##VIDEO ID:7K34TrKVhTc## e e e e e e e in the local Source Andor The Star Ledger the two newspapers are record and notice has been posted on the bulletin board in the municipal building adjacent to the municipal clerk office roll call Mr Wy here M Martins is absent Mr vanger here Mr Miss Scot here Mr Johnson here Mr mcneel here Mr Graves here Mr rickets is absent Mr Champ here there being a quorum present this meeting is now declared open at this time Mr manguso are there any Communications are there no Communications at this time hearing none hearing none our first order of business will be the adoption of a resolution for calendar number 3441 Robin Fu located at 281 through 283 Oswell Place block 5811 lot 14 applicant wishes to expand non-conforming use to permit a parking lot for the dwelling mrman excuse me excuse me yeah um you've all had a chance to read the resolution at this time are there any board members who would like to comment make changes or modification to this resolution as it is written hearing none may I have a motion in a second ad resolution and read and modified as accurately demoralizing the previous findings of his Board second roll call Wy yes Scott yes Johnson yes Neil yes champy yes our next order of business is calendar number 3439 1865 Mars Avenue LLC located at 1865 Mars Avenue block 2315 lot 12.01 applicant wishes to construct a three-story mix use commercial and residential building Mr hail would you like to begin yes thank you very much Mr chairman and board members thank you so much for being out this evening and appreciate your continued uh service on this board uh this is uh a great uh reuse of this property I know Mr chairman you and I always kid about what it was the for years The Beer Temple Oster tag agency uh in the in the township there and uh but what we're looking now is to renovate the property to demolish the building construct a new building uh for uh my friend Ralph SLO seated here he's uh going to be moving his office from Elizabeth to Union and uh really looking forward to uh working on this project this property is in the DT Zone the downtown transition zone which certainly envisions this type of mixed use project having the commercial aspect and the residential aspect the residential obviously having foot traffic and supporting the uh the Union Center business district uh we're before this board board uh because we we do need a floor area ratio um variance it's not a significant variance and we'll have clear testimony that shows that the site can accommodate uh the proposed use so again we're looking at a three-story mixed use building 14 units two studio apartments for one bedroom several uh two-bedroom apartments we do have the review letter from cers we don't have any issues with that we'll address that there were no comments from the police department and we did get the comments from the fire department and we'll address those we have no problem complying with any of the terms and conditions from the fire department so if there were and I know I guess before I I know that Mr panula will want to Mark the application and plans yes Mr Hil good evening I did Mark A1 the application as it was submitted A2 is the site plan of dynamic engineering which consists of 11 sheets uh A3 will be the traffic impact assessment that was offered uh through Corey Chase and Craig Parago Dynamic traffic A4 is the uh boundary survey and topographic survey that was submitted uh dated April 5th consisting of one sheet and A5 is the architectural plans for the Mixed use as proposed consisting of Five sheet so it's A1 through A5 for the record all right thank you very much Mr panula so what I like to begin with is we'll call upon uho DTE or site engineer from Dynamic engineering to take us through existing conditions and then what's proposed by way of improvements then we'll move on to our architect traffic and then planning testimony out can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony you're going to provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth I do if you could for the record State and spell your name with your business affiliation Thiago dwarte t i a g o d a r t uh business affiliation is uh senior principal at Dynamic engineering uh business address 50 Parkplace New York New Jersey thank you all right Mr dwarte if you could please just briefly give the board the benefit of your work educational experience obviously area of expertise as a professional engineer and licenses you hold and confirm that they're in full force and effect sure uh I graduated Ruckers University with the Bachelor's of science and civil engineering in 2011 practicing in the field of civil engineering specifically Land Development since then so just over 13 years of experience in the field um my I am licensed in state New Jersey my license is current as of this evening and I've been accepted the board will accept this credential great thank you very much Mr chairman right so Mr War if you could take us through and I know you put the uh the drive in there if you could take us through existing conditions and then if we could move on to what's proposed by way of uh improvements to the property sure thing and if there items that were submitted as part of the uh package you just identify them if it's a new exhibit we'll have to mark that as and we begin with you didn't know I eduse this A6 would be the next so to to start with I'm