##VIDEO ID:YYhdhgeLkf4## the sth day of November time is 6:30 roll call and Tor uh here Raymond M here here Mano here Sharon Lee here Vincent light here Paul KAG here Anna Cruz here Amanda kabo here e hars absent Havens adequate notice meeting has been post Hall filed with the B cler theburg Park Press River times and star meeting is being recorded and he event the applicant us the service of the court reporter to transcribe the tapes copy of the transcript break about 8 P.M for Del liberation of testimony heard thus far cop on first floor is invited to attend no ever discussion between board members and public is not permitted at that time no new cases will be heard after 9:00 p.m. the rent Bank selling Board of adjustment has maintained a policy cut off hour of 9:30 p.m for its hearings any app against not heard this evening will be carried over to next scheduled meeting um pledge of United States ofer for it stands one nation God indivisible and justice for all okay have a couple administrative matters we have meeting minutes like to move those Mo those second an Tor yes Raymond Mass yes Hogan yeso yes Sharon Lee Yes Vincent light yes and Paul KAG yes okay we have a resolution of approval 160 n Springs Road Mr chairman this was the uh Jersey Central Power and Light application from the last meeting it's a pretty long resolution it was submitted ahead of time this is a resolution memorializing the conditional approval and um Ben Jim nadell the uh applicants attorney is here tonight um and there is some technical information missing in the resolution and uh he was good enough to provide that for me and what we're going to do is uh there's some Landscaping uh conditions and one of those conditions was about landscaping around the park benches because that's in a land or area that is presumably uh restricted by Green Acres uh regulations I think we're just going to clarify that to say uh that they make a good faith to put that uh Green Acres uh I mean to put that landscaping around the benches should the greenacre regulations so allow and uh I think there was at one point you'll recall that there was a pretty intense agreement here about working out a potential title issue with the town and I had um said N9 months in one part and then later on I said 90 days so we'll just clarify that that's a 9month uh period and um there is a extensive hold harmless provision um and uh that I think I just had the resolution being signed but we'll just have it that we have a letter to the effect and um if this is acceptable to the board members we can adopt that as modified and subject to engineering review if that's the pleasure of the board thank you Kevin for that uh anybody make a motion to approve I'll make a motion I'll second oh we also have um my friend an um clarified and the correct spelling of of some of the Landscaping details so I thank her for that but we we'll change it subject to that change as well and Tori yes Raymond Mass yes Hogan yes Dano yes Sharon Lee Yes Vincent light yes Paul K yes okay we have a new business n War Avenue come forward okay and Mr chairman as the applicant team comes forward we just have a couple of preliminary procedural things to do first up we will swear in Shaun Ebanks our director of Community Development and Jacqueline durman our board engineer uh Sean and Jacqueline do if you could just Raise Your Right hands do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide to the extent you provide any be the truth to the best your knowledge to help you God I do all right let the record reflect that both uh w have been sworn um is there anyone here who had any questions or comments or concerns regarding the sufficiency of the notice that they received for tonight's hearing we don't see any uh and let the record reflect that uh the board secretary and Shauna and I reviewed the notice and found everything to be in order so it' be my humble opinion that we have jurisdiction to proceed tonight and just for the record we will Mark into the record what we as a board have before us so let's uh start first with we're going to have uh A1 is going to be the burough of Red Bank Department of Planning and Zoning application uh A2 is going to be the Red Bank denial letter dated April 17 2024 A3 is going to be the tax certificate certification date of July 8 2024 A4 is going to be the historic preservation commission application and we're going to come back to that in a moment A5 is the disclosure of ownership form A6 is the survey prepared by Charles surmont and that's dated June 27 2023 A7 is the architectural alteration and addition plans prepared by uh mode Architects dated July 22nd 2024 A8 is the architectural plans prepared by mode Architects dat June 28 2024 consisting of five sheets A9 is the addition plan prepared by a Carolyn Fegan of arh Associates dated July 1st 2024 consisting of two sheets and we're going to Mark as A10 um the tnm associates review memorandum dated October 25th 2024 and uh one last thing uh reviewing the documents it looks like the applicant here is nine Warf JDS LLC it looks like the sole principal is Jeremy Suarez so just for our own internal conflict check is there anyone here who has any questions or comments about conflicts now that we hear the name Jerry Jeremy Suarez okay seeing none uh this is Dante alfery and um after he makes an appearance just gonna ask shaa one question but we'll we'll get we'll get you going up please you need to speak I pretty bad so close okay good evening chairman members of the board Dante Aly onf of perfect and just shaa um board member Paul kagna had just asked um we know there's an HP historic preservation commission application do we get a response do they come that's why IUD oh okay so the the the the actual application is concludes a response okay very good okay so we'll get into that uh in a little bit thank you uh so tonight we are here seeking the board's approval uh the property address is nine Warf Avenue it's block 901 23.1 LLC zone is ccd2 um it's an existing structure to three story structure there is an existing retail commercial space in the first Flor and then residential above we're proposing to uh put an addition onto the top to put three residential so there three floors of residential one unit in each and then keep the main as commercial I have three individuals who have provide testimony tonight we have an engineer AR contct and our planner without further Ado I'll have our engineer come up and describe the site have to I don't necessarily need it I just want to have it all right if you could just State your uh name and business address please my name is Christopher Morris at 97 Apple Street okay good evening and welcome to the Red Bank zoning board you could just raise your right hand do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide would be the truth the best of your knowledge to help you guide yes I do and just for the record you're testifying tonight in Your Capacity as a licensed engineer yes I'm the liced professional engineer inate thank you please provide qualifications for the board uh sure I'm a a senior project engineer at AR Associates I have a bachelor's degree from Georgia Tech a master's degree in civil engineering from NJIT I have just over 12 years experience in site civil engineering and Land Development I prepared and designed several site plans for commercial and residential properties just like the subject application I've um I have not appeared in front of this board but I have preped professional testimony in front of several WS in state New Jersey and M count great thank you so Chris if you could please describe the the site for the board and just uh go through what uh sure um the site is a 068 acres and 28.9 on warv exuse building with commercial formerly the table gallery and residential units on the second and third floor uh the applicant is seeking preliminary and final major cycline approval to construct a fourth story residential unit and other renovations to the building the existing site has un delineated parking in the rear that is accessed via Oakley Lane off of Union Street um this site has an existing parking deficiency um with the the mixed use commercial and uh residential component it requires nine parking spaces uh with the additional residential unit on the fourth floor that requires two more spaces for a total of 11 um the proposed development will maintain the three spaces in the rear we're going to provide striping and uh identification uh signage