the elevators up we'll have the fire stairs up and we'll have the elevator Lobby up but the the the plantings and everything will not be put up there so it's to finish improvements but you'll have two means of egress up there in case of emergency if somebody is up there we'll have that yes okay we we actually have three means of agess up there okay I'm just thinking of you know obviously workers up there yes we will have um adequate means of Eis and that will be approved by the building department okay thank you but the kitchen the bars all those things would not be constructed that's correct but we have and we have brought up all the plumbing for that we brought up the electric the plumbing it's just again the finishes and that's all stubbed out it's just the finishes would not be installed well question then um the rest of the building will be occupied in phase three this building yes it'll be occupied it'll be occupied so you'll be getting a temporary CE on that or I'm not sure how the building department will give if they'll give us a temp for that or permanent uh so that I'm not sure how that will work out with the roof I I'm almost certain it would be a TCO with the co contingent upon the completion of the other work other yeah CU otherwise you would have be like a whole new uh project going up on a roof but correct okay thank you thank you and uh Mr Russell stamp pipe is in the stairwells correct there's nothing on the roof itself hidden in planters or anything like that no the stand pipes have been brought up okay so they'll all be operational at that point okay very good next page please uh this is is the building currently being constructed yes it's still in construction okay it's still in construction yes um this is the uh exterior elevations of the building one of the changes we like to include is we origin Al had um I can't just may walk up here existing elevation there was an existing elevation um detail number five entry three and four these were one-story entrance to entran to the building on both 15th Street and 16th Street when we originally looked at the building we determined that the original entrances were too far deteriorated to restore them and part of there was an existing building next to it which was torn down but we couldn't access that so we designed and got approval for removing those original elements entrances and come up with a more contemporary entrance that's entry one entry two existing condition photo 8 and N it's uh detail five entry exist entry three and four and yes uh detail 8 and N entry 1 and two correct and then that correlates obviously existing North elevation entry one and two yes and then where is entry three and four on the elevation three and four are located on 15 Street that's the existing Southside elevation that's correct right okay so we determined during construction that we can reconstruct them repair the concrete and now and we'll show photographs of that the before and after pictures uh we determined that it we could restore those and we uh discussed that with the planning the planning originally did not want us to remove those so we're going back to the board to get those uh the original entrances allowed or permitted to be restored that's what we're doing here so we we're restoring them back the way they originally were you lost me I'm sorry so the original entrances were supposed to be demolished and were I'm sorry and were or were not were were supposed to be and we did not we're restoring them so we're back here to to include the original entrances in a restored manner just just to clarify Mr Russell what you're saying is is that when the board originally approved this they approved demolishing them correct planning in our discussions with them would have liked if we had kept them and now we are saying we can keep them and that's what's being proposed as part of this amendment correct thank you and the only reason there's confusion on my part is because the building is under construction correct and and probably my presentation you could say it perhaps U next page please uh this is 2.04 which shows the new proposed entrance on the south elevation uh for both of them South elevation one is a blowup of one of the entrances which is the upper one uh detail three and the detail number one on the bottom is both both entrances on the south elevation these are one-story entrances that was were the original entrance to the building and that included an entrance included delivery and other items to get into the building so we're restoring these and we'll show we'll show you photos of that next and then this is the north elevation same thing a blow up of the one of the entrances on detail number three and then both entrances are shown on detail number one what's also shown on detail number one is where the uh ramp to the basement was going down and that is on the right side of the lower elevation you can see there's two windows now and a handicap ramp that is where the ramp was going to go down into the basement and now that's been taken out and we're putting a storefront system in there and an ADA ramp so we're restoring that entrance to again to way it was we're using as retail next page this is the phasing plan so the original phasing plan uh the bubbled areas are the changed areas and we are changing the that was number two can you zoom into that please so Council this plan is clearly phasing two and three I I apologize if you could clarify this plan is clearly titled phasing two and three site plan that is correct and that might just be a clarification but I don't think it changes ultimately that there was a condition related to phase three we are asking for that commission that condition to be amended and in further thinking about it when planning opines on this and provides what they believe are going to be the conditions of approval I think it even ties further that the requested changes and it's really just what you will see there as 13th Street and Monmouth