##VIDEO ID:A9iZVRdwkow## it's August 12th 2024 I have the time as 6:32 p.m. please be advised that in accordance with the open public meetings act the notice of the time date and place of this regularly scheduled meeting of the Jersey City Historic preservation commission was sent to the Jersey Journal Jersey City Reporter and Ellis balito on Thursday August 8th same notice was provided to the city clerk for posting on the bulletin board outside of the clerk's office in City Hall and on the city website I have proof of this notice in evidence which we can Mark as B1 okay we'll move to a roll call attendance commissioner amuso present commissioner griga present commissioner samp here commissioner sakong here commissioner Gunther here commissioner blazak here commissioner Cronin is absent Vice chair guiara here and chairman Gordan present okay there are eight members of the Commission in attendance tonight five affirmative votes are needed for a certificate of appropriateness change it's this at the bottom looks like the only stepen turn off your microphone usually I have to tell you to turn it on all right um next item is the approval of minutes from July 17th does anyone have any questions comments concerns if not uh staff recommends a motion to approve mtion second okay I have sand camp and blazak do a roll call call Vote for This commissioner griga I I'm on approval of minutes number four commissioner samp this is for the a July 17th minutes I okay commissioner Gunther I commissioner sakong I uh commissioner blazak I commissioner uzo I commissioner Cronin is absent Vice chair Garda hi and chairman Gordon I okay there are eight votes in favor none against no extensions the minutes from July 17th are approved for correspondence um all copies of Correspondence and application materials are linked on tonight's agenda that is on the application number for each item um which is accessible on the data portal moving on to announcements we have a couple of announcements tonight regarding the agenda and Order of items on the agenda the first is that case 9 a 160 Sussex Street is being carried at the request of the applicant to the September HPC meeting um both tabled cases um 2419 Kennedy and 2426 Kennedy are also being carried both to unspecified meeting dates the demo case 11a 384 Communipaw is also being carried to the September HPC meeting at the request of the applicant and then the last item is that we are going to be doing um the new business cases first so that would be 9A and 9 I'm sorry 9B and 9 C first and then we are going to be doing old business 8A which is the proposed amendments to the local Landmark designation standards those are going to be last okay so the 9B and 9 c will be first and then we'll handle 8 a make sense cool all right that being said number seven open public comment if there are any members of the public present who would like to speak regarding matters of historic preservation that are not on tonight's agenda you can approach the public comment mic staff sees no members of the public um approaching the microphone and recommends a motion to open and close public comments mot motion second all in favor I I okay so that just brings us to new business first Robert if you like to call the first case yes I'll call uh case h24 d151 the applicant is Jensen vasil ra on behalf of Laya Ramana and J Sanchez owners the address is 2683 Street in the haramis Cove historic district the application is for a certificate of appropriateness for interior Renovations facade Rehabilitation full height four story rear Edition and a proposed roof deck visible from the public right of way and an altered contributing Italian 8 row house built Circa 1880 it's on there already unug yeah just yeah you can unplug the whole dongle scenario and just yeah there we go it'll populate in a second okay and let's go ahead and swear you in okay Jensen can you just tap the microphone on on the podium uh it's like a little um push it says push but it's a tap on the thing a little green light there we go um and then just staff wants to note for the record Jensen has previously testified in front of this board before and is qualified as an expert in architecture free to go good evening Commissioners uh my name is Jensen basil I'm the architect for uh this project at 2683 Street in the harrism Cove section of Jersey City this project is for a uh four story rear Edition and an addition over an existing garage um at the rear be converting a four family structure to a single family structure and uh the garage structure would be a um would maintain as a garage at the lower level and an exercise room up above it um we have 1938 photos of both the front of the building and the back of the building which uh which show that the that uh the rear building the rear garage was originally two stories and then the the principal building uh fronting Third Street is going to remain in its same configuration um the materials will be restored uh but the um the window configuration and the door configur the fenestration configuration will remain the cornice detailing will remain and uh and the the railings uh at the stoop and the uh and the front of the building will will uh be restored um so the uh the lot is a uh 21.88% side of Third Street and there is a public Alleyway that uh bcts the block to the to the north the um the proposed um addition at the rear would only be visible from the public Alleyway so what wouldn't be visible from the Third Street um and wouldn't be visible from Jersey Avenue um either so on the first sheet HPC1 uh you can see the uh the current photo and the 1938 tax photo as well as the uh the zoning calculation showing that the proposed work is conforming with the district um on these and the the mixture of the just to talk about the block diagram the um on the Block there are a mixture of one and TW story garages and there's also um there's a mixture of partial and full width additions at the rear of the uh the principal structure as well on the second sheet hpc2 uh we have the existing and proposed site plans so the principal building in its uh conf configuration would would uh would remain and then the addition would be um would would be added on there would be no demolition of partial additions or anything like that on the structure right now there's an overgrown concrete Paving in the backyard and uh and and sort of a um the the garage is fallen in disrepair so that all of that um would be completely completely removed and re um the Landscaping hardscaping would be completely removed and redone um at the front of the building the uh existing planter bed and would would remain and the um and the configuration of the stairs uh and Paving would would uh the exist the the stairs the stairs and the fence fence and railings would all remain the same so the site plan proposes a 15 fo 4 in rear addition um that addition is on many floors so there it's a loia configuration so even though the addition when viewed from above is is uh is the 15.4 15 foot 4 in the um it's the actual building it's set back especially on the ground floor the third floor and the fourth floor so the only time that the building is the full depth is at the Parlor level or the second floor um we would have the new Blu Stone Paving which I uh would be a flamed finish um which is the the standard p on on QP and then there's a small amount of fence there um that would be done with the EP on the uh on the sidey yard um so on HPC moving on to hpc3 you can see the uh view from the the aerial view from the north is uh detail one showing the mixture of the uh the rear editions and the uh and the garages and then through that Alleyway so the alleyway uh bisects that block number two is the existing rear of the building so the building had been gutted um the interior of the building has been completely G uh is completely all the finishes have been removed wiring and everything so um they've boarded it up um obviously the um all of we would you know we would keep the existing structure we wouldn't be moving floors around we'd keep the openings in the front um as I mentioned so there's no substantial change to that when we do the addition we'll be keeping the um the returns of the brick wall of the original principal building up to the F to the jam line of the uh of the windows on either side um the detail three shows the sidey uh so you can see the building to the uh to the east of uh to the west of us is already a two-story garage and we'd be going right up against that um and then that would that's where the fence would be uh the fence that's on top of the retaining wall and to the right is a sizable um four-story building a brick building that is um an apartment building um that would um that would obviously remain um and then from number six the final uh final picture on that page is viewed from obliquely from the um from the um Alleyway so you can see um a little bit of the back through the neighbor parking area HBC 4 uh is demolition of the existing building so showing showing uh what is there now um the stair is all the way in the rear back but there's no there's no interior partitions we'd be removing the uh the fireplaces all the way up um in the garage we would be uh keeping the facade the brick and the the Brick the cornice and the door fronting the uh the alleyway and then the the back facade would be that's facing the court would be um would be redone I'm going to zoom in really quickly just on the um on the 1938 it's actually a pretty decent photo of what was there um from that from that time period showing the two stories um on the hpc5 the proposed condition there's uh the bottom floor Garden level is informal living space so family room bathroom a guest bedroom The Parlor and on the back is the two-car garage um we'd be adding a stair to the Upper Floor the Landscaping hardscaping there'd be pervious pavers with um with some synthetic grass in the back and on the Parlor level uh moving up it's the more formal kitchen living dining main main parlor living floor with a small Juliet Balcony to the back and then that is all the way go that goes all the way the the 15 fo4 depth of the addition and then uh finally that the garage up above it there's a um a bathroom and a small kind of exercise room on the upper floors primary bedroom on the third floor on the second floor and the um and the top floor the third floor being the uh the kids the kids floor and uh and play area room play area space in addition on the uh top on the roof there is a proposed roof deck on the principal structure um that is set back from the Third Street Frontage um it's set back so that it's not visible from uh the public RightWay from either the Third Street or uh or the alleyway so it's set back from both uh from both pieces I also want to point out just again the um the loia configuration so the side walls come out and it's covered on the four sides it's open to the back uh on the on the second and third floors hbc6 shows um the existing config ation of number uh sheet detail number one shows the existing front elevation which again will not will not change the the door that's there will be restored to the 1938 door so um it'll the door and transom so there'll be a glass panel with uh two two wood panels underneath it and the and the transom up above and then one other uh note is the um that the Parlor level windows will be brought down to the floor and there's some site evidence which will I will uh I can show you on another photo um of that being the original case um and I on the 1938 as well uh I think it was there's sight evidence of it um and then three is the existing rear elevation obviously that's going to be going the proposed rear elevation has the the loas at the bottom floor it's sort of an it's an outdoor enclosed uh living area on the upper floors um it's a balcony with that's covered on the on four sides and then there's a a cable rail at the back so where the loes are the back the part of the small portion of the back wall that faces North would be stucco and then lining the side walls and the back wall would all be uh shiplap ePay siding so there would be a a a warm color color pallette there between the the epe and the and this the uh the Benjamin more calm uh stucco color there really isn't a lot of Stucco there it's it's it's primarily focused on just the just the wall thicknesses um that face the that are exposed to the back um so there's in there there's uh on hbc6 you can see the the little cladding detail and uh and some of the samples for the uh for both the uh the front stucco and the restoration of the the front facade to a to the original Brownstone um so that would just be scraped um hand scraped wherever it's loose patched and then