##VIDEO ID:9C9ZohroFMA## to the flag the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all good evening cam could we have a sunshine announcement please yes chairman good evening everyone today is Tuesday September 24th in the year 2024 this is a Jersey City planning board meeting with a scheduled 5:30 p.m start time and in accordance with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting has been given to the editor of the Jersey journal the Jersey City Reporter and posted with the city clerk on September 20th of this year this meeting was also posted on the Jersey City division of City Planning web page and all distribution materials made available to the board were published and made available to the public all right thank you Cam uh could we have a roll call please yes uh Vice chair Dr Gonzalez here commissioner gangan here um councilwoman Prince ER here commissioner Torres here commissioner lipsky here commissioner Dr ji H here commissioner green here and chairman Langston here okay we have a full board we have eight Commissioners present all right thank you could we swearing the staff please Mike Magie yes all right thank you uh cim do we have correspondence yes we do chairman um we have one item that is adjourning under new business and they will have to Ren notice when they wish to be heard um so that is item uh nine case p2024 d42 for conditional use address 415 Mammoth street so again they are adjourning to a date un certain they will have to Reen notice if they decide to get heard um and then also under do we have any justification on that because we've carried this and adjourned this multiple times so they their their notice was flawed that again yeah yeah so um two other items wish to uh carry and they request to carry with preservation of notice to October 22 item 16 on the agenda case p2024 0019 address is 248 eie Street and 209 to 215 15th Street and that is for a preliminary and final major site plan with variances they have requested a carry to October 22nd um and then item 20 on the agenda the last item on the agenda that's case p2024 d003 36 for a preliminary and final major site plan Amendment with variances address 20 carbon Place they've requested a carry with preservation of notice to October 22nd and that concludes uh correspondence okay thank you Cam uh let's get into Old business we'll call Item 7A is case p2024 d166 uh a 190 day subdivision filing extension good evening Council good evening Mr chairman members of the board Robert verell from the law firm of conell Foley on behalf of the applicant uh this is a uh request uh to extend time to file the Subdivision plat this is uh with regards to the uh new shop right that's being constructed the plat has been signed we're not making any changes to the plat as you may recall there's a land swap that's involved that will allow Provo Street to extend to um gen Demi Drive we're still working out final details uh for the closing on the uh subdivision we expect that to be done prob I'm sorry to interrupt can we give just have one second Council I just need to recuse myself on this matter uh been recused on the matter so I just got to put that on the record sure and I'll just step off to the side so Council given that our uh council is recusing from this application um I'm comfortable moving forward but at any time if we feel like we need to consult with outside Council we reserve that right understood okay thank you go ahead sorry to interrupt y not a problem um so as I was saying uh there's a land swap involved which will subdivide the um Wells Fargo the existing Wells Fargo reconstitute that lot allow Provo Street to extend to ganji drive we're working out the final details of the land swap we expect to close probably in October uh is what I'm being told um and so the plat was signed back in June um so we just need we have 95 days under statute to record it we're all set to record it but our time is basically up so we're looking for an extension 190 days is the maximum extension we're asking for that just for contingencies but the sooner I can get this filed the better we just need the extra time okay understood any questions anybody no all right thank you is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this application anybody from public saying no public I move to close the public second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed um Matt do you have any issues um no staff supports um this is pretty routine especially complex um property transactions some such as this often exceed that 95 day timeline so okay thank you Mr I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 0166 as presented to our board tonight second okay motion is made un seconded for approval uh commissioner lipsky hi commissioner Gonzalez hi uh commissioner Desai hi commissioner green I commissioner gangadin I uh commissioner councilwoman Prince AR I commissioner Torres I and uh chairman Langston I uh motion carries 90 okay thank thank you Council all right let's move on Item B Santa uh we'll call case p2024 D 0157 is a 2-year extension for 100 Kellogg Street good evening Council hi good evening Mr chairman members of the board Veronica sh from Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant um as an initial matter uh did appear that we noticed on this and I have the original notice if we could Mark that into evidence thank you Council okay so um yes I'm here on behalf of the applicant Bayfront Partners 32 LP um request again is for the 2-year extension um for the approval under case number p2257 um just by way of very brief overview the underlying approval was for a mixed use project with 210 units uh 35 of which were going to be affordable which comes out to 74 units um was approved back in November 15 of 2022 so it's set to expire in about two months um the reason behind the two-year uh request is that my understanding is that applicant anticipates some delay in perfecting the financing structure I think there's some wrinkles to be ironed out with the jcr um in large part due to the substantial affordable housing um so applicant is requesting um the 2-year extension of those approvals so chairman first uh let's mark the proof of publication and the notice as A1 for the record I've had the opportunity to review it it does appear to be in order uh chairman as I've said multiple times with respect to extensions in excess of one year I don't believe it to be appropriate in this situation but I leave it to the discretion of the board I agree Council um does anybody have any questions anybody from the board okay Council we're going to recommend one year of course we understand okay thank you um all right with that being said is there anybody here from public that wants to comment anyone from public say no public I move to close the public second okay motion is made and executive public is closed Sophia anything you want to add planning staff would ask that the applicant agree to the previous conditions of that were approved under the original approval applicant agrees and planning staff recommends approval of oneyear extension okay thank you Mr chair I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 0157 as presented to the board tonight with a one-year extension second okay motion is made it and seconded for approval uh Vice chair Dr Gonzalez I commissioner Gaden I councilwoman Prince AR I commissioner Torres I commissioner lipsky I commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner green I and chairman Langston I all in favor motion carries all right thank you thank you Council all right let's move on to item C is case p2024 d014 is a one-year site plan extension for 212 Culver Avenue good evening Council hi good evening chairman good evening Commissioners Gerard pillo from janova burns on behalf of the applicant LK cover LLC uh this is a request for a one-year site plan extension for uh planning board approval uh p21 d120 uh the property located in midrise zone B of the Culver rout 440 Redevelopment area governed by the provisions of that plan uh the board uh in May of 2022 granted a final preliminary final major site plan for an eight-story 365 unit mixed use building uh containing 1,500 ft of retail and 108 184 parking space garage uh basis for the approval um the applicant at that time was uh the contractor purchaser that deal never happened my client ended up acquiring title in January of 2024 obviously essentially about two and a half years into the you know the three-year appr the almost two almost the entirety of the approval so uh we're asking for the one year just to uh get their final pieces in place so that they can move forward with the development um there are underlying conditions that were part of the uh approval that my client understands would be applicable here they agree to be uh Bound by them and agree to the same okay thank you Council chairman first uh Council had previously provided me the originals of the notice of publication on this matter I had the opportunity to review them so we're going to Mark the proof of publication notice of mailing is A1 for purposes of the record uh with respect to this particular property Council Culver Avenues and and pretty rough shape in front of this site or no there is some uh Street concerns and I think the the bigger issue is pollock on the rear of the side of the rear site the rear of the site um and I understand that yes there's a lot of holy conditions back there uh the one of the engineering comments on the on the underlying approval was to Mill and pave the entirety of Pollock Street which my clients obviously are obligated to do because of the engineering comments that always attach to and are part of the any site plan approval um obviously the that's a permanent condition the building is not built yet um we're asking for the extension today so that they can move forward and build it uh so to alleviate the condition on a temporary basis uh I've had discussions with my client and they will fill that area or those areas of concern on poock uh you know I'm not a contractor but you know with whatever that pothole stuff is and I I mean that's no term of art but yeah uh you know that black top I guess black top uh but I you know I don't know if that's what's used but uh so I could put that on the record uh cuz I know it was a concern and it is a concern uh with you know some of the the neighborhood or some people in the neighborhood yeah obviously we were hoping that the project was already underway and we'd be moving towards that so given the delay for whatever the reason any relief that we can get for everybody I think would be much appreciated and also uh there may be some activities happening on this site I don't know if you're aware of this but uh there may be some activities that haven't been approved by anybody that uh hopefully will be alleviated uh like immediately yes uh there were issues with that uh and I've been assured that by the end of the week all of that will be eliminated uh there was a you know there is other City agencies that are you know monitoring this uh you know with the assistance of municipal court so you know obviously they're under that agreement uh as well as you know the obligations that this board would set you know with regards to the underlying approval and the proposed extension that we're here on tonight chairman with that I think that based on council's representations and obviously we can put the milling and Paving or at least the pothole filling on a temporary basis as a condition of the extension uh I have no no issue with that being a condition of the extension so okay uh I leave that to the discretion of the board okay I I would request that that is a condition of the extension um as you know this has been since the project has been delayed um that stretch of Pollock Street is worse and worse we've received numerous phone calls the city is not able to do its own repair and the the craters are very bad I've been there and I've seen them myself and my concern is actually to another winter season that there might that it might become a hazard so um and and considering the the other the other piece of it which we've also discussed um you know we happy that there's a project that's going to move forward they need to show that they're going to be good neighbors that's what I say all time so I would I would just ask that this in particular whether it's micromilling or some sort of backfill just to make it level um so the people that are also living in the building adjacent to it do not continue to have the issue that they're having because this Project's been delayed so I I understand and no no issues no issues I appreciate that thank you okay Council so we're going to put that as a condition of approval that Pollock Street will be leveled I would say a portion of poock stre I don't so would the the request would be from mallerie to the dead end because that's that's where the problem is right but within a Center Line back because it's not all of our my clients as I understand it it's it's not partially the city's Street and a portion of it sits within our property line or my client's property line so it's not I I I understand the condition and and they know what's out there and they said they will repair it uh you know that's what I can tell you I don't know where in l i I don't know if we can get onto the city street and start doing stuff without any sort of city okay and I just I I just don't want to say from the corner to the dead end without knowing where all that is and without having of course you know Engineers or the benefit of the actual survey to show the lines but the condition is well received and will be complied with but I would just say within my client's property because I think that's fair because we shouldn't right because that's the only area we have control of to actually do the repairs but the condition on the approval is for the entirety of the street and that's not going to go away and and that would obviously be the permanent fix once they start building no and and I understand Paving a road to rip up a road is not the best answer also but I just want to make sure that this is this is finally addressed once and for all because it is very big pain Point um and the creaters like I said they're they're not small they're not small no fair I and I understand that councilwoman okay thank you okay so we're saying it's just under the control Property Owners control that's that's fair okay that's fair okay thank you all right uh any other questions from the board okay is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this extension Mr chair saying no public I move to close second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed Camp anything you want to add planning staff um would just add that they agreed to the existing conditions and then the said condition we added tonight and planning staff recommends approval agreed just on the record agreed all those conditions Mr CH I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d148 as presented to the board tonight with the condition of the extension of under the property owner's control second okay motion is made and seconded for approval Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi commissioner gangen hi councilwoman Prince ER hi commissioner Toros hi commissioner lipsky hi commissioner Dr Sai hi commissioner green I and chairman langon I motion carries all in favor with conditions thank you thank you Council thank you all right we'll call case p2024 d142 is a one-year site plan extension for 50 Day Street Mr mccan 50 day apologize that's okay uh James M good evening everybody uh James mccan law firm of conell fley on behalf of the applicant Mana contemporary um this is an application for an extension of an existing site plan approval uh through September 5th of 2025 so Mr McAn uh we do have to just hash out a couple of issues as I understand it there's some open violations uh with respect to that address uh so my recollection has to do with the various entities and of course the internet never disappoints in this room Mr McAn so when we were here can I get paper for the initial site plan approval um the issue came up because the project does have publicly accessible open space there's a patio in front of the main entrance of the building and I believe there's a barbecue or a series