##VIDEO ID:zd6iE-F4rYs## allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands Nation God indivisible just as sunsh announcement please yes good evening chairman um today is October 22nd 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 October 17th of this year this meeting was also posted on the Jersey City division of City Planning webpage and all distribution materials made available to the board were published and made available to the public um and we have marked into evidence the sunshine notice as B1 thank you Cameron can we do a roll call please yes acting chair um so acting chair Dr Gonzalez here acting Vice chair uh commissioner Gaden here uh councilwoman Prince ER here commissioner uh Dr Desai here and commissioner green here all right we have a quorum we have five Commissioners present thank you again Cameron bringing the staff I see Cameron Eric J Matt testimony tonight going to be the truth the whole truth nothing the truth yes thank you Cameron any correspondence today yes chair um we have three items um that are um being adjusted on the agenda so firstly under adjournments uh item e um it requested to adjourn however they requested a date um which they will no longer be adjourning to um they are going to carry to a date uncertain and they will re notice so that is item e case P20 23-43 address is 3734 Street they will be Ren noticing um most likely in the new year um all right and then now under uh new business we have two items carrying um uh item 15 case p202 24-42 conditional use for 415 m stre um they are carrying to a date uncertain they are Ren noticing um and then the very last item on the agenda uh that is item 23 case P 2023-24 it's a minor site plan with C variances address is 2854 Street they've requested a carry to the December 10th meeting of this year with preservation of notice and that concludes correspondence thank you Cam okay without further Ado I'll call the first case up and that would be uh case number p2024 0181 this is a site plan extension address at 3104 Street good evening uh good evening conell for the applicant um so this is a minor sight plan for 310 4th Street um it's a 4unit property that was approved on September 22nd 2020 meeting um due to the covid pandemic supply chain issues and labor shortages the applicant was granted a two-year extension on November 15th under case P22 d156 applicant is requesting a onee additional extension for the following reason the applicant is renovating a property at 2823 Street in Jersey City that his family is going to move into my applicant has his Elder parents live with him so they can't start the renovation on 3104 Street till they get out and move to the other property and they need that extra year to get out and so that they can pull permits and work on this property and that's the reason for the extension okay anything else that's it that's it okay I'm going to go ahead and call uh public anyone here from the public who want wishes to speak on this application chair see no one for public and wish to close the public portion second okay um public is now closed and who is it Beasley Eric not much that staff just uh request that the applicant agrees to uh comply with the conditions of approval um from the original approval they do and with that staff recommends approval thank you thank you chair I like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d181 as presented to the board second motion made and seconded acting acting Vice chair Council or acting Vice chair commissioner gangan I councilwoman Prince r hi commissioner green I commissioner Dr Desai I acting chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you thank you very much thank you sir okay next case is under new business and this is the review and discussion of a certified artist Lisa belchic uh formal action may be taken um okay so this artist was certified by the artist certification board for um meeting criterias 1 2 3 4 and five as a sculptor and a um an events artist and um planning staff agrees and planning staff recommends that the board votes favorably to uh allow them to enter into the certified artist Lottery thank you Cameron anyone from the public chair see no one from the public I wish to close the public motion second it motion made and second it okay um yep and planning staff recommends approval thank you CH like to make a motion to approve the certified artist L saik as presented um and a recommended by the planning department second it motion made and second it on a motion to approve acting Vice chair Gaden I councilwoman Prince AR I Dr uh commissioner Dr Sai I commissioner green I and acting chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you Cameron next case moving right along is case p2024 0167 this is a review and discussion of updates to chapter 105 of the city code entitled building demolition documents available for review formal action may be taken right good evening Commissioners um I'm here to discuss the update the proposed updates to the demolition ordinance um if you can recall this ordinance has not been amended since it was adopted in 2018 the changes we're proposing today reflect revisions required following an appell at Court ruling of ji in July of 2023 um the changes reflected in this ordinance we've been actually functioning under since October of last year so all of the changes in here have actually been in effect um so therefore they've been vetted they're not an additional hardship to any demolition application uh applicants um the standards of review are the same just the procedure has changed and that those procedural changes again were mandated by that appell at Court ruling in July of 2023 um the biggest change that affects this board is that the entire section for determinations of significance was invalidated by the courts um so all of the demolition reviews that this board I'm sorry demolition memos that this board sees are demolition permit memos not um an unbiased I'm sorry an informal opinion prior to the application um if the board would like I can review some of the specific language changes but again like the the biggest change really is in uh 105 D3 and that is now that instead of HPC staff reviewing all of these demolition applications and making determinations based on our professional opinion for approvals and denials um if we are recommending that the application be denied it goes to the HPC board they review the application and they make a recommendation to the zoning office officer based off of our memo applicants are um able to come to the meetings and testify to their application um bring their own professional Witnesses if they would like we have had some applicants do that and just for context um so far this year we've had 167 demolition applications and we have recommend Den Denial on 12 so this is a very very very small number of applicants that this change affects do any Commissioners have any questions regarding these proposed changes no no any questions no okay all right in that case uh planning staff does recommend uh recommendation of these uh amendments to the city council okay thank you I'll open it up for public anyone from the public here to speak on this no one from the public Cher see no one from the public I wish should close the public portion okay public is oh a second thank you public is closed and you recommend thank you CH i' like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d167 which is the review and discussion of updates to chapter 105 of the city code entitled building demolition uh which was recommended by planning and it's going to be forward to city council second okay motion made and second at roll call acting Vice chair gangadin hi councilwoman Prince AR hi commissioner Dr daai hi commissioner green hi and act chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you guys okay next next case is case p2024 d168 this is a review and discussion of updates to 3453 30f and 34530 G of the city's Land Development ordinance entitled local Landmark designation standards documents are available for review formal action may be taken good evening um I am here uh I'm Michael nice to meet everybody um and uh I'm here the updates to this um portion of the ordinance are something that was part of our historic uh preservation element of the master plan um it was one of the main recommendations uh to obtain certified local government status um CLG status and to codify uh criteria for local designation um So currently we're actively in the process of obtaining that CLG status um and one of the things that is required is updating this language uh currently we have a really barebone section in FNG that just says essentially it can be done but has no guidance on how to actually do that um so we have looked around and kind of synthesized um a ordinance that um you know draws from other municipalities within the state uh we had it reviewed by the New Jersey shipo um and uh it kind of mirrors uh what is required at the state and National level for uh nomination um and if anyone would like me to go through some of the specifics of the language I can um just mainly you know having ways to nominate individual um districts as well as multiple property designations um and then uh just outlining the process that they'll go through um going to HBC and then this board and then uh before city council any questions anyone no Sor okay um uh planning staff recommends a motion to approve um and forward on to um city council thank you Michael anyone here from the public no one from the public no one from the public I wish to close the public portion second public is now closed and you recommend your approval CH I like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d168 review and discussion of updates to the 34530 f 34530 CH of the city's Land Development ordinance entitled local Landmark designation standard recommended by uh planning staff and forward to city council for approval I seconded okay motion made and seconded all right on a motion to approve uh acting Vice chair gangadin hi councilwoman Prince ER hi commissioner Dr Desai hi commissioner green I and acting chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you thank thank you guys uh next case I'm calling up is case p2024 d118 this is a preliminary and final major site plan with varian's address is 20 South Cove Avenue good afternoon Gregory asadorian from The Dakotas Law Firm on behalf of the applicant Liberty Harbor North Partners LLC good evening good evening sir good evening good evening chairman good evening Council Gerard pillo from goova Burns uh my colleague Eugene poino submitted a letter this afternoon with regards to this application he did want have the opportunity to address the board prior to getting into testimony proper because there are some arguments with regards to potential defects uh you know uh prohibiting the ability of the board to go forward this evening Mr palino I is in rote uh there was a demonstration uh along Grand Street that I think has clogged some things up with traffic wise um so I would just ask for a few minutes to allow him to come here uh I could step out and call him again to see where he's at but I did call him when you were going through the site plan extension application and he was on Grand Street so he is a few minutes away uh I'm just asking for that request U just just for the record um I did not receive a letter from their office so I don't even know what letter he's referring to there was a letter submitted to uh I believe the director of planning the review planner I uh I wasn't able to upload it to the portal or we weren't able to upload it to the portal since we're not contacts on the application uh I don't know you know how it was disseminated to all the parties I just do know there was an email sent out with the letter uh I don't know who was on it so Council I suspect that you did not send that email I did not send the email counc you're aware of the letter yes but didn't send it correct didn't sign it no I did not and obviously your other part is not here yet is in route so something like that yes but he's in route so my colleague chair me uh obviously we we always extend Council as much uh courtesy as we can I don't want to put Council on the spot and attempt to have him move forward when he's not the designated attorney on the matter Mr Pino is expected so it's up to the board but I don't think it's fair to council to have him attempt to put forth Mr Pino's positions on some something that Mr Pino is expected on uh that being said uh I'm curious about this letter uh if it came to me today I can guarantee I didn't read it and I wouldn't read it because the meeting's tonight and probably shouldn't have been sent today but we'll get into it when Council arrives uh sure chairman it's up to you and if that letter wasn't shared with Council I accept his representation I don't know if you happen to have a copy of it that I don't have I'm here on that I could go back in my computer attempt to see what sure Mr Pino has it in his I'm sure he does case expect he does so yep Commissioners are you okay with uh holding off and bringing him back up again okay I think will do that mran is that okay with you it is I defer to the board I just want to note for the record that it's now 607 and the meeting started at 5:30 thank you thank you sir thank thank you chairman thank you Council okay we'll move on we'll put that on hold and we'll Now call up case p2024 d177 this is for review and discussion of amendments to the Morris Canal Redevelopment plan regarding mixed use zones c and e uh authorized by resolution 22- 904 formal action may be taken hey uh good evening um Charles Harrington of C Foley on behalf of uh the applicants who are presenting this uh Amendment uh similar to the last application Mr height is caught in traffic um so I apologize but uh I'd ask that you know we'd be bumped and you you moved on I spoke with Mr mccan he's he's uh ready with uh Miss worel if that application is is next I believe it is okay having been stuck in that same traffic I understand sort of so okay I will uh go ahead and call you back later on okay let me call back now case next one p2024 d175 this is for review and discussion of amendments to the Westside Avenue Redevelopment plan regarding allowed uses in The Loft residential district petition by Westside Holdings LP authorized by Council resolution 24- 0780 um Council uh good evening Commissioners staff Council um Jim mccan from the law firm of conell Foley appearing on behalf of the petitioner uh Westside Holdings LLP uh um my colleague Mr Harrington was mostly correct I have an