which were originally tied to phase three those are going to be the only things that are changed and are requested to be changed by the board this evening there is a bubbled out area there showing portions of 14th and 15th Street and mmth it is my understanding and I'll let Ron clarify for me but that is not changing that is being delivered as previously approved it is bubbled but it it's not Chang in from when it was originally going to be provided which is in conjunction with Phase 2 so we're not asking for that to be changed by the board this evening all right so let's talk about it phase 2B Mammoth Street in the middle of the page that's up on the screen that's been done it is being completed as approved with the under case p21 051 that was to be delivered with phase two right it will continue to be delivered with phase two nothing about that is changing with the request this evening what you see now bubbled as phase 4 13th Street and portions of monus street was to be delivered with phase three we are now asking that that condition be removed and offset until we get to phase four and again I know that Mr D Silva is going to comment on this the condition he's going to impose ties it even closer to phase three I think than what we're actually requesting and is being depicted on the planer staff would like to clarify as well that what Mr lean refers to in his testim as phase 3 is labeled as phase 2A on this document which reflects a terminology change made during the previous approval P20 Council what is the most recent approval it was p2051 yes so phase what is now referred to as phase 2B is what was originally referred to as Phase 2 and what is now referred to as phase 2A was what was originally referred to as phase three and and yes when this was originally approved there was sort of one two three four now that we've got two and three under construction at the same time they sort of morphed into 2 a 2B and that might be where some of the confusion arises so phase one is completely finished up to an including what we see in the Carolina blue yes it is okay phase two is is coming to completion I I can't opine on it will actually be finished but anybody driving up the the viaduct to get on the ter Pike will see that it is substantially on its way to being completed it's right that's what I see is near in completion correct yes and that includes the phase 2B purple streak grid on the screen that is my understanding but I'm not going to testify to that I might ask Mr Reeves to testify to that who is our engineer if you would like him to give you a status update I mean chairman I I'm trying to follow as best I can so if everybody else is clear and I'm slightly behind that's fair I'm not the sharpest knife in the draw so I'm best we got though Santo um why well you got you what why don't we why don't we yes why don't we clarify the phasing as far as the roads go as well let's bring Mr Reeves up okay um hacked by Kathy what happened it's gone see that's why we keep yes I do Jeffrey Reeves re VES Mr Reeves good to see you in person as well um we've qualified you in the past your license is current tonight yes it is it is current thank you you're qualified sure thank you very much yeah I've been involved with this project since 2017 uh it's morphed into many different uh phases and different projects uh yes phase one is completely done it's operational uh it's open to the public that is in blue um North section of Cole Street is operational uh fa fa south of of Cole Street South and blue is all under construction uh green I'm sorry all the blue is completed and constructed and operational the green color is currently under construction and that is attached to phase three that's the building that we are currently constructing right now it's the old stacko Warehouse the purple color which is I believe labeled as phase two is attached to phasee 2 Tower which is also currently under construction it's already elevated all the way up I believe it's topped off at this point and they're working internally on the units that infrastructure in the purple section of the map is already built all the water mains are in the sanitary is in the storm systems are in they haven't done the curves and sidewalks yet it's under construction that's phase two so phase three is in green that's under construction fa phase two was purple that's under construction and then we're left with that light color purple which includes phase four which is in the future the pink pink I'm sorry thank you for clarifying my color the pink the pink is phase four which is in the future and south of 14th Street down to 13th Street will be in phase four so Phase 2 a and Phase 2 B the green and the purple are all the mains and infrastructure in everything except curbs and sidewalks correct on the purple section correct what about the green the green a lot of that curbs and soic are already in okay they they even have a lot of the ashphalt in it's getting close to being completed but it's still under construction okay okay to be open in front here I mean majority of all the infrastructure is in all the underground is done to throughout the whole complex they're finishing up curbs and sidewalks in certain sections in addition to the infrastructure under the pink phase 4 on the North section yes by by 16th Street between 15th and 16th Street the infrastructure is in okay water M's in the storm is in makes sense makes sense the curbs are not in okay and the roads are not in because when you start building the tower it's only going to get destroyed right all right but we're here tonight really to talk about the pink south of 14th Street right down to 13th okay that we are hopeful to move that to phase four that is what our request is correct that is corre that is our request to move that to phase four is that infrastructure in or no no nothing is OCC nothing is done yet there's no infrastructure improvements done to the pink in that section South Mama Street section