of barbecues and some picnic benches and there's also a dog run there and um that project was originally approved about 20 years ago this is the Cano Lofts building at 50-day Street um and the original developer owned and controlled the entire building at that time um but it was also known at the time that the site plan approval was granted that the building was going to be a master condominium with subc Condominiums within it because those of you who know that complex know that there's five towers that have been renovated there the actual case that we're here on tonight is the remaining unrenovated Tower um so when that approval was put in place there there was an open space requirement and there's no dispute about that but what happened over the past 20 years is the building was sold and converted to condos as always planned and so now at this point in time Mana my client only owns Tower one the open space area is controlled by the master Condominium Association that controls Towers 2 through 7 and when I was here uh for the original site plan approval the same issue came up and Council you and I had a discussion my client doesn't have control over that open space and we did reach out to um the Ward councilman at the time rich poano and his assistant and we did put them in in connect in a communication with the master Condo Association who is represented by a lady named Cindy vogelman um and I can give that name to the planning staff if that's helpful but I can't remedy for you or make any commitments to any of you about the open space because client doesn't have the legal authority to make changes to that area and I'm not sure what the violations are the last time we were here there was a question I think the planning staff would like there to be an open a public open space sign that's not what the issue is I know that there are are complaints from time to time that some of the people in the building discourage people who don't live in the building from using the open space I've that concern has been relayed to me from time to time also so I'm aware of that council is your client not a member of the Master Association one one member out of five um no it's probably more than one but he does not my understanding is they do he does not control the master Association understood because we've brought has this issue has been brought to the master Association I think it could be solved if the staff would contact the Master Association attorney whose name I just gave you I think it can so without going too far down the rabbit hole the solution is incredibly easy in my opinion which is just to comply with what you're supposed to comply with and not you but whoever controls it your client as a member has some ability to at least provide you with information as well as whoever else as to what this issue is and why it's not being complied with uh but I understand obviously that your client is only one of a whole and doesn't have the majority vote on that Association so uh chairman that's the reality of what we have before us but it's it's problematic to say the least and is disheartening at best so Council just refresh my memory it's not as good as it used to be um yes it is this thank you um this is public open space this is not condo Building open space correct so I hate to say stuff like this but I was the one that handled the original site plan approval 20 or more years ago remember oh I don't remember that I don't know you might have been I wasn't on the board yet I remember it but I will tell you I was on the council and on the board yes yes yes commissioner lipsky you were on the council for the tax component of this you know this project well and I know the issue that still exists and the and yeah and so yes as the approvals attorney from back then the area in question is supposed to be publicly accessible open space okay I don't see how anybody can dispute that it's in the resolution from many many years ago that the staff has okay understood and I would love I'll speak to it briefly because it was then as is today uh somewhat of an issue I mean it's not publicly open say come let your dogs walk in his dog walk or come and use these uh benches or barbecue in fact uh many of the residents themselves are directed over across the street to Cano Park to use it as a dog run my client didn't build an enormous park right across the street from the project and dedicate it to the city I know that's not the issue but there's open space up there no that that that's a huge Improvement and it's greatly appreciated it's just that many of the time if you go walking and it smells like urine or poop so because they're not using the washable dog run across the street but so I long story short is look does it impact the uh request for an extension I don't know how many more people over there are conflated between the two um I go over there for different events it seems you know livable usable but that's that's the issue that some people still complain and the one of their tenant groups have looked to get a dog run offsite over on norc Avenue by some of that New Jersey Transit and Conrail property so other Solutions are being sought um I don't know it's that pressing today but the dog run itself is also part of the public space it is yes okay well I guess I guess somebody's going to the dog park out of neighborhood tomorrow tomorrow um so chairman the issue is it's being restricted sure so again not to say that that is Mr mcan's client's issue uh I believe they're pending violations and obviously if it's being restricted those violations should be pursued and continued and as aggressively as possible as often as possible uh apparently this has been going on 20 years at this point I I can certainly and I will contact Miss vogan and let her know that the entire board was very concerned about this and that my client almost didn't get their extension I I mean I hope we still hope we do but don't speak too soon be careful but I I'm happy to cooperate to the extent that I can and I'm sure my client will also um so chairman something Mr mccan is not going to like coming out of my mouth is the board could always hold this in OB bance until such time as maybe he has that conversation but I would leave that up to to the board and I don't think the board's job is to punish no no we have that policy here um I'll be good cop on this one all right so I I have no problem moving on with the extension um but I think there's definitely some work to do here um um anybody else any other questions I feel the same way chairman yeah I agree I you know I mean there's a whole bunch going over there with the art world uh there are other possibilities being explored um you know it's a matter of access but it's you know it's not something that is there's no gate up there's no like you don't need I recognition or you know anything like that you could still access it it's just not so I trust Mr mccan would bring this back and would work on it as he does and uh let's see what happens in a year yeah just just to say there's no lock there's no fence it I think it's peer pressure yeah is is what happens to be honest with you council do you only have a name or do you have a do you have contact info for Miss vman I have contact info I've spoken to her about this very issue like the first time I was here is there any way you can forward that to me tomorrow of course just in case I can forward it to you and whoever's handling this okay okay all right thank you so there's nothing else we'll move on okay is there anybody hear from the public that wants to comment on this one-year extension Mr chair saying no public I move to close the public second second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed genen Ru Tanya it's me okay so I Mr mccan is correct I did reach out to him in August because for the last year I have been getting complaints uh from the neighbor who has said as much as he was asked to be he's asked to leave the area when we spoke to the manager uh property manager he justified his actions by saying that they didn't have um insurance and that they was a potential to have dogs from another area on their property I know so not the heights right they didn't not to make not to make this more confusing than it is but the last time we were here for this application a solution was recommended and it was ignored so a signage is this really simple answer that really should have just I wish was taken into consideration um and done because now we're here however many years later and it's the same story so I mean as far as an extension if you the the conditions of approval from the last one obviously should carry over to this one but as the zoning officer who writes the violations I I don't know why any kind of I don't know why You' be granting you know they're part of a condo so if you're in a condo of five units I I you don't give one person a benefit of the doubt because the whole building can't get it stuff together that's just and yes I've reached out to Cindy vulgan already who is ignored by emails so Tanya just on the point of issuing the summonses you can issue a summons every day with a maximum fee and it could go into the municipal court so uh that's the enforcement branch and I I think you know if the attitude's going to be we're going to discourage and restrict the public from that area then the Master Association is going to have to account for that and by extension obviously Mr mcan's client who who is a member of that Association will wind up sharing in that uh that displeasure little further than than what we can do okay thank you Council I'll entertain a motion CH chair I like to make a motion to approve case p2024 0142 as presented to the board tonight second okay motion is made and seconded for approval Vice chair Dr Gonzales hi commissioner gagon hi councilwoman Prince ER hi commissioner Tores I just want to put on the record that the um I'm going to vote ey because the bottom line is the building is still in Ni saw and if they can get that done and cleaned up so when we drive that way we see a project completed after all these years um but um yeah but I do agree that we need to uh put violations every day then on them and if it becomes your client too then so be it that it becomes what it needs to be and that's I vote I commissioner lipsky yeah I agree coming over the pasas is not pleasant with that one building so let's get it done I vote I commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner uh commissioner green I chairman lyson uh it's an i and Council please uh tell your client I'll be the Bold bearded man out there every day grilling okay bull motion carries all in favor thank you for your time everybody I appreciate thank you Council okay under new business I do want to move one item up uh that I think we can clear up a few things uh we're going to call Item 13 is case P20 24- 0088 uh is an amendment to a previous approval of P1 18-120 for 87 Bright Street good evening Council Council there was a counterpart do you know where I believe they're out of the room right now I'll just put my appearance on the record and we can notices Stephen Joseph quickly chami for the applicant uh we did notice for this application if we can Mark those into evidence please so chairman I am in receipt of the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 87 Bright Street I've had the opportunity to review it it does appear to be in order okay so we will mark it as A1 for purposes of the record so Council Council I lost other Council council do you want to put your appearance on record Council thank you very much chair Mr chairman um so I'm an stud Holm from post poic and I'm here on behalf of CeCe Deon her husband Tom who has a long unpronouncable name that I haven't been able to learn yet they are objectors sorry Tom I was just hired last night um and because CeCe who knows me had called me just for some advice about exhibits and I said let me see what you're doing and I said oh my God you have a terrible safety issue probably one a lot worse than you know so Council we just went way further yeah we just want represent I represent CCE Deon and her husband Tom in their personal capacities but they're also the president and Secretary of the homeowners association for their building at 85 bright so they're the immediately adjacent building so they own 85 and obviously the sub they a unit in 85 and they are president secretary of the Home Owners Association and my understanding is but again they just called me yesterday so I don't even have a formal retainer I might end up representing the HOA at the moment I represent Tom and okay understood okay thank you Council so Mr Joseph before we get into testimony there's obviously some issues here to say the least um and I I don't even want this testimony to start without asking the client asking your client number one we don't have the previous approval resolution in the data portal I think it showed up there today this morning okay actually I don't think it was this morning because I I looked for it this morning um I also think we need a copy of the easement agreement between your client and the Board of Ed because I I think the issue here is there's a permanent structure built in an agreement an easement agreement that we have no knowledge of is the structure allowed there is it not allowed there I know what your opinion is going to be I know what council's opinion is going to be and I hear you loud and clear I want to see it on paper I want to see the agreement let's see what it says in the agreement and then we'll take it from there so Santo did I miss anything that we want I believe that that covers at the very least what the Board needs to even hear the application and understand where the various pieces fall but I think that perhaps uh whatever reviewing agencies or something sign offs that took place let me digress I understand the structure has been built and there are people residing in the structure is that fair Council that's that's correct it's an existing building it was renovated um and the the structure I guess we're all referring to is the fire escape at the rear of the property but the structure I was referring to is the building it's four units and there are four families living in the structure that's correct right so presumably at the very least there's a TCO out there that's correct and I don't know if there are any uh documents supporting the TCO or not obviously you don't have a CO which is why you're you're here but I won't go any further than that uh chairman the only other question and without having seen it and again this will be up for Council to decide is coun the Board of Ed was noticed of this meeting I don't know if there's been any communication with the Board of Ed since the actual easement agreement was entered into and if the the Board of Ed appreciates what's going on in the easement or not whether they have an opinion or not whether they have an issue or not so if that exists great if it doesn't then you can't Supply it obviously but chairman I think that that helps the Board in understanding uh the ask and why the ask I guess thank you Council yet I Mr Joseph I don't want to be an hour into testimony Y and find out that there's issues that we can address right so I want to have every issue out in the open not the day of the meeting I want it in the data portal 10 days prior okay absolutely so I I think that's you know fair to the board it's fair to your client it's fair to the public let's get everything out in the open okay before we make a decision before we even take testimony so so chairman the only other thing I would add is in light of the fact that that's the request and council's going to uh provide that stuff to the board I think if Council has anything else that she wants to raise if she's capable of raising it now absolutely I would like to hear what those requests are this way we're not hearing it at the next meeting and Mr Joseph is unable to to address it at that point in time thank you very much Council and and Mr chairman um I think the list of documents that you've requested is excellent I'm also going to do what I can to get documents from my clients and submit them I don't know if staff if Tanya would upload them into the portal I don't know your procedure on that but do everything we can to