resurfaced with a brownstone color on hpc7 you can see the existing and proposed section building sections including the the loia pieces um at the bottom the garage the the proposed garage elevation with the original uh original door and small overhang and then brick on the sides that would be maintained and then stuck go up above um and then the rear wall facing that is exposed to the court would be that three part stucco that's the same stucco as the back wall of the principal building as well as the side so um they'll all communicate they'll all be the same color and then HPC 6 there's uh construction details for the sky door uh so there's no bulkhead to the at the roof the permeable pavers in the rear yard um the Yankee gutter that's at the back the building the um the uh cable Rail and the pedestal deck uh system that would be on the principal roof uh HPC 9 is the uh the front window details the wood windows um as well is the U as well as the front the entry door and transom and HPC 10 is the details for the rear uh clad ultimate clad uh doors which will be in Black should mention that the front window uh color would be Essex Green hc18 and then is proposed to be and then HBC 11 is finally the uh the few Windows the casement and the awning windows at the rear of the building also in uh in Marvin standard black um that should conclude my testimony um and I'm happy to answer any any questions that Commissioners may have all right are there any questions for Jensen Stephen yep thank you on the facade you went through that pretty quickly and you use the word restore but I think I understand that you're replacing the doors you're putting new doors in but you're using the 1938 photograph as your guide for what to put there is that including the surrounds around the door or that is correct it'd be the frame as well okay um I'm going to just zoom in but there's um yes everything would be restored to the to the 1938 and you're right the uh the door that's there which was which is a replacement after would be would be removed right and and um the you mentioned the color of the windows being essic screen and the door the door as well yeah they match correct and that goes for below the water table as well that's correct and is there any gate on is there an entrance Under the Stairs there is an entrance Under the Stairs there's an existing iron gate there that would remain okay and all the iron work up in in the front this this the staircase iron work and the front is being scraped and painted that's correct okay thank you as a side benefit the um one of the O the owner the husband is a is a metal worker so um he's trade yeah and speaking of the front facade have you done any probes or thought about maybe removing moving the um The Brownstone or the stuckle that's on there I think this row we saw another uh row building in this row maybe on the other side of the row and they did do probes and they showed us that the brick was very damaged so we let them um put new Brownstone on there so I I think this and that this is maybe one of two on this row that have stuck out the rest of them have brick so have you thought about looked into the state of the brick behind the stucco that was actually my application for 2823 street so um yes we did we tried we tried it the brick was in um was in pretty rough condition what we can um what we could see here um that stucco has been on there for a very long time and we we didn't really want to to mess with it I felt that the safer course of action would be to resurface the stucco they did put quite a bit of thought into this we looked at it when we did the 282 too and there are I mean there are score lines in the in the um in that um within that upper piece so there was quite a bit of detail that was thought of when they did the stucco in here or the The Brownstone so we felt like that was um felt like that was the proper course to to maintain the stucco okay and and the existing cornice is uh you're you're you're restoring it you're leaving it in place and just cleaning it up yes that is correct okay and I I just realized the uh the the the photo EV or the uh the historic evidence for the Parlor Windows was the was actually the 1938 shows it pretty clearly the um the infill yep and I have uh I have paint samples and uh are you putting any uh plantings in the existing bed in the front so that would all be replanted yes was that I didn't I don't know if I saw that in your drawing I didn't I not I noted that it was going to remain I didn't note any of the specific types of plants um but I would you know typically on these I'd like to do a mixture of boxwoods and um and like hydranges and things like that and the tree out front looks pretty bad too would the applicant consider replacing the tree I'm sure they would yes okay if you want Jensen we usually start the samples on that side if you want to just pass them around thank you of course so Jensen is the um is the project that you did um looking at the Block client HPC1 is would that be number five lot five and is that the I don't remember exactly what we approved there but is that the size of the addition that we approved as well that's correct so it's basically the same as what's you're proposing that is correct so I I have one question though just about the addition on the garage sure um because like your zoning chart you know shows that there's no variances required or anything um and I know that's a pre-existing condition there that garage but you're adding on to it so you don't that's okay per zoning um we had got a through the planning department we had gotten a determination with um with planning before we started that restoration restoring this would not be a variance okay that would not count as would not count towards the uh the rear yard um required uh corre minimum and was the height of the Edition um in lot five also full height no because they on lot five it was only one story okay and are there any so I know that on this row it's really Lots 5 to 12 there are definitely uh all sorts of additions there but are there other four story editions on this row there is um there's a four-story Edition that's 276 um and there which is mostly full width on the if you can see the the aerial um but that would be those are the that's the only other one 268 is Al is a similar L-shaped four story Edition although not as deep as ours the other ones are four stories but partial okay thanks you're welcome I just want to add a comment about the depth of the addition that's proposed I mean I know we're talking about Brian was referencing lot five however it seems that the property at Lot Number Eight sort of bisects the the block a little bit so we don't really have that relationship to the other uh buildings on the Block plan except from ours and then 9 10 11 12 13 13 so I guess my question is you know why does the addition need to be so much deeper than what what's on Lots 9 10 11 and 13 because I feel like it's going uh considerably beyond the depth of the neighboring properties and it's going to have an effect given how little like doughnut there is there like the rear yard space and then also you know combining that with the addition on the roof I think that that's going to have a big impact on the volume that's back there okay um we felt I mean we felt like it was um it's it's I don't have the exact exact depth of 11 10 and 11 um but just from a coverage perspective it was it was under coverage um by a decent amount so we felt it was we and there's a a front a deeper front set back so we felt like the building could handle a slightly a slightly smaller addition plus the casting Shadows it's really um it's really not casting Shadows onto any other uh any other building there um except for uh possibly the back of 13 which wouldn't make which wouldn't be alleviated by making that addition any any uh any less deep because 13 on lot 13 the the building is up to the property line so because their building is shifted so farther forward like they have a similar bulk as we have they just shift the building further forward well I guess I'm reacting less to the bulk and more how it impacts the yard and the volume of like what's behind the buildings it does make it does make the yard um quite quite small um but I feel like that it I don't know that um from the from the Block perspective that uh I don't think it I don't think it has a huge impact considering how overbuilt the that block is already that way I mean one of the things I was I was toying with um Janelle I kind of I kind of agree with a lot of your points um and maybe a way to cut down on some of that is and I think the Lo is an interesting idea but maybe it's something like at the top floor that is cut back a little bit just at the top floor and maybe that could be an open deck or roof deck instead of a a loia at at at that top floor and that could cut down a little bit on the the height of that cuz I do I think the full four stories and the addition on the garage is it might just be just a little too much um and and I kind of agree though it it it is kind of overbuilt there but I think maybe something like take taking that loia at the top floor and having it be a a roof deck or something could could be a good solution I I feel like that's a very fair point I mean the you're touching on something that that the loia is set back s feet so the bulk of the building really is back um if you did not have that then if you not have the loia sidewalls then the impact would be would be slightly less yes so I I I think that that's a very um a very Salient point drill down on that yeah I do think something like that some kind of exploration into trying to sort of break down the volume of what's back there even if a lot of it's not enclosed it still feels like of an enclosed volume okay so I'm having trouble reading that rear elevation um I'm wondering there a couple things um you have a different graphic hatch uh for the fascia of the third floor than you do for the stipple representing the stucco around it um do but when I go to HPC 8 and look at the well I I guess I can't find a detail that that shows what that fascia is can you speak to that what that material is at the top of the building no the the slab edge of the third floor slab you you have a sort of an ashler course hatch we toyed with doing brick it's supposed to be stucco I I was to it was to demonstrate to my client that the smaller units don't work on a on surfaces like that I apologize when I did the hatch it didn't translate and then what is what is the significance of you have the you have a diagonal hatch within the loes that kind of make this upside down L it's a shadow line so so it's 45 showing the S ft basically at a 40 understood and then do you have a detail that shows what the material of the S it is in the loes I don't but the plan was to wrap it all in with the ep the ePay yeah and that's true for the rear the garden level second and third floors that is correct just a general comment in in general I I um I've seen a lot of your applications before and I and in general I I I find your application very complete this particular one I'm I'm missing um a certain level of detail that I'm I guess I'm accustomed to your um uh to your drawing sets producing I'm I'm that that rear elevation I'm having trouble believing that that stuckle comes right up to the you know the the stuckle of the power level comes right up without some kind of metal or flashing um the the front front um front elevation door there's a kind of General TBD note that says details to be approved by HBO there's a lot of things that I would typically like to review at at this level um specifically rather than remanding it to um to staff that I I wish um I had a better sense of so that I can get a better sense of what the application actually includes okay there any other questions comments okay hearing that um should we move to public comments on this application okay if there are any members of the public present who would like to speak regarding this application you can approach the public comment mic right staff sees no members of the public present and recommends a motion to open and close public comment second all in favor I I okay we can move into staff comments so normally I skip right to staff comments and recommendations in the staff report but but I'm actually going to first go to Project proposal uh project and proposal background um because I neglected um project background on here um in so the HPC has actually seen a certificate application for this exact property in the past um in 2000 it was submitted in 2019 but um the HPC approved a similar sized rear yard Edition at this property in early 2020 um the only difference was this application