just going to orient the board with the uh where the site it is and located on an aerial exhibit it's uh today's date prepared my my office and that was not previously submitted correct so this will be A6 A6 okay and it's it's very similar to sheet two of the plan that was submitted with the within the site plans uh the color is a little different to make it a little easier to see on the the screen this evening so as you everyone just heard the s's located at 1865 Mars Avenue which is also State Highway 82 uh it's block 2315 lot 12.01 the site is currently fully developed while zo into the center of the sheet uh zooming into the sheet to just highlight that there's an existing uh two-story office building a vacant office building on the subject site and is surrounded by uh paved parking areas uh basically up to the lot line so the site is fully developed under the existing conditions uh access to the site's provided from the state highway via one one driveway and um the sit's located in the DT Zone uh there are residential uses to the top of the page uh but along the mor morab RightWay uh Corridor there are uh mixed uses commercial uses um along that corridor switching over now up this would be A7 this is a site plan rendering basically a colorized version of the plan that was submitted with the application uh we did superimpose the Landscaping um just to make that more visible on the why don't we note that as a separate exhibit since it's coloriz it A6 for the record of coloriz H7 well a yeah this would be a s oh I'm sorry A6 was the aerial aerial the AI got it yep thanks Rob so we here forward uh this evening is to obain an approval for the proposed mixed use building so as as I have colored here the mixed use will have a 2400 ft uh ground floor area that's the the darker orange color that on the screen and associated with that is the off street parking area so the parking areas is the beige color just to toote the difference between what's what's at the ground level and what's parking for uh off Street for for cars uh above these this ground level there are two floors of of residential housing units residential dwellings the total footprint of the building is 7,941 Ft so that is a uh less than than the overall lot so overall lot is 10,000 ft again it's fully developed under the existing condition uh pavement right up to the property lines um and what we're proposing to do drop the building in provide um compliant setbacks for the front yard and side yard so we're providing a 5ot setback for the building on the front and the two sides uh and A 5.6 setback on the rear the rear is a variance but again we're we're really moving the building and the development in from out there today so it's a less active use and the parking is uh going to be enclosed within the building area what we're doing around the perimeter of the building uh is providing green area and Landscape buffering to screen the the proposed use from the uh adjacent properties again the the lot area being 10,000 s ft is undersized for the The Zone The Zone requires uh 12,500 foot Lots so we are slightly undersized there uh which also plays into the the deviations we have from the building coverage um which is exceeding the requirement so 50% building coverage is is permitted we have 79% um and the impervious coverage 80% is permitted but we are currently 100% so we are improving that existing condition by bringing it down to 82.9% as for the parking we propose 17 spaces within that ground floor area um we've got one Ada space and three EV spaces so we're um complying with the the state requirements for Ev chargers for this type of use um the ground floor area just going back to that for a quick second the office area is the commercial space in the building uh is located adjacent to the RightWay so close to Mars AV um and that has an area of 1,434 square ft uh the remaining area on the ground level is just amenities for the for the residential dwelling so you have an access area entry into the building main area stairways elevators to get up to the residential units and we also have a track facility that will store all the trash generated by the the development um and I'll get into that in a little more detail shortly access to the site will remain similar to today so we're going to maintain a full movement driveway on Morris Avenue uh so we'll be able to get in and out of the site very similar to the conditions today and then we provide a full two-way access aisle through the entire parking area um on the ground level important to note that the and the Arctic will touch upon this in a minute but the rear area of the parking area is actually open so while it is covered so there's a level housing on top it's open on the sides to uh just facilitate V ventilation of that area and bring in natural light it's part of the improvements um so again we're reducing impervious coverage so we're not proposing any additional storm water management measures uh it does comply with the the ordinance and the state requirements for for meeting storm water um reductions again we're we're reducing uh by almost 1,000 uh by over 1,700 ft the ous coverage when compared to today the building will be serviced by all new utilities so we'll have water gas electric um to the building all the existing services to the existing building will be removed as part of the the application uh we've got new Lighting in the parking