to submit documents um as I indicated um to Stephen here I apologize I forgetting everybody's names um I think there could be a resolution of this issue but I am such a newcomer to it that I'm a little hampered there but this will give us a chance to to to help educate everybody about this I very much appreciate I would like to see those documents I think they should be public one thing I did want to reserve was my rights I'm not sure that this was adequately noticed and I don't want to be silent on that I actually would like to go record saying I think it was not adequately noticed um but if you're noticing for further date or if they Ren notice again I don't want to make AIG deal of that but I do want to be able to preserve my ability um if it turns out as I strongly suspect that it wasn't properly noticed again I don't know if the board got noticed there was no notice in the the packet the online packet didn't have the certifications and my clients did not receive mail notice I just don't know because this is amendment of an application I have to look into that I just want to reserve my ability for that so this is what I'm going to say to how we're going to handle the exchange of documents you obviously have the right to present Witnesses and Exhibits whatever you're going to present has to be shared with Mr Joseph our rule is 10 days before yes so typically for applicants however when we have a known objector it applies to the objector as well I'm going to request that anything that you want to present to the board you send via email to myself with a copy to Mr Joseph as well as to planning director Marone and we will end uh secretary Cameron for us to hash out before anything goes up on the portal from oh yourself okay fine uh the documents we just mentioned should have been submitted either with the application and perhaps they were and didn't make it to the portal so I'm less concerned about that uh finally with respect to the notice of course I would not try to prevent you from Raising any objection Council I don't know uh you know we're going to carry this to a date certain we're not going to require additional notice however in light of the fact that Council has raised this issue if you want to look at it and and notice for that date I get the feeling you're going to have time to get that notice done uh that'll that'll be your call obviously you're you're the applicant it's it's at your apparel uh do we have an idea of a date that we would carry to again the buildings operating so I I'm sure your client's anxious to move forward but uh and and all the documents that were requested are on the public record so we could upload those tomorrow to the portal okay we have the the 8th and the 202nd yes of October of October correct I would like to I'd like to make a floor amendment to that um I can't be here the 22nd so if we could skip that date uh I believe our November 12th next date is November 12th M if that's okay that's the date then chairman okay thank you unless anybody on the board has an issue with the November 12th anybody else okay we got the ground rules any other questions at this point thank you very much thank you so much appreciate your time thank you everybody thank you everybody so we'll make a motion Mr chair I'd like to make a motion to carry case p2024 d 88 to a date certain of November 12th second with preservation of notice okay motion is made and seconded for a carry to November 12th ice chair Dr Gonzalez hi commissioner gangon hi councilwoman priner hi commissioner Torres hi commissioner lipsky hi commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner green I and chairman lyson hi okay motion carries all in favor thank you let's move on to item 10 is case p2024 D20 uh is a signage application for 909 Bergen Avenue good evening Council good evening chair good evening chairman good evening Commissioners Gerard pisillo from Genova Burns appearing this evening on behalf of the applicant just you you don't have you can I'm hearing on behalf of the applicant DCI sign in awnings um Pro the application before you is for a minor site plan with deviations for signage uh the property 909 Bergen Avenue uh is located in the art deco zone of the Journal Square Redevelopment area um because there are deviations we did notice this application I did provide a copy of that notice uh and it is uploaded on the portal uh just ask if Council has had a chance to review that and everything is accurate thank you Council chairman uh board coun council did provide me with a copy of the notice prior to the meeting I've had the opportunity to review it it does appear to be an order and we're going to Market is A1 for purposes the record thank you Council thank you Council I appreciate it so I'll get right into it this is a pretty standard uh request for a sign uh the end user is H&R Block H&R Block currently operates in 30 Journal Square the ask they're moving across the street to 909 Bergen Avenue uh we did receive the authorization from the landowner uh to appear uh before the board this evening uh for this request uh so we did check that box uh there are three minor deviations that we are requesting are two deviations and a design waiver uh the maximum square footage of or for signage in the Journal Square is 20 square fet the sign we're proposing is 22 Square F feet uh the uh Channel letters it's a channel letter sign internally illuminated so that triggers an additional deviation and then the third design waiver is for the corporate logo of green Sim you know H&R Block uh the Redevelopment plan only uh permits black and white and requires any other color to come before you uh we have two brief Witnesses uh emers two sorry Council two quick ones two uh Emerson Emerson chamako from D DCI signs who will testify as to to chimako uh who will testify as to the the materials the dimensions uh and the colors and then Samuel belly from dreser Robin who will testify with regards to the uh deviations that we're requesting so all that said I'll turn it over to Emerson uh I could plug my computer in uh so the board or the members of the public can see the sign we will be testifying from the signs that are on from the plans that are on the portal so there's no presentation or additional EX IIT so I'll just plug this in right now thank you Council okay yes uh Emerson cako e m e r s o n c i a m a c o good evening sir go ahead sure uh we're not qualifying you as an expert is that correct no okay why not well because he is just a fact witness as to the sign installer okay so he's not a engineer he's not an architect he's just testifying factually with regards to the sign dimensions and how it's going to be installed not a sign he's not a sign expert well he may be no I am a sign expert I work for 20 years in a sign business but I I'm not an engineered or architect but yes I was going to say I have 20 plus years experience under you know as a a union organizer I think that you know just not having a a college degree and license make you not an expert absolutely absolutely thank you I I'm the experts that Discord is used that I I I uh that all right so sir if you could just your sign expert give us a background a sign that eliminated Channel letters it's going to be installed on a Raceway the letters are going to be installed on raceways uh the size that he said is um a little exceeds the allowance sir we just have to wait for Council to get it up on the screen bear with him bear with him not a technology expert I'm not I'm not luckily I came before to uh make sure okay here we go okay so this is the set of plans that it's upload to the portal correct yes okay go ahead continue so the size of the sign exceeds a little bit the square footage allowed which is uh 20 square fet I think and the size is 11t 3 in and 1116 by 24 in high that's the width and the height and the Letts are at 12 in and 5/8 and the color it's it's the corporate colors which is black and um white and green and the lettuce are going to be uh made out of aluminum with the acrylic face internally illuminated with LEDs and installed on a Raceway that the Raceway is going to be installed in the building as it's uh I think it's a leg bolts yes like boats are threaded rods that's on the last page um that's basically it cool I do believe it or not I do have a question about this mhm um just regarding the size of the sign it is 12 and a you had it in front of me thanks J uh 24 in by 11 foot 3 and 1116 inches 11 fo3 and 11/16 is a pretty accurate number is there a reason why it's that exact length because that's how the logo is and when you scale proportionally to 24 in that's what the length that comes out okay so it's not a hardship issue that could be scaled in CAD down to a 20 square foot sign correct that could be yeah okay all right anybody else any questions I have a question the illumination on the sign is it for 24 hours or during the working hours it's it's not going to be 24 hours late uh we did have have this conversation beforehand we understand the board's Comfort level with illumination on signage uh so this would be commerate with you know the hours of operation give or take you know an hour after closing just to you know so everyone's safely exiting that was good thank you Doctor yeah that would have been a condition what are the hours oper um I was given the a of operation it's kind of it's a yeah it's starting on January 3rd it's it's Monday it's 9 to 6 but like usually it's like 9 to 6 and then when the tax season starts it's 9 to8 okay okay so we're not going to do 10:00 at night or have to thing on midnight usually the signs they they are installed on a timer that you can they it's automatic but we give them an extra hour afterwards and you close at 11: and the sign is lit time that's not that's not what we want the understanding is late hours tax season 800 p.m. is the late so then you give the hour it' be no later than 9900 p.m. um ever I don't know is there such a thing but I ever yes yeah yeah ever ever ever okay 900 P p.m. 900 p.m. 900 P p.m. Fair it's night time night time night time okay any other questions anybody are we approving the larger a larger size than required or is that what you're asking that's correct so the the maximum required is 20 ft so we're a touch over at 22.6 and and that's the the square footage square footage square footage and there's a specific reason why you need that extra to well I mean when you scale it like I said like if you put a 24 in high if you want to go down to 20 to 20 square feet that that 24 it's probably going to be much little smaller than than we ideally would be a nice looking sign there so I I think part I didn't so in order to maintain the scale MH sign works out to be 22.6 square feet yes that's is that correct he's asking you I'm asking you yeah he's not I mean at 2T high at that length that's at 2T High okay when you scale it mhm to keep the proportion of the corporate requirements it scales out that the Box in which you make around the sign is 22.6 square fet correct mhm so if you were to make the letters 16 in tall and then Scale based on that your sign would shrink down as a result correct correct and it may be as small as 16 square feet the Box yeah not not really yeah not really but hypothetically hypothetically and then of course the scale on the facade looks out of whack correct correct that's the reason you're asking for it that's the reason it was designed that way C that's exactly right it's a scale thing absolutely 100% I mean and part of the reason you'll hear that you know the request or the justifications of part of Mr Bellamy's which is why you have two witnesses sure so that so I should save that question for Mr Bellamy I think he could put a put more flavor on it in terms of the justifications behind it for sure but I think from a design perspective it's a scale you know connecting with the you know to ensure the proper dimensions of the corporate logo okay yeah because the corporate wants to keep the propor the proportion like okay that's why it comes out but my my question is you know again in the computer you can go up to that corner and yeah drag it down a little bit and make it 20 square feet so I hope Mr Bellamy can shed some light on why we can't do that but let's talk about it so if you know if there's no other questions we'll move on to Mr me well one thing that you may I'm not completely sure but they have um a company that makes the signs like Nationwide for them and they have like 24 in 18 Ines because they may they Mass made it make it you know what I'm saying okay understood and there's Cil there's no other place that has a sign requirement like this of 20 square feet oh you I can't answer that I I wish I had the answer to that question maybe Mr B me does I got a question real quick for the expert though um so your expertise they have 24 in signs all over the country right you have to mount that sign on the building if it's an 18in Square sign are you able to mount it on this building are you familiar with this for side uh where where this is going to go on Burgen Avenue okay you'll be able to mount that sign without any problems or it has to be a 24 in one oh no for the attachment there's nothing to do with the the size with the side itself okay all right thank you very much okay anybody else all right thank you sir we appreciate it no problem uh with that uh I'll call Mr B me an expert I'll let you qualify I I I'll never make that yes I do sure Samuel Bellamy last name b l l a m y Mr Bellamy good evening uh We've qualified you in the past your license is good evening yes it is krent and a good standing okay thank you you're qualified yeah I I've been qualified as an expert professional planner I'm with the firm Jus Robin perfect thank you thank you thank you and Sam if you want to just get right into it I mean I think you heard some of the colloquy back and forth uh with regards to one of the deviations that were requesting the size of the sign so yeah so answering answering the question um I certainly wouldn't qualify this as a hardship um under the hardship test I think it relates to the flexible standard where the benefits outweigh the detriments um given how the city measures signage area it's measured from the smallest smallest box you could create around the perimeter of the sign so given the green square is 24 inches that goes measured all the way across the approximately 13 feet um so you have some gap between the lettering size and the the green square size um the the requirements does permit a maximum signage height of 32 in so we're in scale with that um but just given the length of the sign that's what brings us over and you know tandem with how how the area is measured I think we are meeting the intent of the the scaling requirement even though we do slightly ex exceed by 2 point Square 2.6 Square ft um but I think the lettering size and and the overall signage area is consistent um it's just really a matter of measuring given the uh as Mr chimako testified to the um typical you know Square they use for their their branding um that would be my testimony as it relates to the signage area um we're also asking for a design waiver for the um signage color obviously the green Square the Redevelopment plan only permits black and white um lettering signage color um I think that the lettering itself is compliant and it's consistent with kind of that General mix along this commercial Corridor of Bergen Avenue I would say overall this the location is located a part of uh Bergen Avenue that is retail required along this this strip so you know providing a a a new business in this um currently vacant storefront I think and appropriate signage over all will uh will be consistent with the uh with the Zone plan in this instance um we we are asking for a also a deviation for the internal sign illumination um the channel lettering itself is permitted the signage material the acrylic sign signage is permitted um internal illumination is prohibited so it it requires either um external like Goose light or uplighting uh illumination um we're asking for the internal sign illumination that's kind of consistent with what Channel lettering really is is uh you what you typically see um as you as you heard the the lighting will only be lit during basically business hours um and provides for appropriate uh way finding for