has a roof deck and that does um I'm sorry similar sized rear yard Edition that application did not have a roof deck and it did not have a garage Edition but the footprint of the addition was the same um it was under a different architect of course that approval has long since expired but um I did neglect to put that in the project background um so going into staff comments so I am in agreement that this project does feel a little bit bulky right um that I think a lot of that bulk actually comes less from the rear yard Edition and more from the garage Edition but like Jensen said they did get his zoning determination they are permitted to do that um and it is restoring the full height of the garage originally um we don't as staff we don't really have an issue with the proposed window fenestration it follows what was on the building um it clearly was not there historically but it really isn't atypical um of course there are different variations that would also be fine but the three window openings we don't see any adverse effect there in terms of the rear yard Edition again it's it's big right this most of the addition applications we see are full height full width additions right these are large additions um I do think the loia is an interesting incorporation um into these additions because it it's bulky with less bulk right it's all open air um I very much uh appreciate apprciate Brian's recommendation to kind of cut off the roof on the top of that addition I think that cuts down on a lot of the size concerns that um are present in this application um but other than that from the staff perspective we see additions like this regularly we approve additions like this regularly I don't see an adverse effect here um we have in the staff report we are recommending approve oh actually one more note on the garage um um this was not brought up but I do just want to put it on the record um there is no concern of that garage space being an extra unit because they are permitted to have an extra unit it's not being proposed as one there's no wet bar to convert or anything like that but if the applicant wanted to they are permitted to do so by zoning and we would likely that wouldn't even come to the board that would be a staff level conversion so just wanted to put on the record there's no concern of that here um we are recommending approval of the COA with our standard conditions I did write down um an additional condition that the applicant shall examine the condition of the street tree and replace if necessary any replacement Street tree shall conform with the forestry standards um if the commission is inclined to support this application um and Austin you're concerned about some of the level of detail we can fix all of that at the time of construction documents if there's a comfort level in approving this knowing that those details will come after are there any questions for staff or for Jensen did um Maggie did you consider material on the garage second floor given that they're showing a photograph I believe it's brick in the photograph did you have that conversation with the applicant no um I both materials are equally appropriate um if the commission feels more comfortable approving brick because it's present in the 1938 photograph I would be supportive of that okay um but I do think there is I mean obviously it is a reconstruction um they are already making changes it's it's a reconstruction of the bulk not of what was there originally right um so the different doing a different material you can make an argument for both is what I'm trying to get out understood all right are there any other questions I know there was conversation about the size of the addition and um you know you noted about the the previous approval was it also for full four stories okay full four stories I think the difference is I think that garage Edition does change my perspective on it um which is what you know I think what I suggested would would be appropriate to me I think to to take that top loia and turn it into a roof deck essentially um so I don't know how other Commissioners are feeling on well the applicant didn't sound like they were opposed he you actually said it was a reasonable idea and I'm a little bit concerned about the property just to the West being completely closed in you know they will probably be most affected by light and air um would the applicant consider making that top loia a roof deck yes I do want to note for the record that would also mean the rooftop roof deck would shorten correct um right right because it would need to not be seen from the public right away right well not even that if you look the photo he has up on his proposed section yeah the roof top roof de top of it yes understood so that would pull back likely to the edge of the building right corre or you know plus or minus foot or two that is correct yeah I just want to reiterate that one of my concerns about sort of the overall envelope volume even though the top two floors are open in the back is just that there's the sidewall condition and so it's effectively enclosed and as far as the neighbors are concerned and I just think that if those two if it were possible for those two to be pulled back so that they're just there's a little more breathing room in the in the yard space just because there's so much volume especially since the garage is sort of out of our hands and that's effectively approved um you know we're working with a different site condition than what may may have been approved in 2020 yeah I just want to clarify are we suggesting to the applicant that he that they pull back the enclosure of the Loa for only the top floor or the top two floors top floor top floor only right top floors yeah or the top two floors well that's what I wanted to clarify yeah my concern is that four stories all the way back as deep as they're showing it whether it's enclosed or open to the back is simply too big especially in light of the extension of the garage to a two-story structure right it just feels too enclosed too deep and if there's a way to handle that differently maybe it's something I could approve but maybe nobody else agrees and that's fine no no certainly I was sensitive to that at least if the top one is no longer a enclosed loow on the sides you have is step back the garage is one height the next floor is the next height and then it steps back again to the original facade of the building and that's certainly going to lot let a lot more air and light and reduce the bulk significantly I mean of course you could take out the side walls on the floor below too um that would I'm not as uh sensitive to that I mean I think if the top floor comes off it makes a huge difference yeah I would I would not object object to keeping the Third Floor Terrace become a roof Terrace but habitable so that you lose the sides of the loia and the top only at the top floor but keep the loia on the second floor as a loia I don't for me that would not be a that would not be problematic um just a couple additional questions since um just relative to comfort level and detail I just want to get on the record sort of what the design intent is so that we have something to refer to um the the the front door the transom it's a it's a wood transom is that correct not glass it's uh it's wood frame there's glass obviously glass in the uh in the center okay so it's a and that's a clear glass yes correct same as the uh same as the light in the door and um is the wood in is the intent to paint the wood the intent is pain with it yes correct same color as the wood framing framing of all the windows right yeah the Essex Essex Green and then is the intent for the transom to be more or less in the same plane as the as the door yes it's going to be that's correct it's going to be U right above yeah right above the door frame correct understood and finally the um the existing building right now the the Sills and and headers of the windows are painted the same color as the the field let's say of the stucco is is is your intent to keep that relationship the same in other words paint paint both the Sills and and headers as well as the stucco it is there's um on the um on Note uh two uh for the front elev the proposed front elevation there's something on the right that says color to match the main facade yeah yeah I just there's a there's also a detail of one of the windows en llarge that says um no change to the Sals or Sals to remain so just wanted to clarify um I guess it's a question for staff Maggie uh is your opinion that the that the color of the SS and um window headers should be the same as the as the sto abely yeah the 1938 staff but yeah yeah I'm sorry what I was I was read bring my opinion when I wasn't asked so on the 1938 it there's no discernable difference between the color of the facade and the color of the lentils and cells um clear very clearly a great deal of care has gone into the making this building look like a masonry building which meant that they would have had all of these things trying to look like masonry so historically they likely would have been finished in the same fashion to match so that they all blend and you see those minimal lines and it you think it's Sandstone bronstone whatever it is thank you so yeah it is staff's opinion that they all should be the same color okay thank you you're welcome okay are there any other questions for me for Jensen should we confirm that the applicant's okay with uh yeah so it's so it sounds like the commission is inclined to approve the application provided that the applicant removes the sidewalls and roof of the top floor loia and also reduce therefore reducing the size of the roof deck um that appears to be I'm seeing nodding so that appears to be what the commission is inclined to approve Jensen are you uh comfortable with that yes okay um and then we also have the additional condition that was read into the record regarding the street tree and Austin and I have noted down your detail items to make sure they're present at construction documents um are there any other items that the commission would like to see included as a condition of approval May being a planting plan for the existing planting bed sure so would you feel comfortable that clarified at the time of construction documents sure perfect okay all right planting plan to be included at CDs okay all right that being said staff's recommendation is to approve with conditions read into the record um in the staff report and accepted by the applicant I'll makeing motion to approve with conditions as read second okay all right we'll do a roll call vote um commissioner sakong hi commissioner blazak I commissioner amuso I commissioner griga I commissioner samp I commissioner Gunther I uh commissioner Cronin is absent Vice chair guiara I and chairman Gordon I all right there are eight votes in favor none against and no abstentions the COA with conditions is approved very good thank you all thanks have a wonderful night thank you all right can move on to our next case so I'll call case h24 d146 the applicant is Charles Harrington Esquire on behalf of 299 fth Street LLC owner uh this is for 299 fth Street in the haramis Cove historic district the application is for certificate of appropriateness for interior Renovations facade Rehabilitation and full height rear addition visible from public right of way at a contributing altered transitional Greek Revival Row House constructed Circa 1860 uh good evening Commissioners uh Tom lean uh instead of Charles Harrington this evening on behalf of 299 fth Street LLC uh as you just read from the description in the agenda we are seeking a certificate of appropriateness um the description also mentions that it is a full height rear addition which is visible from the right of way um it is visible uh from kle Street uh through a vacant lot uh it's our understanding that there were approvals to have that site developed I believe those um approvals have actually um uh they're no longer in place uh however I don't know if there's any ability to extend them but we do anticipate at some point somebody will develop that lot um other than that I have Scott mafy here as my architect who will run through his plans and answer any any questions of the uh the board okay thank you it's Scott mafy ma ha FF ey thank you U Mr mafy I believe you have appeared before the board but would you mind uh giving them the benefit of your credentials quickly sure I've been licensed in New York and in New Jersey since uh 1990 I've uh been doing projects in Jersey City since 2003 um I've uh I'm very familiar with chapter five uh sorry yeah chapter chapter 345 Section 5 the the uh the historic district standards the zoning standards I'm familiar with