area and along the front of the building to provide adequate lighting uh for Access and for parking area and pedestrian circulation and then on the Landscaping so we really focused our plantings on the rear of the northern limit of the property where it meets the residential uh lots to the north uh in total we've got two two ornamental trees proposed we're going to put those in the front yard uh along the the highway and we've got 38 shrubs as an mix of Evergreen and deciduous shrubs to uh provide uh buffering against those uses that are adjacent to us and as for signage there's going to be two signs one building mounted um sign and one window sign the window sign will be for the the office use and the building sign uh for future tenant as part of the application we've submitted uh to to Somerset Union so Conservation District we have approval there uh we uh we also need do approval for the changes to the use uh but that is uh subject to to be reviewed and approved by the dot uh I just want to go back to parking for a second because there are some some minor waivers that we require um parking space 9 by 20 is is required and we're proposing 9 by8 which is in Industry standard and for residential uses 9 by8 is the the requirement for this in the um the governing rsis code for for residential developments uh we've got parking setbacks waivers as well um so 5 ft is required from the building due to the the condition where we're having parking underneath the building we have a zero foot setback um parking from property lines is supposed to be 10 ft we've got 5.9 ft that is an improvement from the existing condition today we're just parking right up to the property line so we're again we're removing the parking away from the adjacent uses and putting it in a uh enclosed parking area and then the uh there's a parking waiver for the residential Zone where 10 ft is required and we've got 59 ft as well there um we're again zero feet exists today so it's it is an improvement from the conditions of the parking field as they are today going bring up one more this exhibit I believe which would be A8 is a response to the fire department comment yes correct get the zoom right uh so this is just a site plan exhibit uh we took basically the plan that was submitted with the application and did some some Redline edits to show the changes that we would proposed to uh comply with the the fire comments uh that we received and also just to change the the location of the trash where as a as submitted we had it up near the the rear of the the office space we've relocated that to the side to be closer to the parking field the intent there is for uh building management to have a a closer route to bring the trash out to the RightWay uh we envision the private hauler will stage um temporarily within the state highway and they'll pick up the trash from there and management will then bring bins or cans back into the trash room where they'll be enclosed we were also moving the EV spaces the fire comments we received had concerns about potential fire um and emergency issues relating to charging EV Vehicles so we did move it to an area where it again it's open to the outside but it's still enclosed uh in this case since the entire parking field is enclosed by a building you have the the part the residential level above uh we're not able to fully remove the spaces from being covered uh but at least there in a better spot for for ventilation and access from the inside of the building or the outside on that that 5ot strip U adjacent to the building know we went pretty quick there but think I hit everything if there's any questions happy to answer them and uh from an engineering standpoint I know we have traffic in architectural testimony any problem complying I know you've already addressed fire comments from an engineering stando Point any problem complying with any of the terms conditions in the July 31 2024 letter from call yours no no issues comping with that great thank you Mr chairman no further questions of Mr dwarte at this time are there any board members that relate to question the witness I just had one and it's more of a clarification um concerning um the additional load that will placed on the on the townships uh utility SE water um have you guys taking a look at that and um made sure that that existing system can accommodate U the additional loing yes so actually on that the sewer demand uh there was a question in the in the review memo if a tww will be required and it will not be required we're below the threshold so basically the project will generate approximately 20 2800 gallons of um sanitary flow without taking credit for the existing use which we haven't calculated that yet so it' be even less where the threshold for tww is is 8,000 so we don't think that that's a significant increase or it will result in a significant increase and we definitely will work with the the township on the utilities and the review will be part of the next steps in the application are there any other board questions and just to clarify traffic will be um or parking will be covered yes we have our traffic engineer here yeah thank you Mr M are there any other board members that would like to question the witness hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided hearing none thank you uh Mr chairman I'd like to Now call upon Paul Schwarz our architect good evening everyone good even I