[Music] Ice to the flag of America to the republic which stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty justice for all. Thank you everybody. Could we have a sunshine announcement please camp? Yes. Good evening chairman. Um, today is Tuesday, April 8th, and um, this is a Jersey City Planning Board meeting with a scheduled 5:30 p.m. start time and in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. Notice of this meeting has been given to the editor of the Bergen Record, L Espelito, and posted with the city clerk on April 4th of this year. This meeting was also posted on the Jersey City Division of City Planning web page, and all distribution materials made available to the board were published and made available to the public. Thank you. Could we have a roll call, please? Yep. Um, Vice Chair, Dr. Gonzalez here. Commissioner Gangadan here. Councilwoman Prince Arie here. Commissioner Torres and Chairman Langston here. All right. We have a quorum. We have five commissioners present. Okay. Can we swear in the staff, please? Mike, let's see. I see Tanya, Matt, Joe, Sophia, Andrew, Eric, and Cam. You guys testimony tonight. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. Got more staff than board tonight. I know. More staff than All right. Do we have any correspondents, Cam? Yes, chairman. Okay. So, we have two items on the agenda um that we've received correspondence on. And uh under new business, item 19, we have a letter from today um from the attorney uh requesting to be carried to May 6th with preservation of notice. So, that is item 19 case P2024-0139 for a minor site plan at address 285 Liberty A. They've requested a carry with preservation of notice to May 6th. Um and then the next item on the agenda, um the the attorney representing the applicant will uh just make their case uh to carry. Okay. I believe Mr. Lean, if you're here. Yes. Good evening, commissioners. Uh I am here on item 20 on the agenda which is matter uh case P2024 0185. We're just uh requesting adjournment to uh May 6. Yes. Okay. So we're going to carry P2024-0185 for 933 Communa AB to a date certain May 6 with preservation of notice. Thank you. Thank you councel. That's it, Cam. Yes. And otherwise, um, the sunshine announcement is B1 in evidence. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Let's, uh, get into old business. Item A is case P2023-0106 is a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances for 119 Merit Street. It needs to be over there. Uh for the record, Tom Lean of Connell Foley here on behalf of the applicant. Uh this is a um a matter that was carried from September 10th of 2024 with testimony taken. I reviewed the transcript and it appears that all the commissioners uh here this evening were also there that night. So I don't have to ask if anybody read the transcript. Uh because we did not continuously carry this. I did renotice and uh I did post this to the portal. I will provide to council. Mr. Chairman, I am received the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 119 Merit Street. It does appear to be the same document that was uploaded to the portal. It did appear to be an order, so we're going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record. Thank you, councel. Uh so I'll try to be as succinct as possible. Uh but we are six months removed from the last time we were here in front of the board. So I will just give a little bit of a recap here especially since this is uh this has been going on for almost three years this application maybe four. Um back in uh 2021 uh uh the owner of the property filed an application uh to develop uh the mostly the western portion of 119 Merit Street. 119 Merit Street is a very unique lot in the port industrial zone because it's extremely undersized. Uh it is 27500 uh square feet where 80,000 is required. It is pushed up against uh the Conrail tracks. Uh it is on the Jersey City Bayon border and is bound by Avenue C, Merit Street, and Garfield Avenue. Uh the site has largely been uh kept in a pretty bad condition. in it hasn't been used for anything other than really for for car storage. Um it is there's a lot of trees on it. It's been overgrown. Uh my client decided to finally utilize the property for what he thought would be a good use which is a permitted use under the uh in the P uh the port industrial zone which is an auto repair shop. Uh so our client appro uh filed an application which came before this board requesting a uh four bay auto repair shop and an automatic car wash. Uh that application was approved subject sub subject to us working with the traffic division to make sure that there wouldn't be significant queue significant queuing issues and backup onto Merit Street. We also worked with uh traffic to change some of the uh some of the direction arrows uh at the intersection and change some of the signage uh to make it a a safer and uh easier uh uh ingress and egress to the site. Uh so we had gotten the uh the application into a a place where we the my client could have moved forward with it. Uh unfortunately he um paved a portion of the property that was not approved to be paved under that approval. Um we came back before the board in uh September with a new application September of last year um with what we thought would be um a better use of the uh the auto uh repair area. We removed the uh the car wash uh trying to alleviate some of the concerns about some of the queuing issues and some of the traffic going in and out. Uh and what we came to the board with was uh a design that we had worked significantly with traffic on and worked with city uh planning to try and provide some landscaping on. Uh as the chairman rightly pointed out during the last application, some of the deviations that were granted uh he felt were granted because uh we had committed to s keeping a significant amount of more landscape than um had been there previously. um we decided to withdraw the application that evening and go back to the drawing board a little bit um to try and rectify