architect who was going to make an appearance who is also stuck in traffic however I think I can do this without the architect because it's really an amendment to a Redevelopment plan that's adding some permitted uses so I'm willing to go forward if the board wants to see some visuals from an architect we might have to stop and um and finish it later or I can or or there's someone coming in right now ah okay all right so I'm I'm just gonna go believe we were at was like all right thank you um you want to set your easel up okay all right so um my client Westside Holdings is the owner of this property uh this property received a site plan approval in 2023 for a six-story 200 unit um building with 20 affordable housing units um and 100 parking spaces uh at the time that the project was approved um the one of the requirements of the Redevelopment plan was um there's an old industrial building that um had to be adapted ly reused so the project as approved is adaptably reusing uh that building it's located on the corner of Fisk and Westside AV but it mostly fronts on Westside Avenue uh it is in the Westside Avenue Redevelopment plan and um at the time of the approval uh retail office and restaurant was not included in any of the permitted uses for that District so the ground floor of the uh building to be renovated and adaptively reused is all it's over 5,000 square feet and it's all just amenity space and uh when my client my client purchased the property uh and then engaged me to do financing uh to obtain financing with help him obtain financing for the project it crossed my mind that the space is really appropriate for retail office or restaurant it's right on Westside Avenue so I spoke to some folks in planning um and uh I I believe everybody generally agrees that adding retail office and restaurant as a permitted use would be a good thing um not only for the project but also for the community uh so I filed an application to amend the Redevelopment plan um to include those uses and to include a parking requirement um for those uses under some circumstances and um uh I filed the application uh Charles height and Carolyn have done a master plan consistency report and found the amendment to be consistent with the master plan um I mean with the amend Redevelopment plan and the master plan uh so um that the purpose of us being here tonight uh my my architect uh anir alabe can testify and just show you quickly where the re where the uh space that I'm discussing is located Anor come on up yes I do uh my name is anir ALB a n w a r last name is ALB a l k h a tib I'm a registered architect in the state of New Jersey from AK architecture 151 West bake Street relle Park New Jersey and where's your license current yes it is and uh have you testified before this board before yes I did numerous times right yes all right just very quickly could you show the board Mr ALB is qualified oh sorry that's okay um Mr ALB you've prepared um some plans for tonight's proposal that's correct and I want to share this copies with the board members so they can have it if they want to I think if that's fine yeah it's just easier for them to look at it so can I share those are Miniature versions of what's on the easel yes it is yes Council that was submitted with the amendment actually and onoare that plan that you're going to show the board was submitted we have filed um an application to amend the site plan for this project also correct that's correct yes and that plan is part of the application to amend the site plan is that correct that's part of the first the application correct okay so that's on the planning portal also correct yes there's a difference just the name of the space that we discussing today all right just quickly show the board um where the space is I have to take one step back so sure so that I'm clear this is a petition to amend the Redevelopment plan yes simultaneously with that you also filed a site plan Amendment for other reasons the site plan Amendment this that's not this if the city council were to eventually adopt the amendments to the Redevelopment plan the applicant would have to come back to this board again um to obtain another amendment to the redevelop to the site plan to allow for the retail or restaurant or office to be incorporated into the project yes and obviously those were filed separately correct so let's mark this in injunction with the Redevelopment plan Amendment agreed okay so we're going to mark this as A1 for purposes of the record and I'm showing it architectural ground floor plan last revised it looks like October 22nd 24 correct yes thank you sir okay all right so um can I go to the plan right now briefly yes please okay so uh what you're seeing in your hands is the uh ground floor of the proposed addition to the existing industrial building on the corner of Westside Avenue and Fisk street so the Shaded area here represents the ground floor of the existing plan of the existing building right now um as uh our attorney mentioned this this part of the plan is submitted as a site plan approval Amendment for the original approved application of building units in the site we did some changes on the addition which is the everything around the gray building or the yellow building on your on your pages that's the addition to the um to the existing building in the application we have this High plan Amendment we are calling this as was approved before an amenity space but right now we just changed the name on this page to be a commercial and retail space we're seeking the approval for this to be adopted as a commercial retail counc we're to illustrate to the board that this is the area that the proposed Redevelopment plan Amendment would apply to that's correct yes so then let's move to planning testimony with respect to the amendment to the Redevelopment plan to allow that in the future right so my next witness would be um the Carol in the planner correct the master plan consistency support yes thank you thank you you're welcome thank you Mr Al thank you next WT is Carolyn worell good evening truth truth I do it's Carolyn Rell c a r o l y n worell w r s t l l and Miss worell we have qualified you in the past your license is current it is okay uh good evening everyone um so as you was mentioned we're here for an amendment to the west side Avenue uh Redevelopment plan and to give just a little bit of the background is uh the site that is located here um is in a zone or in a subdistrict called The Loft residential district um and it covers just this site it is not found anywhere else in the Redevelopment plan so what we're proposing here tonight would be subject only to um this specific project um but that Loft residential district doesn't allow for uh any ground floor commercial uses uh which is permitted elsewhere within this Redevelopment plan um along um Westside Avenue so essentially what we're trying to do is allow for those same ground floor commercial uses and you know retail restaurants office uses to continue along the corridor and sort of complete that Corridor um to include this site so that's essentially what we're seeking to do here tonight um there is uh you know it's a very uh minimal um Amendment uh as I mentioned it's just for this site and it focuses just on adding those uses and then essentially allowing for some parking uh requirements to be uh applicable to those uses um I think overall um when we looked at this we were looking to say you know this Corridor is such an important um commercial district for the city um and so what we were really seeking to do here was to uh as I said continue that Cor um and I think overall when we were looking at consistency we looked at the Westside Avenue um plan as well as the master plan and we found that this was very consistent with the overall goals of the Westside um Avenue Redevelopment plan um particularly objective a to redevelop Westside Avenue Redevelopment area that is consistent with the principles of a traditional neighborhood development um and when we think about that we think it it's often characterized as that 15minute City and in order to have a 15-minute City you need to have commercial spaces in proximity to uh transportation and in and proximity to uh residential uses so by allowing those sorts of uses here we're you know continuing that uh reinforcing that uh character of Westside Avenue um in proximity to both residents in this building but also to the proximity to NJCU campus and students as well as the surrounding residential neighborhoods uh we're consistent with objective b to recognize significant opportunities for residential and Commercial Redevelopment that are fored by the area's proximity to the Westside Avenue Light Rail station um so again this uh subdistrict is really within that 15minute walking distance that uh Transit oriented Development Area within that Westside Avenue um uh Light Rail stop um so again this is continuing to reinforce that um character for that commercial Redevelopment in that uh area objective D to reinforce Westside Avenue as a neighborhood commercial Corridor by providing Redevelopment opportunities for the construction of commercial and mixed use development and ancillary features um again I think pretty self-explanatory we're continuing to allow commercial um at this site and continuing that Corridor and then finally objective f to provide for the orderly phased conversion of vacant land underutilized commercial facilities and ant uh Antiquated industrial land uses in buildings within the Redevelopment area to a modern integrated mixed use Community um so what's very specific about this site um and this district is a fact that there is this existing industrial structure that is being adaptively reused it's a corner site it's really a a really good site for commercial use and I think it will provide a much better um use to The Wider Community than limiting it to just a residential use which would basically mean that it can't be used for um The Wider public it would be limited to the residents of that building so I think that this is uh really uh allows for a better use of that existing um structure and then looking at uh the master plan consistency um obviously this is consistent with numerous um master plan uh objectives um looking at the economic opport you know economic objectives um goal one to promote development of a diversified economy so again allowing for more um commercial uses in that commercial Corridor um looking at uh goal two establishing that 15minute city um which again we we talked about before this would allow that 15minute City that Corridor to to continue um social Equity accommodating population growth grow and changing needs um so again the needs of the people who are moving into this area they need more commercial and Retail spaces and this would allow for that to uh be accommodated um it's consistent with the land use element uh land use principles to continue efforts to enhance residential neighborhoods so again by allowing for the commercial uses we're we're enhancing the residential neighborhood by allowing them to have those goods and services in proximity to them um and strengthening neighborhood oriented commercial areas um so again Westside Avenue is a major commercial Corridor U not just for the city but also again for that neighborhood that surrounds it so again this would strengthen that Corridor so I think overall can be concluded that this Redevelopment plan amendment is substantially consistent with the goals and objectives of not only the Westside Avenue Redevelopment plan but also the Jersey City master plan um so that it concludes my testimony any questions I have a question sure um what part of this area belongs to your client everything or parking lot and everything the whole thing whole thing M and how about this stackers you have 24 by2 parking how it's going to work so that that will all be part of the the site plan um application when that comes forward um but the those spaces you know are are part of that application and we're not asking you to approve that tonight we're just asking for the Redevelopment plan Amendment which is to allow the commercial use only it it really has nothing to do with with how the parking would be laid out in internally good okay okay anyone else okay that concludes my case respectfully request favorable recommendation to the city council for the proposed amendment thank you Council okay anyone here from the public see no one from the public I wish to close the public portion second it the public is now closed who do we have Matt hi um staff concurs with Miss wor stelle's testimony as accurate um as has been mentioned the master plan explicitly identifies this area as being in um what our plan calls a Transit Corp you're a 10 15 minute walk from the Westside Avenue Light Rail station um generally north of the station there's a commercial Cara commercial character to Westside Avenue but south of the station where this property is located it gets um patchier less consistent and this plan and other locations as well as other zoning over there um already pushes the area towards be taking on this mixed use commercial cor commercial Corridor character um staff recommends um a favorable recommendation to city council is consistent with the master plan and the Westside Avenue Redevelopment plan thank you Matt chair I'd like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d175 which is the review and discussion of the amendments to the Westside Avenue Redevelopment plan regarding allowed use in the Loft residential district which was petitioned by the Westside holding Holdings LP um I second it with the recommendation of planning staff and forward to city council for approval okay I second it it's been motion made and second it twice we like that okay roll call uh Vice chair gangen I uh commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I uh commissioner councilman Prince AR and acting chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you guys yes uh is Mr palino here here okay perfect hi sir okay I'll call a recall back uh case p2024 d118 uh this is a preliminary and final major s plan with variances address 20 south coav and the applic and his Liberty Harbor North Partners go ahead Council let's get appear appearan is on the record now that Mr pelino has arrived sure uh Gregory asadorian from the doota law firm on behalf of the applicant Liberty Harbor North Partners LLC M work yes we should Jean poino Jova burns on behalf of lhn owner urban renewal and L hn Roman numeral 2 LLC good evening thank you good evening and I appreciate your pausing so Mr pelino where