ask to witness to swear or affirm that the testimony provide is the truth and the whole truth I do and for the record just State and spell your name with your affiliation um I'm Paul Schwarz s Swartz I'm a senior partner of USA Architects based in uh 20 North dowy Avenue in Somerville New Jersey thank you all right and Schwarz if you could please give the board the benefit of your credentials sure sure I'm um I've uh graduated from college T night from a two University in 1976 to an oldi U been around for a long time licensed in many States including New Jersey um and also a professional planner in New Jersey as well um I've testified amongst very similar boards throughout the state of New Jersey we accept his credentials great thank you Mr chairman all right Mr Schwartz I see you already have the rendering up there if you could take us please through the uh floor plans and elevations for the proposed building that's great so what you're looking at right now is essentially a perspective view uh from Morse Avenue looking towards the building uh the idea is is that as Thiago had mentioned uh on the lower level on the lower leftand side is where the entrance to the office area would be as well as the lobby for the residential above you can you'll note that the parking entrance is off of uh the curb cut is there um the idea again is we're getting 17 parking spaces below the building and to thiago's point uh in order to meet the ventilation requirements of a garage uh it has to be more than 50% open and so um I'll show you on the elevations very quickly it for the most part it's totally open yeah by the way this is a new exhibit correct I well it's part of our original submission part of let's mark it A9 as a colorized version of the proposed site okay great thanks uh essentially the the building it's it's a relatively simple building um we've got brick on the upper part uh with glass into the individual units um depending whether it's a a a studio one bedroom or two-bedroom you've got a lot a lot of natural light High ceilings which is nice um and then uh below is a decorative uh CMU uh material decorative uh concrete block uh product um and then on the the top you'll see a metal cornice that sort of caps off the building this is going to be a little hard to read I think Thiago had noted it before so in the the lower leftand corner you can see there's a uh 1438 ft office space um that actually are the land uh our client might be actually taking the space uh and then there are two stairs along with as had mentioned there's a a large area for trash there's a utility closet in this area as well along with the 17 parking spaces it's a very simple plan as you can see it's almost almost a square U simple rectangle uh it's comprised of essentially um seven units per floor and it is uh consists of studio um one Studio on each floor and then we've got two bedrooms and one bedrooms and the composite no uh number for both floors is 14 units second floor very similar to the first floor and a roof plant the only I can note on the the roof plant here is the fact that we are sloping internally so you won't see any any any drains or any kind of uh L rain leaders on the outside of the building to kind of keep it kind of a clean clean look and these are just some simple elevations I think it's they're a little bit small but the idea is primarily is is that the overall elevation of the building in fact I'm going to go back to here so essentially from the ground level up to the top um is essentially it's to the roof line it's 35 ft and then an additional 2 feet or so for the parit so the overall height is 37 ft and the allowable is 40 so we we meet within that those constraints that's all I've got okay just briefly um also uh from the fire department I know uh Mr Dart covered the fourth comment just want to touch on uh they want the fire sprinkler system designed to the NFPA 13 yes absolutely and that the monitoring fire monitoring alarm system will be installed yep and at the fire rated stair Towers correct okay so we have no no problem with none whatsoever we we have to actually design the code so and from an architectural stando Point uh any problem complying with any of the terms conditions the July 31 2024 letter from cers no there's no no issues whatsoever great thank you no further questions Mr chairman are there any board members that would like to question the witness hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to question the witnesses testimony hearing none councel thank you Mr chair thanks Paul I'd now like to call upon Craig peroy our traffic engineer thanks go ahead good evening Mr Parago can I ask you to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth yes it is and just for the record State and spell your name with your affiliation sure my name is Craig perago a p r e g y with Dynamic traffic business address 245 Main Street Chester New Jersey thank you is there any changing credentials from the last time you were qualified as a traffic expert in this uh in it before this board no okay I would note that for the record Mr chairman great thank you and you did learn everything you know from Joe stiger here I guess so all right if you could please provide an overview I know you prepared a traffic uh impact study which was marked as A3 if you could please take us through the results of your your study and also touch on the uh Municipal uh Provisions for