the uh uh secretary Secretary of the Interior standards um all the different subcodes uh that are applicable here I have presented to the uh uh to HBC for the first time in 2004 I believe and the most recently in 2018 I think so I'm probably a new face to some people um to various his uh neighborhood associations to the zoning board planning board and I think that's about it yeah and is your license current yes I am currently licensed in New Jersey I would submit Mr mafy as a expert okay staff notes that Mr mafy has previously been qualified as an expert in front of this board in the field of architecture okay yeah you might have to show me cuz there's two identical ones I know one is one is USBC and one is whatever the port on the bottom of everyone's iPhone is I think this is I don't know but they're changing it to USBC so I guess that name doesn't matter just waiting for it to pop up there we go um with your permission I have more sheets but I don't think I need to go through them as a the same level of detail as our previous applicant did um and if you want me to go through them with more detail I I will do that so as Tom said this is a Circa 18 or Maggie or sorry um Commissioner Gordon um said this is 1860 Circa uh townhouse Tech technically three stories because the basement's considered a third level it's one of eight or sorry nine um running along the south side of this block of Fifth Street there's an identical set of about 11 of these running across the north side um then there's a set of were a set of six buildings along U coold Street two of which are missing as U Tom mentioned um which are providing the the view from cold Street to the side of this the structure um let's see if I can make a little more here um given some of the conversations you were just having um about the size of well actually let me start with the front so in the front we're going to remove the brick face off the uh U the the front of the building and uh we're going to replace the aluminum windows with new wood windows uh the existing Stoops actually in Fairly good shape we're going to clean it up paint the railings and stuff like that um the front door is being replaced but the um existing frame uh is in pretty good shape and has a uh an existing uh uh exist there's an existing transome and frame that we're not going to do anything but make sure is in good shape and come on sorry my fingers don't seem to like the there we go all right um yeah so the so we're replacing all these with a standard Marvin um double hung ultimate uh Windows um there was a question about the uh Paving right now the entire lot is paved although interestingly the garage that's in the back against the alley has a dirt floor but the rest of it is all concrete so we are going to remove uh the concrete from the front um of of the building uh and put in a planting area and while I have had several requests into um Mr reing to give me a list of what those uh kind of plantings would be I haven't gotten that list yet so I I don't have that on the drawings just yet but we we do expect to have a uh a planting schedule um uh for that front area and also we're going to do that in the back where we're removing all the concrete that's between the front building and the and the rear building not sure why this isn't my fingers all right so from a basic site plan standpoint that's what we just talked about about at the front wow my keypad touchpad does not like my fingers tonight um the front building is uh as uh mentioned is having the U is going to get a gut renovation inside um the second piece of it is there's a an existing uh frame structure a rear yard addition that seems to been built sometime between 1885 because it's not on the sandborn in 1885 there's a small one um on the 1906 sandborn map um but the uh construction of that addition the the wood sizes and stuff are clearly from the 1930s um post 1928 dressed um Lumber sizes um the third part of it um I'll come back to the rear art Edition in a second and the third part is the uh there's an existing wood structure um that also doesn't show up in the 1885 plan um but does in the 1906 sandborn map so it was built not as a garage but as a stable and has an upper level that was actually built as a hay loft so our uh plan for that rear section the rear building the rear structure is to maintain it as a garage and add a unit um above there currently the property has two units um both in the front building and the size of the the property allows for three units total um and so we're going to add a third unit as a studio apartment um where the hoft is over the garage um let's see I don't think I need to say anything else about the front of the building right um do you need to see the floor plans of what we're discussing okay these are um details of the different area ways of um by the doors and the wood fence and pavers in the rear yard uh the uh we're not calling it a basement we're just calling it the first floor even though it's about a foot below grade um just to make things simple so the lower level the first floor will have uh three bedrooms and two bathrooms um the existing um and I said the the garage will be uh uh kept as a garage this existing building coverage because there's two buildings on the site is already 60% 65% of the lot so we're already above the uh already above that that number um so what we're proposing is is not necessarily I would consider a full height extension but rather would be to remove the last four feet of the rear yard addition it's uh 16 ft long we take off the last four feet and candle lever on the second floor and and the third floor an additional 7 and 1/2 ft um to make for a a bedroom you can actually put your furniture in the current bedrooms are like 9 by S um very small rooms um and that would give you um a unit on the first floor and the second floor uh that has uh three bedrooms and an office you could say or four bedrooms and three bathrooms uh the unit on the floor above the third floor uh we do the same thing as I said take off the rear uh four feet extend that back seven and a half feet and you'd have a two-bedroom one bath unit on the on the third floor uh let's see did I pass by the studio layout I did um since the Hoff doesn't have a stair to it um there's basically a little hole that b barely one person could fit through and uh right now just an aluminum ladder we're going to be reframing that second floor using the uh existing beams flatten them out and make it into a u Studio level with the stair running down the side down to the alley uh there'll be a bathroom kitchen a nice 200 and was it 300 I don't have it in front of me um square foot space that um um we would need to to re reconfigure the existing openings on the north side of that um as Windows right now there's kind of a window it looks doesn't look like it's original um and then put a new window in on the South Side uh facing onto the alleyway uh I uh given what we said about the uh um once in future approval for uh 60 so 8486 uh Cole Street this is the one uh the one part of the building that's actually going to remain visible from the public right away um even once the that um uh even once that that uh that other building is built um so uh here we go so on this sheet is a201 which is the build typical building sections uh it's cut through uh looking towards the West uh Fifth Street is on your right the alley is on your left um and you can see in the darker shaded parts of that are the parts that we plan to uh reframe and rebuild um for this extension this CLE lever uh for the extension of the rear yard addition uh the next sheet um kind of shows the same thing in the other direction both these sections are taken looking North uh the one on the top is through the existing section as you can see we're not expanding it the one on the bottom is through the southern part of this expansion where we're actually making it 2T wider um as well um these are just the wall sections of what we're planning to do this one on the left simply shows that we're keeping the existing structure for the second floor Framing and the roof uh sorry the second floor Framing and the roof framing um I'm take that back that's the third floor Framing and the roof framing um and we're re reframing the the second floor framing over the first floor in order to create this candle lever um the next sheet shows all the the the windows we're mostly using a uh a 2 over two uh the a number of the buildings on the Block have had the windows replaced with two over tws and um we have the we're also working on 88 kls which is the building on the corner right next to this uh AKA 30 1 um Fifth Street um the 1938 photograph from that project or that building shows two over two windows um from 1938 on that one as opposed to to one over ones so we're proposing two over tws on the uh the parts of the buildings uh both buildings that uh were visible from the public rights of way and one of her ones in the back the addition would be getting um class windows and uh the window in the rear that faces onto the alley would also be a um uh would be a a a double hung larger size two over two uh Marvin as well um many of the buildings around this have had their front doors replaced so this uh type a door it says existing stoop entrance door as I said the frame of the of it and the transome are going to be be retained um and painted and the new door has the the um layout that you see there as a five door a five panel door which is again consistent with all the doors you see on the other buildings around it um let's see so in terms of the the elevations on the street you have the Stone Face uh that we plan to remove um we have not yet done a uh a probe to see what the uh condition of the brick is behind there but many of the other buildings on that street have had their their uh brick face or Stone Face removed um and you have a common brick uh behind there um in most of those cases uh we're proposing to do the same thing next door on 88 as well um um so and we haven't done we've done a walk through with Mr Reen on what that one looks like and we're going to have problems in that building while it's going to be a certificate of no effect um has a lot more work that's required for it you you probably have seen you know exactly the building we're talking about it's got mold growing up all one side of it it's in really horrible shape inside and out um this building at least was being lived in up until last year um even though it's not in particularly beautiful shape on the inside um as well um yeah so our our proposal is to uh expose the brick if we can uh do the two over two windows the existing uh railings are not original but we're going to keep those uh we'll do whatever repair work is required for the stoop um and uh it's one of the few Stoops along there that has the original railings and they they look pretty good so we're going to paint those um the in the rear uh call the rear yard elevation um the rear of the original uh brick building has a stucco on it a parging we're going to keep that there's existing windows that we're going to replace with the one over one uh wood windows uh this portion of the the rear yard is part that we're removing is part part of the four feet that we're taking off the back um and we're going to be uh putting new sighting on the back of that addition um can you describe that siding on the back of the addition sure if you don't mind me jumping ahead a little bit so the idea um a couple years ago the south and east sides of the uh the carriage house or the stable in the back had siding replaced with um the uh 6in reveal James Hardy uh Cobblestone smooth finish um howy plank so our proposal is to take the there's a stucco on the north side of that rear rear structure so we're planning to take the stuckle off of there continuing that stuck the sorry this the Hardy plank around the side and then on the original uh 12T sections that are to remain on either side of the existing uh rear art Edition we're going to take the gray plastic uh you know vinyl sighting off and also put the same hearty plank on the side of that the part that's the addition the part that's new the expansion that we're proposing we' be doing in Hardy panel same material but 4x8 sheets with battens um every 16 in on Center and I have all those samples if this is a good time to pass those out um Cobblestone is very similar to um Le a rever pwer the um HC 172 uh rev pwer so our plans are to uh repaint all of the stucco um in that same color unless we think it should be a different color um but then as much as possible reuse the uh they use that Hardy plank to sort of tie tie all of it together so that way the section that's new the part that we're proposing