South and 13th Street have not started construction yet so what's on that lot this interior that route one Emerson Park phase 4 what oh go ahead yeah sure so that is the area that is essentially the the turnpike extension coming down into the Holland Tunnel where it meets 14th Street there oh it's brid that's above it's the bridge you have the Emerson Park which is a requirement of the Redevelopment plan and is a requirement of the original approval that this board granted so just move the screen because the aerial is going to show the approach into the Holland Tunnel right sure away from the Holland Tunnel there you go so that triangle right right is that bottom corner of the piece the chair was just speaking about in the colorized roadway phasing map that I've just made up right correct and that Trestle approach is elevated above obviously so the pink phase 4 I hate to use the term below it it it is yeah guess that's North though north of 16th and 15th Street it's sou 13th Street is the area south of the elevated Turnpike area North is to the top straight up so what is what is driving that change the move that portion into phase 4 sure uh it's a couple things one we don't control the area currently that will connect Monmouth Street through to what will be eventually MMA Street connecting to what you see to the north there there's a there's a number of issues it's currently blocked off the city actually controls a portion of it there's a number of title issues um and right now it's just there's too many moving pieces for it to be completed right now what about the section underneath by underneath you you mean the park or the both the park and the and the so the park was always meant to be approved by this board as a matter of fact we can't get a CO for phase four until this board approves the design of that part so that's already set into phase four I think you're talking about 13th Street 13th Street and Monmouth connecting to 13th Street so 13th Street again I don't want to testify but I believe 13th Street is currently usable it's just that we are to improve and complete it as part of the entire design and that would be include the extension through to Monmouth Street but if if I understand and and please correct me if I'm getting something wrong here Monmouth Street behind phase three I'm sorry behind phase four right phase four butts up to Monmouth Street it does okay so at the north at the West the West yeah Northwest and looping around the South actually Northwest so if we're holding up Monmouth Street to the west of phase 4 be because of concerns about construction and damage to the asphalt and the such what prevents Monmouth SE to the South to the south of phase underneath route one and Route One and N right and that was what I was talking about about it being a lot of moving pieces essentially that we do not control that portion it is city-owned right now and I believe there are a number of title issues that have not been resolved on top of the fact that psng is right there to the west of that site and I believe they have access and uh excuse me encumbrance issues on that portion right now we're working through all those okay but we're trying to resolve phase three and again you're going to hear some conditions from the city that are going to force our hand to resolve some of those issues okay which we've already been in discussions about I thought you were talking about M Street going north no okay that's where I thought the title issues were and the blockage was yes if you were to go down Monmouth as it exists right now you would run into a dead end there MH yeah and it's it's fenced up there's not access right now okay so but we have provided got it it's back I fixed it so from 16th down to the viaduct on Mammoth that's already been installed and constructed it's under construction under construction it's under construction right the concern is for really 14th Street the connection between 13th Street and 14th Street on Monmouth right right so you alluded to title issues I don't know what those are Council but uh is there no Redevelopment agreement pertaining to that portion of this Pro project this there is no Redevelopment agreement for this project no we are required to provide all these improvements and these improvements will be required we are simply asking the board this evening to consider when they are delivered and what the conditions precedent to that are and again I I don't want to jump the gun here but we've already been in discussions City Planning where prior to receipt of construction permits for phase 4 they want those roads in place so I can put that on the record because I'm going to have to agree to it as a condition so those roads aren going to be in place we're asking that it not hold up phase three so Council obviously my general thought in response to that is there was already a agreement as to when that was all going to happen in the prior resolution so obviously I understand the request of the applicant but we obviously have not been able to meet the phasing plan that's in place that is correct the the obligation does not go away for the developer though no but the developer is requesting to shift it to a different phase and point in time while delivering all the other items including the col Street Park and the other improvements that Mr Reeves testified to I just want to be clear what the request is so that those members that vote on the request understands what they're understood being requested and voting on is there more testimony to be provided from the applicant I have no other direct testimony but obviously we're open to questions and I know that planning has significant comments so yeah and Council obviously you know me well enough to know that I just want it to be clear as to what's being presented Absolut I appreciate the professionals and their their testimony I'm clear now chairman so I hope the board is also clear I would like question yeah I let to be clear on one