we it was indicated that a letter was sent sometime today uh however Mr asadorian has not been provided a copy of that letter was in the portal it was sent to auu to Tanya Marion to U Cameron black um so it's not in the portal well it was supposed to be in the portal I think it was arranged to be in the portal so Mr pelino it doesn't work that way as far as whether or not it gets uploaded to the portal but uh it is not in the portal and well I think it was a difficulty with loading it onto the portal portal initially because we're not a party right right right so we had we had to work through planning however it was sent via email directly to the three people mentioned so I assume everybody got it so Mr Pino I received it this afternoon I did not read it because it came in this afternoon but yes I received an email from your organization I don't believe it was you specifically but from your sure uh but Mr asadorian says that he was not provided with a copy of the letter I don't think I have an obligation to provide it to Mr asadorian if I believed it to be in the portal and I believe it to be in the portal okay so it is not in the portal I have not reviewed it Mr asadorian has not been provided a copy I don't know if you have a copy I do but uh I'm just laying that out there so nobody on this board has seen that correspondent just so you're aware of that that's too bad that being said we have your appearance for the record do you have anything else that you would like to say at other than the letter that you haven't been able to read I I sure I I'll repeat some of the argument I can if I can it depends upon how you want to lay this out I'm happy to do it I think I would suggest if I can that uh there's a threshold issue which should be resolved and if it if it is resolved uh not in my favor so that the applicant can proceed then the applicant can proceed and I have the ability to cross-examine any of his Witnesses I assume okay I think that's a way to go well we'll decide that so obviously that is how the board will I appreciate that side uh as far as proceeding threshold are we talking about a jurisdictional issue yeah yeah we're talking about we're talking about jurisdictional issues and factual issues and defects in the in the application so if the application is deemed to be found to be inadequate for whatever reason then the hearing would be I guess postponed until that defect is cured because you you would have effectively an incomplete application right so the application been deemed complete which is obviously why it's scheduled and has been scheduled right it was deemed complete by staff and has been scheduled for a hearing I I appreciate staff's expertise in this but I think there are legal issues which render it incomplete and I would not stop you from Raising those issues that's great I'm not trying to stop you but good uh uh do we have any jurisdictional issues not legal argument pertaining to the merits of the application jurisdictional in nature only well the fundamental threshold issue is whether or not this applicant is entitled to come before this board absent certain things that he's failed to do okay so chairman me and Mr Pino will sit here for hours talking in circles uh that's not do we' we've gotten used to this I think what is the first threshold issue that you would like to raise Mr P well the first threshold issue is we have an issue with notice Do you have a problem with the notice have you been provided the notice uh I believe we were provided with notice that's correct okay is there anything about the notice that you found to be defective there's no there's no claim of not having been notified okay so council do you have your original notice I do can I have it absolutely the entire page which was filed on October 9th 2024 do you want just a notice out of it I the entire package so chairman what we're going to do is we are going to Mark the notice as A1 for identification I believe the notice is in order and I believe that based on notice this application belongs before the board however Council has some threshold issues that he would like to articulate we'll give Mr asadorian an opportunity to respond to those issues and we will proceed accordingly so sure thank you coun do you floor is yours I have a copy of my letter to the board with me if you want someone to make copies of it or I can make copies and send it to you post uh post this hearing it's up it's entirely up to you well it isn't entirely up to you excuse me I will I will do that because I think it it enhances the record for wherever this may go at a later date I would I would object U Mr lampy he's here he can raise whatever arguments I haven't been provided with copy of the letter but from his office the board hasn't been provided a copy it wasn't updated to the portal the public was not provided with a copy he could make whatever arguments he wants to make I don't see why the letter would come in the letter itself is not evidence a writing of person a person in objection to an application does not go into the record I've not heard of that I've not heard of that maybe you can en write me on that so my position is I have not read the letter the board has not read the letter we are here and we are going to proceed as if the letter has not been received and read because it has not been read objection number one Fair but you're going to now articulate what is in your letter and hopefully with the same degree of clarity as my letter but I would think that a writing that embodies and memorializes my argument just as a brief before a judge does that despite the fact that you may have oral argument before a judge is something that should be part of the record so if you will not have the letter as part of the record then that will be my first threshold objection I think every judge is going to agree that you don't submit the brief sir reply or any other document as you're walking into oral argum correct but for the record it's noted the objection okay floor is yours councel floor is M hold issue may I have the D the uh I don't think Mr asadorian is giving you the Das or the podium I should say okay then I'll hold my documents in front of me okay if I drop them you'll excuse me your learned Council will immediately this is a u this is a property uh that is uh the subject to what I call a structural or commercial condominium uh in other words it's not it's not condominium units the entire property is divided into condominium units right so here they're actually at the start of the game in 2013 for as a condominium there were two uh condominium units Master unit one which uh later embodied the two Vantage Towers um and master unit two which embodied a potential Hotel the the uh Master the master units um are both of course uh subject to and become documents become effective documents by virtue of the establishment of a condominium uh Master deed and that condominium Master deed has terms one of those terms and and this is of course as a condominium it has the same just like an apartment house it has the same uh characteristics there are for instance common elements elements that are commonly owned that are uh operated or dealt with through a Condominium Association all of those things were set up here so you had two condominium units the Vantage towers and then this open piece of land which was um to be developed as a hotel at the time that the master d was entered into in 2013 and recorded a couple of days couple of months later the the um the property was uh the terms of the master deed was set forth in the master deed and one of those terms is simply this that the master deed is subject to a Redevelopment plan as it then existed not a Redevelopment plan as subsequently amended which was done here but as it existed then in 2013 what did that plan show the plan showed two residential towers and it showed in in a big black rectangle on a map that it was a hotel the entire Redevelopment plan refers to the hotel as a matter of fact the entire Master deed refers to the hotel so shot through the document is that that's the general background I can go into greater detail but if you ask questions I'll respond to them but as for this purpose I don't think that that's necessary common areas include the area in which buildings and units are located common areas in this case require the consent of the unit owners or the association through which the unit owners operate to consent to the application there is no consent in this case what happened was basically that it was ignored the percentage interest of the parties is something like 87% is in unit Master Unit A my clients's units and 16% I have got the mathematics wrong but it's it's close to that 16% for master unit two so the threshold issued from the get-go is there's no consent to go forward the second issue that I would raise is that there is as I said under the master deed there's a requirement that that be a hotel now you may view that and understandably view that as a contractual issue that's between the parties of the units right so my position is well that's that is the case but it's also not the case if there is no right to proceed because it's not permitted under the master deed then he should not be before before you doesn't have the lawful basis the fundamental basis the ownership of the property and the right to go forward that he that anybody else would have the third issue that I'll raise to you if you look at the application you will see that there's a reference to parking an important issue with respect to highrises especially in this case the application before you is a 30 story residential bu building instead of a 16 story Hotel the application says and the section where it talks about parking it says existing well such parking does not exist there is no parking that allows 200 spaces for this applicant a threshold issue which cannot be super which cannot be overcome because he doesn't have the spaces we don't have the spaces the spaces are not there the fourth issue that I ra raise as a threshold issue is there is as I stand here before you an arbitration proceeding it's actually scheduled to be heard on Thursday of this week it's been going on for several months the arbitrator is hearing what is he hearing the arbitrator is hearing two fundamental issues one is the parking issue there's a claim as Mr asadorian well knows that he's entitled to certain amounts of parking that's disputed the second issue that's raised before the AR arbitrator is whether or not he even has the authority to build a hotel given the language of the master deed as I said the master deed as well as a Redevelopment plan that was passed at the time the master deed was signed with no reference to Future amendments by the way says that this area will be a hotel by the way just look at it what they this what the parties together in 2013 actually well before 2013 this was the formerly the trams hotel that was The Proposal the idea was always to have two residential towers and one very smaller um hotel that was the quote configuration of the property the planning purposes of the property what was presented to the planning board when it passed the resolution recommending this to the municipal Council what the municipal Council and the end did in fact pass Two Towers the two Vantage Towers the Vantage collection they call it and at the and a hotel what do we have here before you an application for a 30 story Residential Building in place of a hotel contrary to master deed contrary to the m to the Redevelopment plan at the time of that was passed without a parking with a proceeding going El uh going on elsewhere as we speak it's not like a year down the line it's on Thursday and you're hearing site plan application so that's the that's the gist of my argument I'll stop there thank you Council Dorian um I guess I'll start with the condo association arguments that he makes there was a condo association that was formed it was called The Liberty Harbor North condo dominium Association Inc I did a search with the New Jersey Department of Treasury not once not twice but three times I did the search first time on December 5th 2023 what I found out is that the condo association no longer exists its Charter was revoked on August 16 2023 for failure to file annual report for two consecutive years I then did the same search again and and I'll have these marked in a minute I did the same search again on September 19th 2024 same result I then did the search again today to see if the condo association has been reinstated same result it says that its Charter has been revoked for not filing annual report for two consecutive years so this condos Association that he's telling you that we need consent from and it owns elements and common areas has not existed since August 16 2023 and Mr lampy if you would allow me I would like to Mark these as exhibits and I did actually um attach one of these and file it with my Affidavit of service even though the condo association does not exist as a courtesy I still noticed their members and whoever was identified as as owners of the condo association when it was formed and I attached a copy of what I'm referring to in my notice and it was filed with the portal back on October 8th 2024 so we will get into markings but if you could address whatever absolutely arguments you want to address towards Mr Pino's position absolutely so the first argument he made was that we needed written consent from the condo association it is axiomatic that we cannot get consent from a company that does not exist the second thing Mr palino said was that we need written consent of the unit owners meaning his client and the condo association I just discussed why it's impossible to get written consent from the condo association now assuming written consent was needed pursuant to the master D that he relies upon which is not the master d specifically States on Section 14.1 D that the master deed requires consent of a unit owner if a subdivision is filed and that's the language it uses subdivision it does not say anything about site plan this application does not involve subdivision it involves a site plan application therefore we do not need consent from either his client or or the condo association if the condo association even existed and I would like to just read the one paragraph or sentence for you so you see what I'm saying Mr palino if you notice told you what the cond say but he did not actually take out the deed and and read any of the citations if he did I think you'd probably have your own interpretation which may be different from his so page 37 of the