that's a whole new section um is uh distinguished with a different color and a different uh orientation of of the material um so that you can tell that's the new section and the rest of it's the the history toric section and it's uh there's like little color elevation on the on that board as it gets passed around um that's interesting went a different direction right so again the idea is that you can tell oh that's the part that we added that's not and that's not original um the window sizes are all different every single window on this building is a different size even more so on 88 8 next door um but uh we're going to be as uh as as far with with the exception of the um this addition that we're proposing and the rear wall facing the alleyway of the uh the carriage house is what um the people who sold this uh this projector named cillo which might be a cillo might be a name people have heard before apparently they've owned that building since about 1952 or something like that and they gave us a story about absolutely everything yeah which I have yes been told to take with a grain of salt yes um so uh let me just call attention to that alley elevation so we're uh and if you'd like to see I have lots of photographs of just the poor condition and maybe you've seen it and walk buy it yourself so the existing garage doors are in very poor shape so we're planning to replace them um but we're going to replace them with an overhead door that has the same sort of beadboard pattern on um on the outside of of it right now there are four individual panels and the drawing doesn't really show up but there are four individual panel that sort of bfold I don't know if they bold but they are supposed to bold um I guess they bold enough because there used to be a 30 to Plymouth parked in the rear yard and a 69 Camaro parked in the garage that hadn't been moved in several decades and they got them out of there so the door opened enough to to get them out would you mind showing us the photos of the current condition sure um I'll start on the inside first is that okay or you want to see the outside the exterior what do you were just talking about the outside doors and okay that's what you meant by the bead board I was curious yes and I and I have even more pictures uh on the inside showing just the the rotted pieces it's unfortunately they're in very poor condition um but it's our plan to uh replace them with four new panels um or visually four new panels one of which being the uh door to the uh stair that leads to the new apartment upstairs and then the overhead door will have a dividing element in it so that it looks like there's three more doors on that side as well so with the exception of having this a piece of trim in between the two doors this will essentially look like the same four doors that were um that we replacing uh and then originally according to 1938 photograph upstairs was just a little hole for loading the hay in so we're proposing a nice big window um because this faces South and this would be nice for the uh nice for the studio apartment to have a decent sized window in it um let's see and I think I probably have left some stuff out but that was that comes the end of the drawings um like I said I have lots of photographs if you want to see the you know any other reasons why we're proposing to do what we're doing um well the only thing I was going to ask is do you do you have photos from Cole Street that shows the view through the vacant Lots yes I I have photos and I have computer renderings that would be great you want to see the computer renderings both why not both okay can we Mark the renderings before you show them just as A1 Maggie I have a question yeah did we not approve um a plan for that vacant lot on call Street we did I will discuss it during staff comments um we can discuss it more in depth but that approval has long expired okay and I believe you told me that they had never actually memorialized it no they had not um in my understanding uh the the GC that we're talking to about doing the work on both this project and 88 is the guy who is Dave slurs who's oh okay um was one of the the two owners of that I don't know if he's an owner but own two people applicants for that property yeah um and I made to understand from Dave that the other like the money people behind that project are looking to sell it because they're retiring and moving to Florida so it's on the market if anybody wants to buy it and just so you know I have um seven of these or six of these images okay so this is a computer modeling looking at the uh what would be visible from uh from cold Street um on one side of course is the stucco that's on the side of the the original building this is the um the Cobblestone um Hardy plank that we're um proposing for the extant section of the addition and this little strip of gray there is what you see from directly across um Cole Street you say well what if you do a more oblique view okay oh sorry before we get to The Bleak view so this is um the project uh this is uh computer rendering that includes what was approved uh for um 84 886 it's U 44 feet tall it's literally 50% taller than all the buildings around it and even if someone just did a three-story building or even a two-story building would still be screening um the side of 299 from cold street so you wouldn't you wouldn't see it go to uh you go down cold Street a little bit to the South you don't see any of the the work that we're proposing if you go the other way um you're standing across from 88 cols you see a bit of the gray of the uh the timber bark color that we're proposing for the um for the extension for the proposed the new section and if you go right to the corner then that's what you see is the uh the Hardy panels with the uh battens on the side of it in that extension and so those are the shots from cold Street I also have which I guess this would be the next um sorry the connecting to this has made everything on my screen smaller so even though I have my reading glasses on oh okay so this is a computer model showing this gray box here is the extension that we're proposing and you can see it in in um relationship to the other rear yard extensions um with the exception of the one that's just been completed this this darker gray at the left here at 289 which I believe was approved um in 2022 it's recently completed um it's full height full width um the other ones are not and we're not proposing to do a full height or full W or full width at least least um% uh see this this red line down here is the rear yard uh the 30 foot rear yard step back from the alleyway and we're at about 32 or 33 ft um from the from there um this this one by the way uh what I have my cursor on uh that rear Edition shows up in the 1885 uh sandborn map so that actually might be um the first precedent for this uh particular uh for this particular block um and that's this uh part right in the middle here this is the part that was approved a couple years ago and just recently approved uh Jeff Jordan was the architect on that um this is us with a little bit of addition that we'd like to have on the back and um yeah um is that sufficient or what else would you like to see no well are there any questions for Mr mafy that would lead to Popp gone all the way around okay and I don't know if you you you didn't show the photos but the only the only thing I want I wanted to add was I I live nearby and I know this View and the existing vinyl sighted the existing vinyl sighting is very dilapitated um and in poor condition so this you know whether or not we're going to consider whatever with the um vacant Lots there approvals or not this is going to improve that by the removal of the vinyl sighting and the new Hardy plank um so I think that's something to take into consideration as well also you saw in my images that that um there's some improvements we're planning to make to to Corner building to 88 koh's 301 oh those have not been approved yet but but on on the um material sample board the bricks are are shown like very dark I I that's not yeah they're good my apologies there's only certain number of uh of uh flip it around brick when I tried to take a brick color and put it on there it just made it red so um the other buildings around there have common brick apparently they were originally painted so as you know Common brick is the whole mix mixture of sort of Browns and blacks and reds and oranges and it's a whole mix mix of colors which doesn't exist in Vector works' um uh render Works uh library that particular okay yeah I just I just want to be sure you're not proposing to paint it like a dark color or anything on the front unless uh unless you take the stucco off and it turns it's in bad shape or something and then right unless we can't remove um I know that was one of the the things in the staff report that Maggie I'm sorry his O'Neal flag um that if we have some issue with removing that stone work the question then is do we just leave it do we paint it do we do we just leave it is it artistic enough in itself it's like 1950s 1960s gray it's not beautiful yeah so well that's the question so there's no so might remain to be scen um if we do paint it or if I don't know if if it should be painted just because it's Stone and not brick if it was a brick face like some of the others on there of course yeah if maybe you'd want to paint it a red color um my understanding that 289 used a particular HC color uh Cherry something or yes uh they but they already had an existing brick facade that had previously been painted so they removed the many layers of paint and then repainted it in order to keep the brick intact sense to paint that red no yeah so our our thing I guess would be to leave the the stone work or the Stone Face in place um unless people think it should be painted unless you guys think it should be painted unless staff thinks it should be paint we can we can discuss that in do you have the uh colored elevations that you um are showing on that material board do you have that digitally that you can put on screen so that we can all look at it together let me just think where that is that comes off easy should be in the same folder here ah sample board it's downloading this is the same incredibly slowly I do have if you wanted it uh I do have the CAD program on here so I could open it up and do all sorts of more stuff but I thought that might be a a waste of y'all's time tonight so I don't have it open at the um yeah this it's an interesting vile does not seem to be opening all right if you want um you want yeah can pass it around sample board thank you oh you know what I do have my own purposes in case I forgot what was in on so pass around doesn't have the actual pink samples on it but it does have essentially the same information no I pass down I guess yeah so it doesn't have the paint actual paint samples but but has mhm yeah we've seen this m well that's the same it's the same as the board it's just that it's not been spray mounted to a piece of foam core and the samples taped to it but the question you've posed is what to do with the facade if you cannot remove the material that's on there now correct um yeah I thought if that question came up I wouldn't have an answer you're still doing two over two windows you're still doing the appropriate door and then you have this uh material on the on the facade and and one other thing I forgot to mention right now the cornice is covered up with metal uh panels on it um and the cillos assured me that the Cornus is still there behind the metal panels because they were the ones who paid to put that up in 18 1957 or whatever right so if you were asking for an answer obviously there's got to be the exploration first to see if that material can be removed and how successfully and then there's the question what do you do if it can't be removed you know there's been times when stuckle is applied to buildings when that's been appropriate I if you were asking me if it should be painted I wouldn't paint it because it's of its time painting it I don't see how it's going to do any any improv because it's Stone and not brick exactly so um but I think we'll have to cross that bridge and you'll be working with staff when that time comes yeah yes like so we have the added uh benefit of working with uh two staff members yeah because it's two different projects two two in one all right are there any other questions about the projects just to ask about the most Salient feature of the of the addition um I I I think it's I think it's interesting the the way you've articulated that floating volume m um I guess I'm just curious why is it why doesn't it come down to the ground why is it can delivered because we're at 65% ah it