for the storefront I think overall um again I think the the benefits here outweigh the detriments um again this is uh consistent with the commercial storefront area along Bergen Avenue um this project does promote the purposes of the uh Municipal land use law I think it is continues to allow for a retail use um it's appropriate use and uh use of the property consistent with purpose a I think that the signage overall is consistent with the commercial charact character along Bergen Avenue um consistent with purpose I I don't see any impacts to the general welfare or or um or good here I think um we're consistent with the the goals and and objectives of the Redevelopment plan and master plan um consistent with the goal of this Art Deco Zone and um one of the objectives is to uh encourage local quality retail with within the greater Journal Square area I think this appropriate signage does that with uh with that commercial space so with that I would say that the positive and negative criteria has been met here but I'd be happy to answer any questions or expand upon my my testimony all right thank you Mr Bellamy as far as the internal illumination goes the entire let's let's say green box obviously H&R Block and is the gray portion behind the name illuminated um I we could flip to it I I believe the LED lights are installed within the the lettering itself and the green square itself not the band that it's okay it's on okay but there's nothing outside of that area correct there's no additional lighting beyond that okay that's my only question anybody else all right thank you Mr belly council is that your uh testimony that will conclude our presentation chairman thank you okay thank you is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this application Mr chair saying no public I move to close second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed Matt do you want to add anything um certainly um staff would like to start um by substantiating Mr Bellamy's testimony as valid and accurate um in the professional opinion of Staff as well um so this stretch of Bergen Avenue where this is located this is the between essentially between Bergen square and the hard of Journal Square if anyone's familiar with this you would be harded to find a coning sign on this stretch um it I mean just appears in the way business has been conducted that these standards as written are sort of incompatible with the modern needs of business and perhaps the board should study changing them um that being said um staff recognizes the board's concern around um Channel letter elimination at nighttime hours and requests that a as a condition of approval um the sign not be eliminated um late no later than one hour after business closes for the day um staff recommends approval conditions okay um Matt before we take a motion Steve you have a question one other thing I mean if you're going to recommend updating and I agree because it's a podge of either hilarity or heinousness in terms of the harbingers that are there uh but in terms of even the lighting I mean with the great infrastructure repair of Bergen Square those lights are out there and over the summer I've seen families hanging out in Bergen Square upward of midnight so I mean lights on that particular stretch I don't think you know 10:00 you know it's going to affect the Western World um and I think in terms of normaly uh you've got a national brand I mean so I'm going to sweat about 2 feet and you know I mean you've got the US Post sign and Provident Bank on that same street which has a you know like a a sense of Keras the rest of it looks like a circus pulled into town that's my comment certainly I think you know it's the board's prerogative whether they want to impose that condition or not um staff staff is comfortable either way um so if the board is loath to impose a nighttime restriction on the sign then um staff is comfortable with that as well but it's the ultimately the board's prerogative so we we make it a policy that any illuminated signage we don't want it on all night so you know I think an hour after closing is a fair number um but at the same token I mean that whole Bergen square is lit upward of midnight and Beyond so sure I'm I'm just saying is if if well this is why we say an hour after closing I don't know what those other shops are what saying the city has lights on those new poles that are lit it looks Exquisite and families are coming out sure it's a different culture many of them have he hij jobs on and they're you know big families I think it's great I was loving seeing it certainly a difference than it had been before no I thought you were talking about store signage no I am I'm saying is if you want to have synchronicity and continuity and consistency if the city's going to keep we on and know our families to sit at number 11 score and these new pocket parks on Academy and Bergen then you know why I think illumination crime prevention through environmental design sure more light less crime but that's only me okay for consideration okay um Matt I do have a question about the just the the sign standard so you know I guess this is something we should be looking at just you know not everything fits into a a rectangle so if you know the the predominant image on that sign is that green square you know maybe we should look at changing the standard to where the rest of the sign is just proportionate proportionate around the lettering and not just a rectangle um yes I mean that is a a notion worth considering um I'd also like to point out that a lot these standards here that they're asking for deviations for um aside from Channel lettering pertain to the specificities of The Deco zone of the Journal Square Redevelopment plan and not our overall sign ordinance our whole sign ordinance is more liberal this um and some of these problems are unique to the prescriptions of this Redevelopment plan okay um but certainly there can be a wider conversation about signs overall obviously any changes are ultimately the prerogative of city council but the board is free to study and send to council whatever they'd like ultimately okay all right thank you so uh the chair I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d020 is presented to the board tonight second and that's with um with the condition of that's condition an hour over yeah we're talking about an hour after closing is that okay so that that motion is with the condition just to clarify okay so that motion is with the condition of one hour after closing and that's acceptable to the applicant okay thank you Council Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi commissioner gangen hi commissioner councilwoman Prince Ary hi Commission Torres I just wanted to say to my friend the expert I'm a Tradesman I an installer and they consider me an expert in my field so you are an expert with that I'm going to vot on commissioner lipsky I hope that with the expansion of the sign will'll bring expanded business I vote I commissioner Desai I commissioner green I and chairman Langston hi motion carries all in favor okay thank you everybody thank you chairman thank you Commissioners have a good night Mike do you want to take your uh take a break now 7 o'clock okay we're going to take a 10-minute break everybody 7 o'clock we'll be back around 7:10 Eddie I don't think I've ever seen your working person I don't think I've ever seen again please everybody and we'll uh call Item 11 case p2024 d34 is a minor site plan for 54 Cottage Street good evening Council Peter chinini on behalf of the applicant I have the original proofs of Sur excellent thank you councel CH receive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application does appear to be in order can Market as A1 for purposes of the record chairman this application was at a previous hearing and carried through to tonight with the preservation of notice thank you Council thank you Mr ly um 50 for Cottage Street is currently a two family house the applicant sees to demolish the house while preserving the historic facade and replace it with a four-story 8 unit residential building with rooftop amenities uh you may recall that approvals were previously granted a year or two ago for the same property but since then the zoning has changed and the applicants able to improve on the original Plants uh our first witness is going to be the architect uh Carlo enza I'd like to call him thank you Council good evening everybody good evening uh should we probably right yeah show your plans so much donth truth truth I do my name is Carlo fuell F Ru g i e l e fui yeah fuu would be the correct Italian pronunciation fi I believe you you've been before I've been here is your license current tonight yes it is okay thank you you're qualified thank you car if you could just describe the project board okay um there's a uh there's a handheld one right behind you there hello y good okay there's a yeah there's a handheld one right there oh there we go good a lot of steps start singing to all right good um let me just walk you through the the images of this we're just going to go to the bottom of the presentation and just gives you a quick visual of what we're doing here so it's an it's an original building uh currently three story as you can see in the renderings and we are uh maintaining the facade which has some historic relevance we certainly agree with that um and then building in the back we've worked closely with Matt uh which has provided some really good uh points here we hope we've integrated that well uh into making it a sensitive but yet modern uh addition to the neighborhood which is improving rapidly and and growing quickly so we have improved on the floor plans which I'll show you in a minute um to make it it a more consistent layout a more efficient building um code compliant safer and with the two staircase uh located within the building so with that said the it's a 8 unit Residential Building um just give you a quick introduction to the floor plans as you can see maintaining the uh Street facade and then having a you know well orchestrated at least we think or balanced core with the elevator and the stairs we we looked at a couple different options to compact us but we seem this seems to be the most efficient and then having these one-bedroom units uh with a with a common core share for for bathrooms and and kitchen so we think it's a very um efficient layout that will provide good housing for the neighborhood um but yet within uh certain some kind of affordability let's put it this way they're not enormous but yet they're well and modern now we asking and I'll leave perhaps Sam to explain a little bit more of the what we were originally asking for deviation which happens to be no longer the case yeah Sam we'll get into that just describ the layout the amenities yep we have um a lower level basement we can call it that way with uh storage units as well as a bike um area uh which we hope will be a good uh feature for the residents as well as the area which has been developed to be uh landscaped let me show you again the renderings here landscaped and uh with with a tree front and you know some kind of um Greenery uh which will prevent again parking in the front which is what the current use of the of the front yard is um we're going to have a roof accessible roof which provise some kind of U um relief also from the bustling of the city and the ability for the um residents to enjoy some um outdoor spaces that's that's in a nutshell I would say all right and you're in receipt of uh Mr D Silva's uh planning review letter uh dated uh September 20th right you had to you to look at that we're in agreement with all of his recommendations as conditions of approval right correct does the board have any questions of uh Mr F Elli um I I do actually the so it's currently there's currently front yard parking there you mentioned um there we go picture so I hate to do it to you but can you go back down to the uh the rendering yeah the rendering of the front absolutely and I'm just going to ask for a couple Dimensions here so from that plant box to the left where those stairs are sorry I got to go to the S plan that's fine yep right here so my concern is that somebody's going to park in front of those stairs right here yeah um okay um yeah I mean if if there was very very small car maybe I would say what's the width there do you know the width there I might not have it on the plants but we're looking at less than about 7 ft so a parking spot is usually 8 by 20 8 by 18 I think they couldn't possibly open the doors if they park there so I've lived in Jersey City for 22 years now and if if there's room somebody's going to park there so from that bottom step to the sidewalk what is that scale um and I can show you even on the model which I have but let's say the reasoning behind this uh Council was that we wanted to leave the 5 foot radius for the handicap turn to get onto the ramp and so that's why we left a slightly more open space there um so again here you can see the 310 uh for the ram and so we have a 5 foot uh turning radio here so if we if we push this out let's say the planter to prevent a parking area then we're running into an issue with this area um in accessibility if we push the stairs out um that that's a possibility it would just make um you know kind of a longer call a walkway to together there we probably do that but we want to make sure that we got space here that foot I mean I think the bigger concern for accessibility is when somebody Parks a car there and nobody can get through there with a you know with a wheelchair or a walker or something like that and so from those stairs to the sidewalk is the you know what are we talking there I mean we could we could put some um uh um Ballers yeah Ballers and in in the front just to prevent a car from driving through or I I hate to ask for Ballard because the the look just yeah it's terrible um I know that's the easy fix but are you sure you could push those stairs out and still make it handicap accessible because we could just agree to that as a condition all I know is that we did spend some time right on this area just to make sure we had those uh clearances um and so we settle on this again we're not against anything to to facilitate accomplishing what needs to be accomplished we just we just want to make sure we had enough room to turn around no I agree that's you know that's something you should have it's just it looks like to me if someone not if when someone parks there that car is going to be hanging over into the sidewalk which is why I asked from the sidewalk to that front step what is that scale to obviously if that's if that's 7 ft I mean the only way would be for me to meure I can do it quickly for you if you want to Chairman I think if that's seven feet plus the five for the sidewalk you got 12 feet and somebody's absolutely gonna if you're you're saying from here to here from the front step to the sidewalk okay uh chairman Langston may I privilege the board with a suggestion that might of course feet so so five feet to the sidewalk through the sidewalk so somebody's gonna take 10 feet and block five foot of the sidewalk probably eight feet to the sidewalk yeah so so the sidewalk along the stretch of cottage contains a planting strip if you can ensure there is a tree well um located to obscure any potential car trying to mount the curb over there everybody that might be appropriate yeah that's a Nob brainer um certainly and if and if that requires a deviation from forestry standards to fit a tree well that's something um can work with City staff on give that all day long that deviation no problem yeah so on that block the sidewalk is kind of narrow MH and I don't think there's a a tree between Summit and keny Boulevard on that entire block there are a number of overhanging cars at least about 8 to 12 on each side so I don't know if you know having one tree on the Block versus is maybe a planter box or some other ecologically uh beautiful arrangement yeah that's certainly if um you know not having the dimensions in front of us I think if we can keep the condition um to a broader Landscaping feature whether that be a permanent planter box or a tree and that's something that the applicant and staff can work on um between a potential approval and signature plants absolutely