the fact that yes, my client had significantly increase the coverage on the property. And what we're back here with this evening is we think a a better design taking into account some of the comments that we received uh the last time we were in front of the board. Um including more trees uh a fence with details uh and what we think is a better circulation plan uh based on some of the comments that we heard from the board during the last meeting. Um one thing I will note is is that I did go back and review not only the transcript from the first approval but the transcript from last time. Um, and I think there might have been maybe some confusion and some misrepresentation on what had been on the site for years and years there. And the fact of the matter is is that the area that was paved has actually been a gravel area and a staging area for Conrail for a significant amount of time. There was undergrowth there. There was bushes, but it really wasn't a heavily forested area. So, we do have some pictures to show the board tonight to show what that condition looked like at both times when we came before the board requesting approvals. Um, and uh hopefully that will help explain some of the decisions that were made even though we completely admit that my client made a mistake when he paved over the property. Uh, finally, the other thing I would note is is that um Conrail has used uh this site for access to their tracks for a long long time. I think over 30 years as far back as I can tell. Uh they never actually had an easement on the property. They were just utilizing it. Um through this process, we have met with Conrail. We have agreed to enter into an easement to allow them to access the tracks and uh they're going to work with our client to make sure that they can get up to uh to repair anything that they need to repair. Uh so with that said, I'm going to have Jeff Lewis come up. uh he's not going to give as long of a presentation as last time because you did hear all this, but we would like to give a good reminder and just run through the plans. And then I do have Lauren Bennett to go through our landscaping and show the improvements we made. And then I also have Caroline Wistell for uh planning testimony because we did not get to that last time. Okay. Thank you, council. Truth and truth. Yes, I do. Jeffrey Lewis, LWIS. Mr. Lewis, good evening. Uh, your license is current tonight. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. Uh, sorry, Ken. You bring it back. Okay. So, as was mentioned, we are a long narrow lot at the very southern end of Jersey City, right adjacent to the Conrail tracks. Uh, today we're here to propose propose an automotive uh service center without a car wash as well as associated office space. uh 20 parking spaces, uh vehicular circulation, as well as new landscaping. I'm going to jump right into the site plan. So, a lot of this is just um reconfirming what we had previously agreed to. So, the site will have all new uh concrete curbs and concrete sidewalks. We are proposing two new curb cuts. Previously, it was three, but there is now one on Merit, one on Avenue C, and we removed a third that was all the way at the uh eastern end of the property. There are two new ADA curb curb ramps. Those are located on merit and those were um originally approved. And there are also eight street trees which were also previously approved. Uh looking onto the site um at our buildings themselves there there's an o sorry there's an existing two-story building located at the corner. This will remain and be reused as an office. Uh below that there's our new service center located along the rear property line. Um, these two buildings are the same as our previous approval and there are no changes to them, but I will go over them anyway. Um, as far as vehicular circulation, there's the main entrance off of Merit Street and one main exit off of Avenue C. Um, between them there's a two-way drive aisle that connects the entire property with. Um, again, we removed that exit on the right side here and added a roundabout to improve the circulation at the end of the lot. Uh there's a total of 20 parking spaces. Two of them are located right next to the office. Six of them are in the middle of the property here and then the other 12 are located at that rear parking area. This shaded area here is that 10 foot wide easement for uh Conrail that we're proposing. Um we also have landscape buffers on the property along Avenue C along Merit Street and then wrapping all the way around the back. Those will be addressed uh with future testimony. Uh there is a retaining wall located along Merit Street. It starts uh right where the entry is at Merit Street and extends all the way down to the eastern end of the property line. Uh on top of this wall, we have a 6ft wood uh fence that's on top of the wall along Merit Street and actually extends around the side and all the way around the rear property line as well. Um, additionally, we have some jersey barriers located here uh behind the parking space. This is to separate the parking area uh from the tracks. I mean, the fences there as well, but we are at the same level of the tracks and we just don't want anyone driving anywhere near them accidentally or on purpose. And the jersey barriers will be able to stop that. Um, that's really all there is on the site plan. I'm going to go on and walk through the buildings briefly. Again, these have not changed from the previous application. So, at the top, we have the two-story building that will be retained as an office space. On the floor plans, the first floor is used as a waiting area as well as a customer counter, and there is a half bath. Then upstairs is the office and an additional half bath. On the exterior, uh the existing finish is just a concrete block. We're going to paint the lower level concrete block a gray color. And then on on the top level, we're going to um put a new green vertical corrugated metal siding um as the finish. And that's actually going to match