uh to limit to reserve those parking spaces for the tenance of the property um the the parking deficiency um will be handled through public parking within a 400 foot radius of the site there's ample on street parking on Union Street on warv and on East Front Street there's also the Marine parking lot there's also two parking garages within the immediate vicinity of the site um during the design phase we also reviewed putting in a handicap space in the rear of the property um it it's due to the narrow narrowness of the site it just wasn't feasible to get that to work and maintain the spots um so uh to provide handicap access to the site we're going to utilize the um handicap spots and Van accessible spots on Union Street and in Marine parking lot and they provide clear access to the site um we spoke with the applicant uh prior to this uh meeting and agreed to inquire about maining parking permits for the uh deficiency in the parking for the residential tenants um we agree to provide those as a condition of any approval tonight um SED service by water and sewer at this time the domestic and sanitary sewer connections are to changed there will be a new 4 in uh line for sprink which this system that will be installed connected to the main within warad so we will show that on our R site planine drivs from a drainage standpoint the site is 100% impervious um it doesn't meet the threshold for which any storm water attenuation would be required the um existing roof leaders on building they get charge through the side of the property and they run down through the rear down Oakley Lane and into the infrastructure on our proposed uh roof leader system will maintain the same drainage characteristics and not um cause any negative impact to the drainage pattern on the property and again our our revised plans will show location of the down spouts those Roof cleer Systems um touching on the trash collection um trash pickup will be provided by a private huler trash cans are going to be stored within an enclosed refug area in the rear of the property and rolled out to the front for collection and lastly just touching on loading and deliveries with the commercial component that's currently in place we do not expect any loading or delivery operations to be prevalent the site okay any questions from the board for the parking the spaces you need that oh mine's not working it's not it's not working my M um with um three spaces there for the tenants and then everybody I guess to the Galler Gallery um the framing place has to find three faes in the rear will be there'll be one designated spot for each residential unit okay second third and fourth floors we each have one spot for the tenants and and we are trying to obtain a part the other three residential spaces that are required regulation what what do you mean by a parking permit I mean I know what a parking permit is but what would this give them permission to park in some public area in in the public Lots yes public garage that is the goal of the applicant to secure that prior so so they're not just trying to find designated spot within the vicinity site to I'm curious how did they go about that never heard of that like that's the first you know an applicant applicant getting a permit because you know other ones have come in and I've not seen where they got a permit for a you know specific space in the area I I I don't have the details yet on how he's going to cure them he he's just inquired about that's something that he feels is necessary to um provide to the tenants of the property designated parking so it wouldn't necessarily be a designated space it would be ability to utilize a space in specific space that's dedicated the tenant within the parking but my client is going to secure permit from one of the public um parking lots for those tenants so they have the ability to come in have a space available may not be the same space every time but they'll have the ability I just didn't know that something tell us if these SPS are available how many of those parking permits would be available know yeah I have to ask the um parking parking and this sorry to dwell on this but this would be if a tenant of one of the one vehicle as it is they would have a spot in the back for their for a single veh just regulations with the two bedroom unit two parking spots are required so the securing those spaces is an attempt to try to make mitigate the necessity of the VAR that we are asking and just for the record um the uh second floor has how many apartments right now there there's one apartment unit on the second floor one apartment unit on the third floor okay and you're proposing this fourth floor which is going to have one additional one additional thank you allting is a two bedom unit same amount of all two boms yes exist two bedrooms each you can do yes how is how is parking handled today with the two apartments and the one tenant do they each have a reserved spot in the back or is it just no the all the spaces are UND delineated and no Reserve parking for any of the tenants or the commercial space do you know if today they need to find parking spaces on the street to accommodate their vehicles no no one is currently living there okay are you renovating floors two and three also yes we are okay so we need to accommodate the commercial and three floors of Apartments so like two units so six maybe eight cars eight Vehicles yeah so for regulations 11 spaces would be required under those whereas nine are required under existing so that that fourth story residential unit will increase the parking Demand by two spaces and you currently have three three so 11 total for the new build nine currently existing those are the requirements yeah okay and the request is not to have to add to additional or it's just not possible given it's not possible due to the size of the site we have parking expanded throughout the the entire WID property I've looked into parking authority also for purchasing a site but from from my experience they're all owned by Redbank and every time I meeted a spot I've had to pay for parking and it's it's pretty expensive I'd be interested to know I know it's only someone's initiated the conversation but whether or not you can even purchase parking spots I purchase spots for dumpsters all the time but I'm not allowed to keep them forever so I'd be interested to know if anyone's actually been successful buying a spot from the bur yeah there is a mechanism in place I know that Hack and Sack Midian Health buys spaces permits that Park in Marine Park so there's a mechanism I just don't know how it works I see a public need for that you know those are for the employees of H are in in the door right there's overflow they've got a lot overlow yeah there's they buy I don't know how many permits that take up spaces in Marine Park but I don't know the mechanism or if there's a limit regardless of the A spot for UN in the back stri right one one well not two spaces for each just but I I would assume an apartment like that one car even if there's two occupants it's in the core core of downtown well just the building original building I can't answer that this is also not an engineering question but these would be rental apartment sites yeah and they you said no one is living there now they're not rented that that's my understanding okay any additional questions for sweat I guess just one just in terms of the uh the garbage is it uh the the tenant's going to take it out uh he's talking about taking hands out or is there a management company and they going to bring it back back in timely fashion yes the tenants would roll out their cans to property and then it would be picked up by a private Haller brought back to the rear can I add to that yes please where would they store it where are the cans stored can currently are stored in an enclosed area off the sides of the property in the rear okay so it's not internal it's okay thank you on one more before I said any questions from the public for this witness okay hey good evening if you could just take your name and business address please Danielo uh with mode Architects 621 Lake Avenue asber Park all right good evening good to see you if you could just raise your right hand do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth the best of your knowledge to help you guide it okay and just for the record you're testifying tonight and your capacity as a licensed architect yes thank you please provide your qualifications for the