has to to do with carbage got it as it turns out I don't know if this is a recent thing or not but the um uh aanta lever is not counted uh against either building coverage or um uh lot coverage so this way um we can uh expand the building uh expand the upper stories make decent size of you know bedrooms that people can actually put their Furniture in and still have uh the almost the entire rear yard uh uh planted keep it permeable and that gives us our uh I believe it's 79.6 s or 80% um or 80% lock coverage okay any other questions comments should we open a public comment I'd like to propose a five minute recess oh sure yep we are at an hour and a half okay so before we open public comment we'll take a five minute recess all right it is 7:58 see everyone at 8:04 cool all right all right so we can call the meeting back to order okay all right we were on open public comment if there are any members of the public present who would like to speak regarding this application approach the public comment mic staff sees no members of the public present recommends a motion to open and close public comment motion second all in favor hi okay so we can go into staff comments on this talk through a couple of things that have come up so the first is I just want to clarify um The Proposal on Co Cole Street for that empty lot the commission saw an application for new construction at that site in 2019 um the HPC actually denied the first application for that um in late 2019 and then the applicant reapplied with a new scheme that was shorter um by I believe a full story um with that third story set back um and that was approved I think it was the meeting right before Co honestly I think it was February of 2020 um the applicant did not ever continue on to the plan planning board for that application um so that HPC approval expired the following year um at this point it has been 3 years since that expired and the applicant would have to that we would not renew that COI um that is past the point for new construction that we would renew um especially because they did not go to planning board or zoning board and get it approved so um at this point in staff's mind there is no approval at that lot that being said there are like maybe 10 empty lots left in the historic district so it something will happen there eventually um for those of you who are on the board at that time if you do remember that lot is a very very non-conforming lot um it's I think 50 ft deep um so any application there will be a struggle um so I don't necessarily think anything's going to happen anytime soon but long term yeah something will probably go there um second item I think so the next item down I have is talk about that brick and stone facade just kind of jumping around a little bit um for so on the staff report I did include a a recommend and condition for approval that if the applicant does get approved um and they go to remove the stone face and they can't they they have to put back brick right um sometimes you are able to turn the brick around and use the other side I am seeing less and less applicants successfully be able to do that I I think I can count on two hands the amount of people who have actually been able to turn the brick around um Garden State historically um unless there is the mesh behind it is almost impossible to get off of these bricks and when you have the mesh behind it that's a whole host of other issues that you then have to deal with um which is why I recommended that condition that they replace it with a brick underneath that at least kind of matches um I cannot think of an application where we have um let an applicant paint a stone face like this we have let applicants paint the brick version of the Garden State um mostly because when painted it can reflect a predominant building material this type of stone that's on this building does not reflect any kind of predominant material that was used historically in this District um or frankly any of the downtown districts that I can recall um nor have we appr in my experience at least approved an addition on a building um and allowed the facade to remain unrestored to some degree um they are proposing some restoration work including the cornice the windows the doors and things like that um to my knowledge I can't remember when we have allowed or permitted the applicant to retain the brick face so with anything on the facade we would recommend that that they do some probes they try to remove it hopefully it goes well I have seen it go well in the past it is a small number but maybe this will be one of the unicorns um and if not it would be to work with staff to determine a rep an appropriate replacement brick as reflected in the 1948 okay that being said going into the staff report we are going to staff recommendations and comments um the applicant did a good job of showing this is a relatively standard size Edition for this block it is one of the smaller editions on the Block that we have seen um I can't recall the last time we've seen a can levered Edition like this but I do think it is an interesting solution to their coverage problem um that being said it is something that you know we don't typically see very often I can't necessarily fit it neatly in a pattern of development but the size of the addition is something that is consistent with the block um the only real drawback of this is that it is visible from the public right of ey where there's really no getting around it again um to in staff size there is no approval at that lot um despite what has been done in the past so that is something that the commission will have to consider with their with their review of the application um so if the commission chooses to approve a certificate we do have recommended conditions the first of course is that um condition regarding the brick on the front um and then I also had not noted down a condition um similar to the last application that a planting plan with planting schedule will be included at the time of construction documents right are there any questions for staff I think I have two Maggie um given that we can't determine when a building will go up on Cole Street is there anything else that you would consider mitigating on this on what they're planning to do since that will be visible from the public right away do you see anything else that would assist or in I mean it's obliquely visible based on the renderings that they provided right when you're standing right in front of it you do see that historic bulk um that is something that like the obliqueness of it through an empty right it's not like you can see the addition like we've approved obliquely visible additions before through Lots right um this one is more visible than some of those um but unless you are looking at it from an angle right you can justify it that way is that it's through an angle and it's the bulk is similar to others on the Block my second question is obviously you can't see the cornice it's covered with metal so the applicant would come back to you and show you the condition of Cornus before proceeding yeah that would be um something the applicant would clarify before the submission of construction documents okay thank you right so it' be those two items on the facade that they would and I mean of course any other probing or any internal things that they have to do before construction documents for full permitting um just for the commission's note so typically before construction documents the applicant might submit two partial permits um I don't know if that's the case for this applicant but in the past we've seen um interior cleanouts with interior non-structural demo and um footing and Foundations things like that before they submit full construction documents reflecting what they approved for at the commission so if they take off the metal and the cornice isn't there uh then they're back to looking at 38 photographs to determine what the design is do they have to come back to us in that case they don't have to come back to the commission um so in the case that they take off that metal and there is no Cornus there their construction documents would need to show scaled um Dimension details of the proposed cornes with materials and profiles and things like that and then prior to um them frankly even I mean you can't get shop drawings until you pay the manufacturer anyway but um they would have to submit shop drawings that matched the approved um details on the plans okay thank you right are there any other questions concerns yeah go for it Scott this is the only building of those uh nine on that block that the Cornus is covered up so we have plenty of EV evidence if supposed to go there that's right if if when we take it down it's not behind there perfect so we we know exactly what to do from what I recall we know exactly what to do I'm going to hand it to you yeah and from what I recall it's a relatively simple Cornus too we were not looking at any brackets at every two feet they have a specific profile in fact if I me show off just for a second that profile is different on those nine units than it is on the 11 across the street and 11 across the street actually 88 coals and the other ones down Cole Street had that same one from the north side of Fifth Street so it's a slightly s similar simpler pattern than the ones next door and across the anyway gotcha yeah we're um yeah yeah we would we would replace the brackets if that's uh was necessary great okay are there any other questions um questions about conditions anything you'd like to see I assume at this point the commission's leaning towards approval so any conditions you'd like to see reflected in the COA that we have not written down hearing none okay and the applicant is oh um so again the recommendation is to approve uh the COA with the conditions in the staff report and read into the record we have that planting plan when read into the record um I know that is different than what you guys had said right the recommendation is to if you cannot remove the stuck the if you if the brick underneath is damaged to replace the brick with like a thin brick or something that matches historically a full thick brick would not historically we've done a full brick okay um but that would sorry that would leave you with uh like an 8 in uh depth from the face of the brick back to no you would remove you would remove the damaged brick Oh okay so and replace it okay so if there's only two I think there's only two wies of brick so we basically wouldn't have very much left if we took off the one white you only have like four in of yes brick and expect it to stand by itself well no you don't expect it to stand by itself there' be a good amount of structural scaffolding involved in order right this for what it's worth this is why I very specifically note this in the staff report because I I want to make it clear that the removal of Garden State is an undertaking um it is I hate this material so much and everyone loved it in 1955 um it is it's not easy and I really do hope that this stuff just peels off wonderfully for you that is obviously ly the ideal scenario because you know if we can reuse the original material we would like to reuse the original material but I do want to make it clear that the expectation of the commission is that if you cannot remove that without damaging the brick then we'll have to remove the brick that has been damaged and replace it so that we are following the Historic Site evidence okay good yes we accept conditions client says yes okay Tom yes we' reviewed your report we accept the condition there well as the great all right that being said anyone want to make a motion I'll make a motion with the um conditions as set forth by staff second all right commissioner blazak I commissioner amuso I commissioner griga I commissioner San Camp hi commissioner Gunther I commissioner sakong I commissioner Cronin is absent Vice chair guara I and I'd like to say I appreciate the subtleties in the color pet that you've chosen for the project it's one of the more sensitive ones that we've seen yeah thank you and chairman Gordon I okay there are eight votes in favor none against no extensions the COA with conditions is approved thank you thank you okay we are on to our next item which was actually our first item so moving to Old business we have review and recommendation of proposed amendments to chapter 345 article 3 subsection 30 of the city's Land Development ordinance entitled local Landmark designation standards recommend this is a recommendation to the Jersey City planning board and Jersey City Council and uh this was carried from the last regular HPC meeting okay can we hear me I mean that's not usually an issue anyway but all right so we have