master deed for the Liberty Harbor North condominium says the owners of other units shall ex execute any application written authorization or consent required to apply for and obtain a subdivision approval for the property provided that the subdivision plan fully conforms with the applicable subdivision and development regulations this is not a subdivision application therefore his client's written consent is not only is it not needed it's inferred that his client consented to a site plan application because if the master deed specifically carved out a provision for written consent for subdivision it would have also carved out a provision for wrent consent for site plan the fact it's specifically carved out only the subdivision and omitted the site plan means his client consents by executing the master deed to a site plan application with respect to the common Ellens you heard Mr palino tell you that the condo association owns common elements and common areas however the master D tells us otherwise if you look at the master deed what the master deed tells us in section 4.1 is that the common element is owned by the condo association for any foundation footing slab structural loadbearing columns beams walls sanitary store lines cables wires meters driveways and landscaped areas that service and serve more than one unit this is a 2unit Condominium Association my client's property is vacant it's not developed so these common areas that he's referring to only service his client which means they only service one unit which means the condom there are no common elements and the Condominium Association which is defunct does not own any common elements or common areas with respect to his argument for the 200 parking spaces section 8.6 of their Master deed specifically provides my client with 200 parking spaces it states on page 23 the owner of Master unit 2 which is the applicant my client and owners of subunits thereof which would be under my client for their benefit and for the benefit of their tenants sub tenants employees guests lienes invitees shall have a Perpetual unsubordinated easement quotes parking easement for Ingress and egress to and from and the right to utilize 200 parking spaces located in the garage component in an area to be mutually agreed upon between the owner of Master unit one Mr Pino's client or the parking garage owner and my client the master deed specifically provides my client with 200 spaces nowhere over here in this language does it say it's it's conditioned upon a hotel or anything else that Mr Pino wants you to believe it only says that my client is entitled to 200 spaces Mr palino is tries to argue use he's telling you that the use is not permitted the use is permitted the use is permitted under the Redevelopment plan the Liberty Harbor North Redevelopment plan was amended earlier this year we appeared before this board earlier this year on February 20th of this year this board adopted a resolution making a recommendation to the mayor and Council on March 20th if I'm not mistaken of this year the Liberty Harbor northw re uh rone plan was amended to permit a 32 story residential structure at this site in addition to Hotel the hotel use remained and the residential structure was added my client is proposing a 30 story residential structure it's two stories less than what is allowed so the use is absolutely permitted if Mr Panino is trying to make some kind of contractual private argument saying there's a private agreement between the parties that do not permit it that is different than what he's trying to imply and he wants you to infer he wants you to infer that this board lacks jurisdiction based upon a master deed this board's jurisdiction does not arise out of a private agreement between the parties this board's jurisdiction Rises out of the municipal land use law and you have the power and the right to hear this application so with those arguments said I believe oh his arbitration how can I forget Mr Pino says put this off we have an arbitration two days from now as though what do you got to lose just put it off what he didn't tell you is this has been going on for years he has delayed this for years and years every time we appeared before the mayor and Council for the Redevelopment plan he appeared and objected he we my clients designated redeveloper with the jcra he wrote a letter objecting we appeared here in February on the uh proposed changes to the rone plan to allow residential as a permitted use at the site he appeared here with expert Witnesses objecting he filed a lawsuit when the first ordinance was adopted he already has told you that he's going to appeal this if you grant this application and if you decide to go forward I suspect he's going to also appeal the arbitration decision if it's not in his favor so by him saying it's only two days away just put it off don't decide it now let's see what happens at ARB it's a delay tactic just like he's been delaying for years and years so with that I respectfully submit that this board has jurisdiction that the application is proper there are no jurisdictional issues and we have and this board has the wa to proceed to this evening thank you Council uh Mr Pino before you consider responding and before the chair determines whether you can respond I don't sure uh think it's fair to say that Mr Pino is doing anything Mr Pino obviously represents an interested party and uh I just don't want anybody to get the impression that Mr Pino is doing anything other than advocating for his client who is putting forth these positions so uh I just want to make that clear for purposes of the record so that it is clear for purposes of the record and I don't think council's implying that it's Mr Pino I think sometimes it just gets stated because Mr Pino is the gentleman standing there so uh chairman it is up to you whether you want to give Mr Pino the opportunity to respond to any of Mr asadorian comments I would submit to you that Mr asadorian is the applicant Mr Pino is an interested uh obor in the application and it's Mr asadorian application not Mr Pino's application but if you want to indulge him and give him the courtesy of responding to any of those arguments it is up to to the board yeah in the interest of courtesy Mr P I think you you should respond um be cognizant of time and they we're allowing you to do this and I'm fully aware of where we stand with Mr asadurian being the the uh presenter here but um if you wanted to to argue briefly uh Mr chairman I I appreciate that and I'll go as fast as I can and you know me I try to go fast to begin with so no Condo Association it's taxes had not been paid that means absolutely nothing in terms of the legal requirements of both parties the uh Condo Association I have no idea whether or not they paid or didn't pay their taxes but that is the only way his client his own client can operate this in this condominium through the the Condominium Association of which he is a member as is the master unit one so there is a condo association by the way there are two there are members of the Condominium Association who are the owners they exist they're not they're not in uh they're not in Russia they're not they're here in New Jersey so they're available if there was any issue as to whether or not he had the authority to go forward so it's silly to say the Condominium Association didn't pay its taxes it doesn't exist because he contacted the department of the treasury three times as he said before at the at the original hearing on the amendment Mr Pino is your client a master unit owner yes and your client has an 87% yes share good good question Mr Mr Mr asid dorian's client is a master unit owner 16% I it's whatever the number is 133% excuse me it's it's 12.67% ah that that is that is the key the key here is that they they have equal voting rights even though your client even though the percent is are so out of whack much larger percentage Yeah so it's one to one it's one: one that's right that's exactly right and obviously your clients are not in agreement on even keeping the association in good order well you this is the classic lock you know lock out you you you know to get a majority you need the other guy that would agree and for for for me to get agreement I have to have his client agree it's it's it's a one to one it's a it's an and if there was a if there's a problem like this it's an impass immediately and it's fair to say that that's what's happening that's exactly what's happened and now we're litigating that's true and your client's position is I'm not even speaking to you and I'm not cooperating because I'm objecting to what you're doing that's your client's position well also is that your client's position or not Council uh my client was is open to discussions has been open to discussions in fact there was a association meeting at which Mr asadorian uh participated despite the fact that the association that counil you you are here representing your client opposing their site plan application so not only do you not consent to the application your client opposes the application yes so it's fair to say that your client would never consent to the application well you now that we're talking can't I can't discuss that you're opposing the application I'm opposing this application corre very specific so you your client obviously well but doesn't consent he opposes the application so how how could Mr asadorian get your client to consent to him moving forward with the application if your client opposes the application it's an impossibility you ask well if I'll tell you One Way build what you agreed to build a hotel again that's not the ask the ask is do you consent to me moving forward with a site plan application to build what the Redevelopment plan now permits your client's position is no I object to it and we're going to litigate whatever issues we have between us that's your client's position is it noty that's that's obvious that's we object to the application for building anything other than what's set forth in the master deed that's what our position is remarkably enough if if they agree that the master deed terms should be abided by that's the that's the issue the master deed has terms those terms should be abided by may I address the other issues quickly because he did say other things please so common are definition common are definition is a it's not meant to be an exclusive list of what common are is it's meant to be a list structures piping electrical that's all common doesn't mean there are other things that are not common areas land is a common area there's no question about that it didn't need to be recited the 800 the 200 parking spaces he makes reference to that was to build a hotel you get 200 spaces my friend if you build a hotel you don't build a hotel you build a 30 story highrise instead of a 16 story Hotel you don't get 200 spaces the master deed addresses that issue it doesn't address an issue that is building something else it just says 200 spaces is for this kind of a project not that kind of a project that would be silly you'd have to you'd have to you only can say what you intend to build and that's what the parking is for yes there are 200 spaces subject to whatever the documents say for a hotel he's not building a hotel the next issue is the use permitted the use is not permitted if the master D doesn't allow the use to be per to to go forward it doesn't permit anything other than a hotel the plan doesn't permit anything other than a hotel except that as it was amended several months ago that's the that's that's the first time the hotel was was superseded by or added to for a residential building which Council indicated before this board we want to leave that hotel as a permitted use there because we might come back to you and actually build a hotel well we knew then and you're finding out now that it was never meant to be a hotel it was meant me by this client to be a 30 story Residential Building the next issue was the the arbitration I don't know what to say years Mi Mr asadurian says I've been at this for years and years as far as I know I haven't because I haven't been billing for years and years I've been billing on this for probably an less than a year on this issue okay so I don't know what Ma what Mr asadorian is talking about arbitration if this arbitration is is is against him I'm going to appeal that he doesn't even read the arbitration Clause the arbitration says it's final it's done the arbitrator makes a decision it's not appealable I can't go to any other court that's it so that's the problem with arbitration so in some cases so everything that Mr asadorian has said first to last wrong facts completely slanted the wrong way that's it thank you I don't have to respond anymore I just want to add one thing because I think you you guys would like this what he didn't tell you is that I don't represent this client in the arbitration proceedings he has another firm he knows that I have nothing to do with the arbitration but he's making it sound as though I'm represent him in the arbitration I'm not telling you stuff I have nothing to do with the arbitration whatsoever I just know it's on for two days from now but thanks for that Jean okay thank you gentlemen gentlemen yep all right Council you have uh any words of wisdom I know what I want to say so chairman it is obvious to everybody in the room and anybody watching on the computer over the Internet that Mr asadorian client and Mr Pino's client have very different versions of what's going on here what's permitted here they have a dispute Mr asadorian has an application this board's jurisdiction comes from the ml it does not come from the master deed it does not come from the association and governing documents that their clients may be bound by May amend may change so as far as this body is concerned with respect to whether or not a residential structure is permitted in this Redevelopment plan everybody will recall we sat here listened to the request to amend the Redevelopment plan the opposition we went through how height was measured there was a recommendation by this body to the governing body who actually has the ability to amend Redevelopment plans the plan was amended to permit the residential use under the Redevelopment plan whether or not it's permitted under the master deed apparently sounds like it's going to be decided by an arbitrator and it's going to be binding on the parties whenever that decision is made quite frankly has nothing to do with us uh that's something that they can work out with respect to whether or not in a two unit condominium where everybody