the shared parking yeah um so our our traffic study looked at two things one is the the traffic impacts of the uh the project and the second is the parking so uh briefly I'll just touch on the the traffic impacts we do have an existing building there was a medical office building vacant now but it was obviously at one point occupied and and generated traffic so what I did is make a comparison of the traffic projections that the It or The Institute of Transportation Engineers would tell me for that existing building and then for the propos close building and make that comparison and what we're focused on is the morning and evening peak hours the busiest rush hour time periods commuter hours and basically that prior Medical Office Building compared to what we have proposed here the 14 units in the office space is a wash in the morning peak hours no no change in in trips both of them uh generate nine peak hour trips in the evening that prior office would have generated 11 trips and we're at 10 trips so we're actually a one trip reduction so essentially a wash from a traffic impact standpoint from what was there the difference being we're consolidating the one conventional driveway and cleaning up the access as opposed to the two that the office had they hav't had a parking space hanging out into the RightWay all that's going to be fixed and cleaned up and we do gain one parking space on the on the street in front by getting ready out the driveway uh in terms of the parking your ordinance in this zone for a mixed use development allows for a shared parking scenario and essentially that's because obvious ly residential parking is peing overnight when everybody's at home and office is going to be during the daytime so some of those parking spaces can be and the ordinance does site using the it procedures for coming up with that basically it gives me a percentage of the peak demand for each hour of the day and then I multiply that by your ordinance requirement and find out the peak instantaneous demand in any hour of the day now in this case we do have eight spaces that are in a tandem configuration so those are going to be reserved obviously for the two bedroom residential units so those are essentially considered 100% occupied throughout the day so I did that share parking analysis with the other grouping of spaces the base requirement from your ordinance is three spaces for the office and then the ordinance defers to the rsis which calculates 27 it's very high for the residential for a total of 30 when you go through the analysis because that office parking is so low basically that overnight residential number governance and it's 27 total parking spaces required after the share parking uh we do have the EV parking spaces which the state gives us the the credit for up to 10% reduction so the technical parking requirement is uh 25 parking spaces we have 17 provided now the it also in that parking generation manual gives us suggested parking ratios rather than look at the rsis and the ordinance if I use those ratios uh the office still requires three so right on right on with the ordinance but the uh the residential is reduced to 15 basically they give you a parking uh ratio per bedroom we have 22 bedrooms here and it's 68 per bedroom is the average Peak demand same thing happens though that 15 overnight governs again we have 17 So based on sort of a realistic look at it with the it numbers there's enough parking in there from your ordinance we are are eight short essentially which in this Zone there is a payment of L parking procedure that's uh uh available for that but I think realistically the 15's going to work here that's that's The quick summary of the report and just to confirm that the because there were some comments in T's review letter uh regarding do this will require dot approval yes uh the only reason that we need dot approval here is because we're redoing the driveways if we would kept those existing driveways because there's no change in traffic they wouldn't approval but we have applied to the dot we submitted our application they're still reviewing it and we're obviously Bound by whatever they tell us to do and you don't anticipate any issue with DOT approving no other than how long it takes then great thank you I have no further questions it's time Mr per are there any board members that would like to question the testimony of this witness just uh the one um in terms of the calculation of the parking demand your summary is a little different than what kers came up with have you seen their their calculation I have and they the if you look if you were building a standalone office the way your ordinance is it would be a 1 per 300 foot requirement but the shared parking section the chapter that's on shared parking and it's only for the DC and DT zone so so this zone so wouldn't apply everywhere but that gives you a one per 500 for the office as the base rate so that that's the difference have you discussed that with cers and do they agree with your analysis uh we haven't but we will we'll get confirmation from Mr Venia uh that that that is in fact the correct calculation it took me a minute to find it until I did the same I did the same thing they did I was wait a minute it's a little different because normally you have a a standard that is across the board throughout throughout the municipality here because of the location close to downtown they