okay yeah that of course excellent okay any other questions anybody nope okay thank you sir we appreciate it thank you thank you and I uh recognize I'm still on their oath from the prior application okay thank you and you are still qualified thank you for the record s Bellamy our planner um so when we originally submitted this application I believe it was back in June um we're in the zone four of the Journal Square Redevelopment plan um we were asking for two deviation um one was for the building depth the maximum extension from the right of way um which is uh 70 ft was permitted and we were asking for 85 ft um and also we were asking for a deviation for the maximum pertinence height on on the roof um since then and and I believe the date was August 14th um this board recommended to the council which then adopted uh uh plan amendments to the to the Redevelopment plan um largely those amendments were to include the mandatory affordable housing which does not apply to this project as it's zone four but there was also some um bulk changes to to the zones as well as the changes to the uh rooftop section of the of the Redevelopment plan um with those changes the max the rear yard set back requirement changed from the maximum depth from the uh building extension from the RightWay to now a 30 foot or 30% requirement whichever is less um we have a lot depth of approximately 116 ft so that in this case it's a 30 foot minimum rear yard setback requirement um we're we're proposing a a setback of 31.2 feet here so we're meeting now the new requirement of the Redevelopment plan um removing the need for the ation request that we uh we were seeking when we originally submitted this application um with respect to the maximum rooftop of perance height that requirement was originally a 10 foot from the uh roof to the top of the the bulkhead um height requirement that requirement was removed from the Redevelopment plan therefore we we are now referring back to the Jersey City Land Development ordinance which has similarly a 10-ft height requirement for this this Building height um that we're proposing but it's a building height on top of what's permitted in the zone so it's a 44 foot building height standard plus 10 feet so you are 54 feet to the top of the bulkhead um what we're proposing is a 402t building with a 12T rooftop enclosed area so we're in line with that 54t standard um so with that I I think we're no we no longer need the two deviations that we were originally seeking and that this project um complies with all other bulk standards of of the Redevelopment plan um so um with that I I think that this project does continue to meet the the purposes of the the Redevelopment plan and the the zone four here um we do promote the purposes of the municipal land use law and again um this is an as of right development now with the with the new zoning so it's good to see those those changes that were recommended um be implemented on some of these projects in this case is creating a conforming project in line with what the the zoning calls for okay thank you Mr Bellamy any questions anyone all right thank you sir Council that's your presentation that's it okay uh is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application anyone from public saying no public I move to close Okay motion is made and seconded public is closed Matt do you have anything you want to add um so staff did submit a memo dated September 20th um so this project was initially submitted and my memo adjudicates the project under the standards of the old zoning um that being said as the applicant is requested to be adjudicated under the new zoning since the amendment to the Journal Square Redevelopment plan um went in I guess around a month or two ago at this point um it is now an as ofri project um it's actually Parcels like this that spurred on this rear yard change um we had under the original standard was basically made both undersiz and oversiz Parcels almost unable to conform and actually have a buildable floor plate um this is 116t deep yard and so the new standard reads either 15% of the depth of the yard or 30 ft whichever is less and so in this case the 30 ft standard governs um and a 30t yard is very much standard really across the city um on 100 foot deep yards um deep lots and this is a somewhat larger lot than a standard City lot um that being said this is an as of right application it meets all standards um it is a facade preservation project um this particular building was um is in the historic inventory and was denied demolition um and as I'd like to state with all of our facade preservation projects um if in the course of construction something were to happen to the facade the site plan is immediately null and void um we we've accepted that as a condition yes so there were seven conditions laid out in the memo and in addition I'd like to propose um based on um the discussion that happened between the board and the applicant a eighth condition related to the provision of a tree or other Landscaping feature that provides a physical barrier to a car occupying the front yard space um staff recommends approval conditions okay and Council you're okay with all those conditions correct uh yes we are okay thank you Mr i' like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d34 as presented to the board tonight with that condition of the tree or other feature uh in front second okay motion is made and seconded for approval with conditions Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi uh commissioner gangadin hi commissioner councilman Prince arry hi commissioner Torres hi commissioner lipsky it's good to see as Mr Bellamy said how our Zoning for Community mixed use is catching up with your presentation and I think be careful about tree there but I vote I commissioner Desai I commissioner green I and chairman Langston uh it's an i for me this is one of the honestly one of the best um reuses of a a historic facade that I've seen really nice work I appreciate it so it's an i motion carries all in favor okay thank you all right let's move on to item 12 is case p2023 d33 is a minor site plan for 721 Newark Avenue uh yes that's uh Peter Chini again on behalf of the applicant we have the same cast of characters here here's the original service you can make that an exhibit um 7 so 721 nework uh is actually connected to the pre the prior application the two lots are connected at the back um app owns them both um it's currently a one-story commercial building the applicant seeks to De demolish this building it's not historic building I believe was built in the 70s um seeks to demolish it and replace it with a four-story building with commercial on the first floor and six residential uh units above with rooftop access um so I would again call Mr fr jelli Council some things that were built in the 70s are just fine don't worry about it chairman for purposes of the record IM see the affidavit publication proof of mailing it does appear to be in order this is another application that was previously scheduled and carried through to tonight with preservation of notice A1 thank you Council thank okay so I'm uh before you start if you could just for the record recognize that you have been sworn in qualified and are still on the road tonight yes I am okay thank you yes I am okay so we have the um companion building we could call as he abuts the building to the rear um we originally evaluated the possibility of making into a one building results in being two separate buildings uh which is advantageous to the character of the city we believe um addressing properly uh both streets in this case there is an existing building as Council has pointed out uh which served its purpose for the time but uh we realize that as we move forward in in history things need to change and therefore are proposing a larger structure um it's a fairly simple floor plan with an open ground floor which will be commercial uh we try to minimize the impact of the circulation but certainly being a narrow lot um it it results in kind of a long uh space however uh commercial uses of perhaps offices or something like that would work well we left that uh uh appendix let's call it in the L shape as an open space which will be recreational let's say or just at least a relief space for the occupants of the commercial space uh this should provide additional light and air for the neighboring uh buildings on the upper floors is a similar layout to what I've showed you on the cottage side with the exception that we're able um because of L limitations of course here to provide a two-bedroom setup uh still again um reasonably small but yet we believe uh compacted and organized well to take advantage of uh this unique lot uh the units are the same uh we offer some outdoor spaces uh this will be you can see here on the roof of the commercial area below uh should be a a wonderful space to spend some time with friends and family um as per the previous building we also have a roof accessible roof area which will provide some uh relief again for the occupants and finally it is a somewhat minimalistic building and I'll show you some of the uh renderings We've created that show a uh integrated yet modern uh cleaner more efficient design than its uh neighboring counterparts um substantially that's that's what we're proposing here um could you just go over the screening on the mechanical units on the the roof yes absolutely we um we have here probably a better view on the elevations um we're considering is a semi semiopen uh enclosure which means there will be uh created uh most possibly with an aluminum uh type of boarding or planks uh supported by metal post and this should be enough to enclose screen and integrate into this very linear design that we have so it shouldn't shouldn't stick out in any form from the renderings if it's um of any use uh we see and so here you have a bit of more of a three-dimensional view of that um you we should be able to to see that there isn't really much of an impact um on on either side these are you know fairly accurate Renditions of what you would see from the street so they're they're tucked back and U semi invisible um to the street um if we could that that aluminum screening can we make sure that has a matte finish on it so it doesn't reflect sunlight by all means okay all right that's it for me anybody else any questions all right thank you sir appreciate it thank you all right I'll again call Mr Bellamy and Mr Bellamy again can you just confirm that you have been sworn in and are still qualified and still under oath tonight I confirm I I recognize I'm still under oath from um the prior application thank you sir all right this project um is located in the zone five commercial Main Street zone so even though we're adjacent to the prior project different zoning here um similarly we were asking for one deviation um when we originally submitted this this project um that deviation was the rooftop of pertinence height we were asking for 12 ft where 10 ft was permitted um so again with the Redevelopment plan amendments removing that requirement from the general Square Plan it defers back to the Jersey City Land Development or ordance allows for an additional 10 ft of Building height for roof top of perces elevator bulkheads um so with that we're proposing 54 ft to the top of our elevator bulkhead in line with what the base Building height requirement of 44t of the zone five is plus the 10 additional feet for rooftop of verances so again this is an as of right project um it complies with the new zoning um overall it it it meets the positive criteria promotes the purposes of the um Municipal land use law and again it is a permitted mixed use building so it's in line with the The Zone plan of of the Redevelopment plan um so with that um that would conclude my testimony on this one all right thank you Mr Bellamy any questions all right thank you sir so I just reiterate the like the other application uh we will accept all the conditions of approval from uh Mr D Silva's planning report as well as the uh condition for the mat uh finish on the uh screen for the Mechanicals on the roof okay thank you Council we appreciate it uh so at this time let's open it up for public comment is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application Mr chair I see no public I move to close second all right motion made and second it public is closed uh Matt do you have anything you want to add um not much so staff submitted memo dated 920 um as Mr Bellamy stated this is an as of right project um this is basically as standard As It Gets in Journal Square um staff recommends approval with condition including the um reference mat finish condition um and that's really it Mr chair I'd like to make a motion at this time to approve case p223 d33 with conditions outlined second okay motion is made and seconded for approval with conditions Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi commissioner gangadin I commissioner councilwoman princer hi commissioner Torres I commissioner lipsky be a great addition for joural square I vote I commissioner Desai ready commissioner green I and chairman Langston I motion carries all in favor okay thank you thank you you let's move on to item 14 is case p23 d44 is a preliminary and final major site plan for 604 to 606 communo Avenue good evening Council good evening Stephen Joseph of castano quickly try for the applicant I do have notices that we'll enter chairman I receive the Affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 604 to 606 commun PA Avenue here in the city this matter was scheduled for the August 20th meeting carried through to tonight with preservation of that notice had the opportunity to review it it does appear to be in order it'll mark it as A1 for the record thank you Council all right um 604 606 Communipaw what we're proposing here is a new six-story building there's 69 dwelling units ground floor commercial 20 parking spaces um this is an as of right project there are no variances associated with the application the application's also utilizing an affordable housing bonus bonus so there is one affordable unit in the building um and in order to utilize that bonus we also had to be designated as a redeveloper so there's a a redeveloper agreement with the jcra um as part of this project uh we do have an architect and an engineer here this evening we're going to start with um architecture um let's get Anthony swor I do here we go uh yeah sure Anthony C vandemar Jr uh v d r m r k principal of mvmk architecture Mr vandemar good evening your license is current tonight yes it is okay thank you you're qualified great thank you it's it is a little uncomfortable with all the tech in this room that not reach the podium anymore Mr Vander Mar can you tell me how many slides you got in your slide presentation and if uh you want to mark it as an exhibit the entire thing sure I have that work okay I have uh I have 15 slides and I probably intend on using maybe potentially eight all right let's mark all of them we'll mark it as uh A2 and I don't see a date on it so we'll put today's date and you'll submit that post hearing thank you all set all set all right great again as Mr Joseph had previously stated we are here for 604 606 commun PA we have a six-story building at 65 ft in total height for 69 residential unit uh the property sits in the Jackson Hill Redevelopment plan mixed use Zone one um highlighted here uh in the center in red um it borders uh with communa Avenue which is directly to the South Harrison Avenue above Montello to the East and then Bergen Avenue being uh very long way to the West um the intersecting street is uh Jackson Street um walking your way through some of the pretty existing site conditions there's an existing two-story masonry building uh it housed U an empanada shop um it is mixed juice I believe is residential above directly behind it being a through lot you're on uh Harrison Avenue again it's a a twostory uh Mason rebuilding uh there's an adjacent uh paved parking lot that's also included in the site just talking about the the Jackson Hill uh Redevelopment plan uh as previously stated this is an as of application U very happy to state that uh of the 69 residential units being proposed we are proposing 10 Studios 35 one-bedrooms 19 two bedrooms and five three bedrooms the