has equal voting right so let's forget the percentages they have equal voting right for whatever reason it sounds like that document did not consider what happens when everybody doesn't agree and we have a stalemate situation sound familiar to anybody when you can't get something across the goal line Mr Pino is never going to consent his client is opposed to the application that's why Mr Pino's here he's opposing the application he's here he can put forth whatever arguments he wants from a zoning perspective I think the application should move forward with Mr pelino objecting along the way when the arbitration happens whatever happens this may all be for not if it's determined by the arbitrator that Mr asadorian client does not own the property is not permitted to develop the property but that is not for this body to attempt to figure out uh and that's that's my advice chairman thank you Council yeah I'll I'll open it up to uh to the uh to my Commissioners here I for one agree um we are bound here by the ml not with the master deed we're not arguing or or doing any of that here today and Mr Pino you know the the fact too that the I didn't even know about this letter um I do try to look at what's going going on in the portal and I didn't see the letter so this was kind of surprise I don't really like those kind of surprises I'm not saying you did anything wrong there I just didn't have the letter I didn't know about it until I I understand that yeah um and um you know your your points are fair I again my job and again I always rely on on uh on our counsel the way I see it you know do we can we go forward and you can object to the application I think that's the way to go and I again I'm not speaking for my Commissioners I'm just speaking for myself they will tell you what they think um but but I think that we should go forward uh listen to uh Mr Asad Duran's application as of it is your right to do that you were on the docket to do that we called you up um uh you weren't here at that time but it's okay because I was stuck in that same issue um and you know and then we'll figure out uh later on what happens in arbitration but uh that that's my two cents um and I'll open it up to our commissioners I can um chair I think we should proce the application okay I will I agree okay that's it can we take a break or no I don't know if yeah we can take a break we can always take a break we're going to if do you mind it we take a little break here for it's been a little tough for our guy here down here all right we'll take a 10-minute break guys and come back thank you thank you affordable uh we are proposing 85 Studio 26 1bedroom 78 two-bedroom and 11 3bedroom rental units the property is located within the Liberty Harbor Reed Liberty Harbor North Redevelopment area when we filed the application we originally asked for uh a variance and a deviation the deviation is for a maximum floor to ceiling height under the Redevelopment plan the max ceiling height allowed is 15 ft my client asks that one of the floors only be uh extended to 19.33% Court um the other variant that we asked for was for the number of Street trees uh four Street trees were proposed seven Street trees is the minimum required my understanding is that the applicant can make a contribution to forestry uh division which will eliminate the need for the variants my client has agreed to make that contribution therefore that variant is no longer required uh so as a result we are basically uh what you may call an as of right application with the exception of the one deviation for the basketball court um so with that said I would like to call my first witness who is the architect Dean maretto thank you I have [Music] it ttim ton be the truth the truth the truth yes I do my name is Dean moretto and it's spelled m a r c h t t o Mr Marto we've qualified you in the past yes your license is current yes it is perfect thank you thank you qualified good evening ladies and gentlemen um T tonight I'm going to be presenting a design for a 30 story Residential Building at Liberty Harbor North and I'm going to be presenting several slides that are taken from the application and the submitted drawings that will AR file on the FL there are no new images in this presentation um Mr Mar Shadow do you know how many slides are in the deck because I'd still like to mark it for purposes of the record let me just uh 14 no 13 13 images and is it titled and dated it's titled and dated on my uh application uh my computer I I I I could give you a PDF of it yeah you're going to have you're going to have to submit it obious viously after the hearing but it's the Liberty Harbor North block 24 proposed 30 story building mhm the title is at the top Council Liberty Harbor North block 24 visual impact assessment dated April 26 2024 okay thank you A2 so the um the proposed project is in the Liberty Harbor North Redevelopment plan it's um known as block 24 and it's also known as lot 3 c002 lot on the tax map and the property is35 Acres it's 15,300 Square ft the first image here comes from the front page of the visual impact assessment that was that was submitted and and and this uh drawing is intended to show you the location so I could uh zoom in in here that blue square rectangle is the site uh the site is um surrounded by four streets the fronting Street on the south is South is is South Cove and the street to the right is Maron Boulevard the one to the left is St St Peter Street and the one behind us is Park View Avenue as you heard earlier this is one portion of a block that is primarily developed already with two residential Towers 45 story Towers this is a vacant piece of property um and it is um being proposed to put in a in a hotel I mean a residential building of 300 units the property originally as you also heard was scheduled to be a hotel and no uh Hotel was developed over the 16 years of the project uh the Redevelopment plan so we petitioned the board and the city council to come before you and say since a hotel was never built the demand for a hotel didn't exist and the council and the board sort fit to re re uh rezone it for a permission to put not only a hotel but to include a residential building the plan that I'm presenting to you today at 30 stories with 300 units is completely as of right the bulk is all as of right or are no deviations except for a ceiling height which I'll explain towards the end of the presentation okay this Photograph comes from the planet exhibit this is an aerial photograph looking down at the site you can see the two 45 story Towers uh known as the Vantage and you could see that empty space that's vacant uh since this project has been built and the proposal would be to put the uh new residential building in that spot this is the first page of the architectural site plan set and this gives you a quick rendition of what the building looks like the building is 30 stories it has a ground floor retail space and Lobby the second and third floor are amenities and residential units and the building uh proceeds up to 30 stories um the next exhibit here is a [Music] 02.01.2012 the lobby you can see that there are um elevators here there's a mail room and um there's a package room to the right of the lobby is a bike room the Bike Room uh holds 150 parking spaces uh bikes bicycle spes spaces excuse me um and that is what's required it meets the requirement for bicycles and you could see on the bottom of the page we have uh a bicycle rack to accommodate uh the bicycles how they would be installed and accommodated in the Bike Room there's also on the left side of the plan in this light gray area a a loading dock and an overhead door so a loading truck could come in Access the back of the elevator and have some um Recycling and mechanical spaces on the ground floor as well the next image is the second floor plan and um in this floor plan you can see that the building as it goes up above the lobby has a curve in it so it's not simply a rectangular building it's a building that has a little bit of a bump out on the ends and a curve to create uh a nice architectural uh feature in the design so it's not simply a rectangle and you were able to see that in the rendering as well um you'll see that there there are two different color uh residential units the units are shown in a in a yellow color and a light yellow color and even lighter and what they represent is Studio units one bedrooms and two-bedroom units and some three bedrooms depending on the color um the building has um has a total of 300 units as I mentioned um 28% of them are Studio units 43% of them and maybe I'll just give you the numbers 84 Studio units 128 one-bedroom units two bedroom 78 unit and three-bedroom 10 units the building also has 15% affordable housing so 45 of the third 300 units are affordable um and of those units um there are four studio units five one-bedroom units 27 two-bedroom units and nine three-bedroom affordable units as you heard as well there are 200 parking spaces in the building behind us there's a podium with two towers as you saw in the photo and in that Podium is a garage that accommodates 200 parking spaces um for this project you'll see also on the second floor that there's a in a kind of lavender color behind the residential units two stories of amenities and one of uh one of the floors is you could see here on the left has a basketball court and so without changing the height of the building what we're proposing to do is is just lift the ceiling up to the floor above it at the basketball court and create a double height Space by doing so technically we need a deviation because the highest floor height can be 15 fet and we're up around 19 19 ft for to accommodate the the basketball court so it has no negative effect on the building it's simply just removing the ceiling upwards and occupying part of the space above to accommodate the basketball court because of the height needed for that amenity um the the plant pretty much is typical all the way up some floors have 11 units some floors have 12 um but they're typically double loaded caror like this the curve goes all the way up and you see that there's an elevated car a stair and a carer down the middle this particular floor plan I'm showing you here is a fifth floor plan so this is where the building steps back from the podium and those units on the fifth floor plan which you can see wrapped around the back is a a private deck for the units at that level which is at the fifth floor level and as I said this goes up from five all the way up to floor 29 on floor 30 this is uh another amenity space the building steps back there's a roof Terrace up there common roof Terrace for the residents it has a pool and an outdoor space for recreation it also has an interior amenity on that floor which is shown in in the uh in the light uh lavender color and above that is our roof plan the roof plan uh you know has our mechanical equipment which will all be screened from the building behind us and to the right um the building has a full screen and the Mechanicals would be up on the roof this is an elevation uh but you can see the building I think um more accurately in the rendering this elevation shows the floor heights from floor to Floor shows the building uh at a height of 316 ft um to the top of the roof and another 20 ft to the top of the mechanical bulkhead so the total height from ground to roof is 316 and 4 in and to the top of the Mechanicals is 336 and 4 and 4 in as you heard earlier the um the building isn't allowed and be permitted to be 32 Stories the building is being proposed at 30 stories we didn't use the full height on this page as well you'll see um indication of materials you'll also see some details for the railings that would be surrounding the private Terraces and up on the roof deck um it is important to note I think it's a board's concern that the railing that you have won have a flat handrail it'll be a rounded handrail so no one can place any cups or drinks on there so that there's no danger of something falling off it's and and on the uh on the fifth floor which is on the podium level the railing height is 48 in and way up on the roof deck it's 5et it's 60 in to make sure that there is a safety involved on the roof deck at that height and that's common for buildings of this type um it's also important to note in this drawing I think you could see it here and maybe even more so on the next the mechanical equipment is shielded with a screen but it's not just a mesh it's a it's a designer uh material of metal it just curved to create a nice texture uh so that the building has a a very nice uh metal top okay so this is a little bit of a detail of the elevations um and what you can see here is there a series of Windows and the basic super structure of the building has a metal framing system with Windows and um and and glass it's really a two material uh two material Tower there are some additional materials that occur on on the lower level which you could see on the lower left the tower is pushed forward the podium is pushed back so that the tower can land directly on the ground and as the podium gets pushed back we have a dark um I guess it's a stone stone material and then uh to get into the Bike Room and some of the Mechanicals we covered that up with a green screen type of uh door opening um to to kind of make it more of a of a of a setback um on the left on the lower level this is where our loading dock is you could see at this this point here this is our overhead door and then there's some mechanical rooms here with um match colored louvers and ventilation the main lobby door is here and that's the main entrance and then above the main entrance at the top of the the first floor there's an awning that's that can of leave is out to protect the sidewalk and the entire awning and the um and the ground floor is got that curve so the whole building has this curve now as the building curves back the ends come out the points that come out are in fact called bay windows but the um the part of the building that steps back does not allow us we're not getting any more square footage we're just moving the building forward and backward and we're creating bay windows on the corners to create this nice curve in the facade of the building Dean do you have a do you have a proposed picture that you could show an exhibit to to to to show what you're describing I do um it's it's it's an additional exhibit it's not one that was submitted with the uh with the application I don't think I need it unless there are questions asked but if but if you'd like me to show it I would um what um Greg asadorian