some uh local Landmark designation standards for everyone to review um this is following in the recommendations from the master plan to start working on some elements of our ordinance that uh are a little lackluster because remember we updated some demo ordinance language a couple meetings ago and now we are on to the local Landmark designation standards um for full disclosure this language change is bumped up on the list in terms of priority because we need to change this language in order to qualify for certified local government status which is something that we are actively in the process of doing so this needs to change and then we will have a free and clear application to the state for that so um we are going to take you through most of this language um this is almost entirely from scratch new there is so you'll see there's a remove text and strike through new text underlined almost everything in here is underlined because prior to this set of language our only Landmark language was that sentence at F at the top of the page wow we it quite literally just said if we want to Landmark something make an application it had no standards it had no qualification it had nothing um apparently the in apparently The Story Goes that they had designation L language and someone forgot to copy and paste it into the final docu this was 2001 apparently no one knew how to M work Microsoft Word anyway so we have entirely new language here um we have uh taken this language from a couple different municipalities throughout the state um some are very similar to Jersey City some are very different but we took basically different pieces of sections of ordinances that we like um we assembled this all together we sent it off to shipo to make sure it met the qualifications required to be a certified local government um they signed off on it Jonathan and his team at legal reviewed it they signed off on it and we have this language here in front of you so I'm just going to very quickly take you all through it so again the only remaining section is this first top sentence um it starts off with the the proposals to designate a property as a landmarker district and then it has um has to be submitted to City Planning because of course we're part of City Planning like any it's a zoning change essentially to Landmark something so we have to have an application that goes to HBC to planning board and it goes to city council um for individual landmarks you need to submit clear exterior photograph showing the entirety of the property historic photographs if available location map um on showing the municipal tax map physical description statement of significance um and those are expanded on what's in that later on for districts you need a building byb building inventory clear photographs of each property historic documentation the municipal tax map showing the boundaries and Parcels included in the district physical description of the proposed district and boundaries and also a statement of significance for that we also have standards for multiple uh multiple property designations which um essentially we determine if it should be filed as a multiple property designation individuals or um a district and then we dictate which way that should go next section discusses procedures for designation so you start by having an interested party submitting the application to the HPC um the commission can also initiate their own application so it doesn't necessarily have to come from an individual it can also come from the commission saying we would like staff to explore designating this um once we get a complete application complete as determined by the standards in the ordinance and by staff um we'll schedule the hearing for the HPC um so here is where we get into a little bit different from a normal HPC application so we do you do have to provide notice to the owners for designation of uh individual landmark or District um it has to be 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing it has to go to the property owner through certified mail um and there's a whole host of things that the notice needs to have um you also need to notice in uh do a public notice in the newspaper of record at least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing these standards actually follow um the planning board and Zoning Board standard uh notice standards um so it's assistant throughout HPC planning board and zoning board right um and that we also you we also state that you have to notice for both HPC and for planning board so there will be two notices provided to any property owner being designated all right um upon review hearing comments from the public if any proposed nomination shall be voted on by the HPC and then it forwards to planning board for consideration planning board then reviews it and if planning board agrees with hpc's recommendation it goes to city council and then you have to notice again for city council right so there are three Public Notices in addition to any Community meetings or anything that's happening um so for criteria for designation We are following the department of the interior's criteria for designation um so we have our standard four here right we have so associated with broad patterns of History a significant a so event person architectural style or um architectural I'm sorry archaeological information and then there's also um criteria for specific sites so cemeteries birthplaces Graves things like that this is a copy and paste language from the National Park Service um this is not language that came from anywhere other than the National Park Service um and then we also have designation of a landmarker district within the boundaries of Jersey City by city council that represents so we have um some standards here as well and that is it is there I know I went through that very quickly is there any part anyone wants to go back to it's a lot of words just one question um the you had mentioned that one of us could actually put up for a landmark designation yes so the an application for designation can originate with the commission right the commission can ask staff to explore something explore designation of a site um that mean so right so if it originates with the commission you guys are the ones putting together all of those materials understood that was going to be my follow-up question yeah right so those materials don't come out of nowhere right and that this is one of those things that um is frequently talked about with designation is there is a barrier of Entry right you have to have all of these documents ready and that's one of the things that we're hoping CLG status will help us with um you get access to there's a match but it's a very small match percentage more grant money for these things um funding for anything historic preservation is always difficult so having um a yearly source of money that we know exists that we know we have a relatively decent chance of getting there's only I think 75 clgs in the state so it's a pretty small group of people we're competing against for that money um it gives us the ability to help with this more than we have been able to in the past so if we put that together like let's just say Steph were to you know nominate something does he have to recuse himself from voting okay yeah right so if Stephen put together the documents yes okay but if let's say there's a let's say we pass this we get CLG status and there's a conversation on the commission that says oh this is mentioned in the master plan is something that we should designate staff should look into that and then we choose to apply for a CLG Grant to hire to do that like right we could do that um typically that has not been how um the commission has pursued designations in the past it always comes from an individual or a group um but having funding to be able to do that stuff opens us up now if you yourself were to prepare a designation that would conflict you out regardless of if it originated on the commission you're a member of the commission but because you have prepared the documents saying I think this is significant you can't sit on the commission and evaluate if it's significant right makes sense thank you yeah it's a little a little hky there but that's essentially how we would navigate it will this new um document have any bearing on what we are in the middle of for Sherman Place no because you guys are already following the standards in this document okay yeah so the standards in this document also match um the process for designation on the state and National level as well um so we're not asking for any more or less information than um any entity would have to provide for any other level of designation barring of course like National Historic Landmark or anything like that great Magie I have a question um in that uh first paragraph um where you strike the word site it's so it's it's not it's no longer nominating sites landmarks and District it's now just nominating landmarks and districts yep out of curiosity why is the word SES stricken because we Define the word Landmark um and sites is not defined right so you're nominating a landmark or a district right um it sites is a very broad term Landmark is both defined in our zoning ordinance and in the ml got it um I actually think does it does does that definition and maybe shame on me for not knowing the answer to this um does that def is that definition broad enough to include not just buildings but also Open Spaces you know rights of ways um yes the distinction yeah the distinction between a landmark and a district is a landmark is the individual entity be it a building structure landscape Etc district is a collection of those um and of course the distinction between individual in a district is when you're nominating a district it's all going to be under one theme right so let's say you have multiple concurrent battlefields in a row and you want to make a battlefield District right you can do it under the thread as a district they were all next to each other of a battlefield whereas a landmark is going to be something that is individually significant which is also actually to tie this back to something we did recently you have Hamilton Park on its own being significant under Criterion a and Criterion C but we individually landmarked the Venus pelagatti house for association with Criterion B right so that's actually a very apt distinction between a landmark and a district okay are there any other questions on this okay hearing none should we open for public comment okay there any members of the public in attendance I think you have to flip on the mic though there's like a uh yeah actually you can just use this one yes Shireen maor it's sh r i n m a c c o r m a c k 130 Glenwood of um Sharon before you start I know you've presented in front of the HPC before but the record I do want to clarify uh you have 3 minutes to address the HPC I will set a timer I'll let you know when you have 1 minute left and if you have any questions um you ask through the chair and we'll respond okay thank you Maggie you're good to go good evening I'm the president of McGinley Square community board I'm a trustee uh new trustee at landmarks conservancy and woman of action in JC in 2024 the last time I was here I was advocating for Jersey City to gain CLG um uh status I appreciate the newly outlined Clarity in the nomination process and that the city's requirements will now align with the states and the countries however these will be quite daunting and demanding for the average person requiring the resident to do an exorbitant amount of work to research fund and Survey my goal is that my guess is that the average resident would not be able B to easily or quickly complete these requirements many like me previously would not even know where to begin my neighbors and I through our community group have been working towards designation of Meo teris from 1:20 to 130 Glenwood with the close help of JC landmarks Conservancy for the last one and a half years now we see no end in sight the 1895 Queen Anne holes are the first and last of their kind north of Montgomery a block from the HD they're in an area where letters of significance exist for the Block's former Garden Apartments and dorms from the 1950s but no study or letter yet exists for Mayu Terrace I have supplied many documents to the hpo and learned just today that the funds are not there and that these are con not considered to have urgency despite having architectural and cultural significance my community group wouldn't exist if we thought so we formed after 104's demo was applied for in 22 and later approved in 2023 we seek to protect these assets marking up the current tax map including um current and 1938 photos of properties