the finish for the new uh service center as well. There's also uh two signs which were previously approved as well on the corner building. uh looking to the elevations of of the new service center. You can see we're matching the gray block at the bottom and then that green corrugated siding above. We have white um white metal garage doors. Uh there are three total garages. Each of them have two bays. Two of the garages are for auto repair, two for oil changes, two for tire changes, and then there are two spaces at the end which are used for storage of tools and materials. Uh this is just showing our materials. This is the siding. Um here's the garage doors and this is the color for the the block. And then lastly, we do um have a storm water mitigation system here. I can go over it briefly for you if you like. It's really just a dry well at the backside. And on the left there are three buried pipes with uh catch basins throughout the uh the site bringing all the water to those uh retention uh pipes. Um that actually would conclude my part of the presentation. I could answer questions that you have about it or we could do it at the end whichever you prefer. All right. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Um talk to me about the uh roundabout. Uh the roundabout would be used mostly for uh internally for employees to just take cars and just to make circulation a little easier. Um it's not necessary. If you'd prefer more green space, we do have a spot at the end. We'd like to maybe have a a 4ft nub of that uh drive and we could stop it right there. It would be right about here. And then the the entire circle, we could do a landscape area with a couple trees if that would be preferable to the board. We're happy to do that. So yes, um I don't want to speak for for the for the for the um use itself. It was a little more convenient, but it's not necessary. No roundabout, Eddie, or yes, roundabout. Well, the roundabout, there used to be a curb. You said there used to be a curb cut, a third curb cut. Yes, there was eliminated that. There's no parking on that side of the street anyway going all the way down. Correct. And now existed. No parking on that side. Um, but if we get rid of the roundabout and they need to have a backup of cars, they're actually going to have to go into the road. Well, we do have we have a roundabout. We have a full 24 foot wide drive aisle. So, we have a full width drive aisle. And instead of like the last spot, we would leave maybe an extension of four or five feet so that the last car would be able to have room to back out while staying on the driveway. And we could do again, we have all these, we're using these jersey barriers. We could do a jersey barrier end of that driveway as well if you like so that no one can drive up there. No, I I I like the idea of everything being in the space. It's such a small space. Yes. And I I see it all the time. And the and the landscape here is like so much greater than what's been growing there. It's just what's growing there. I don't even know if you could consider them trees, right? It's just like weeds that got real big, you know, basically what they are, you know. Uh and it's just it's been a mess since the last 25 years I've been living in that neighborhood. Uh just nothing there. Um the fact that you're not going into the road though, I like I I I like the roundabout. Um you know, I think you have a lot more um landscaping that there that probably ever saw, you know, but that's where I leave that. Yeah. Mr. Lewis, on you said there were 12 parking spaces there in the back area. There's 12. Yes. Which is where do you count the 12? Where are the 12? Uh starting starting here is the first Oh, gotcha. Okay. To here. Okay. And I believe you have 20 overall. Yes. Correct. And 18 is the requirement. Right. Right. Yes. Okay. Anybody else on the roundabout? We have one for and one against right now. I will always take more trees and tree canopy over roundabout if possible. I think also too considering the amount of cars that are going to be coming through here and the nature of the work that might be done that will also mitigate some of the exhaust and fumes. So if you don't need the roundabout, I would say no roundabout. Sorry, Eddie. So I would say we don't need need it. Um if you want, you know, we have someone here that's going to be talking about the landscape. They can talk about what we would do there in turn and then you can make your decision. So yeah, I think so. Yeah, that'll come with landscaping, too. I'm more concerned with the landscape buffer from that residential section across the street. Um I I think that's it for me on architecture. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Council, I do have one question. Sure. Did we get rid of the car wash use alto together? We did. Yes. So, we're only talking about oil changes, auto repair, and tire changes. That's correct. Yes. Again, that was when we first came before the board that there was a significant concern that people would be queuing to use it and they'd be lining back up into Merit Street. So, we just figured, let's get rid of it. Sure. I only ask because the plan still indicates car wash. That is a mistake of my architect and it will be changed when we submit hopefully for your plan conformance sense. Okay. Um, one thing I just wanted to bring up about that roundabout and kind of where it came from. Um, if the board recalls, there was a proposal for an additional exit from the property onto Merit Street. That was a recommendation of traffic. After presenting before the board last time and hearing some additional comments from planning, we decided to remove that. We felt that was an undue burden on the residential nature uh neighborhood across the street, additional lights, additional cars going out onto their street. So, the the concept of that roundabout was to keep the cars within the property. But, if uh in speaking with uh my team, we can definitely get rid of it and make sure there's enough room for those last two cars to back up and turn around while maintaining a two uh car uh drive aisle. Okay. Thank you, council. Uh next up, I have uh Lauren Bennon. Sure. Let me just get this plugged in. There we go. Council, you said somebody had photographs of I guess the prior condition that will be part of Miss Venon's presentation and we will put it into the record since it was not uploaded. Thank you. The truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. Yes. Lauren Venon, Ven I N. Miss Venon, good evening. We've qualified you in the past. Your license is current tonight? Yes. Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. All righty. All right. So, we're going to focus on the landscaping uh starting from uh Merit Street and moving across the the site um north to south. So, along Merit Street, um the plans do call for formalizing of the curb and the curb line along Merit Street, which allows for the installation of eight street trees. And this is a uh forestry uh Jersey City forestry standards compliant tree pit setup. So you have your 5x10 tree pit with the trees and the underplantings in the tree pits along the property line. Then we are installing a landscape buffer. I'm going to see if this will let me zoom this in a little bit. Perfect. So you can see that we are creating a buffer of mixed evergreen trees and shrubs where space allows. We do have a double staggered row and this allows us to have a a more upright and then a smaller or then a you know shorter wider in between so that we are providing a very thorough amount of coverage between the parking area and the new streetscape along Meridav or Merit Street. Council, let's mark this as A2 because this is a colorized version and I guess the other ones if there's additional sheets. I don't know. I don't Do you want to mark the whole presentation as A2? Tell me how many slides it is. Yeah, I have a second page. It's two slides. Okay. So, A2 is colorized renderings of the landscape plan previously submitted. Yes. along with a an exit or a prior conditions photograph which I'll put is on the next page. That's the second sheet. Second sheet. Yes. Okay. Okay. All right. So, the landscape buffer continues along the edge of what is currently shown on the plans as the roundabout. We are taking the larger evergreen trees along the property line with um additional evergreen and deciduous plantings between that tree line and the curb. We continue this buffer then along the south side of the property along the Conrail line. This is on the outside of the Jersey barriers to provide some screening and visual break between the Conrail line and the uh parking lot, particularly where the cars would be head in um and headlights facing in that direction. In this area, we have room for a triple staggered row. And that continues along the Conrail property, filling in the parking lot islands at the easement cut through with additional um grasses and native plantings. We have two additional parking lot trees which meets the ordinance requirement uh for the number of parking spaces provided. The shrubs going in are going in at 3 to four feet, which is compliant with having a 4ft tall buffer within the first two growing seasons. And the evergreen trees are going in at 6' to 8 foot in size. So that is the landscape plan. The other information on the sheet uh is a summary of the ordinance requirements and the standard um streetscape requirements as per Jersey City forestry standards. Irrigation uh we are not indicating the irrigation system on the plans but it can be provided if requested. We intend to have irrigation I suspect. Yes, we can. Yes. Yes. that we will indicate it will plans. Uh I can go to Before you move on to the next slide, obviously you've heard from the board here this evening that uh they would probably like to see the uh the roundabout removed. Uh if that were to be done, could you testify as to what uh plan schedule could be used to to fill in that space? I'm just going to zoom in on it a little bit, make it easier while we talk to it. Given the amount of space, we would definitely be able to fit some additional shade trees into that area to give a bit more canopy um given overall maintenance concerns and not wanting to create a space that would then we don't want to invite more of um weedy space. So, it would probably make sense at that point given the likely curb adjustment. we would have some lawn space and mostly ground cover um directly under the trees and then just beef up this back buffer area. If we get rid of the roundabout, we would be able to have something more similar to what we were providing in the back here by the Conrail property along this side to have that triple row and then have your shade trees a little farther into the site. So, it would just provide a little bit more insulation against the adjacent property. question. Yes. Came on. Okay. On the north side and on the uh east side of what we're seeing. Um so if the roundabout was gone, um you have like three layers of shrubs and small ones. as you get bigger and like wider because it it's much seems to me it be much harder to maintain to keep clean. Yes. You know, with the uh uh things that get blown around and stuff like that, especially in certain areas, right? So, by your opinion, sorry, sometimes making it bigger sometimes could get uncontrollably a little messy too at the same time. it would require additional maintenance to keep that area clean. If we went to a a larger planting area, um the recommendation then would be to have an orderly edge to it with that triple row of shrubs and then go to a simpler ground cover and possibly lawn underneath the trees so that it would be an area that could be clean cleared out regularly because it it is a valid concern to have a a very large area of landscaping. being in a spot where you're you're going to have windb blown trash, you're going to have maintenance. More of different animals or stuff that would be living there, right? Basically, that's not too much of a