board I a licensed architect in New Jersey I have a bachelor's degree in architecture from I've been working in field for 15 years now and projects of scale and size use thank you and you know why we just Mark that um we need what a11 yeah all right so a11 is an illustrated rendering is that what we're calling it Dan yes it's a exterior rendering uh and is it prepared by your office yes it is so that's prepared by mode Architects is there a date on it uh I believe today date okay so that's November 7th got it so that' be A1 okay can you describe the existing condition and what the proposed condition will look like sure so um spoke about it uh already but this is a existing three-story building um the first floor is a commercial space the second floor is also existing apartment two bedroom uh the third floor is also a two-bedroom apartment the proposed addition is uh to the rear of the building within the same footprint but on on the uh the third floor the the rear is being expanded and the uh the fourth floor is being added for an additional two-bedroom apartment I'm sorry the third floor is being expanded correct so the the third floor right now doesn't uh cover the entire footprint of the building so the back of that third floor is being bumped out and then we're adding the fourth floor on to of that while looking at a11 that shows what the proposed condition is that is the uh the proposed renovation in addition can I ask a question was that was a11 shown to the HBC is that the document uh this was revised uh taking their comments into consideration okay so it was not sent back to HBC for them to take a look at no HBC well did HBC I'm on the HBC um I wasn't there at that meeting but it seemed somewhat inconsistent with my history on the committee to have uh White windows currently existing right the frame of the windows and in your plans that are submitted to the zoning shows white windows but the top are black was the HBC was comfortable with that uh the HBC was more concerned about the height and the the the uh the look of that addition they were concerned that it looked a little too mod they wanted to step back mass of that top floor so I I know in the comment from the HBC has said that they thought it was too uh contemporary and they requested that the siding be changed correct right on the fourth floor but what I'm not getting I guess from your plans that are submitted to the zoning board it shows the existing white framed windows that would currently exist today but your drawing shows black framed windows so are you planning on changing all of the windows at the building from white to black um yeah so that was told to the HBC I I just don't have just seems very inconsistent with my experience on the HBC to allow a contemporary window on the historic structure it's it's a new window it's a hella historic window that we're proposing the the the windows that I believe are on plans of the HBC saw noted that and there was no comment to it I'm I'm I'm looking at the h at the application it seems that it it was shown them that the existing windows were going to stay white meaning the frame of the windows as it currently exists today are white I have the the elevation if you would like me to HBC um I have a related question uh because the that's I looked at this hogide the plans we got are not do not look like that right the plans we got are very it's a very contemporary we got the one that HBC uh we got the one that HPC don't no that's marked into exhibit that's you guys didn't provide that to us no HBC did not see this we went to the HBC well we haven't seen it either I guess let's just clear it up so first let's sorry sorry first let's talk about the window so I'm getting what mrag traditional that they prefer the white to bring the chairman of the planning board says you have to be like a rockar you guys are bring it in sort of scream yes so what I was stating is that the HBC would prefer white Windows opposed to black windows is that what you're um historically like in the historic district and other historic homes throughout Town typically um HPC has referred um that it remain that way that's been my my experience like I said I wasn't at this meeting I was a with but it seems inconsistent that's that's what I'm saying I was at the meeting um and yes the drawings that were presented um did depict these Brown Windows your drawing shows black windows but what you provided to us was brown windows I don't know if it's the shading was off but they were did a different okay I we the zoning board haven't seen architectural plans for this building we've seen architectural plans for a different style of addition I a little put out by that we did we get the wrong plans sent was today or this week I dropped in am I crazy this what we're saying this is what I have I don't we we have not received PL this is what looking at apologize that maybe we can clear it up a testimony for you yeah but we'll also look into the windows we're not trying to to change anything approv HBC that they did not see so we'll certainly make sure that that's accurately reflected um so while Dan's making that change I the question would be is looking at what we've presented tonight to what the board actually has seen are there any structural differences or is it just the side well to Paul's point it is I mean you have a faux Manar type of roof on now instead of like an aluminum clad exterior but I do have to agree with Paul because a lot of times and my personal experience included you know there seems to be a bait and switch in the color and I completely agree with you know the colors I've gone through HBC myself you know and to see something very different it's not just a color scheme it that mansard the faux mansard on the top the railings the windows the storefront I I think makes it very different I agree the structur L might be the same but those Dormer windows are very different on that third fourth floor than the just a flat double hung with the aluminum it is different it's not just the colors in my opinion you know I'm just trying to point out that structure itself is not changing asking question the math of the building all the bulk um dimensions of it are the same as it was it's really just the exterior look of the building that Sur and we were trying to um address the comments of the HBC they had commented that it was a very contemporary look on the fourth floor Edition that it it didn't mesh well with the existing building we had taken the approach to have um it sit in J Theos of the the traditional building but we revised it to to uh to appease the comments of for so that this is our attempt to address those counts is there additional work that's going to be done to the building because parts of it are in pretty bad shape yeah the entire building would be renovated and uh there there's structural work in the basement that needs to be done it will be brought up to code and and everything will be addressed by any deficiencies in the structure by tightness of the building Energy Efficiency so it's all being updated I can't really tell from that drawing 20 feet away what those materials are so can you address that sure um so the the ground floor is the existing storefront we're not changing anything there except the paint color that we're proposing and those three colors were listed on the the rendering here say uh damville tan these are all from the Benjamin Moore historic collection um Ashley gray and historic black so the the storefront uh is remaining as is if it needs to be refurbished or repaired we would do that in kind and then repainting it um the existing brick is painted there so we're just proposing to paint it again uh this is the Danel tan color with the the window trims the existing Trims and detailing all to remain just painted the Ashley gray color these are new hell Windows which we had pulled out on uh the the previous plants um these are the the pah historic type windows and on the fourth floor that is a a manard like roof with three Dormers and that roof um was to address the comments of stepping back back the building so that roof pitches away from the street kind of lessen the extent of that fourth floor the uh on the side elevation that's a Bard and batted fiber cement side the Hardy uh B and batten sighting on the addition area and then the existing materials on the first second and third floors remain but are painted the Danville tan color so the addition on the third and fourth floor is not