site area is 13,390 square ft which is3 Acres we are proposing one affordable unit as part of this application just a quick Amendment to the original testimony by Mr Joseph just through uh some different uh City engineering comments we reduce the overall parking proposal from 20 to 18 which is still compliant with the Redevelopment plan uh so again the application is 18 parking spaces uh one in which is ADA Compliant and we have three electrical vehicle charging stations uh which is compliant with the state mandate Pro survey you have before you again we have a two-story masonry building that's in the Shaded area we have a paved parking lot which is white uh in this uh diagram we have 120 linear feet of Frontage on Communipaw Avenue and 121 linear Frontage on Harrison Avenue to the Western uh side which is the long side yard we have a 119 linear feet and to the Eastern side we have 105 so the the the lot's kind of shaped like a trapezoid but still all and Hall uh more or less a square the building and plan uh as you can see before you it is a kind of a fat uh eye shape uh we have a courtyard uh in the center to the West a courtyard in the center to the east uh on the two Street frontages we are proposing all new uh sidewalks and curbing uh as well as five Street trees facing uh communa Avenue four Street trees uh facing Harrison Avenue we have one proposed curb cut which is on the opposite side of the property on Harrison Avenue that is 20 8 in wide uh that is to the flare aprons the actual uh driveway apron is 18 ft in width that occurs uh 20 feet 8 Ines from the Western Property Edge very common dimensions and again we only have one vehicular access for the te parking spaces as being proposed uh part of the city uh traffic comments was is that the Jackson Street intersection uh you know directly in front of this property on Communipaw is uh an incident filled uh intersection um therefore we moved the curb cut and all the vehicular traffic to the opposite side of the property on a lesser traveled uh Street which is Harrison Avenue again in plan uh we have a simple uh bulkhead assembly um six-story building in plan and and the two uh one-story sections which are the courtyards uh as part of this application and the Redevelopment plan uh they require a 15t setback from the curb line we are fully compliant with that so that actually meant moving uh the building line 6' 7 Ines off of the property in the front and we're at zero property line in the back which is uh compliant with the Redevelopment plan graphic to the left at the first floor uh we're proposing One retail unit on communa Avenue and that's at 1,800 Square ft we have a centralized Lobby um for the residents and directly to the Eastern portion on communa Avenue we have a 1300 square foot amenity that takes place over two levels directly behind it you have a uh stair and elevator bank and the 18 parking spaces which is previously mentioned um to the back on Harrison Avenue which is more of kind of a service Corridor we have the Transformer and and different uh utilities uh being connected through that elev ation the right side floor plan which is the second floor um which is the atypical of the floors we are proposing 13 units on this floor and that that is part of program with two uh 435t Studios 7 525 uh s foot 1bedrooms to 620t bedrooms three uh two bedrooms at 7:15 to 820 and one three-bedroom at 1,330 Square ft so 13 units here uh bottom right hand corner as you can see is the upper portion of the amenity level we are proposing a common area Terrace as you can see 600 square feet to the Eastern face you will get a a little bit of Eastern View at this level then we have four uh private Terraces at the second level to the Western courtyard all the other floors third through six are standard 14 units per floor again we have two Studios that are 435 ft we have seven one bedrooms 525 to 620 and we have four two bedrooms that range from 715 to 825 once again that's that one three bedroom which is the upper leftand corner at 1,330 so 69 units in total with a very nice program mix um and again as part of this application we are proposing one affordable unit at the rooftop we have no ameni um we have one 1,340 ft common uh amenity roof deck we are proposing 500 square feet of uh extensive green Roofing off of the uh elevator bulkhead and again any of the mechanical uh equipment that's going to be located on the roof uh will be uh screened from view proposed fin elevation uh that matches the uh opening rendering uh we have a Roman style brick used in two different dimensions that is edged Band by an aluminum cladding system as you can see we have a kind of a varying building form uh with a 4in recess that separates the front from the back here we have a coral uh top brick that simulates a cornice which is in the background and then in the foreground again we have a standard uh Roman brick pattern uh with some infill of ACM going back to the front elevation uh we foresee a a bone colored or a very very light gray with a terracotta accent aluminum uh clad banding as you can see here it's at staggering floor levels we are proposing uh Pacs so the louvers will match uh the aluminum composite material part of the edge banding system and also the coping cap will be in that terracotta color which gives the building definition at the at the sidewalk scape uh as you can see we are providing uh a series of projected awnings still within our property boundary that projection is 5T uh and we have the retail signage and the building numbers centrally located here on that canopy system next slide below uh is a glazing schedule that we are fully complying with in accordance to the Redevelopment plan below is a detail of the canopy system how it will be inset and separated from each other at each Bay opening uh within the retail Lobby and then also amenity space graphic in front of you is a close-up rendering of those canopy projections and again uh retail signage will be on the face uh of that uh canopy projection we are providing uh a small number of down lights that are going to shine down and not upward uh at the building line and this will set up a nice lighting effect uh you know at dusk and the evening and of course that will go off uh via timer or or photo cell at you know at 10:00 dur elevation at Harron Avenue uh very similar to the front elevation uh other than the garage door garage door is 16 ft in width uh a central right location as we have shown here proposed elevation on Harrison Avenue matches the front facade so that the building is somewhat identical uh from Street to Street um for the record at the 65 ft the first floor to second floor floor to floor height is at 13' 4 in and then the residential floors are both all common at 10' 4 in building section uh at both courth yards as you can see will be a a fullsize cement board uh panel uh uh you know within pattern um and we are anticipate kind of a color match to the pre-existing pallet that's going to be on the building multiple views from a different uh Direction in section again uh a cement board panel uh system uh in similar color scale to both uh Street frontages in closing uh the building uh Mass here fully compliant uh in height with the Redevelopment plan um similar to scale with the masonry building as you can see further to the west and a visual uh impact along Communipaw and then at the intersection as you can see the building is somewhat of a Pioneer that if it's it's the first of its kind at this location so it does have uh it does stand out you know slightly in scale however we do see this or I Envision this neighborhood or in this Redevelopment plan actually catching up to the scale of this building as far as Shadows go uh you know the building being where it is uh you're only going to be casting Shadows on the vacant property which is directly to the West um we have a series of garages directly across the street on Harrison Avenue which is to the west and to the north and again directly across the street is the KFC um and again 60ft right away and the KFC is actually set back from the sidewalk so we we don't see any scale disturbance uh as far as a uh shadowing goes so I think all in all this is a a very good application and as a right application uh within a good area thank you all right thank you Mr vanderark um just a couple things that I have here um I would put a condition on for uh the driveway um entrance exit uh if we could have some kind of a warning signal and curved mirrors in there just to watch out for pedestrians yes and um the next one is my standard one for affordable units that the the units uh built exactly the same as the rest of the units in the building there's no difference in fit and finish of course okay thank you um is this wood frame or is this metal frame inside this would wind up being um two stories of uh non combustible concrete and then it'll be sck above okay gotcha all right thank you uh that's it for me anybody else nope all right thank you Mr vanderark okay uh we do have a civil engineer here this evening um we've been skipping the civil engineer on some applications in the past but if the board would like to hear from the engineer do it I don't no we're okay okay thank you we appreciate it though so there's just one more thing I want to add which another condition um the there's a a neighbor if you're looking at the building to the right it's a house of worship um my clients met with them quite a few times they're in communication the legal descriptions that were recorded for these properties are there was a mistake made somewhere along the line no one knows where it is um so we have agreed to enter it into a a property line agreement with the neighbor regardless of whose legal description is correct the The Building Development doesn't change so we took the more conservative approach um but the gentleman did leave so I wanted to put that on the record okay and I apologize to the board that location is right here this little notch in the plan gotcha is where that occurs okay Matt you're aware of that okay yeah and I spoke to the gentleman before he had left today okay excellent Council that's your presentation anything that concludes Our Testimony okay uh is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application anyone from public CH saying no public I move to close second okay motion is made and second public is closed Matt do you have anything you want to add uh yeah so I just wanted to bring up that there are some memos from some of the review agents there was um some questions from the the transportation team sure uh traffic team um asking about protecting ballards um for the bike um U parking area as well as calling out three parking spaces that they had some concern about accessing uh I don't know if you guys want just address whether or not you're looking to maintain those spaces or if uh you're looking to adjust um how you're laying out some of the parking spaces yeah I think that we're we're certainly going to be able to satisfy those comments there was the bike protection uh with ballards there was the actual uh locking mechanism of the bikes uh that would be required and we'll certainly change uh uh bike racking systems to be able to be lockable and then they were talking about you know the tightness of you know space one and Space 9 and then even you know potentially space 16 here that you know it we have a little bit of uh maneuverability to you know potentially uh just change slightly some of the dimensions to go compact with either you know these three uh uh parking spaces or potentially even you know compact in the compact adjacent to it will pick up an additional foot to buffer off of these walls and certainly will be you know compliant with the amount of compact that still can be provided in the project so I I think you know you know with a dialogue between City engineering and us we can get this done okay uh yeah so this uh project um uh really started in I mean the Zoning for this project started in 2015 uh you saw that there is one affordable unit here uh this was uh kind of at the outset of when uh zoning started to incorporate affordable housing requirements so it it it isn't um at 10% of the unit count uh the affordable housing requirement actually was applied to the additional stories over the zoning that existed prior to the change in 2015 uh this a conforming project on all accounts um we included several staff recomended conditions um has the applicant reviewed those and was able to comply with those yeah so we've reviewed all the the review memos the staff memo um and those are all acceptable in addition to the uh driveway warning system condition the affordable unit being the same finishes condition and the uh boundary line agreement condition added as well all right thank you very much uh staff recommends approval all right thank you m Mr CH like to make a motion to approve case p 23-44 with the conditions outlined second okay motion made and seconded for approval with conditions okay Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi uh commissioner gangan hi uh councilwoman preri hi commissioner Torres hi commissioner lipsky like Mr vmark said I he's a game changer I this is one of three east to west uh thorough Affairs and commun poor having this uh addition I think' be great I vote I uh commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner green I will miss the shrimp and panata restaurant but um I will Li chairman Lon I motion carries all in favor and a motion Pro with conditions okay thank you very much all right let's move on to item 15 is case p2023 d0110 is a minor subdivision with C variances for 296 C viw Avenue good evening chairman general coun for the applicant we're waiting for one more witness so we ask that you just skip us for now and come back okay we'll come back to you all right let's move on to item 17 is case P22 d234 is a minor subdivision for 13 to 15 JW Avenue good evening chairman uh for the record Charles Harrington of conell Foley on behalf of the applicant do have uh the public Public Notices that were provided for the application I'll provide those to councel M receive the affidavit publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 13-15 J Avenue here in the city this matter had been previously scheduled and it was carried with preservation of that notice although it does appear that the notice that Mr Harrington has handed May is for to tonight's hearing so this notice is for this evening here at 5:30 In This Very Room does appear to be in order we're going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record okay thank you Council okay so I mean this is a very uh straightforward uh application uh it it uh started started off kind of a little convoluted where uh my client Wasing different things but at the end of the day we ended up but what's uh before you tonight uh where we uh are are proposing to subdivide this one lot into two conforming Lots 2500 square fet each uh there is an existing building that uh will be uh demolished uh my client does have the demolition permit uh in hand uh it is in the R1 Zone um so there's there's nothing really different about it it's just two conforming Lots uh there there was a planners report that was provided that um you know we would be in agreement with the conditions of approval uh and uh you know with that said I have my surveyor here tonight he can show you the plan uh and walk you through it um but I uh any alternative we could submit on on the U the subdivision plot that's already been uh provided to the board because it's it's really that straightforward it's two conforming Lots 25 by 100 so I'll defer to the board no I mean it doesn't get any more vanilla than that now does it yeah um Mr hington could make it take an hour he could um so Council are there uh is there a curb cut there there is an existing curb cut that's going to be filled in and then uh the the um planners report uh requires us to um well I know the new zoning encourages the sharing of curb Cuts in the event of a new development but we we may have development that doesn't require any curb Cuts whatsoever okay are you Shen Ru are you comfortable just saying the curb Cuts being removed or as a condition do we want to condition that a shared curb cut would be used if there was a driveway proposed in the