concern. Yeah, I I got them in my backyard, so much of a concern. Okay. I was just wondering. And um the north side that's going right to the property line of Conrail, the north side. So on this plan, the north side is along Meridav here. No. Um I mean the I'm sorry. South. The south side. No problem. Yeah. So south we are taking the landscaping. I'm just going to zoom in a little make it easier. Uh we are taking the landscaping up to the property line. So we are running from the Jersey barrier back to the property line. And then on the other side where there is not the Jersey barrier, we are running from the curb line back to the property line. Okay. with landscaping. That's what I have that. Yes, Miss Venon. The um Do you have a a drawing on the height of the shrubs? I don't have a a drawing indicating them. Um so, how high are they? I can I can give you um I can give you a a little bit. And I and I know it's hard with the abbreviations because we we know them. Um we are using uh two different types of upright junipers which are going in. So the JSWs here are our upright junipers. Our TO G's and our T GG's which are yeah they're on the other part of the plan here are um our bvites. So they get very high also where what we have the arrangement that we have is um a taller so the larger material being a taller with a shorter shrub in between because as they get taller you you end up with a little bit of a gap at the bottom. Sure. So, we're um effectively setting upright evergreens close together with the smaller evergreen kind of plugging the holes in between. Um and where we switch to a wide uh moderate height, something that's going to top out closer to six feet, we have a the narrower uprights that will get in the 10 to 12 foot range in between. Okay. So, we're providing some visual interest by switching up that rhythm of tall and skinny, short and wide, and then taller, wider, and skinnier in between. Okay. For the benefit of the board and the public, just trying to visualize that the height of the ceiling in this room is 10 ft. Yeah. Your your skyrocket junipers are are going to be in the witch blues are going to be about 8 to 10. At maturity, your arbor vites are going to be in the 10 to 12 range. Okay, thank you. All right. Um, so I can go to the next exhibit that has the um prior conditions. Hold on a second. There we go. There we go. All right. So, the top pictures. So, these pictures uh these images are aligned so that the property lines do line up. So you can see the character of the site. This is an aerial photo from 2022 and you can see the character of the site prior to when you say existing conditions, it's really prior conditions um and how this lines up with the uh the proposed plan. So you can see the the larger bare gravel area, gravel area with some weedy tree coverage and then the um underbrush weed material underbrush in this area. So that was all gravel underneath that. It's Yeah, it's a grally area with some I can I'm gonna try to zoom in a little bit on this. Sorry about this. Let me just get back to Yeah, I can't quite zoom in on this view, but it's um here we do have some canopy and you just have some grally um wouldn't really call it soil per se underneath. And that dotted line is the overlay of this is the property line subject property. Okay. Yeah. So you can see this section of the property line lines up with the property line here. Okay. Any questions? Anybody? You say this photo is dated. It was an aerial photo from uh 2022. I don't have the exact date of the aerial on hand. I suspect you did not take the photo. It was a near map image. Yeah, I have nothing else this time. If anybody else does, we can move on. No, we can move on. I have nothing else. If if everybody's ready. Okay. Thank you, Miss Venon. This for Yeah. And again, chairman, you know, it's my understanding that that grally area has been used by Conrail as basically a staging area and a parking area to access the tracks for a long time. So, you know, I'm not putting this on as a fact. People are welcome to go look at Google Earth all they want. I went back to like 2025 and this was basically the condition that it was has been for quite some time. So, uh with that, I have Miss Worcstell who's going to come up and uh go through the uh the variances we're requesting. Okay. Thank you council. Good evening. I do. Carolyn Worstelle, w L. Mr. Worstelle, good evening. Your license is current. It is. Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. Thank you. Uh so we're here this evening um as has been presented to uh make these uh improvements and and upgrades and changes to the subject property. Um there are a couple of variances um that are related to this this application. Uh they're very similar in nature to the variances that uh or or identical to the variances which were previously uh requested and approved back in 2021, but we'll go through them again this evening. Um so the first one is for the minimum landscape buffer next to a residential and somewhat related to that is also a minimum perimeter setback. So the port industrial uh district requires that um a minimum landscape buffer of uh 50 ft uh be provided when you are adjacent to residential use. um where we're providing about 5'4 in um where we at a minimum where we are adjacent to the residential uses on the other side of Merit Street. Um one of the things that when we look at this application we have to be aware of is the fact that the port industrial district was designed for really very large scale industrial uses. The minimum lot area is 80,000 square feet and your minimum lot width is 200 feet. So that's really big lots, you know, just under two acres. This lot is a little over 27,000 square feet. So it's all a little bit less than a little more than quarter the size of the minimum required. And our lot width at the narrowest point is 50 feet and we get up to I think around 60, you know, so we're substantially unders sized here and we're really narrow and skinny. So when you sort of take the fact