brick it's what what did you call it it's a a Hardy panel uh board and bat siding nice on the side elevations okay and the rear I'm sorry it's called the hardyy plank plank Bo yeah it's and it's like a shiplap look right so it's not just a board and B look so they're they're vertical batons oh those not like a shiplap okay panels of like 16 to 18 inches wide so instead of stepping back the building as the um APC recommended you decided to do the mansard grof or did you step it back five feet well it's still behind the existing corness and then it begin to backward how could you just add this am I correct what you're saying is that the historic preservation committee hasn't really seen this no this has not gone back to the hisor they have not seen this they they didn't ask us or require us to they haven't seen this no that's correct the attorney had spoken and said that because the when an application comes before um the planning board or zoning board the historic commission acts as as an Advisory Board and so they aren't the applicant isn't required to um come back to the HBC they can take the recommendations or they can leave the recommendations because their recommendations at that point is at advis she had went on a whole tangent about it at meeting well I guess in my only comment that I would be it's hard to give advice when they don't when the HBC doesn't see what the how does how would the HBC give advice if they don't see what the final product is it doesn't seem well they recommended that they change the entire new addition that was what it was um that's what they recommended um that it didn't fit with the character of the building and that it needed to be changed technically they could be there with the original plan right if they wanted thanks for the advice that's pretty much it so given that the first three floors today are brick why did you decide to use a different material uh I think that's a fair question and it's it's one of the ways that um you can that the um Secretary of the Interior kind of recommends historic preservation projects um is either you you try to you try to make it look as if it's not part of the original building you want a clear delineation between what was existing and what is new um you want them to be in concert with each other and work well and create a nice uh building but you also don't want to disturb the the fabric of what was there originally and if anything ever needed to be removed it's clear what was existing and what was new I have never heard of that but um you said that's a secretary of interior recommendation that's the design standards it's a nationally known standard for um historic treating historic sites and doing addition new additions is the Secretary of interior Secretary of interior is there there's we have guidelines for the HBC that says that it's based on it so the guidelines are there and it refers to in the ordinance the Secretary of interior standards yeah it's this is news to me um there have never been an application to the historic preservation where we've said we wanted to look different than if you're doing a new addition you have to make it look different from what the original because you can't recreate when it comes to Historic if it's if it never existed you can't recre recreate it to look like what was there there never a fourth floor yeah so you can't fourth floor right it's also a practical matter because to put brick up there the weight the exposure the elements the cost be crazy Hardy Board is like you have on a deck that'll last for a thousand years but it looks oldfashioned especially from the street you know it's you just could never do brick there C okay any additional questions chair I have some um can you talk about mechanical equipment on the roads please are there any uh yeah there would be uh three outside units for the uh the three um residential tenants that would be all roof and they would be to the side of that little Pilot House the stair access comes up um so they wouldn't be visible from the street they're set far enough back from the the front edge of the building they wouldn't be visible from the street and they wouldn't be visible from any of the adjacent properties to the left or right of the building um to the to the left the buildings are lower in elevation and the building to the right um would be blocked by that stair that's um and in terms of the height of the building um we had asked for confirmation based off of our ordinance what is the proposed height the proposed he is 44 feet from the existing gr and did you take me elevations around the building we have our letter dated October 2 so um page two 1.2 oh I'm sorry um 1.3 if you could provide [Music] that just so we get an exact height variance number the variance really is for the height speaking of height how does the height of the proposed building compare to the heights of the buildings on either side uh it would be about a story taller than the building to the left of it and then it would be around the same height as the building to the right of it there's a building to the right of this build two so I guess the question is do either of those buildings require height variances next to this proposed addition yeah well they would have already gotten it no know I'm just trying to compare the height of the two buildings I mean I think it looks like I mean this is just Google you know what I mean like I think it will obviously breach the the sight line of the second building but the one next to it four stories they're just lower ceiling Heights I guess yeah g downhill yeah so it'll be taller than the adjacent building to the right of it but that's to be expected you could see that that one's shorter next to it presumably that's why you want it because the mansar views are the best Windows are front and back but if they windows on the side facing the river you want them to clear that building next door I would imagine that's what they're trying to achieve what the height is to clear the building next door which is probably 40t high so how tall the red brick there okay any more question I just wna for PA reference and our ordinance 49055 uh H um sorry as standards design guidelines and criteria all project requirements by the commission and all application for development in historic districts or on history storic sites shall be governed by the Secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation secretary interior standards for treatment of historic sites with guidelines for preserving rehabing restoring and reconstructing historic buildings the guidelines that may be and the guidelines that may be adopted by ordinance in the future that's one and then if you scroll down to seven guidelines for new construction this chapter does not require or prohibit a particular architectural style rather its purpose is to preserve the past by making the past compatible with the re with and relevant to the present to that end new construction within a historic district or upon or near a historic property is not required to duplicate an exact historic style but must be compatible with and not detract from the historic character of the district and aect historic sites so yeah I would uh probably want to take a myself take a look at that too because it seem that seem to to me on your reading to indicate new construction not necessarily an addition the word was the word addition in that addition isn't included but this technically on top is related to new construction well I guess that's where I think it's ambiguous um but that's why you're here that's the the way you want to present it then that's your choice okay moving on any additional questions from the board for this witness any questions from the public for this witness okay I guess we move on good evening if you could just uh state your name and business address please Justin a u c i e 52 Reckless pleas you're address right new address add that was the first time on the record so I think about it for one second so if you just raised your right hand do you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth to the best of your knowledge to help you guide yes sir and for the record you're testifying tonight in Your Capacity as a licensed professional planner correct thank you please absolutely um I'm a masters in planning for markers I've been a licensed plan you did speak close to that thank you um I've been a licensed plan in the state of New Jersey since 2008 board on multiple occasions