and some info um for nomination seems very reasonable however the part that's rigorous is the building by building and I'm quoting inventory of all properties within the district identifying contributing non-contributing or intrusions I strongly suggest that this one be a assisted by the HP office or their Consultants at Hunter research or shipo um in some way with community outreach to alleviate some of the wheels spinning um with a lot of time involved and the need to create the to uh to manage the need for accurate Professional Knowledge the average person is not educated on what is considered contributing or non-contributing or what consist constitutes an intrusion or the fact that if it can be undone it affects the assessment they're not aware of the industry lingo um a preservation Enthusiast maybe you can't tell you what style or period a structure belongs to or the difference between a ballister and a spindle one minute um I was even in a planning board meeting when the architect so-called expert repeatedly referred to a touret as the con likee structure he should have known but everyone my point is that everyone is able to tell you why a building should be nominated and how a building made them feel um or how upset they'd be if that building suddenly disappeared so please provide opportunities for the HBO to engage with Community for nomination requirements and do not leave it all in the nominator um to figure out and provide upfront nomination has to be realistic and doable Andrea Tingley of shipo runs seminars to help people fill out the forms at the state level and the Jersey City hpo should um hopefully consider engaging her for the HBO's goal of Outreach to educate the public we want to work with all of you thanks Sharon thank you thank you okay um do we want to close public comment as no other members of the public are here I'll make a motion to close second all in favor okay um I didn't there weren't any specific questions for staff in there I will just kind of go through a couple of things um again we're hoping that uh we like again I as I said before there is a barrier to entry with designation um it is important for us to have very specific standards that um outline why a building is significant right part of the reason sometimes that we struggle with applications in our current historic districts is because in the '70s and early ' 80s when they were designating a lot of these districts they didn't have enough information in these applications because they there wasn't the professional expertise there and it's something that we see now that restricts some of our um ability to make informed decisions on applications so I understand that there's a lot of information being asked of applicants but there is a reason that we're doing it um and it's so that future Generations can make informed decisions on applications that being said we like I said earlier I'm hoping that the CLG funding will alleviate some of these things and we can help engage Community groups and say okay well we can apply for a grant if we get it um you guys can be the main point person and the city will essentially like the community group could potentially provide the match I don't know how any of that would work right but we're again the the main reason driving this is that we're trying to open additional opportunities through that CLG funding um that we hope would again make it a little bit more accessible at least that way so historically these uh applications have been initiated in a Grassroots effort every single application that I've seen in any municipality I've worked in has been um at the request of the community funded by the community completed by the community and um you're saying that with these grants potentially available will be be able to connect these groups with potential funding yes and and ease that burden yeah so there are there's one existing Grant fund that will fund work like this if you are a nonprofit um which a lot of uh local community groups have nonprofit status um it is not it's through um the DCA through the New Jersey historic trust it is not available every single year um but that funding does exist um and some groups have taken advantage of it in the past um I believe the West Bergen histo uh District that was how they funded um that community group when they um prepared those documents to get the West Bergen District designated they did it through a New Jersey historic trust Grant um so again that's how they've been completed in the past um the last individual Landmark we saw the Venus bagatti house that was prepared entirely by um an advocacy group who was working on a documentary based on her life and they compiled enough information to um prepare a nomination so it's it's always been done and it actually allows staff to have some level of Separation to be objective about these things right like we that is part of our role as staff is to evaluate if it has significance right so we do need some level of objectivity right we can't prepare these designations in house could we however if say there were an organization that didn't necessarily have the wherewithal to bring one of those full applications forward could they attend one of our meetings speak during the open public comment segment introduce the idea and then the commission could you know the the language refers to the uh May originate at the HPC as we were just discussing so could we then send it to perhaps hunter or some other group too um so we don't have hun I know that was mention we don't have Hunter research contracted we have them on a very very very limited contract to review demolitions um if we wanted to have an outside group similar to Hunter so an outside consultant review something on our behalf it would have to be a separate contract with them um but that is something that the HPC could request staff to um look into and see if funding is available for yeah I was going to say subject to funding of course yeah yeah um the city just I don't know who reads the city's budget city does have um a Consulting line item for the planning department every year um it is almost always eaten up by us getting a outside engineer to review planning board projects but on occasion um and also I mean plan the engineer and also you know people reviewing our demos for us is not cheap um but sometimes there's money left over um quick question so as the um as Sharin had just mentioned before that someone at the state level does like preparation seminars so this one of the things that the state so this is the state historic preservation office they offer a number of different seminars um on a rolling basis for a variety of different things sometimes they give them at conferences sometimes they host them through uh the Ruckers March program sometimes they just host them um through shipo either virtually or at there's a training facility in Glassboro um and those you sign up for on a anyone can sign up for them so I guess what I'm asking is there a way that we could collaborate with that department and get one for maybe the general public like once a year at least we could we could ask if there was enough interest in it we could ask sure and just out of curiosity uh do you know uh the amount of funding that went into the Venus pelagatti um project that was all privately I mean and again their their landmarking process was a essentially like a side project understand for the larger yeah I Janelle I almost said side quest because it was um but that that was a part of a larger project so I don't know what their amount was I do know um that West Bergen was in the ballpark of I think it was $65,000 because it's a very it's it's an unbelievably large District a smaller district is um somewhere depending on the size of the district between you I would say you're not going to find anything cheaper than $5,000 and say 15 is probably a middle ground something like um what Sharon's describing where it's a row of six houses would be much on the lower end of that threshold if not cheaper than that 5,000 and a specific question if I may about the project that Sherin is bringing up she mentioned the need for um um contributing and non-contributing buildings that would be for a district not for a row of houses correct well it would choose to be how you would uh designate that District if you would do four individual designations or if you would pursue a district we typically recommend that districts have at least 85% contributing versus non-contributing rates um but we would have again we would have to evaluate it right um it I am I do not I have they've been providing a ton of information to our office we have looked at it I can't tell you if I think it would be better to pursue as a district or as individuals and wasn't there a third option where there's a group group M prop you do multip proper there four here right invol you could do you could do a you could do multiple property designation for the which possibly eliminate some of the the bulk of the work that would be involved [Music] in individual yeah yeah well sort of like the warehouses of what used to be the former um Arts District yes or Warehouse District yeah the so what where you reduce some of the work with a multiple property designation versus a district is your statement of significance for a multiple property designation is going to apply to all of the properties right and you're going to have individual property descriptions right um You might have a small addendum for each property for significance based on you know who lived there things like that but um it does it an M multiproperty designation looks similar to a district seems like that would be a lesser undertaking than establishing a district yeah yeah yeah there are and New Jersey has a history of doing multiple property designations um they're more commonly associated with Statewide projects like um the women's history Trail and the New Jersey African-American Heritage Trail those are all multiple property designations gotcha the good thing about those is you can also add to them over time okay there any other questions for staff any comments on this if not um the recommendation here is to um recommend to the planning board to approve um yeah make a recommendation to the what yeah so it would be recommend to the planning board to recommend ad option I'll make a motion to recommend to the planning board to make a an adoption second okay all right we'll do a roll call vote commissioner Gunther I commissioner song I commissioner blazak I commissioner amuso I commissioner griga I just want to before I give my vote I just want to say like I agree with you know what Miss Mrs McCormack was saying um that's why I did ask if we could at least do once a year try and uh collaborate with the residents with these Community groups I think it's important that all of these Community groups get a chance to at least see what that process looks like um other than that I will vote Yes but I just want to be on the record about that thank you right commissioner San Camp I also vote I and I also agree with what our speaker U was saying um but I also believe that um it's one of the biggest reasons why the landmark Conservancy um gains membership and um it is it is the one big interested party in Jersey City that can identify and and um um get behind uh a district or or an individual Landmark yes and to my knowledge uh lmar Conservancy is also a 501c3 so they would also be eligible for some of those other grants I talked about anyway um commissioner Cronin is absent Vice chair Garda I and chairman Gordon I right there are eight votes in favor none against with no extensions the recommendation to recommend adoption is approved all right let's go through the rest of the agenda so for tabled cases um I do not have an update on Temple bethl however um they are going to meet with me sometime next week with some new structural documents so hopefully we'll have an update on that soon um 2426 Kennedy they are being carried they they requested to be carried to September um they are still waiting for a date to meet with the community for the proposal um so we'll see if that ends up on September or not demolition review um we've carried this communa application for many meetings I am every other week I send a me an email to them like begging for someone to get on the phone with me so I can explain what the purpose of that meeting is um rather than them just say oh we're going to look at our plan for this site and figure it out um so working on it um there are no resolutions to introduce and discuss no resolutions to memorialize we do not need an executive session so that just leaves us with adjournment motion second okay it is 8:43 all in favor I all right