future right um I think in my sta report I said the existing curb should be removed sidewalk should be fixed for future development but I guess if there's any future development that actually require the curb cut uh I would say it will be better to condition a shage right way for devel okay so Council will uh we'll condition that that uh any future curb cut that would be put in for those new developments would be a shared curb cut between those two unit uh two plots right and that that would be in the event both houses require a curb cut yes yeah obviously okay um anybody any questions no sir it's pretty standard all right thank you Mr Harrington okay thank you uh is there anybody here from the public that wants to on this subdivision saying no public I move to close second okay motion is made and second public is closed um General anything else um no I just uh want to say that uh ask the applicants to agree to the condition that they raised tonight and also in my report and was that for recent approval okay thank you Mr like to make a motion to approve case P22 d234 as presented to the board tonight second second okay motion is made and seconded for approval with conditions Vice chair Dr Gilles I commissioner genon I councilwoman Prince Eric I commissioner Tores I commissioner lipsky hi commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I and chairman linston I motion carries on in favor okay okay thank you okay let's move on to item 18 okay uh case p2023 D20 is a minor site plan with variance for 540 Route 440 this good evening members of the board Veronica schmeil from Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant uh for this application we do have variances so we did notice for this for which I have the original so we also have a signage application before you this evening we're hoping to keep it brief I only have um two witnesses we are proposing um an on-site pylon sign to advertise for the existing car dealership um the two variances that are associated with this application or for the typee and the size of the sign um our first witness is going to be Ron konian who will be our expert witness in signage and then we'll have Sam Bellamy for our variances as well all right so I'll leave it to Ron thank you Council chairman just before we swear in the witness I received the affidavit publication proof of mailing this matter was previously scheduled for August 20th and carried through to tonight preservation of that notice it appears to be in order A1 for the record okay thank you Council testim give tonight be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do yes Ronald canoan r o n a l d k i n o i a an forgive my voice and my runny nose that's fine um good evening sir um I feel like we turned the corner tonight if you could just give us your background and signage and uh I have over 20 years experience building installing and selling okay I am comfortable qualifying you as an expert then tonight that seems like the Benchmark tonight I like it we mooved the goal post tonight anybody less than 20 go home got boots in a hoodie that's all we need okay go ahead sir uh so uh at one point and I don't know exactly when there was a uh sign a non-illuminated sign on four stanions uh roughly center of the parking lot there uh uh towards the right side I'm sorry a little bit towards the right facing the highway uh the client at one point proposed a digital sign um and I don't know exactly what happened uh Thomas I think was a part of that and it just got turned down so they asked for some kind of system and what we proposed was a banner system something that has it's very similar to what you see on billboards it's a spring-loaded metal frame that goes around you post the banner in and then you put a molding around the edges it's non-illuminated it only illuminates from uh the existing uh I guess you call hood hood lights or LED parking lot lights that they have throughout the entire car parking lot and uh that's essentially it it's not there's not a whole lot to it it's a banner um you know designed to look like the billboard size okay are are those lights on 24 hours I can't answer that um council do you know I do not know unfortunately but I can get that information to you um back to my phone I could quickly text I mean the sign itself isn't illuminated it's it's more of a a site specific question I believe um I I'm not 100% sure but I believe the The Car Lot always stays illuminated yeah for security reasons so when I was there most recently it was about 4:00 in the afternoon nothing was on yet but I'm pretty sure the nighttime photos I saw the entire parking lot was lit up okay okay that's yeah I mean that's fine the sign itself isn't illuminated other than those lights so um it's not like there's extra illumination um yeah I have no other questions anybody else okay thank you sir and uh this is my last application tonight so for the for the record um I am do recognize I'm still under their oath as a licensed professional planner okay thank you Mr Bellamy go ahead um so we're asking for one deviation tonight for the signage type we're proposing a pylon sign um the the four pylons are actually existing in the parking lot so they're remaining the location of the sign is is remaining we're proposing a new Banner signed to to replace what was previously there and removed the sign itself is 200 square ft um 10 ft High by 20 ft wide um for reference the the previous sign was about 264 Square ft so um relative in size to what was there previously um the Redevelopment plan we in the uh highrise zone of the route 440 Redevelopment plan um it does not permit um pylon signs free freestanding signs um that are typical with box Stores um automobile dealerships that are along throughout 440 really what the Redevelopment plan envisions is for the you know the Redevelopment of sites and mixed use buildings um that are typical um with new Redevelopment projects so permitted sign types include wall signs blade signs window signs directory signs and Awning signs again none of those are are pylon signs which is triggering the the deviation request tonight um there are existing pylon signs and freestanding signs along the Route 440 corridor including at this site for the existing automobile dealership um the Redevelopment plan does contemplate um both permitting the existing uh automobile dealerships as long as um as well as uh appropriate expansion of those uses to allow to continue allow for the operation of of that business um overall the signage is compatible with the architectural style and color scheme of the dealership and um generally the commercial Corridor along Route 440 um so with that I don't see any substantial detriment to the general welfare um I likewise don't see a substantial impairment to the Zone planner zoning ordinance as I referenced the Redevelopment plan does specifically allow for for the uh automobile dealerships that are existing to remain and expand where where appropriate um this project does promote the purposes of the municipal land use law again I think it's a continued appropriate use and development of the site consistent with purpose a and I believe the signage um replace placing what was previously there on the existing pylons will promote a desirable visual environment and appropriate branding for the automobile dealership um with that I think the benefits here would outweigh the detriment um and that the project does meet both the positive and negative criteria okay thank you Mr Bellamy I have no questions anybody else thank you okay thank you Council that's your presentation that is our presentation um we are also in receipt of the staff memo dated um September 20th uh we've all reviewed it and we agree with the conditions there excellent okay thank you uh is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application Mr chair saying no public I move to close second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed cam anything you want to add um well planning staff thanks the applicant for agreeing to the staff Memo's conditions um and uh planning staff agrees with the professional plannner testimony this is a unique scenario and the Redevelopment plan doesn't exactly contemplate this very unique scenario where we have existing infrastructure that they're simply simply wishing to retrofit with new signage um so planning staff recommends approval with conditions and we see no detriment to the Zone plan the master plan um or the Redevelopment plan or the Jersey City uh ldo so that concludes staff's comments okay thank you Mr J like to make a motion to approve case p2023 D20 as presented to the board tonight second okay motion is made and secutive for approval Vice chair Dr Gonzalez hi commissioner Gaden hi councilwoman Prince ER hi commissioner Tores I commissioner lipsky I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I and chairman Langston I motion carries all in favor with conditions okay thank you okay we're going to move on to item 19 is case p2024 d007 is a preliminary and final major site plan with SE variances for 22nd Street good evening Council evening Stephen Joseph C try for the applicant I do have notices which I'll hand up yeah good man the the application I like this opport publication all appears to be in order purposes thank you Council okay all right uh 22nd Street this is preliminary and final major side plan but it's essentially a Lobby renovation this application was also previously approved but those approvals have expired so this is kind of a redo of that uh prior approval we do have Dennis deino here this evening to provide the architectural testimony and we do have a planner for the two what we feel are minor variances so let's get Dennis uh sworn in ton be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do Dennis d n n i s deino d v i n o m Mr dinino good evening we've all obviously qualified you before your license is current tonight yes it is okay thank you sir you're qualified Dennis how are we presenting this evening uh hopefully this thing will work yeah let's get that plugged in I didn't Factor this into the time um this one right yeah let me help you out here there you go that works not that old Jesus [Music] okay let this thing get up and running um have a little PowerPoint presentation which is essentially the 12 sheets that were submitted to the board remember Dennis everything's on the public screen just a quick little summary uh as U Mr Joseph indicated this was approved March of the board approved almost an identical application in March of 2019 uh this is essentially U an addition a Lobby addition to uh 22nd Street Okay um okay coming up as I mentioned this is a a total of 20 slides uh the first slide is the rendering um so we'll enter this as a two but it's uh comprises of everything that was previously submitted so I think it's probably 12 slides how many slides Dennis 12 12 12 slides 12 talk about the on you need to talk yes 12 slides so uh once again I think it's probably I know this is a a a new application but it's probably uh worthy for uh me to Simply let the board know that this is almost identical to what was approved before just for reference um the Min the the only major changes that were made on the exterior of the building um really were the client wanted a revolving door and um so we and uh change the uh front elevation to include a revolving door and two flank 8ft doors uh but essentially everything else is pretty much the same as what was approved in 2019 um so I don't I think we all know U manderlay is um Mand and Hudson is um adjacent to the Riverwalk um there is a Riverwalk access which is maintained at all times unlocked also on Second Street there are two other access to the Riverwalk uh one directly to the east of the manderlay and one at the end of the actual of Second Street so there's a ample um locations to to access the Riverwalk slide two uh is the um is the uh zoning tab the zoning chart um uh and um Charles height will will uh explain a little bit more of the the variance requests that we're we're seeking here um but it was uh the uh front yard requirement for this building because of the height is uh 74t 74 1/2 ft the existing setback 72.9 ft and what we're proposing U which will include a a slight 6ot uh protrusion or overhang off the lobby would be 57.8 ft I also think it's important to note that we're not extending the existing curb cut at the entrance way is not getting extended at all the aisleway the um the um vehicular isway that's in front of uh The Mandalay is staying exactly where it is what we're doing here is removing an existing canopy of 3 uh 14 Square ft existing 15 1 12 foot concrete canopy with two concrete pillars uh that really serves no purpose other than uh people staying out of the weather uh it doesn't add any square footage to the lobby I mean back this building was completed in 2000 uh you know in years 2000 our lobbies have changed substantially in 24 years uh package uh needless to say the the amount of storage uh package storage is is um um has increased substantially uh so uh the lobby was in in in um dire need for renovation and for addition so we took up that 314 Square ft and we added another uh 259 Square ft getting a a total Lobby extension of 573 Square ft² uh and include that into the existing Lobby if you include uh the new package the new cart room we got a new Lobby of why don't we uh switch over to the floor plan Dennis sorry why don't switch over to the floor plan so they could uh that we're essentially enclosing that making it part of the lobby correct that's a good uh way of putting it uh okay all right we go to the floor plan so I want to back I'll do this and then I'll back up I didn't mean to go too quickly uh so you can see the the plan of the lobby uh what we're adding on is this section right here and this area here is in the is the existing lobby but the total Lobby square footage now is uh uh 1533 Square ft and and Dennis the existing canopy goes to uh where well let me back up now let's go to so here's a this is a demo plan of the C of the existing canopy you can see the dotted lines um the two trees that are getting relocated and you can see all these dotted lines and the uh the concrete uh pillars so uh let's go I I don't want to keep jumping around because extending past the existing canopy we are extending 4 and 1/2 ft past the existing canopy okay all right um so Dennis why we uh there we go so that's that's the existing canopy right now and we'll bring up Charles to uh do planning test yeah okay so that the canopy right now is 152 ft the new canopy I mean the new addition will be 14 1/2 ft so it actually be a foot lower than what's presented and I think again Charles will testify but remember this is this is only one story this isn't a request to uh to build 26 stories uh with this it's this is just this is a one-story uh Lobby okay any questions for Mr deino sorry oh no I was just asking for questions I have one more slide and I thought you were wrapping up so and I think it's probably worth noting that we're losing six parking spots although we still meet their parking requirements for the building uh but what we're adding what the advantages of what we're getting here is we're adding an additional again because there's so many package deliveries we saw it everyone clients saw it necessary to get an additional location for um delivery trucks so we took six spots away from here and we added a larger delivery zone so thank you Dennis M all right let's get one question on that so if the delivery zone is in my screen I guess it's to the right where would the packages be unloaded to so um let's get back to this floor plan do the main the extra what the other the other item we added is this 2 and 1 12 or 3T extension is strictly uh required um for package delivery the package will come into this IND individual entryway which is directly off of the package delivery uh parking spot so deliveries will be parked here and all the packages will come into a separate entrance and not through the main lobby perfect excellent thank you all right any other questions for uh Mr deino anyone no okay thank you sir we appreciate iter all right let's get [Music] Charles home I do yes Charles height last name spelled h y DT Mr height good evening your license is current still current yes okay thank you