is asking me is that is there another rendering that you have of the base and I do it wasn't something that was part of the application say it Mr you'd like to see it m so this this view uh is a ground level view it gives you a better idea of what that feels like at the ground floor you could see how the lobby is recessed there are pile Esters that come down and there's an awning that takes that curve linear shape you could see how the setback part of the building here is pushed back in the podium to let the front of the building push forward and land on the ground it's just an architectural design uh element that I think makes the building uh more interesting you could see also on the super structure up above the U metal uh Mion that change uh that frame the windows and the floor lines cover the floor slabs have a shape to them so it's an elegant um An Elegant design and um the materials here was shown on and I'll go back to let's mark that as A3 thank you and if you could just this is A3 here that's on how would you describe it Mr March ground floor rendering thank you so let me just uh go back to where I was this here uh was where we had left off this shows you a elevation gives you floor to floor Heights but I actually took the opportunity to blow up the corner on the upper right so you could see the materials you can see the windows here are shown as silver framed windows um with a with a darker window in the darker base if I that shows where the the stone is you could also see here the glass and then this Stone here is the cladding on the bottom of the podium and then the canopy itself that projects over the sidewalk the underside of that cabin uh canopy is is a wood material which you could see here in this brownish color and then this is a section of the glass and then this is uh just a photograph of what the green the green wall would be and that'll be a planted wall to kind of create um a green base to the sides of the building um I didn't put all the units up but this is a sample page we laid out all the apartments the ones the twos the threes but um rather than go through every single unit I just wanted to show you um an example of some of the apartments uh so you could see uh the dimensions and you know the application is required to present unit layouts so uh here we have um the unit layouts showing the interior bathroom kitchen bedrooms and and related dimensions and then finally I just wanted to conclude on this final image which uh allows you again look at the entire building and you could see um the building is caddy corner to the two existing residential buildings behind us that a four store a 45 store so instead of them all being in the line the building that we're proposing because of where it is is pushed forward so it doesn't directly block anybody's views from the other two buildings on the Block so if each each building doesn't have a building in front of it it it's caddy corner so they look past each other I think um that was probably considered when the plan was drawn up because it works um and that uh that's a general description of the plan includes my testimony on the design of the building I just want to add one question um the ground level is going to be commercial right there's a retail space of uh 899 square feet like a retail space it's a mixed use building mixed use yes thank you yes yes please go ahead uh it's state that the 200 parking spaces is off site where is that located oh on the block there is the two towers on the base of the two towers behind us is the parking so it's on the same Block it's right behind us you have to walk down to the lobby come out go in the garage entrance right on the same Block it's in fact the parking garage touches the back of our building and the affordable units are fitted as same as the other regul oh yes yes that was my question Chris question that was a Chris question yes yeah I have a question uh how are you going to get rid of the tress do you have a compactor yes we have a compactor and and in the garage or you have a separate pleas at the base of our building we have a mechanical room and a waist reic and a and a compactor with dumpsters that will store the garbage until it's removed and another question you have 45 units restricted affordable units what does that mean if for oh there 45 units that have a lower rent as per the standards uh set by the the Housing Commission but you you yeah the the uh IO that was uh passed uh requires new developments to have to provide affordable housing units uh this is actually going to be the first project in the Liberty Harbor North Redevelopment plan to provide affordable housing units so we are uh proposing 300 units out of that 300 45 is going to be 15% 15% is going to be uh reserved only for uh low income people and I could give you the actual breakdown if you give me a second he told us yeah um we we filed an application with the Jersey City uh Department of Housing Economic Development and commerce and uh it was approved for the uh 45 affordable housing units and the breakdown of the afford is going to be six of the units are going to be very low income and out of those six one is going to be Studio One is going to be one-bedroom three are going to be two bedroom and one two-bedroom then there's going to be 18 lwi income out of that those out of those 18 it's going to be one Studio two one bedroom 11 two bedroom and four 3bedroom and then there's going to be another 21 moderate income units and the breakdown for that is two Studio two one-bedroom 13 two bedroom and four three bedroom uh and like I said we filed an application with the uh Department of Housing uh Economic Development and commerce and this is what they approved this is what they uh suggested and approved any other questions yeah please one question um with regard to the requests to pay in into the tree fund as opposed to plant the trees what's the justification for that the dimension of the property and the garage doors won't allow us to place the tree where where they require them every 25 ft so we were because of the doors the vehicle entrance it you can't fit them in technically you can't fit them I understand that I just didn't see that in the presentation that's why I'm asking well yeah like it wasn't put in the presentation I think it was not a variance that we needed to ask for because we're providing the the um the the yeah the uh no I understand that but part of the spirit of the paying into the fund is if you cannot do it you are still required to do it not because you there should still be some justification for it right is what I'm saying yeah thank you any other questions okay Mr maretto thank you do you want to open yes I have go ahead did you just say you have no questions no I said no I was ready to place a bet please councel good evening Mr marchetto good evening Mr marcheto uh did you review the master deed here at all I did not did you look at any document that uh referred to parking in in the project area for this project I I personally did not know you did not so you were simply advised there be 200 spaces is that it in the garage yes you know who's entitled to theing spaces I believe that that supposedly exist yeah I I believe that the my client is entitled to the spaces but you don't have any independent knowledge of that no I don't okay um the would you agree that the uh Redevelopment plan was amended in March of 2024 7 months ago it was around March I can't be sure what date but it was earlier this year I wouldn't disagree it was earlier this year I remember yeah were you are you familiar with the original uh Redevelopment plan I am okay would you be permitted to build a 30 story Residential Building under the original Redevelopment plan and then object it's irrelevant it's not irrelevant sir so I don't know that it's irrelevant I don't know that it's appropriate for this witness Mr marcheto can you answer the question I I can say as a matter of fact I I I I agree with you in terms of there are other witnesses that might be able to answer the same question the planner but I don't know whether or not a planner is testifying so I have to ask it of this witness I'm assuming that there will be but why I didn't overrule you he's here so Mr marchetto can you answer the question yes the um the previous um Zoning for this site before it was amended allowed a building of this height 3 336 feet high so it was a different number of stories because the floor heights were different and I made that case in front of this board but uh the building did not get any taller than what would permitted before Oh didn't it require a 16 story Hotel yeah with taller ceilings with do you know of any hotel that has taller ceilings what size ceilings would they re require to make it doesn't matter it doesn't matter it does matter it doesn't matter the building that was um allowed to be built this building is No taller than that building there are more floors because the floors are shorter but the building size the size of the box is identical okay Mr Mar I won't argue with you with on that although there is disagreement on that subject if there is was no existing parking um on the site is the did you did you design for parking somewhere else there is parking on the Block I didn't design it it's in an existing facility I'm not sure I understood your answer answer if there was no parking existing on the site that you counted on that you assumed was that your does your plan provide for parking anywhere else no I didn't I didn't see do you have a did you submit a rendering or a picture of the three buildings together I did okay I must have missed that I have I have the two buildings alone yeah and then have this one showing two of the buildings in this rendering but not the three buildings on the site together in plan yeah I believe we have that I didn't see it but I might have missed it oh that that that picture yeah that doesn't show uh the proposed building it does it's the blue box and the two towers that are it was a swimming pool so yes this is an aerial view it was my opening slide shows the two towers that are there the podium that surrounds and the and the blue building is our building that's being proposed uh between them you don't have an elevation of the three buildings together is that right that's probably what I should have said I don't no so this the the relative sizes of the three buildings on one lot you don't have no I could say that this building is quite a bit smaller than the other two if that helps you how how big how tall are the other stories 45 and this is what 30 15 stories difference yes my math must be good did you do Shadow study I did that was submitted in the portal yes um you may have answered this in a response to a commissioner but the affordable housing units the 45 affordable housing units that was triggered by the inclusionary zoning ordinance it was it not yes okay that was not a voluntary that's number that's required by the ordinance yeah that's all I have thank you sir Mr marad thank you thank you I don't know if anybody else from the public uh yeah anyone here from the public no we're we'll uh we'll ask that at the end Mr aoran our normal way of doing it I'm sorry that's all right don't worried my next witness will be my engineer Thiago Duarte truth Tru I do Thiago darte d a r t is there another tho can you please provide the board with the benefit of your educational background sure uh I graduated Ruckers University in 2011 with a Bachelor of Science in civil engineering been practicing in the field of civil engineering specifically Land Development uh for the last 13 years I am licensed in the state of New Jersey and my licenses are current as of this evening thank you Mr D you are qualified thank you thank you civil engineering Council yes yes did you prepare any materials as part of this application yes I prepared the the site plans that were submitted with the application can you bring that up and uh we can mark them and you can walk the board through them yes so up on the screen is the the uh the site plan PDF that was filed with the application consists of uh 14 sheets are these all the site plan drawings that were submitted with the application or do you have an actual slide deck that's a mix MOS these are the plans that were filed all right so Council only things that were compiled for purposes of presentation will Mark so these were submitted and are on the portal they don't need to be marked for the proceeding fair enough can you please walk the board through your plans yeah uh actually I I do have an exhibit it's uh site plan rendering probably just work off of that since you just heard a lot about the building uh so we're just focusing on the the site plan um all right so Council we're up to A4 and this is entitled site plan rendering uh with today's date and I do have a hard copy if you need that for the record you're going to have to submit it electronically okay we'll do uh what this plan shows is basically just a colorized version of the site plan sheet that was filed with the application just gives it a little more uh texture as you heard the site is located at 20 South Cove it's block 15 97 lot 3 c0000 00002 um the site is approxim o imately 15,300 ft as you heard earlier from Mr maretto it is undeveloped currently consisting of just grass areas there is a asphalt pavement along the front of the site within South Cove RightWay um and what we are proposing to do as you again just heard is to develop the site with a 30 story building uh within the with develop the undeveloped lot with the uh 30 story building the site improvements that we're proposing along with that construction is to redo the the sidewalk uh improvements along the South Cod RightWay for the frontage of the site we will replace the asphalt uh sidewalk that's there with pavers and concrete for more traditional sidewalk design part of that includes a 14 1/2 foot driveway that gives access to the Loading area on the ground floor uh ground floor of the building building that is on the ground floor you also just heard you've got a retail space and access to the various um support areas of the building the trash mail room can you zoom in on that on the sure so zooming in uh on the left that is the 14 and 12T driveway uh to the Loading area the electrical room along the frontage got the retail space the lobby for the residential bike parking package room storage uh all things the uh architect just just walk the board through um as part of the application you also heard about the street trees that we are proposing we have four proposed where seven are required um