part on uh when we talk about the park and you can't get a CEO for one of the building so the park is under it it it was always agreed it's in our previous res resolutions does that have any ties to the part of the property that has a conflict with the titles in the city no so you'll still be able to if that doesn't get resolved let's say if there's a problem with the titles you'll still be able to deliver on the park on the and and this board actually needs to approve the site plan for the park so that's about to be clear we have to come back here for that which hasn't hasn't been presented yet no no it has not and that I'm sorry that happens before phase 4 begins correct it happens before a COO can be OB yes okay yes okay understood anybody else any questions no sir this this isn't your only shot don't worry we're gonna I'm sure Matt's gonna have testimony um if there's no other questions I'll open it up for public comment now if anybody's here from the public that would like to comment on this application please come on up chair see no more public I would like to close the public portion second it okay motion is made and second it public is closed um Matt do you want to jump in uh certainly comments thank you chairman um so I guess I'll start um so staff provided a memo dated 27 2024 with um some application background that memo mostly pertains to the changes to the building in phase three itself um there were some small um Arata in that memo based on um due to incomplete documentation of previous project changes in the materials provided to staff I'd just like to clarify the entire Emerson development the whole development of all four phases upon completion will have 437 parking spots not 471 spots upon completion um and that the total number of housing units as currently proposed is 1,083 units not 1,99 units um the applicant had expressed potential interest in the future of adding those 16 lost units back in a in a potential future amendment to phase 4 but they are not moving ahead with that as of now that is not Germaine to tonight so um The applicant's Proposal as of now is to collectively have a total of 1,083 residential units and 437 parking spots in the entire in the development in its entirety um can I can I just jump in real quick just because it's it's in the front of my mind I want to get it out to certainly if you have a question it's not a question it's um it's a comment so if the applicant wants to add those 16 units back in they were originally live work units correct um they were live work units in phase three I don't recall I'm looking at the original approval and I think they were all wasn't that the testimony that was residential units that could be work spaces also so they were not they were not live work they were not live work they were residential units that could be used because it's on a commercial space person commercial space so they could be used for commercial as well as living areas okay so if in the future and I I think this should be in the resolution that if those units were proposed to be add added back in they should be of the same type same type they should be able to be a work space and and the only reason I want to be very careful here is because work live is a defined use in our ordinance I I thought that was the testimony I apologize and and I I don't have it in front of me I don't want to say yes if that because I don't know if that's a permitted use in this Zone okay so um they will be of the same kind and like of what was is removed if we come back to request okay ju just given the you know this is a unique absolutely project it's a unique neighborhood that you know we see a lot of projects come through that don't pay homage to the original fabric of the community and I I think that's important to keep that if it's being proposed taken out and it's added in later I I just want to make sure that the resolution reflects that and that's the intent of the original plan also is to have those units be you know paying homage to the industrial past understood okay Matt I apologize no certainly that thank you chairman that was um very important and thank you for stepping in um yeah so the memo as I said the memo this speaks mainly to the changes and reprogramming of the building in phase three the Adaptive reuse um staff supports um the removal the parking per the D instructions about the need to seal the basement um and the increase in um in retail space um as noted um even though parking is being removed from this phase that there were 307 39 parking spots provided um in Phase One um and there are still parking spots proposed to be provided as part of phase 4 and phase 2B if I'm correct [Music] um um if you could clarify Mr Russell yes there are 309 units which was previously approved for phase one phase two will have 128 parking spaces so 309 phase one 128 for phase two MH we had 94 in the basement of phase three that's being deleted okay so at the end of the day we'll have 437 spaces being provided currently when we come back in the future with phase 4 we're planning to put parking into phase four that's a different application okay so no parking in phase four as of now park as the current plan does not have parking in phase four the current approved plan okay thank you um Council you want to clarify when you come back for phase four phase four was approved if we come back to amend phase four but I I just want to clarify one thing Mr Russell uh with the numbers you provided that is compliant with the requirements of the Redevelopment plan correct for for phases one two and okay correct so if we are to come back with a amendment to phase four there would be proposed parking in it but it's not Germaine to the issue at hand because we're providing enough parking that's why I don't even want to talk about it right now so just just for the board's you know voting tonight that's not in play tonight it may be talked about but that is not what we're voting on tonight and you can't