that we have this very narrow, skinny lot and you then consider what our buffer requirements are, they don't match up at all. If we have to provide a 50-foot buffer from a residential use, we can't really use this lot because that would be a 50- foot buffer along the entire frontage of Merit Street and you're left with nothing of the lot. Uh very similarly, we have a minimum perimeter setback variance where you're required to provide a setback of 60 feet along the entire perimeter of your lot. Um and we are providing uh eight feet six inches. So again this sort of again relates to the fact that we have a very narrow skinny lot and 60 ft was again for that minimum 200 you know lot width nearly two acre lot. Um so what we are doing and and trying very hard to do here is provide um a combination of both a landscape buffer you know we as uh my colleague uh Lauren uh just described there is you know significant landscape buffer um using uh various tree uh tree and shrub sizes and um you know staggering them in order to create a very uh vegetated buffer as well as provide adding some of that that fencing. Um, so that really helps provide some of that visual buffer. Um, we are also the way that we've oriented the design of the lot is so that all of the vehicles, you know, they're going to be parked on the far side of the lot. Um, and they would most likely be parked, you know, headlight, you know, facing towards the train tracks. So, you're going to reduce, you know, headlight glare or things like that. Um, so that should help, you know, reduce some of the buffer between those parking spaces and the lots. Um, and then the other thing really to consider too is the fact that this application is formalizing the sidewalk right now. When you when you drive past it, there's no curb, there's no sidewalk, you know, it's just a metal fence and par uh the pavement. So again, this is really providing that additional visual buffer by creating the actual sidewalk which is supposed to be there and isn't um and providing those street trees. So you're really going to get a much more substantial visual buffer um through the different improvements that are being done as part of this application uh which really I think help to meet the intent of that requirement which is again to buffer those uses from your adjacent residential Uh the other variance we're requesting is a maximum is for the uh the signage set back for freestanding signs. Um we're required to have a setback of half of the front setback. Our front setback is 60 ft. Half of that is 30 feet. Um that sort of puts your sign at like the middle of the lot, which is not really the appropriate place for it. Um, so we are requesting a variance to provide uh a freestanding sign uh that is adjacent to uh the the ingress driveway uh that would need uh that uh relief. Uh the two signs that are on the building, they don't need the relief. Um uh but the one freestanding sign adjacent to the um um driveway access would need the relief. Um, so again, you know, it sort of relates to the fact that this lot is not how the the Port Industrial District envisioned lots being uh sized. The final variances we are requesting are for the curb cut width and the driveway width. Um the requirement um is 10 ft is the maximum we're permitted and we're requesting uh a width of 12 feet. Um you know we we uh there was extensive conversations with um you know uh the uh traffic department um over the design of this. Um you know there were you know turning templates were were provided and and um through all of that uh 12 ft was sort of established as what what everyone felt to be a really comfortable um entrance and exit for what is a commercial use. 10T is the standard but it's a standard for a lot of different things including a one or two family home. 12 feet for commercial use is a is a probably a pretty good uh it allows for a little bit of extra wiggle room for people coming in and out, but it's not going to result in a really wide curb cut um that's wider than most people would perceive. Um so we think overall um that these variances can be granted um related to that C1 criteria uh for those um buffers and setbacks and the signage setback requirements. You know, again, relating to the fact that this lot is severely unders sized. Um, and that the curb cut width and driveway width, I'm really thinking this is more of a C2 criteria. Uh, that the benefit of having slightly wider access for, uh, this commercial use, um, you know, outweighs any detriment of a slight increase of two feet for a curb cut. Um, especially when weighed with the fact that we're creating the curb for this property as part of this application. Um I think in terms of the municipal land use law um this uh promotes purpose a um appropriate use or development. Um the prop proposed use is permitted in that um port industrial um district and it's sort of replacing the sort of car storage and parking that is there today. Uh so that's really a much more appropriate use and it will be much more uh wellmaintained um as a result of creating this new use on the the property. Um it's consistent with purpose E. Um talking about uh establishing per uh population densities and and um well-beings of the persons and neighborhood. Again, uh this is an industrial use in an industrial district. I think that's a very appropriate use and and uh the improvements here really uh will benefit uh the neighborhood as well. Um and then I think it's consistent with purpose eye, desirable visual environment. Um, again, you're really sort of creating a much better um, streetscape as a result of this application with the new new sidewalks where there aren't any today. Street trees, eight new street trees, um, you know, extensive landscaping on the property. Um, and then just I think it's going to result in overall just a a much better uh, visual for that block. Uh, I don't see any substantial detriment to the public good. Uh again, it's uh the permitted use and bulk um as well as all of those improvements along Merit Street with the the new streetscape. Uh and no substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone plan. Um it's consistent with the purpose of the port industrial district. um to uh enhance and accommodate um the city's you know uh sort of port uh port waterfront um with uh appropriate uh uses such as transportation facilities while adequately buffering them to protect nearby residential neighborhoods. Um it's also uh consistent with uh the 2021 Jersey City land use uh element uh promoting in innovative and industrial activity that's cleaner, greener and job creating. So I think this application is consistent with with that um all of those cleaner, greener and job creating. Um so I think overall that this application uh is consistent uh and that the variances are justified uh under both the C1 and the C2 criteria. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Worstell. I have no questions. Anybody else? Um I'm just going to wrap it up by again saying my client is aware that he made a mistake here. Uh he was not supposed to proceed with the paving of that. Uh, I think the level of detail and the the time and energy that he's put into getting these plans into good shape, uh, shows that he's he's committed to to try and write is wrong and try and uh, clean this property up and make it into something useful. You heard from Miss Wrestell's testimony based on the zoning here, there's really very little you can do with this land under other than this use. And I think promoting an active use here and an active commercial use will help keep the property clean and in use. and uh we hope that the board agrees and approves. Thank you. All right. Thank you, council. Uh before we open public, Mr. Lewis, do you have the previously approved plans accessible? I do. Can we take a look? Sure. Chairman, I think you're interested in seeing the site plan sheet. Yes. This is the plan with the car wash. So this was the car wash here. This was the council. Let's mark this as A4 just for purposes of the record. Entry was the entry was the same here. And then we had this big open circular area in the same exit on Avenue C. Um just clarifying Mr. So, this was the um site plan that was approved as part of res uh council. Do you know the resolution number? Ah P21053. Yes. Okay. Yes, that's correct. Great. And this was this is not um the plans that the board previously saw as part of this application. That's correct. I have those as well. All right. Just wanted to make sure that was clear to everyone. Do you have any questions about it, chairman? I mean I suspect, let me ask the question. And the cloudlooking design with the striped lines on half the site is what the buffer was supposed to be, right? That would have been left as undisturbed wooded slash growth area. But so that wouldn't have been planted. It was supposed to be planted. I'm sorry, my mic was off. Yeah, that was supposed to be planted, right? That wasn't just going to be left alone. Do you know the answer to that? I I do. Um, we didn't provide a full landscaping detail. I think as part of what we testified to the board was there would be plantings there, but yes, it would almost be left to regrow what was there. Um, we didn't provide a particular planting schedule. Obviously, we did provide uh for some buffering and some trees that were proposed, but yes, the the the idea was essentially to sort of let it go back to its natural state, which was gravel and and some some tree cover and some canopy. Yes. Yes. Um council, the resolution may indicate slightly different. I believe that we indicated that we would leave the area as landscaped and that we wouldn't be disturbing the area. If there was testimony that that area had significantly more coverage at the time and more greenery, uh that was that was a mistake in the testimony and a mistake in fact. Mr. Lee, do we know why the owner decided to move ahead and do this? Was it oversight? Was it he just not caring about the previously adopted plan? Um she I think he was uh I think he was given some bad advice by a contractor who told him that it would not be something that would require approval and he went ahead with it uh without my knowledge. That's why you get legal advice from lawyers. Mr. uh can we go back just to the site plan sheet? Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chairman, I don't know what questions, if any, the board has regarding it. I think it's pretty clear and obvious. I think it speaks for itself. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Close. You're welcome. Everybody. Okay. Moving on. Mhm. Okay. At this time, let's open it up for public comment. If anybody's here from the public that wants to comment, please come on up. Maybe you got to get past this. Yeah. Absolutely. Yes. What's your home address, please? Javanni Hernandez. Uh, J I O V A N I E Hernandez. H E R N A N D E Z 21 Merit Street. Mr. Hernandez, good evening. We have three minutes for you, sir. Hi. Um, I guess we'll skate over the fact that uh there was all vegetation there and not gravel apparently. Um, I my question is really the legitimacy of the business that's being conducted there. um from advisement from even Denise Ridley's office, our council woman in that area, she had stated that uh some summons were given to the business for the business that was being conducted there for renting out uh spaces for parking. Um it's a nice picture of sedans being shown there on the uh the graphics there, but it's all commercial vehicles, large trucks, large box trucks, trailers, um you know, all you can name it uh that are just packed in there like someone's playing Tetris. It is not nicely lined up and organized at all. Um constantly there is, you know, headlights that are being just brightly shown right into residential homes. Um the area is not kept well at all. Overgrown weeds, trash being blown around all over the place. Um that it's just stuck in there or someone eventually was playing some games with the chain link fences and sticking