provided testimony and applications like this uh in most municipalities throughout throughout U here mov County and and Ocean County and also 20 other 18 other counties in the State uh familiar with the site with your zoning ordinance and thank you You' reviewed the plans we've heard the testimony tonight I have take it away okay so just uh for ease of reference for the record I'm I'm going to refer to page two TM letter October 25 I'll just start with the VAR required 1.1 states that the maximum density of 25 per acre in the in the ccd2 zone whereas the applicant proposes a density of uh 44 dwelling units per the acre um and I'll just start with that um you know the ordinance uh prescribes certain conditions and one of the conditions is density so even though a D1 use variance is required this is a bit of a a unique circumstance I I kind of see it more as a hybrid uh D2 D3 I don't want to um you know money the waters but I'll just put the proofs on for the the D1 variants the first prong of a D1 variant is suitability uh what makes this site particularly suited um for this use as you heard from the teson this evening uh it's an addition on the third to the fourth floor so so one additional floor bringing this building to floors the building is currently situated is mixed use it's commercial or was commercial on the uh um first floor uh with the gallery and uh two residential uses on floor two and floor three so when you look at suitability what's proposed here the only material difference and I mean it is a big difference but there's a there's a second story or a fourth story going out this building but there's no change in the usage of the building the usage of the of the building will remain the same as it is today with the exception of course the the additional story of the building so I think with that said I think this building uh or this site still will remain suited for the Mixed use nature of the building um I'm going to talk about the special reasons a bit later after I go through the proofs of the E and the height um but I think in terms of uh you know suitability I think I think certainly um you know this is not going to create a discernable difference in the hi of traffic it's not going to create a discernable difference in the generation of uh of of school AG children it's really going to have very little impact but for the introduction of perhaps one or two more um residents on the street uh in terms of the the F variants uh 1.2 of the letter states that maximum Flor ratio is uh is 1.7 whereas the existing is 1.66 and the applicant proposes 2.06 uh now the F standard is a bit different from the D1 standard the standard is whether or not the site can accommodate uh the proposed f um I think I think in terms of what's what's really driving this F variance um you know I me obviously the f is the comparison between the lot area and in square footage but what's really driving this is that this lot is severely under sized um for this zone so the introduction of the additional square footage um is it may appear to be a significant jump from uh 1.66 to 2.06 but I think it's a practical matter uh as a person standing on the street uh looking at this building with the additional story uh constructed um even though obviously there's there's a extra story on it when you look at in the context of the surrounding area the buildings on either side especially the building going towards the river it's not going to create a situ sitation where the intensity or the massing of the building is going to look out of place um also as you heard from our engineer um the drainage uh that's going to be generated um will be accommodated and of course there's no expansion to the footprint of this building um it's not going to encroach obviously from the existing setbacks the front side or rear so when you look at the intensity or the massing of uh the proposed story from a a planning standpoint I I think this is a bit of a meque situation um as opposed to other applications that you might have on a bigger line the single family home that someone posing might look at a place in this instance I just don't see it planning standpoint um lastly uh the proof the height is is the same same same type of proof for the F can the site accommodate uh the the extra the extra height as it stated as as 1.3 of the letter uh the the maximum height in this zone is is 40 feet not to exceed uh four Stories the applicant proposes a height of 44 feet and of course uh four stories as well that complies I think the same argument that I applied for the f um you know works here as well in terms of I always look at height in the the comparison between this site the ability for the site to accommodate the height and also the character of the surrounding area um the height uh is is going to be similar to the the Union Street Village mixed use development which is to the north uh towards the river it will be one story higher than the building uh to the left if you're basing the building but I think in terms of consistency um again this is not creating a situation where uh the extra height is going to uh you know blow out the look of the site as it relates to the character of of the surrounding area um there are multiple purp excuse me there are multiple um uh special reasons uh for purposes of zoning that will be Advanced with this application um certainly as you can see rendering from the architect uh a uh Desir visual environment is purpose I of of zoning of the ml um I think I think the architect um has done a good job to respect the the sort of nature of this building uh complying with the Department of of interior um regulations which I believe are are codified in the zoning ordance as well so I think in terms of the Aesthetics of this building and also I think importantly as well the Improvement uh of the existing building uh to bring it up to code and also just to generally clean it up I think it goes a long way to advance the purpose of zoning I think the population density is appropriate that's that's purpose e um I think you know even though of course um variance is required and Kevin um just a legal question I'm not certain I just want to make sure for the purpose of the record that's correct is a a D5 variance um here in this application as well or is it just the the D1 which contains the the conditions for the density I just want to be sure the record yeah um Jackie what did we say D1 I think it's D1 yeah okay so um so even though a a you know D5 Varian and let me just I I think it's a nuanced ordinance but I think the conditions require certain densities and certain fs and and because you're not meeting them all you then need a a D1 but it's it's it's Nuance but I think that's that's the answer okay thank you um so so in terms of density I I think for the reasons I I had stated for for the for the proof um you know for the D1 which contains the condition and one of which is density um I think certainly in the context of this site in the surrounding area density um really fits within the character of the area um and certainly uh purpose J uh as you heard from our architect and obviously the board is aware this application has been the HBC the um nature of the site being historic again I from a planning standpoint is creating a situation that is respectful to that Heritage as well which your master plan also speaks about the need to protect the the historic nature of buildings in the burrow um so I think uh you know those purposes of zoning um would be Advanced um by this application terms of of the negative criteria terms of whether or not the proposed variances will present a substantial detr to the public good I think the applicant through the previous Witnesses um have established that there's really not not much in the way a negative impact certainly no impact which broughts US the level being uh substantial uh no no negative impact uh you to the drainage uh the massing as you heard from the architect uh will remain the same um also one thing that I didn't touch on is the parking barings um as you heard from from the previous witness uh we're deficient uh one spot um two two will be required uh for the residential use one will be provided so deficiency or the new deficiency on the site is one um the applicant um will um find the spot to accommodate um that extra spots that that's required I just want to say for the record my office did reach out to the parking utility we did we did speak with someone uh late last week and