they uh lessen the parking requirement which was good plan makes sense and even for those eight spaces that were short what's what's anticipated for those for those folks that they pull up and not have a parking space well I anticipate based on actual it counts and data that that the 17 will be enough that actually 15 with the shared parking would be enough parking spaces it's the ordance that's the difference and part of the reason is the ordinance just defers the residential site Improvement standards which have very high ratios they don't take into account the fact that you're in a downtown or there's bass Transit available the type of apartments that just assumes that everything's like a guarden apartment complex out in M nowhere now RSI has recently changed those rates to be maximums and not minimums so now the RSI says no board can require more than these number of spaces without getting an exception from them but your ordinance just refers to the RSI number so I I have to assume that it's those rates not you know not going through that procedure but realistically if it didn't say that if if we were just straight residential the rsis would govern over the ordinance and we 15 would be the number that I'd give you that would be appropriate so as long as it's all technicalities it's very confirm with with kers who yeah engineer we will just following up though Mr peroy on on Mr O'Neal's question if there is Overflow me where do you envision it happening I mean the coler's references the pilot space is available from the township what do you see happening if that person does pull up at night and those 15 spaces are full they're visiting their they're it's a third car and a unit whatever you know is what from a traffic perspective where do those people go where they park there is a a public parking lot across the street and not to right right over here uh Lot 12 uh which is very close walking distance there's also parking allowed on on the street there it's time restricted during the day uh but overnight visitor could park just right on the street right in front of the building which I suspect will be easier so no objection to note that if it becomes a problem in the future it could that you recognize the option through the township pilot permit program that could be available to alleviate any impact to the neighborhood yeah absolutely and it's it's convenient location for this I know the college kind of references it but doesn't I just wanted to get the clarity on what's envisioned with that as as long as the applicant knows it's an option and then if it becomes feasible or necessary more importantly that we Implement absolutely yeah absolutely I just have Scott has a question I just have one question we keep we're talking about the parking and I don't want to be redundant but I did hear you say that the two bedrooms would have Reserve parking yeah cuz there's four spaces there in a tandem configuration so it's almost like a drive like a driveway over the garage and the driveway behind it so neighbors could share keys or something like that but that's not really practical it's better to assign those to the same unit I guess it doesn't it doesn't necessarily have to be the two-bedroom if a couple lives in a one bedroom and have two cars it will just be assigned to a single unit so you wouldn't have strangers having to deal with each other cars all right cuz the way I I thought I understood it was the two bedroom two yeah which makes sense and that's what Colliers recommends but realistically as the buildings tenanted up whatever makes whatever makes sense you don't want to leave those vacant if somebody moves into the two-bedroom uses one as their home office and doesn't have a car why would you give them parking space to still or if one of the two bedrooms uses the electric vehicle spot there that too yeah so it'll be it'll be how it works and it could work for the office too if it's two employees who could do it to you know we we've seen this and I know the state really in my humble opinion hasn't thought out the impact from the EV credits and use of spaces but as long as the applicant's willing to work with the township if it becomes a problem two years from now that's all we really can do and I'll reference it in the resolution because both the applicant and the township I think are on the same page to satisfy the tenants of this building and not be a burden to the neighborhood so it's in everybody's interest oh 100% yeah are there any other board members that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided hearing none counselor yes uh thank you uh Mr chairman I'd like to call us our last witness our professional planner Mr VI Victor vegra good evening Mr veger can I ask to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth I do any and just for the record State and spell your name what your affiliation okay my name is Victor middle initial e last name vegra v n g a principal with the firm of Harbor Consultants located at 320 North Avenue East Cranford New Jersey I be before this board but probably about a year and a half ago yeah any changes to your qualifications when you qualified and appeared before this board the last time a little less hair maybe but that happens so noted so noted for the record all right so Mr vegra if you could I assume the board will accept this qualification Bo will accept this cred all right Mr vegra as I