consider any additional parking that might come up in the future correct until we see it until we vote on it it doesn't exist thank you for that clarification chairman um I'd also like to clarify so this phase three the Adaptive reuse portion the Redevelopment plan exempts that portion of the Emerson District any adaptive reuse from parking requirements and so the changing of the programming and the increasing the amount of retail in this phase has no relevance to the parking requirements for the site plan um so the CH removal of the parking and the changing of the increasing amount of retail space has no impact as to the as of right nature of this application as the applicant proposes um I would like to move beyond the staff memo to discuss um some concerns staff has had with regards to the phasing plan for the improvements um the completion and dedication of the roads as part of the site plan approval um so the um as counselor stated that the Improvement of these roads and the dedication of them to the city was always a part of the zoning and is written into the Redevelopment plan and is a condition of the development rights and density provided here um the phasing as originally approved um in previous approvals was always related to balancing that obligation versus the Practical need um to force site access and to ensure that you're not improving roads and then ripping them up and having to put them back in again for example that's why we didn't require them to put all the roads in beforehand um staff has some concerns about pushing the block of Monmouth Street between 13th and 14th Street as well as the Improvement of 13th Street between Cole Street and Monmouth to phase four um there's as um Mr Le mentioned in his testimony there is no practical construction constraint on that those completion and that obligation still exists um we do understand that um there have been some legal encumbrances that have de delayed the ability of the applicant to act on improving those roads according to the originally agreed on phasing plan um and so staff um would like to recommend a floor amendment to have instead of having um the that block of monry and that block of 13th Street be simply part of phase 4 that they be required to comp as part of the phasing plan complete those two blocks prior to the issuance of a construction permit for phase 4 so they do not need to be so staff is proposing that they do not need to be completed in order to get um a certificate of occupancy for phases two or three but that the applicant may not pull a construction permit for phase 4 until um that performance in terms of the construction of those two streets is constructed if um does the applicant agree to those terms uh we do if the board is interested in imposing that yeah it so essentially I think what it's saying is and and this is why I felt more comfortable about the notice issue is is that we're amending the condition as it relates to three which is to say we can still get a CO for phase three we cannot commence construction on phase four until the roads are completed and let's for the record let's define the exact spot so it's 13th Street 13th Street between Co stre to Monmouth correct and it's also the stretch of Monmouth from 13th to 14th 13th to 14th not to 15th 15th will be completed that is already under construction okay yes so they are required to complete Monmouth between 14th and 15th as part of phase 2 which is currently under construction and then from 15th to 16th happens during phase four correct that's correct yes so when all is said and done before phase four can begin 13th Street from Kohl's to Monmouth will be complete Monmouth from 13th all the way to 15th will be completed before phase four begins I just want to be very clear because I don't want to time the the end of phase two which would be 14th to 15th but certainly before phase four begins 13th to 14th on Monmouth will need to be complete that's the condition we're agreeing to today so chairman the only problem with that obviously is if phase four doesn't begin right so I like to tie it to an end not a beginning because you may never get those streets constructed I understand council's concern I do um I don't I don't know if I have an answer to that before you um I can say that um all the the financing is in place for all four phases um it does not behoove the developer to leave that uncompleted um this is a it's a phase project that works entirely all together and for us to showing that we've already started construction between 14th and 15th uh to leave that portion uncomplete I I I don't think it makes much sense um and I I can't say more than that to assure the board that it will be completed except that we have a we have a site plan approval and we intend to to move forward with it we complet it entirely but In fairness Council shouldn't that onus be on the applicant and shouldn't the applicant deliver the deliverable when it gets the co for that phase for phase three when phase three is completed shouldn't the improvements I don't I haven't heard what the issues are regarding title I heard a general comment that there are title issues I'll accept the representation coming from you Council that there are title issues I don't know what they are what the hurdle is to resolve solving those issues and why they haven't I I I been solved I can put on the record and mrva just also put on the record that we have spoken with planning they are satisfied that there are conditions that we cannot complete in an expedited timeline and that there are all I can say is is that there again it's not a piece of property that's under control of the developer psng is next door and has certain incumbrances on that piece of property which we're working through it's a timing issue they will be resolved they're not going to be resolved tomorrow phase three is under construction and it's going to be completed probably well before that portion is resolved phase two is under construction