what we were told that they were going to get back to us uh you know as to the the ability to get a parking permit but we were told that that had been done in the past um and we were also told that one spot uh would be available as well so if that's the case we we would be able to or the applicant would be able to acquire that parking permit obviously should it be available into the future be that as it may the applicant is willing um you know to to acquire uh the to satisfy uh the SP required also I think importantly as well as you heard from from our engineer there is sufficient parking on onsite parking in the surrounding area um that that would be would be um useful to to accommodate um the parking Demand on the site and also the parking demand need guests um to uh the new apartment as well um so in terms of of the negative criteria certainly for all those reasons uh no substantial detriment in terms of the impact to the The Zone plan the zoning ordinance um again because of that quir in the uh in the code in terms of requiring a a D1 use variant as I had previously said given that the mixed use nature of this site and Theos mixed use station the only difference obviously being the additional story and the apartment unit um I don't see this as a use which would uh fracture the intent the zoning orders and and the zoning plan I think there are ample justifications for the variant relief um that that's required as for my testimony and I feel that um the advancement of the master plan the Zone plan and the zoning ordinance uh would be met um with this application question um I'm I'm sh if it's a proper question for you but we didn't really talk about the roof Terrace um did we want want to talk about that well I was going to bring that up also with Chris's information because the building top of building is 44 feet but the top of the stair ax is 50 feet so I don't know like to the top of the the top top of the building it's 50 not 44 and do we consider that stair aess part of the height requirement yeah I was thinking that as well and then what other buildings in the area have a roof Terrace um you know what I'm I'm not certain I I'm not I'm not exactly sure so U I would have to get back to you on that okay counselor are you familiar with any buildings in the area that have a roof pairs I think the uh tattoo shop on Front Street I think the tattoo shop on Front Street has a roof tirus on the back of that not sure exactly of others how many stories is that two I mean Red Rock has how many roof Terraces you know I'm just saying first is nice I was just saying like if that includes the you know the the height of the building as the stair entrance okay you know what can our engineer does our engineer be able to address that like in other words the staircase is that counted in the height of the building feet 10t yeah is it four feet over or is it because of the staircase apply enclosure for the staircase say they're allowed to build a fight you know what I mean like they need hours St of towers so stair towers are included so the height limitation created here under shall apply to ch ventilators skylights tanks stair stair towers fly Towers elevation Towers apparatus usually carried above the roof level and non-commercial radio and television antennas attached to a structure except that the same May exceed said height limitation by no not more than 15 feet or in the case of fly Towers 20 feet except that Sky light heating and air conditioning equipments and ventilators May exceed height limitation by no more than 10 feet such features shall not exceed in total coverage 10% of the total area so it's included yeah theight because that is the because your the stair Tower where's applies to the height so they have you're talking about the stair Tower correct yeah the stair tower on top of stair Tower is included with a height when you measure the height right and but the variance was for How High um so they're requesting a variance for 44 but it could be for 50 but they still need a height variant they still need a D6 is that because the Terrace that the stairs going that high because of the rooftop Terrace that they have yes no I think it's because of the staircas stair Tower the stair Tower that's what triggers because they still need a D1 D6 variant it's not a regular height variance it's a D6 no but I think to raise question if they didn't have the Terrace they wouldn't require the stairs ter that was my question yeah no don't still need a stairhead like that on the roof in a modern addition like this oh you need it but just whether should ask for 44 50 instead of 44 Let's Get Right saying if they remove the teror they still need they still need one anyway yeah no we didn't so oh it's 50 that not it's 50 it's 50 not 44 given that um you have AR testify as it relates to do you hear me no the mic's not picking yet what' you say I got the subs up um I'll have our architect come up and just testify as it relates to the height of that area specifically potential visuals and then come up and just supp his testimony you heard you heard discussed can you please describe the area in question so the uh the stair AIS URS in in the middle of the building if you're looking at from the front to the rear it's set back uh I don't have the dimension in front of me but it's at least 25 feet from the the face of the building and it we minimize that stair axis as much as we can um it's actually a popup hatch as opposed to a full pipe Pilot House which would be more like 8 to 10 feet this is only six feet above the top of the roof it will not be visible from the street um it sent back far enough that if you're on the sidewalk across the street stair access and uh we we really did try to minimize that uh the size of it as much as we could and located it from the the front of the building wait so it's it's on a slant it looks like you said it's a hatch you're not walking out the No it's it's not a it's not a full door it's not a full door this way you just window PCH that you step up and up and out onto the rooftop lift it up and then walk out that would be available to all the departments in the building that's for the uh the top floor P house oh just the one okay the P house okay they have to walk up wait the hatch is is available for everyone there just the just the Mechanicals are so it's going to be used by the penthouse residents right only only the rear of the here the building is used as a roof where would that's a down that's down this is up so in through here and then [Music] up there's the up and there's the hatch then you can only go go back to you get to it from you can only get to it from the fourth floor if you look at the the here on the right page the Shaded area of the building so you have where the roof Terrace occurs roof okay and the uh the structure just to the south of that out that on the right hand side of the page the stair Tower coming up the the hatch out to the roof Terrace the mechanical equipment would be uh behind the uh the stair access how tall is that railing this uh it would be three foot or 3 foot6 and I just the same ordance that I read um they're allowed they're allowed 15 feet for that stair the stairs they're at six so they don't need a variance for it's still part of it's considered part of the height but they're allowed up to 15 ft except that same May exceed said height limitation by not more than 15 ft that's if they meet the height requirement so it's part when you have a height limitation right it's under height limitation so you add you it's part of the height that you're right so if they me for if they meet the height limitation then they're allowed 15t 15 but in this case they don't meet the height if you meet it then you could be 55 feet high well they could have they could have the 15t if it was microphone yeah right but it could be 55 could be 55 ft wide um the mechanical is going to be next to the staircase does that mean it's going to be next to the adjacent building on the adjacent building side it's 10 feet off and I think that's what they need 10 feet off the side of the 10 feet off the side of the building yeah how big is the um deck space feet 26 by 17 plus a little more yeah 33 by 18 space it's in the back I'm sorry what was it the rooftop deck is what 25 by 18 25 ft by 18t plus a little yeah that's not enclosed no it's not enclosed and there it's not covered no this area did you say that the Mechanicals I thought you said the Mechanicals are behind the staircase