those are shown in the green call it circles in the right of way along the PA area of the sidewalk the requirement for the trees is seven based on the lot front edge but again we've got a driveway to just consider we've got existing light poles two of which we are maintaining we are relocating one for the driveway and then we've got our utilities that are entering the building so we do have an open space in the middle without a tree but again we need clearance for all the utilities that are serving the building uh storm water management we are not proposing a uh Basin on this site we are considered a major development in under the New Jersey DP regulations and under the Jersey city regulations uh however this is considered uh clean runoff and it is tributary to a tital water body so we don't need to provide a detention system uh because the maren Boulevard out outfall is is directly uh Downstream of of this building um as part of utilities we have uh all new utilities serving the building so we've got electrical um water and sewer facilities on the lighting as I just mentioned we are relocating one of the three existing light poles and that's going to be adjacent to the the driveway um that is that's really it as far as site plan it's a small site um and it is going to be all developed with the the building as you heard thank you Mr Dar is there anything else you'd like to add before you f questions no that's all thank you Mr brino yes um I don't know if you're the right person to ask answer answer this question did you do a traffic impact study for this property we did did and it was filed it was filed with the application yes where is the entrance to the parking garage for this project for this for your residents it is to the side of the building what side the entrance to the there's a parking deck on the overall block that's accessed through there's an entrance on South Cove and on the opposite side of from the street level at the street level okay the um I don't know whether you received this as part of the portal it's it's the review from the Department of infrastructure division of Transportation Planning let me show you this document before I don't you show it Council first chorian have you seen that document before no actually I have not well wait Mr Pino sure can I see to deliver it to for yeah I thought I saw it so Mr asadorian uh for purposes of the record the document that Mr pelino is holding is the September 9th 20124 memorandum from the city of Jersey City Department of infrastructure structure division of Transportation Planning which was uploaded to the portal and again it's dated September 9th 2024 yeah understood I don't know why it never came through to me but I I absolutely I suspect the witness hasn't seen it either but maybe he has I was going to show it to let's find out take a look read it oh sorry sir have you seen that document uh just now yes previously I have not very good did you so you had no ability to review this with with your client not previously no okay have you does the application refers to 200 200 existing parking spaces um but the spaces are not included in the site plan review is that right spaces themselves the 200 spaces they are provided on the the block the overall block where the project allocation is not indicated right sir let me help you does your roaring show the 200 parking spaces it does not no thank you no other questions Commissioners do we have any questions from Mr DTE anyone nope okay thank you Mr DTE you beautiful Mr aor thank you I have one Final witness um I'm GNA call Dean marchetto again but this time as a planner not as an architect come on Council objection I thought you were asking me to talk to you like a conference yes I object to it this this witness was never put forward anything other than an architectural expert and now he's a planner he he he testified in the field of architecture because he's an architect he's also a licensed planner we went through architecture we did engineering and now we're doing planning you don't have a planner he is my planner he's a planner you don't have a separate planner is that what I'm saying I don't have to have a separate planner he's a licensed planner what's the objection the objection is when you presented Mr marchetto you did not identif him as a planner as well as an architect granted the gentleman May hold a planning license Mr Pino as a courtesy to this board wanted to ask some planning questions which I cut them off for because the gentleman is a architect witness and now he's being called to give planning testimony so Mr Pino rightfully says wait a minute I was prepared to ask questions before and I feel maybe this was a little unfortunate that being said we're going to have Mr marchetto sworn in or while he's still under Ro so we'll recognize him he's going to give us his qualifications as a planner council do you want to challenge Mr maretto I'm not going to Cheng but it comes as a surprise that Mr Mr uh sadorian did not identify him as a planner but go forward with the with your with your expertise your background I guess we'll go on from there thank you Mr Pina okay your planning license one more one thing the the statement of principal points that you have excuse me the application the GDA lists the planner is John mcdunn I could have sworn I saw Mr mcdunn earlier tonight I don't know what happened he had to leave that's a problem lucky for me I have a Dean machetto who's also a planner he's licensed perhaps lucky for you perhaps not lucky for you I assume there's a report somewhere from the planner or from Mr maredo with respect to points or something that would allow me to review his testimony so Council obviously if Mr marchetto is going to offer planning testimony in lie of Mr McDon who IET know I saw but apparently has had to leave you know I think I have a simple resolution to this we needed a simple uh deviation it was for the basketball courts it was a 15 ft was permitted and 1933 ft were proposed because we want to have basketball courts as many we will withdraw that part of the application it will make it completely variance and deviation free and we won't even need planning testimony so you want to amend the application and remove the basketball court floor what would you do there the height the height of the of the basketball flow will be reduced and it won't be it'll be volleyball I don't know but it won't be a basketball court you could shrink the height of the building too that's not being offered yet Council I didn't get that so it can be eliminated I I'm here to provide testimony on the deviation if that works because I can do it and I know what the the testimony is it's classic C2 variance criteria but if if that's an objection because I didn't write the principal points and that forces us to suspend our application then the alternative would be a modify our plan not to require the variance so I appreciate what you're saying Mr moretto I don't advise that you provide such comments Council it's your application if you want to amend it and remove the basketball court as opposed to having Mr marchetto attempt to put forth the planning testimony Mr Pino is going to cross-examine him on his planning testimony I understand he didn't write the principal points I understand your expectation was Mr MCD was going to provide that testimony Mr moretto says he can pinch hit as they say in baseball and is prepared to put forth the proofs of what he's already described as a deviation C2 variance that places me in a his position because I don't have any report from Mr maretto in front of me I'm pretty sure Mr marchetto did not author a report Mr Pino I I that's the point that's why I don't have it in front of me so uh although your objection you want to amend the application to remove the basketball court if we could what you're doing take a two-minute recess so I could discuss with my client it would take not more than 30 seconds Council just get rid of it get rid um so amended um yes I've had a chance to uh speak to my client he has agreed to amend the application to reduce the maximum floor to ceiling height for the one floor from the 19.33% Mr Ward is it your understanding that the removal of the height within that floor of the project for the basketball court will bring it into Conformity with respect to floor to ceiling height without altering the overall height of the building that correct does anybody have any question about that anyone no I don't it's pretty clear pretty clear Pino do you have any objection to that I'll stay silent you make the determination okay thank you I have no further Witnesses okay thank you sir uh I'm going to open it up to the public now anyone from the public wishes to speak on this application chair see no one from the public I wish to close the public portion okay the uh public is now closed I second it perfect thank you uh and um Matt uh yes so um application before us uh 20 South Cove Avenue um the staff prepared a a memo dated October 17 2024 uh regarding this application um uh with several staff recommended conditions uh they do have affordable housing in this project uh as a requirement uh they also have uh some improvements which are permitted uh uh over the property line to as encroachments um it's actually permitted right in the Redevelopment plan uh that said they still would require a franchise ordinance uh for those uh or such encroachments so that is another um more uh specific condition to this application and then there's some more boiler Point uh conditions uh should the the a motion be made to approve this application um regarding the uh the testimony or the uh changing of the application removal of the variances or the testation or that them attesting to the fact that they will be uh making a contribution uh regarding the uh the lack of Street trees uh those do remove um any variances that would have been initially considered under this application as it was uh uh noticed um they have put on uh testimony regarding the facades the design um the loading um the the uses and density um there has been uh uh reference to the off-site parking spaces um there have been several applications in this Redevelopment plan that have also uh recently got approval for uh off-site uh parking um and uh the access to which uh was never put on the record um on how they get in the building or access that parking um but uh it it was put on the record that these were set aside um when we when the board came to consider uh approving or denying that those applications um this application is uh conforming in height and density um and staff recommends approval thank you Matt uh before we go forward with a motion i' uh we'll have um the two sides present closing statements uh Mr palino if you wish you go first and chairman just before Mr Pino gives those comments uh Mr asadorian can we have Mr marchetto articulate what the height of that floor is going to be by making the stipulated to change for purposes of the record and Mr maretto I just want to know what it was and what it will be I think it's 19 wow the new height of the ceiling will be 10' 4 in thank you I should we ask what the space of the on the floor above will be will that be amenity space yes it is yes the um the gymnasium pops up into the amenity space so we lost that floor on the amenity Space by pushing the ceiling back down to its normal height the amenity space will remain what it is and it'll just I mean on the floor above where the ceiling's coming down adjacent to the units on that floor will there be the units are um it's two stories of units and then the amenity space is right behind so it's a twostory space a two story amenity space okay thank you for the clarification thank you sir Mr poino yeah I'll be short because you've heard from me a lot U I'm gonna start with just one geometric fact that I have trouble with maybe after this is over Mr maretto will take me aside and explain to me what how the arithmetic works but I don't see it he's telling you that that a that a 16 story hotel is in the same box as a 30 story Residential Building I begin with that you just you you're it's for you to consider the site plan that's been filed and determine whether or not it's compliant with the with the Redevelopment plan past seven months ago so I leave that to you the master deed the the master deed uh you've heard a lot about it I think it is fundamental to this matter and if it tells you that the only thing that can be beat built on this location is a hotel then I appreciate that the ml has a has a say in what this board hears but this board has to hear with what is lawfully permitted on the site otherwise we're just talking about fanciful things right we're just talking about maybe this could be built or that could be built but under a document that is a recorded document it tells you it's got to be a hotel and this is not a hotel the the the other things that trouble me is um you also heard that that he's relying upon 200 parking spaces existing hasn't planned for any for it anywhere else and that's in direct dispute I'm objecting to it because I'm telling you there aren't 200 existing spaces that he can rely upon and he's tell telling you it is when until that's resolved you're again dealing with a fanciful issue here you're dealing with is there parking is there no parking and you're going to consider and allow this applicant to have site plan approval on the possibility that he's going to get 200 existing spaces Mr Ward I'd like you to remember that next time I make an application because I think that that is that's a that's a fundamental problem in this application it's not he doesn't have the parking that he says he he has and it's required under even the amended plan so I'll leave you with that you've heard all my other stuff about the master deeds and the unit deeds and the inability to uh file an applic even file an application without consent you've determined that uh that it can go forward but that's an issue that I assume another body is going to look at so um I'll I'll leave you there thank you thank you Mr Bina thank you um I believe this is a good application it is uh fully conforming we are not seeking any variances we're not seeking any deviations uh we're providing 300 units 45 of which will be affordable and like I said we will be the first uh property first residential property in the Liberty Harbor North re development plan to provide affordable units his client owns Two Towers 45 stories each you know how many affordable units they have zero that's what the focus should be on um and the question is why are you so against affordable