we are working on the roads that were to be delivered as part of that we are making an agreeing to a condition that before we commence work on phase four those roads will be delivered to the city that that's that's all I can right provide to the board this year so the question is does does the board feel comfortable with that condition or would the board feel more comfortable with a condition that it's tied to the issuance of the co for phase three for the board to decide that is yes okay but go ahead clarify something on this um the start of construction of phase four that will allow you to um have the vots completed uh but you didn't do the infrastructure yet no I don't believe the infrastructure to that section you said was not completed there's nothing no water no sewage no anything down in that portion of faceb under the bridge correct that not good start so would you be able to deliver the roads and then start the sewage and the waters and other I I'm not sure I are you talking about water to the building phase four building the section underneath you testified that all the rest of them have their water infrastru the water mains the sewer Ms in the street but the phase four does down at the bottom does not or does not have it it's a very good question all right um I call it the bridge the viaduct under the viaduct Mama street is going to be constructed all right and along 13th Street is going to be widened and improved with sidewalks landscaping and trees and so forth and improve drainage improve water lines that's the vision right that's that's the plan that's our commitment that's our requirement on our master plan though that particular roadway Mama street from 14th to 13th under the viaduct has not been started there's been nothing done no infrastructure no clearing there's still fences there Port Authorities still parking there all right it's still being actively used by pscg import Authority and there title issues pardon me and because of those title issues north of 14th Street all the infrastructure is in right the section of Mama Street between 15th and 16th infrastructures in it's it and then the water's in the Sor is in the storm's in that that particular section of Road underground is all in we have not done the curbs sidewalks of road because we're going to build Tower phase 4 and you're only going to destroy the roads and sidewalks but the underground is in okay so then you'll be able to give the vots completed even though that part under is not started yet has been done so chair uh commissioner there's a question as to whether what is proposed as this phase 4 extension and construction of Mammoth and 13th Street can actually be achieved no it can be no it it it can be achieved it cannot be timely achieved in the time that phase three will be completed that is why we're asking for it to be p is there pending litigation over the there is no pending there is no pending litigation there is no question as to who owns what properties there there's not but if there are encumbrances on the property that take time to clear because people are using it for example psng and the Port Authority then we can't start digging up the property until those incumbrances and their uses of them are resolved what is it I don't know exactly but I can say that I know for example that psng uses it I believe partly for Access and that the Port Authority currently Parks cars on it so what's the encumbers they have a 99e ground lease I don't have that in front of me but I believe that they do have some form of Lea lease that they are working on removing or ending the time period for the lease well but Council I don't mean to get cute but you say there's an encumbrance on the property in plain English there's a property right dispute of some sort or maybe it's not a dispute it's recognized right so whether it's disp whether it's a ground lease a leasehold uh an easement an ownership interest there is something that some third party not your client and not the city has a legal right that prevents the street from being constructed both below grade infrastructure and curbing sidewalk and finishing of the street that it could then be dedicated as a right of way to the city today today as we sit here today yes and that may in fact be true in three years in 18 months you don't know the answer I don't know the answer which is fair I'm not chastising you for it I don't know the answer I want to be clear because that means to me phase 4 may not happen when phase three is complete that is correct but okay okay all right but let's let's not beat around the bush that is true that is true yes what does that mean for the park nothing it means that the park again if we are to develop phase 4 and this is not something new this is not something changed this has already been approved by the board but so if phase 4 gets put on hold let's use that term sure right phase four is just put on hold phase one is done phase two is done and phase three is done phase four is on hold the rest of Mammoth and 13th Street do not get completed or constructed and the park does not get constructed until phase four is constructed the park the street based on what is being discussed as a potential condition the street from Mammoth down to 13 and 13th Street would be improved at the time that permits for phase four are issued that is correct that's yes the action being asked that is correct yes is that is that clear enough for everybody yeah I'm clear I'm clear what the question I had okay all right and to clarify that's a staff recommendation the board has the prerogative to take or leave that staff advice sure I just want people that vote on things to know exactly what it is that we're saying and that's exactly what we're talking about and the park was always tied to phase four that's correct completion of pH four corre I don't want to mislead anybody that that's a change that's what it was correct yes okay I'll stop talking chairman Matt anything else um I think