that would be on the roof Terrace we we show them on the plan just uh just in front of but uh we could locate them to the left of the stair so that it's not visible to the unit to the right well with the shroud of the staircase you wouldn't see it anyway right when when you're walking up the stair you wouldn't see it and you wouldn't have access to it either you're walking the way you're look the way you walk up the stairs you would never even get over there see to see that from the street as well no it's it's kept far enough away from the front of the building that units are no more than three or four feet tall another question uh the the drawing show the building existing building is 38 fet is what it shows so if you you need you need a variance to build an addition it's impossible to change the building if if you restore the existing building which may be unal we're working with the existing add to it fin floor levels for the there isn't enough room left cor without going over the 40 and sorry right just a couple more um if I'm standing on the roof and I'm like looking towards the river um so I've got Union Village Apartments to the right and they have Romeo and Juliet balconies are you familiar with those uh I'm familiar with the the balcon I'm not familiar with the building that you're okay so if I'm staring at the front of your building the building to the right Union Square Village I think is the name of it that building is also four stories this your building is going to be a little bit taller than that right and um that building to the right of your building has balconies on that side that AB but your building and I want to know if I'm standing on the roof of your of your new roof deck the view is there any invasion of privacy issues for the tenants in that building oh can these people look down does that make sense yeah I couldn't say photograph currently you have no windows on the right hand side of your building but there's balconies on the Union Square building so if you're on the roof I want to know can you look into those apartments you have a view into inside of those apartments yeah I I couldn't say for sure okay let kind of move us long I'm sorry one more quick uh there was a quick there was a mention of the absence of a handicapp space in this tiny part lot in the B um do is there a variance required for not I mean this is a small building I wouldn't know you know would you have to have a handicap space for building that small or so my question is really is there a need for a variance for that lack or all right and just for the record Christoper Morris you're still under yes handicap spot would be required so a variance would be required for the retail component the lot thank you in area the general area and a clear accessible path to the site it just seems to me maybe you ought to ask for and get that variance as well yes that that Vari was mention in tnm letter I think it was Point uh 3.2 one b space is required but SE can just out of curiosity can they say they're going to have a space Ada space off site you can say that you can't I mean you don't control it similar to Red Rock it's similar to Red Rock situation um where they were using the handicap space the diagonal spaces on the other side of is that Warf still next to the park y next to the park next to the park um and they were required to as much as feasible create a handicap P to their building right we can identify that on the plans too what's the purpose though of having handicap like across the way you know what I mean the purpose of it is to have it so it's accessible to the building easier for somebody with handicap than walking you know I you said something about offsite how does that even how is that legal to be an ADA spot like offsite because it's a public it's a public spot it's not what's the handicap benefit though being far away you know away from it's it's across the road literally the road okay could one of the spots that they have now be designated exclusively for Ada you're getting a parking variant any eliminate two spots here so they have three spaces one accessible have to have the access aisle so you'd only have one ada8 spot and one regular spot out of the three spots I see E's point about who cares if there's a handicap spot across the street you know like if it's a person you know living there you know but also we have to remember that the commercial space is pre-existing that's for the commercial space yeah that's only for the commercial space not for the resident so zero spots right now are for the residents zero they're not required you're saying they're not required for there's no elevator in the building it's kind of so they're further retail now but they will be converted for residential spaces so the retail won't have any more they're not even strip spots or just because they don't exist now doesn't mean they won't exist you know like so I'm wondering could we make allowances for an ADA person to have a spot in the space or a pre-existing commercial space so had they not done this application they wouldn't have needed I mean they wouldn't have needed one any the person would have used the Ada spots where it is now it's just the creation of the new residential portion andv are Ada correct they're not fitted to be Ada all the stuff is going to create you know issues for somebody looking to rent in this building if they're own't enough spaces not any handicap you know that's something they have to deal with so right okay any additional questions so we can move this along I have a question for the um the planner so he could come up I was trying to follow your um argument on the suitability of the the required density The increased density of the building and you actually said it was character of the area do you know the density of the building surrounding this building that's a good question um yeah I did a calculation for Union Street Village that's it correctly Union Street Village I was going to say a square but it's Union Street Village um the density of that building is is lower than the PO that but I practice that by saying that this this lot on on this side the applicant side is severely undersized so so any increase in in floor area is going to create the appearance of a density um that may appear to be substantial what's the current density as it stands today I I have that the current uh um I do have the current density in my notes sphere just the ex area um sorry if you bear with me sir post density of course is 4412 oh okay uh 2941 is the current density uh which is calculation of 068 see by two units that's 29 2941 our plans so by my calculation it's 29.41 so the current is 29 with the proposed addition it becomes 44 4412 so the current uh use of the building the existing use of the building is already slightly over the allowed density slightly yeah thank you and really I I think as I said in my testimony um I'm really seeing it in the context not just the site of the character of the area and even though the density AJ the building uh you uh Union Street vage is lower than the proposed density that's on a much much greater size lot uh there are more units in that building believe there are eight residential units in that building versus the number of units in this building so uh that that actually you know from someone who doesn't know land use if they're looking at on the street on Union Street looking at that adjacent building they may think or I guess you know visually you would discern that that could be denser in your mind but when you look on this property uh it's not going to have that kind of massing character just because this is an narrow lot um you know undersized lot and the addition of that extra story is going to be consistent with the character of the adjacent building which may appear larger but actually has slightly lower Den okay WRA this up any further questions for any of these witness any questions from the public for any of these Witnesses okay we close that part you wan to pay your final pie here so would like to state that we are seeking the board's approval tonight for a few variances density um parking and height and I believe use um but as you've heard from all of our professionals it seems that this type of use and the proposed improvements um aren't going to be a detriment to the area if anything it's going to be nice positive and hope that the favor tonight okay well one thing I just want to say is that I'm surprised that we didn't get an updated