indicated in my opening we're before this board uh in a Zone where the use is permitted encouraging this downtown DT Zone uh we're here before this board because of the slight variance uh for Flor area ratio but if you could please briefly provide the justification for both the C variance variances being sought design waivers and the and the D variant yes as Mr hell's pointed out the reason we're here is because it's called a d4 variant for FL a ratio and we're on we we're in a transition area downtown transition uh one building over from us is the excuse well maybe I'll just point it out here on the screen uh with the mouse over this way one lot over we would be in the downtown core Zone and we wouldn't have to be before this or Zone we're 16% over the maximum floor uh area permitted by ordinance that's why we're here tonight again so uh but it's it meets the height it meets more or less the building coverage and everything else it's just a floor area ratio which we don't meet again if we were one two lots over there is no floor area ratio we could be as much density as permitted so uh with that the site existing as people know it's right across the street it's 100% impervious it's an older site no storm sewer in there uh no Landscaping almost whatsoever on the site so it's a a building that's been there for quite some time and and it's been and this use here the building I feel is aesthetically pleasing is a nice new building in that area uh we're going to be reducing the amount of impervious coverage going to add some Landscaping to the site and also going to add storm water uh detention from for the storms and to make overall a total Improvement to the site and I'll give the reasons quickly now so we're here today because it's a D4 deviation D4 uh use variance of an expansion uh in excess of the permitted floor area so we're going to give you special reasons which are part of the medich test and that would be you have to meet certain criteria as you know you've been on this board uh one is to encourage Municipal action for the appropriate use of lands in a manner I can't see a better place both the office and Retail use on the first floor and the apartments are all permitted in the zone we're just here for this F variants uh item e to promote establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that contribute yes we're downtown yes we're going to be building new uh housing downtown and the beauty of this housing it's elevator so people as we get up there in age we don't want to walk the stairs anymore people want to rent this fully elevated apartment G to to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses which include residential and I to promote a Desir desirable visual environment through creative development I feel that the architect has done a fantastic job with this building I like the uh the brick I like the way they they they Ed the windows I I find I think the board would find the very attractive building uh special reasons or different reasons and I I'm going to give you a couple case laws Burbridge Mine Hill um again the special reasons which I just stated a is a e g and L and a few case laws that backed it up are Kesler Kesler V bunker Alpine Tower versus mayor Council of Pine Ridge uh some positive uh items here not just planning or again existing site 100% aerious we're going down to in the 80s the majority uses on the east side of Mars Avenue are all 100% impervious so when you go and walk those areas now you'll notice that almost all these old buildings are 100% impervious that's why when you rezone the area you had this transition zone created uh uh the there's other buildings in downtown that have four times the amount of f such as a the Centurion uh and I think this is again a low-level attractive building uh we only exceed by 16% and again I think another good reason is that the building is fully sprinklered again safety between higher first floor as the architect testified the nicer roof Heights Here the more modern roof Heights uh Mr Salo is proposing the taller windows it's very attractive Windows uh these are all things that add to uh the Improvement of the downtown of Union and it also adds to one of the reasons the support has to Grant this variance there there's one variance for the rear yard uh don't I'm this is uh I'll enter this is a has anything been which one is that this is just a site plan you've already have sheet four yeah it should be part of I guess uh A2 Rob the artifa is A5 okay all right part of with he already has I show that we have one variance here we're supposed to have a 20 foot rear 20ft rear yard setback the we have a six 6.5 but that's to our stair Tower and the only building it affects is someone's garage the main part of the building is 48 ft the requirement in the ordinance is 10 the the the vast majority of the building is 48 ft it's just our stair Tower back here and the only two structures that it affects are our neighbor's garage so I feel again that not uh this building will not be shadowing upon their home and that is one of the ca bulk variances where requested a couple of the SE bulk variances are U the coverage just is existing 100% impervious The Zone permits 80 we're asking for 82.9 building coverage uh 50% we're doing a 79% so that's a a coverage but again the impervious we're reducing the other two minor variances or pre-existing Lots siiz variances which are grandfathered