um Santo's playing pretty well um the applicant um I don't um the applicant did not provide staff any further information about the incumbrances then that has already been presented by Council um so um staff can can't necessarily illuminate more there um if the board has more questions about that um I advise directing those questions towards um the applicants Council okay so um do we want to deliberate do we want to entertain a motion I yeah if we're going to deliberate I I I agree with staff I I you know I don't think we can tie it to the end of phase three as much as the beginning of phase 4 um obviously the the applicant has every let's call it what it is the applicant doesn't make money on phase 4 until it's built so you know it's clearly to their advantage to build phase 4 as quickly as possible so you know tying the completion of 13th Street in Monmouth between 13th and 14th is obviously in their best interest and the park um we're not even going to get into the rest of Monmouth at this point tonight but um but you know I I think you know I do agree with staff I think we should get 13th and Monmouth between 13th and 14th before permits can be pulled on phase four and obviously the park is 14 to 15 13th to 14th maybe I misspoke I apologize Monmouth underneath route one and N in the turnpike let's just call it um I'm more than comfortable tying that to building permits being pulled on phase 4 that it has to be completed before those permits are pulled if you know anybody else has any reservations about that let's talk about it open Forum guys I agree with you no I agree with you it was agreed upon before right into Mike Getti sorry we did agree on this before with the phases and um I don't think um they have of always come back doing phases and infrastructure has been requested and U in that area and and that's a knowing the area is a hot spot right it's a hot spot because of that close intersection there uh so but it's a ball that's getting started I would rather not throw something in there that would stop that ball from keep going so I uh kind of agree with staff that and I'm comfortable with that as far as the rest of it I you know I have no problem with the D's recommendation to eliminate the parking um to be honest I I think the increase in retail makes it a better project I really do I you know I think there it's it's still an emerging neighborhood you know we've been talking about we've been talking about this neighborhood as long as I've been on the board and you know it's still an emerging neighborhood it takes this amount of time to get these things done and I I think any help with retail space in that area makes it a better project so I I do think the increase there helps um so that that's my two two cents I agree on the the parking it really doesn't change the the overall number that's required in the Redevelopment plan it still complies and I think you know the the roads as we've discussed I think are valid so if there's nothing else I would entertain a motion no just for the record I would like to just that well I just like to say that get putting the historic back into that everon building it's a it's a big bler yeah no going the extra effort to do that it's a it's a Plus on my part that I I I like that part of the project yeah I've never been shy about saying how how interesting this project has been and it's you know it's it's paying homage to the past and it's it's the only project that I know of that you know on this scale does that so okay CH I like to make a motion to approve case p2023 d74 as presented to the board together with staff recommendation second okay motion made and seconded for approval uh with staff staff's recommendation acting Vice chair Gaden I commissioner Stato yes commissioner Cruz yes hi commissioner Dr Des hi hi commissioner Torres no the sad part right now is that this room is not full of developers that they could see what happens when a developer does the extra B how and and the community and and and does things man too bad everybody else wasn't here looking at this right now you know uh I'm going to vote I thank you and uh chairman linkston I don't think there's anything else I could say about this tonight um I think it's all been said record so I I'm happily voting I congratulations guys good luck thank you thank you so much motion carries with conditions okay let's move on to memorialization of resolutions please chair I have four resolutions and thank you for your comments on the much appreciate resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City case number P 23-17 address is 115 Wayne Street Jersey City New Jersey block 1 to 802 lot 14.02 application for minor subdivision approval and C variance resolution number two resolution of the board of the planning board for the city of Jersey City approving an amendment to final major site plan approval applicant is perini Avenue LLC for amendments to final major site plan approval 17-23 peran Avenue block 10803 Lots 2 3 and four case number is p2- 099 resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant HP Lincoln urban renewal company for Amendment preliminary and final major site plan 20410 Street 545 Manila Avenue and 5435 Manila Avenue block 8801 lot 63 and 4 that case number is p2023 d70 resolution of the planning board for the city of Jersey City applicant h HP Roosevelt urban renewal company LLC for Amendment preliminary and final major site plan 18010 Street 543 D5 Manila Avenue and 545 Manila Avenue block 8802 lot 6 block 88 0 1 Lots 3 and 4 the case number is P20 23- 0069 second second second acting Vice chair gungan hi commissioner Torres hi commissioner Dr Z commissioner Cruz I commissioner Stato I chairman langson I motion carries all in favor to memorialize resolutions okay thank you does anybody need an executive session anybody no thank you you do Santo for real no no okay motion for adjournment anybody motion to adjourn I second it okay thank you everybody all right we're adjourned what