set of plans for this building and what we have is not what you're looking to do so I mean appearance-wise but being that I think we're here to approve or not approve the concept of what you want to do is add that additional uh apartment on on the second on the fourth floor so anybody like to make motion to approve or deny this application could I just ask for clarification on the parking and the Red Bank you know permits or whatever so what's the current proposal is that you would get you would acquire to acquire secure parking permits for the defici spases that to additional spaces one additional space it would be three two two two 11 so you would you would acquire two additional parking permits from the municipality Red Bank if you can three tot three not two but we can't base our decision on it because it's unknown whether or not they even can right like the attempt is there yeah but it's there's no guarantee that those spaces will become available to the to the project like there's an there'll be an attempt well is you know they don't have the parking it's tough for somebody want to rent an apartment where they own parking so you know that's up to them to try and decision on thep so anybody want to make a motion yes I I will make a motion to approve this uh project I think it will add a housing unit which is always nice it's attractive um fits the area um and I'm not going to let my irritation that we didn't have the right plans get in the way of that uh so that's out there thanks you know I've written down yes why don't you Kevin all right so we have a couple things that we'll need some clarification on so let's just uh the regular standard conditions would include compliance with all the promises commitments and representations the team made tonight uh compliance with the team Associates review memorandum we usually have a 24mon time frame shelf life within which building permits are to be obtained um compliance with all affordable housing rules regulations contributions and directives and sha just towards that end is there any uh I mean are they supposed to go to affordable housing compliance beforehand or is it they're under 10 units so they're not required okay so they just have to comply with the regulations compliance with applicable outside approvals and uh if the application or the requested relief materially changes as a result of those outside approvals uh you need to come back to the board petition the board for further amended Rel we have a a requirement that um if the applications is approved you will uh prior to co you'll need to submit uh engineering certification from uh your professionals and Architects confirming that the Improvement was uh built and installed in accordance with the approved plans in accordance with the testimony and in accordance with the uh resolution sha we wouldn't need any type of developers agreement on on this um and we have uh grading and drainage details if necessary to be reviewed and approved by the board engineer uh Jackie your memo had made reference to off-site water vulnerability contributions uh and then um it is private garbage compliance with Ada regulations um typically in use varing situations we say that you'll get more um or you would agree to more frequent uh private pickup garbage pickup if your client deems it necessary or an agent of the burough deems it necessary because it's a non-compliant nature um and then uh just real quickly uh Jackie memo had made some something for an access easement for lot 20 for parking does that still maintain is that still Arrangement still I think Jackie unless I misread it was there something in your review letter about an access easement with for parking for adjacent lot 20 was towards the end I just want to make sure I'm not yeah the applicant shall provide copies of any restrictions or easements on site it would appear that an access easement across lot 20 may exist for ex for access to the area all right so you'll you'll get us a proof of that um Fire official to review uh for the emergency access um and then some of the things we talked about tonight now um we talked about the HPC for that um since the board um seems a little uncomfortable with the HBC not seeing the final um I would Rec recommend that the um commission make it a condition that the HPC sees this rendering um and the proposed new renderings and should they have any changes um would the applicant be okay with complying with what their recommendations are with regards to the siding um color of the windows or whatever is that something that the applicant would be for their review and approval continue yep just speaking to the mic so I was able to confirm with my client that they actually do have already secur they've already secured two placards for parking and they my client actually owns a separate parking lot in the area so in the event they needed to provide additional parking spaces and economy so I know there's some questions about permits able to in Red Bank area like in right in town he has an extra parking lot not not taking an Uber to the apartment okay okay ex extremely quick to that HBC Point since they're technically not required right and there's no approval function of the HBC would you would you be concerned about the president that's all I'm asking I I think the new the new building looks looks good to the board if they would want that um I can understand the precedent but it could be by Case by case Bas it I mean I'm I'm fine with it as a case by case Bas and I'm just worried about the pr that g us this leverage I'm okay with a good faith effort you know I mean they showed a good faith effort with the new design I thought okay and then we're going to uh there's going to be striping identification and signage for the uh parking um and uh the Ada space Arrangements um let's see uh down spouts on the plans um private huler we talked about um attempting to get those parking permits so that that's been changed you have two um and then we have the third Arrangement uh for the private parking Arrangement that your client owns uh it's rental apartments we talked about um all right that was the HBC comments um I guess in just in terms of construction staging we just have a general you work consult with the municipality and the police department to minimize disturbance um now we're we're saying that the building height is 50 ft okay and we're going to you'll just confirm that and we're also going to have um let's see with the uh height and I guess we should just clarify if this is the intention it's just for that staircase and you can't expand the rest of the building to 50 ft that's not it's not a blanket 50 footage just for that staircase and let's see uh given the D variance relief no usually you have a requirement no further expansion or intensification abs and further formal approval of the board compliance with um the building and construction code requirements now Dante at the end I think uh your architect said something I could locate the air conditioning rooftop to the and he said One Direction is that a condition sha that we requiring that the um I think you said so your architect said so it wouldn't be in the way of the roof deck is that something that we're doing or not doing I mean it would help to Paul's point of blocking people from get over into those Juliet balcon we're gonna locate the air conditioning rooftops to the right to the left or to the east think leaving it where it is it where it is leave okay and we are going to um um again with that ADA Arrangement you're going to have to comply with Ada regulations and to the extent Ada regulations require you're going to have to create um a a path as much as feasible and practical to the building and you're going to have to put that on the plans and let's see um we have the uh space about the you have the two parking spaces and you're going to make the permits and then make uh Grant one uh tenant access in your client's Union street village and obvious that's a Perpetual Arrangement but I think that's the gist on our other standard conditions Dante before the board discusses it are you and your client okay with those uh conditions yes okay so sorry Mr chairman a little bit longer than I wanted yes based on Mr Kennedy Tori yes Raymond Mass yes Hogan yes Ben uro yes Taren Leon light yes Paul kagna uh no all right so that's six yes one no uh application passes um thank you thank you chairman members of the board appr time today thank you motion to in favor