you're qualified okay um I'll jump right into it where in the uh harith Cove uh Redevelopment plan area the East Waterfront District uh the primary deviation that we needed with respect to front yard setback in that Redevelopment Plan Building height is regulated by a required front yard setback this board actually heard a similar application albe it for a fully new building a few um weeks back but essentially this requirement requires you to meet a certain setback on three sides of the power because we're expanding the ground for portion we technically are encroaching into this front yard setback um but it's only at the ground floor so in terms of the technical deviation um the building's 220 ft tall 222 feet tall which requires a a setback of 74.5 Ft on three sides um as Mr deino mentioned uh the proposed will be 57.8 on this Southern front yard setback to Second Street so that's the encroachment of enclosing in the uh the expanded lobby area um there also is a canopy encroachment because it exp expands um the beyond the six feet in certain sections from the front facade um all part of the same proposed improvements uh upgrades to the main entrance of the building uh obviously the for new floor plan interior of the buildings an improvement um as Mr deino just mentioned there are changes to uh some of the areas with the drop off and circulation in front um there's no uh deviation in terms of overall parking even with the reduction of six parking spaces there's the associated parking deck that's on the subject property um and improvements will actually Aid in the accessibility and and overall um entrance to the to the res to the Residential Building um with respect to any special reasons I I would would say that the primary vision of this Improvement is to promote a desirable visual environment that's purpose I um so by by way of improving the front entrance that's still consistent with the overall theme of the building meets that purpose in terms of the negative criteria um I don't believe there's any substantial detriment to the public good um we really made these improvements to address the public good address the functionality of the ground floor um and bring it up to date to Modern needs of the the residents there today um the circulation as Mr D uh deino had mentioned Still Remains uh the same there's no changing curb lines um into the drive aisles they'll still remain intact um with respect to uh any impairment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance again um if we were proposing expansions on any of the upper floors we would be creating sub any potential massing impacts because this is on the southern portion of the existing building all of the massing impacts from the on story Edition are onto the building itself there's no spillover impacts to any light or air with the proposed improvements so I do still think it meets the intent um the existing Tower will remain and this is an upgrade at ground level um we further purposes of uh goals of the Jersey City master plan as well so continue to enhance residential neighborhoods and ensure the cities of available housing is balanced and meets the needs of all current and future residents so those are some of the goals that we further the master plan my direct testimon is complete all right thank you Mr height thank you any questions anyone no okay pleasure thank you for the record Mr Bellamy uh did not want to share any of those applications and is going on it's honeymoon for two weeks so you that work good for him good for him where's he going anywhere good that's all right there that's a it's all right I think I'm already over time so that does conclude our direct testimony here um we have reviewed the staff memo and all conditions are are acceptable okay thank you Council uh is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application Mr chair I see no public I move to close second okay motion is made and second if public is closed Sophia this is yours yes planning staff doesn't see any detriment to the public good in granting these variances and as mentioned before the River Walk access will be maintained and unlocked and that is a specific condition in the staff memo as well um the applicant has already agreed to the conditions so planning staff recommends approval okay Mr chair I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 00007 as presented to our board tonight second okay motion made and seconded for approval Vice chair Dr Gonzalez I commissioner gangen hi councilwoman Prince commissioner Torres commissioner lipsky since 1997 Amazon has increased deliveries by 18,000 per. very needed I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I and chairman Langston I all in favor motion carries okay thankk you thank you all thank you everybody all right let's go back to uh item 15 is case p2023 - 0110 is a minor subdivision with C variances for 296 cvu Avenue thank you chairman good evening Council again Eugene oconnell appearing for the applicant floor Santos this is a notice case so have my notices graas yeah receive the publication proof of mail with respect to the application at 296 CD here in the city matter had been previously scheduled back in August of this year and reviewed it at that time August 6 does appear to be the original of the virtual I have reviewed all does appear to be in order and Mark is A1 for thank you Council thank you chairman so this is a fairly straightforward application as far as the minor subdivision is concerned it's a corner lot on the corner of C viw Avenue and RAR Avenue and we are proposing to create three lots measuring 25 ft by 113.0 ft which is a legal siiz lot for construction in Jersey City um but the issue that came up as the I see the shared driveway and um I just want to put a couple things on the record before I call my first witness so the property is on the corner of C viw Avenue and north side of c viw and the east side of RAR on the cvw Avenue side there is an existing driveway and a fire hydrant and is also a bus stop on the r Avenue side there is a six a 69 foot curb cut for an old uh I guess garage or whatever was there so actually on the cvw Avenue side even putting in the second driveway there we're not taking any we're not removing any on street parking because there's no on street parking Allowed by that fire hydrant or in the bus stop and on the RAR Avenue side where we putting in one driveway that will be 10 ft and that will that will uh leave 59 ft uh of curb for orang street parking uh now why are we doing this it's because of the prevailing setback of the homes that will exist on cvu Avenue and Jeffrey Lewis will testify as to why this has to be done tonight it's be the truth the whole truth nothing the truth yes I do your name Jeffrey Lewis uh JF y l e w i yes Mr Lewis good evening your license is current yes sir okay thank you you're qualified thank you okay so Jean walked through most of what we're doing for the subdivision so I just wanted to start with what we're doing for the propert the buildings themselves and how that's going to affect everything uh so we are subdividing to three properties one on the corner and two uh internal 25 foot wide Lots uh the corner lot has a zero foot front property uh front set back line along RAR Avenue and then all three properties have a 10 foot front yard setback along c View Avenue to match the existing uh two-story building to our right uh the buildings have uh two feet sidey yards at the uh where we have a setback of 3 feet or more next to us so the property to the right has a 3ft setback so we're doing a twoot to make that 5T same with next to the corner property where we have a larger setback and a twoot setback and then in between the buildings we have three fet setbacks uh to provide for light and air for our windows um as was mentioned we are not asking for any variances for this however the driving uh the driveways are a little complicated uh the driveway for the corner property is on RAR Avenue where there is that long cut that's going to be removed and replaced with a 10ft curb cut uh the other two driveways are the ones we're discussing or one driveway depending uh so we're showing two driveways here however um the ordinance requires that we provide a a shared single driveway however we are having some trouble um making that work um and actually this is this was me doing some setup for for Lee Klein our traffic engineer he has a couple of uh sketches showing uh one driveway and two driveways with uh some traffic uh information so if I could turn it over to him and then we can answer questions at the end all right and just to clarify so we're saying that the 10-ft setback to be to prevailing setback on CV is causing the issue of making the turning radius into the driveway so leine is will be on my next expert okay thank you ton truth truth the truth I do Lee middle initial D is and Daniel kleene kle i n Mr Klein good evening always a pleasure uh your license is current tonight current in good standing yes sir okay thank you you're qualified thank you uh I prepared these two exhibits uh on the behest of our client to show what's required is one driveway one curb cut to be split to get into the uh garages but as you can see the layout of the driveway and the layout of the curb cut and the Turning maneuvers of a car to be able to make that turn to get in it's not feasible for that to be done I just want to point out I think it was said already that there's a stop sign at the corner so no parking 50 ft from the stop sign there's the hydrant no parking 10 ft either side of the hydrant there were already uh driveway curb cuts a little further uh to the I guess that's East yeah um and so if you go to the next slide so this is what it looks like with two and I guess the point here is that we're not going to gain an extra parking space on the street if we do one driveway and the one driveway just is not going to be maneuverable for people to get in and out of their the two separate garages so it would be my recommendation to allow us to have two 10t curb cuts it won't affect parking uh because there is no parking within 50 ft of the stop sign anyway and uh the hydrant and the bus stop um Mr Klein where is that 50 oh I'm sorry there's a number right on the bottom thank yeah by the Yeah that's the 50 so it takes you to the to the center okay so if let's say we could get those those driveways the actual parking into the the structure about six foot closer together do you think we could make one curb cut happen I'll have to leave that to the architect I don't know what the spacing is between the buildings right there's yeah there's so I mean are you really asking how wide would the curb cut need to be to make it work oh for a single yeah yeah if we squeeze both of them together if we we got those oh like almost you know what 12T wide or 18 no no the same the same size driveway if we move those buildings together oh to be able to make the angle better yeah oh um well I I that's probably part of the reason that I'm here the reason um that the buildings do need to be 3et apart on that side is really more of a architectural layout issue where we have the entry to the right and the garage to the left because we need the garage to be to the left and typically if the entry is to the left that mean I mean if this entry is to the right and the stairs are on the right which means the bedrooms end up on the left which means we need the 3ot set back on the left for the windows okay gotcha I tried okay any uh questions Mr Klein anyone so right now there's one park space there on that blocker there's nobody there no there's no parking there now that's what I'm saying this doesn't affect parking by putting the two separate hardways yeah I I go I do circles around there when my niece does the barbecue so I know I know the block um so where is 69 ft curb cut on Roma are they going to gain spots on that street with the 50 ft uh can you park is there a stop sign on that corner yeah you can park on that side I was there today okay can I bring up the survey I'll show you yeah pick it up okay so this is the existing survey and here's that dropped curb all the way down to here so we're only going to have a 10ft curb cut here so all this space will now be available for parking hold on I lost it okay so there's an extra at least 30 to 40 feet of parking available and considering the there's no stop sign on that corner so they won't be they'll be able to park this two this is going correct it's a one way going correct so the stop sign's way up at the next corner so you're going to gain a HD for the r two parket spaces at least probably we'll get about two spaces considering right now we have none on that that whole Corner because of the drop curb yeah because of the driveway yes and that's definitely going to be two parking spaces allowed there right there's going to be an increase on this side for sure okay that's all I got that's the I want to clean up okay thank you anybody else any questions no all right thank you gentlemen thank you anything else that's my case okay all right is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this application Mr chair I see no public I move to close second okay motion is made and seconded public is closed gent anything yeah uh step for GR to the applicants professionals testimony I would just ask the applicant to agree to the conditions in the Seth report yes of course we agree to all of them okay with that uh Seth can approval okay thank you like to make a motion to approve case p2023 d0110 as presented to the board tonight second okay motion is made and seconded for approval Vice chair d garos i commissioner gon hi councilman Prince Eric hi commissioner Torres yeah I just appreciate the fact that uh I know tough Corner the neighborhood should be happy that they're going to get two parking spots in that area so with that I'm going to voted I commissioner lipsky I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I and chairman linston I motion carries all in favor okay thank you everyone uh thank you thank you all right let's move on to memorialization of resolutions Mr chair I'd like to make a motion to memorialize the following resolutions I have four seven seven uh resolution number one of the resolution of the city of Jersey City planning board case number p2024 d0 052 applicant is arender minhas Singh at 192 Cambridge Avenue Jersey City New Jersey block 2203 lot 2.01 application for minor s plan approval with C variances for maximum front yard lot coverage number two resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant is joural square ban properties AL C for preliminary and finer major site plan approval 76-82 Liberty Avenue Jersey City uh New Jersey block 6304 Lot 29 30 31 and 32 case number p2023 d71 resolution number three is the planning board of the city of JY City it's fdad Maple LLC for administrative Amendment 99 Monitor Street Jersey City New Jersey block 1 19003 1.01 formerly known as Lots 1- 7 case number p2024 d01 21 number four is the resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City for proposed fees for zoning review as well as fees for zoning and planning board applications number five resolution of the planning board of the city of Georgy City for minor s plan approval with C Varian uh chuko Nono okona owner 14 Cole Street block 12702 Lot 8 case number p2024 0056 resolution number six of the city of Jersey City the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 369-377 1 Wht Street LLC for extension of final major s plan approval with deviations at 369 371 Whitten Street Jersey City New Jersey block 1 19001 Lot 8 case number p2024 d131 and the seventh resolution and final resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 975 Garfield LLC for extension of final major s plan approval with deviations at 975 Garfield AV Jersey City New Jersey block 19702 lot 14 case number p224 d143 second okay we have a motion and a second we have a roll call please Vice chair Dr Gonzales hi commissioner Gan hi councilwoman Prince hi commissioner Tores hi commissioner Lipski hi commissioner Dr Sai hi commissioner green hi and chairman Langston hi motion Carries On favor to memorialize resolutions thank you uh do we need Executive session anyone negativo all right motion for adjournment from motion thank you guys we are adjourned