units but with that said I respectfully submit that the board uh approved this application thank you thank you mran all right I'll entertain a motion any motion chair I like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d118 removing the variances the variance of maximum of ceiling height of 19.33% acting commissioner uh acting Vice chair uh kangan I'm happy to see that there's 45 um units that are restricted as affordable housing um this is an as of right application and I vote I uh councilwoman penzer I commissioner Dr Desai I commissioner green I and acting chair Dr Gonzalez I motion carries all in favor thank you thank you very much thank you too all right we're going to take a five minute break guys so we'll be back at uh 8:33 and I would caution those members further down on the agenda with in frontyard setbacks are really a product of existing conditions so um we're trying to work with the existing sidewalk withs and make sure that they are at least maintained um and where we can improve them with the proposed Street trees we are doing so in keeping with the for R standards um the streetscape is important on this project so um while we are deficient in the sidewalk with um along 14th and and certain other sections along ER and 15 um we are maintaining the historic character of the Salvation Army building as well as proposing a very appropriately Tastefully designed um addition to the other portions of the block along the streetcape so um that's one aspect to add with respect to the maximum power of the building coverage uh one thing to note that I think the project engineer just mentioned is that we are proposing a almost 9,500 ft green roof so while we are def or exceed the maximum permitted coverage for the tower um we're 85.5 FTS permitted or proposed and only 70% of the upper portions are permitted for the tower uh we are utilizing the remaining space on the base of the building for appropriate means um as well as as appropriate setbacks so um with respect to the building height and feet um obviously we detailed the uh elevations and the um minimum floorida ceilings for those uh in for for the for the overall Tower of the building um but I do want to reference that this proposed story at 16 stories uh 74 ft is consistent with other Tower developments in the neighborhood in this District so just to name a few in terms of consistency Soho L loss is existing at 20 stories cast iron loss existing at 26 stories uh Hudson House existing at 28 stories Hudson Gardens which is um a new project uh with the city um being proposed at 26 stories and 16 619 Marin Boulevard at the time of this we understood it to be 14 stories but I do understand they're amending it um I don't know exactly how many additional stories but again those are all in concert with the proposed 16 Stories being provided with this application um and with respect to the rear yard setback uh I do think just to reiterate that it is uh a complicated site in terms of three frontages so it's technically defined as a cap lot it's a combination of a through and uh a corner lot or in this case a double corner lot um so we are still providing what would we call that interior light well um there's a pinch point of uh 10 in one instance but um it goes down to at at at the base where it meets at zero foot but the predominant setback in the courtyard area is 24 ft so there that that I think was shown visually in the plan but I just wanted to reference that Dimension um spoke about the loading I won't get into that uh deviation uh I think that was clear and the signage was relatively straightforward we're still even though we're proposing two signs we're still less than the overall square footage permitted so we're consistent with the square overall size of the signage um with that in terms of promoting the municipal land use law it's an appropriate guidance of development for mixed use development that's also introducing affordable housing that's purpose e we're also establishing an appropriate population con density and concentrations uh that promote will Pro contribute to the well-being of persons in the neighborhood uh and neighborhoods so that's purpose e we are not requesting uh any sort of increase in density we're utilizing a bonus that's contemplated in the plan so um it would be an appropriate location of of the added density and uh we are promoting the desirable visual environment through the Creative Design techniques of good Civic design and Arrangement um whenever you have an opportunity to do a uh an adapt historic preservation element with infill development I think it creates a really unique setting um so this image I have up uh from the architecture set is uh is telling of that that uh goal of this project so that's purpose I um on the negative criteria side uh we did work with City Planning historic preservation um the historic preservation office as well as the track transportation office on this project uh we had multiple iterations over many months if not years um really trying to refine what the overall proposed plan is um so we do think what's before you today adds a really Dynamic uh modern residential development in the appropriate portion of the site as well as the uh Hotel aspect of the site which is a relatively new addition um both are permitted uses it's a mixed use overall development um so I don't see any detriment um given that it's its location and is in the approach of of uh 14th Street as well as um the overall neighborhood in in the the north portion of the city um we are furthering purpose of the Redevelopment plan and land use plan so this is a second prom I I don't see any impairment here we permitted use we're implementing the bonus so I do think we are uh encouraging uh conservation and preservation of selected structures including those with historical or architectural significance by providing opportunities for adaptive reu which will give an economic life comparable to new structures that's the historic preservation element of it and we are also creating creation of new major new employment and housing opportunities for residents of Jersey City um we're doing both we have the commercial aspect as well as the residential aspect of this project um boards heard me speak on the Master Plan before we're ensuring uh available housing is Bal bance and meets the needs of all current and future residents as well as the um recognize and promote the rich richness of the city's historic assets and lastly I would just say that we are we are promoting a diversified uh economy with with this large scale mixed use development so I don't see any impairment of the master plan I do think we're furthering goals of it um and I do think this application meets those justification standards so that completes my testimony be happy to answer any questions any questions from right nope okay thank you very much thank you I would just conclude by saying that I am in receipt of the uh September 19th 2024 memorandum prepared by Matt Ward uh We've re reviewed the conditions therein and can accept them uh you know if the chairman was here he would ask me to add the condition regarding materials uh for the affordable units and of course we will also agree to uh to add that to the resolution solution thank you sir thank you um all right I'll open up for public anyone here from the public anyone chery no one from the public I would like to close the public portion I second it okay public is now closed uh Matt yeah so um they just uh put on the record that they're going to comply with the recommendations in the staff memo um should you make a motion to approve this application in addition to that there was a memo produced by the jcmua and uh the department of infrastructure uh to which we would uh one of the conditions is that they comply with those um those comments as well uh this being a preliminary though uh this we're probably very far from uh from that being the case but it will stand um and uh this application um did I will Echo it they went through a lot of uh iterations they worked uh very diligently with with uh staff and historic preservation staff um with regards to them being denied uh uh uh or required to retain a portion of the building um with its uh since it was determined that it was uh significant uh this application is uh doing what um the amendment that allowed this to move forward uh wanted uh is uh utilizing the affordable housing uh bonus um it is uh providing those units uh 40 of which will be deed restricted affordable housing um and it is doing it in a very uh Innovative mixed use fashion um with the the hotel component uh staff recommends approval thank you Matt y chair like to make a motion to approve case p2024 d19 as presented to the board together with staff recommendation and conditions I second it motion made and second it roll call acting Vice chair gangan I coun uh councilwoman penzer hi commissioner Dr Desai yeah I definitely know this place you know coming out of Hall internal and you can see on the right side they used to be used stuff selling over there and such a big apartment coming it's going to turn into New York that's what I feel so I'm going to vote I uh commissioner green I and acting chair Dr Gonzalez yeah good nice job I like the building actually looks really nice I love that you retain the portion of the other building the affordable housing the hotel thing there it's a win-win really win and I think uh there's um it meets the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment plan I v i good luck motion Carri all in favor thank you so much thank you all right guys that uh concludes our anybody want to say anything we are done thank you I'm just kidding we have uh Mr Harrington was going to be up next right Chuck right you want to say something to us so yeah I guess I'll ask that this be carried right um so is I don't know there any room on on a November meeting anymore or guys keep getting added and then you sit here I I I think it's probably best that we start pushing um what yeah December 10th December 10th okay so this is yeah p2246 38 Cottage correct okay so to nove to December 10th 10th okay okay and then I have while I'm up here if I could I I also have uh p2024 d119 285 norc Avenue if I could move that to December 10th as well okay with preservation of notices preservation of notice okay thank thank you Mr Harrington thank you good evening chair Mr wi how you doing good how are you good so with me this evening I have two witnesses I knew you were going to do that I'd be remiss if I didn't try um so uh so with respect uh I I know that you just uh carried to December 10th um I would only ask I know this is a relatively small application we've been carried now a second time um I will be here on November 12th anyways for another application if there's any room on the agenda um for a small application I would respectfully request that we be adjourned to November 12th with preservation of notice okay we're I mean he's going to be here anyway right he's going to be here anyway okay all right Mr so just confirm with preservation of notice preservation of notice all right thanks very much everybody thank you sir sorry about that absolutely okay uh I guess we'll move on to resolutions shair there are 13 resolutions okay they all real there real resolutions sure really okay pleasure look at you resolution of the city of Jersey City planning board applicant 35 Cottage LLC for final site plan Amendment approval 35-43 Cottage Street Jersey City New Jersey block 7903 lot 17.01 case number P 202 24-16 resolution 2 is resolution of the city of Jersey City planning board case number p2024 d007 this is for the manderlay on the Hudson condominium 22nd Street Jersey City New Jersey block 1163 Lot 25 third resolution is a resolution of planning board of City Jersey City Liberty Harbor holding LLC for an interim use mobile concrete batching plant Morris Canal lock 15801 lot 28 case number P 202 24-9 fourth resolution is a resolution of planning board of City Jersey City for the Bayfront Partners 32 LP extension of preliminary and final major site plan approval with deviations 100 Kellogg Street block 219 1.01 lot 6.01 case number p2024 D 0157 fifth resolution is the resolution of playing board of City Jersey City for Sadia yusf Ali minor subdivision approval 13-15 jwi Avenue block 16802 lot 33 case number P22 d234 next resolution is the resolution of planning board city of Jersey City case p223 d0110 minor subdivision with C variant address is 296 C viw Avenue it's block 28501 lot one seventh resolution is a resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City for the Hudson exchange embankment Plaza LLC 19 day subdivision filing extension and that is for Block 11603 Lots 2 47.0 2 and 51.0 2 it's case number p224 D 0166 next resolution is the resolution of plan Board of City Jersey City approving minor site plan with deviations and conditions the applicant's DCI signs and awnings it's from minor site plan approval 909 Bergen Avenue block 12106 lot 6 case p202 24-20 next resolution is a resolution of the planning board approving a one-year site plan extension for applicant LK Culver LLC it's case number P22 4- 0148 212-2 38 Culver Avenue next resolution is a resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City Homestead market LLC minor sub division approval for 25 van ripen 29 van ripen 608 Pavonia and 612 Pavonia block 7904 Lots 12 14 and 16 case number p2024 d128 next resolution is a resolution of the planning board for the homy Market LLC preliminary and final major site plan for 17 van ripe and 25 van ripen 29 van ripen it's case number P22 24-0129 next resolution is resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City 100 Water Street Phase 2 LLC amended preliminary and final major site plan approval for phase 2A Amendment major preliminary site plan approval for phase 2B and interim use parking approval block 20704 Lots 1 and two block 20703 lot 3.01 151 Yale Avenue formerly known as 135 Yale Avenue 165 Yale Avenue and 100 Water Street it's case number p2024 d51 and the final resolution is a resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City Homestead market LLC for preliminary and final site plan approval 608 Pavonia and 612 Pavonia block 7904 lot 14.01 case number p2024 d01 30 can I have a second second okay motion made and second uh Vice chair uh Kaden hi councilwoman frari hi commissioner Dr Desai hi uh commissioner green I and chairman Dr Gonzalez I do we have a executive session need I need anyone no no okay I think we promote s too can can I have an adjournment okay perfect than yeah Santa you found a new job