in on the briefly on the negative criteria uh the board has to have two reasons you use special reasons the positive reasons why this is a good project and I think I just testified to those and then there's the negative reasons is there a negative uh situation caused by this application to the municipality and to its citizens and the negative criteria or two parts without substantial detriment to the public good and I feel that the pro since the project is a permitted use of the Zone there's no impact to the public because it's residential and a permitted residential Zone and it's office in a permitted office Zone and the the project is in compliance with the vast majority of the standards except for 16% exceeding on E but if we were one house over we would be in keeping with the f um so the and also I feel that there is no detriment to the public because we're taking a building that's not as attractive and we're bringing in new elevated tall ceiling tall window department into an area uh with some good high quality housing and item number two is without substantial detriment to the intent and purpose of your Zone plan and zoning ordinance and as I stated before there is no detriment to your Zone plan because we meet the zone as far as the requirements residential and office and we meet the zone for the vast majority of the ordinance except for those two items which we uh those three items which I testified before a couple of bulk VAR Varan es the C the C2 variances and the D4 variants and on the C2 variants one typical example example that Planters use is Kaufman V Warren Kaufman V Warren it's that doesn't meet the neighborhood are we asking for variance and we stick out like a sore thumb no the vast majority of the neighborhood has similar characteristics of short front yards of pre-existing and short rear yards so in in that case we meet the intent of the Zone plan the intent of your zoning ordinance and we also meet and exceed I feel the neighborhood uh for the citizens and that sums up my testimony are there any more board members that would like to question the witness hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided at this time are there any members of the public that would like to comment or have Express concerns on this application hearing none counselor would you like to sum up yes just briefly and again thank the board and the board professionals staff for their their time yeah this is an exciting project I think you see from the building it's a beautifully designed building and again going back to the old days there you had the the old Gary and I laugh about when we come in on these these projects about what it used to be the building is vacant uh Mr cermo acquired the property looking to build this this great new building right now 100% impervious we're now introducing Landscaping to it uh both along the rear and the sides uh the parking I think we've more than adequately addressed any concerns with respect to that and the and uh it's exactly the type of use this mix use project and development that we want to see in this DT zone so I think for all of those reasons and our uh willingness to comply with all the comments from the coler's review and the fire department we respectfully request that the board Grant this application and look forward to uh this project moving forward and hopefully within the next Century get the do approval so but thank you very much and look forward to uh you know us moving forward thank you counselor at this time we're going to councel this Mr BNA would you like to begin sure thank you Mr chairman uh based on the testimony this evening I feel the variance was justified and the property is well suited for the use I also want to say the building is definitely um going to bring a nice enhancement to that area on Mars Avenue so I'll be voting yes tonight Mr Johnson yes Mr chairman I agree with my colleague and I I'm was surprised to see that the building it's a looking building it's going to enhance the area so I will be also voting yes Mr Graves I see no negative impact on the community therefore I'll be supportive of this application Mr mcneel I I would also agree that um the building um as it is as an I saw um the proposed building will be aesthetically pleasing uh to to the community and I also plan to vote Yes Miss Scott very nicely you know it's mod buildings good so it's a very clean and Mr Wy application netive impacts site nice and attractive as for myself um I feel the variants are Justified and that the property is particularly well suited for the proposed use the intended improvements uh will really improve what presently exists uh I will vote Yes for this but in closing I just want to say the architect Mr Zari did a great job a beautiful building so I too will vote Yes may I have a motion and a second to adopt the resolution Mr chair I move that the board that VAR is applicable to this application and that council is directed to prepare a resolution consistent of the board's decision roll call Mr Wy yes benger yes Miss Scott yes Johnson yes Mr McNeil yes Mr Graves yes Mr champy yes October 23rd I'll put it on the agenda for a resolution pass it great thank you very much and have a great night and truly appreciate your time Mr chairman there' be no further business coming before the board this evening I move that we adjourn second all in favor wait a minute you're going journ absolutely I just