some uh plastic bottles in those at some point. Um I don't know where the perimeter of the actual business starts and ends, but there are vehicles outside of where the chain link fences are located. The pictures that I see being presented there are not current. They're not. Take a drive through there and you'll see yourself. Um, as someone had mentioned that they are familiar with the area. I live in the area so I have to deal with it on a daily basis. So there's, you know, my my neighbor that you'll see you hear from in a moment. Um, my concern is one noise. Uh, I don't know if trees and a couple of bush bushes are going to necessarily stop the Conrail train that goes through around 2 or 3:00 a.m. that we hear constantly that wakes up the entire neighborhood. Um, or if there is going to be any stop of headlights that are going to be shown right into homes right across the street. Um, I don't know if trees and a couple of bushes are going to stop that. So maybe some kind of actual physical barrier between that and the residential homes would be more suffice. Um I question the owner's uh I question my faith in the owner's business conduct of what has already been presented of what apparently was vegetation there then magically turned into gravel then magically turned into asphalt. um what is currently being conducted there as a parking lot with a parking sign right directly in front of the business where apparently wasn't supposed to be done in the first place. Um all of those things need to be taken into account and also just the appeal of the actual property itself. Um there's trash all along through it. There is um trash adjacent to it. Um we constantly get homeless that are camping adjacent to the property there. I've se even seen one starting up a fire at some point. So this is all concerns of people that live in the area and have to deal with this on a daily basis. Um that was your three minutes, Mr. Okay. Thank you. We appreciate your time. Anybody else? Please come on up. Hi. I do. Okay. Kathleen with a K. Cork qu 16 Ocean Avenue. Good evening, ma'am. We have three minutes for you. Discuss 119 Merit Street. Um, I live on Ocean Avenue. I've lived there all my life. I want to say that this is something that the mayor had said once. It's when you first come into Jersey City, he wants a a nice clean look. Well, it's it's terrible. There's trash shroom all over. They did the black top. The black top's there. They have gates and on the gate, we have a picture that my neighbor has and it says for rent. He's renting that out right now. There's all trucks up there. They're parked every which way. There's a little car like parked on the grass. You have the building on the corner of of Avenue C. And inside next to that, there's it's all enclosed. There's just cars all thrown in there. No license plates, no nothing. outside there's like a flatbed. It's been there probably two years. There's bags of of garbage there that that's been there. He he doesn't clean up anything. And you know, it's just that you know, we'd like to see it nice, too. But we feel that we're being lied to. That he's saying he wants to do this, he wants to do that, and he doesn't do anything that he says. He just made it a parking lot and he's renting it out now. So, he's making money on that. and he came to you in good faith for you to approve something which he did and then he just neged on it. Didn't even bother to do it. And it's just you, you know, it's it's terrible that he's allowed to do this and not clean it up. He said at the last meeting he's going to clean it up. He has not made the least bit of interest in cleaning up the area. It's like garbage all over the place. It's it's it's it's a shame. right next to that little building there's like um a medical van and there's a sign the city put a thing up no parking on the sidewalk. It's right there. The van's right next to it. He has no regard for what they're supposed to be doing. And you know it's very frustrating. I would like something nice, too, but I feel that we can't trust what he's saying. like he says one thing and he turns around and he does the exact opposite or he just does what he wants, you know, and he has spaces up there all lined up for park, you know, they're not even pulled into spaces. One day you have a truck or there was there's been burned out um SUVs up there. It it looks terrible. And this is one of the first things that you see when you come into Jersey City. And I think it's it's a real shame that this has been allowed that he keeps doing the same thing and he's he's telling you one thing but he's not doing what he's saying he's going to do. And I'd like it to see it see it look nice but I don't have any faith in that being happening because it it hasn't happened in what two years or whatever. So, and you know that's my sight on it and that I wish you can come down and see what it looks like and then you live there cuz I've lived there my whole life and it's just a shame that he's allowed to get away with that or that you know he has no regard to telling you people what he wants and then just saying nope I'm not doing that. He black topped the whole top too to make a parking lot. There's all the spaces, but you know when you he has everything shrun all about. It's not even like neat. And you know the there was a meeting how long ago? Five months ago. You think that he would have some initiative to get out and clean it up and have somebody come and like rake and whatever, but there's garbage all over, black garbage bags sitting there and and nothing's done about it. So, I I hope that you take all that into consideration and that you know there's something followed through that this is taken care of because I'd love to see it like nice landscaping, but at this point I I really don't believe it cuz I think they're just saying things and they're not coming to fruition. It's it's not happening. So, I appreciate your time. Have a good evening. Thank you, ma'am. You too. Anybody else from public? Anyone else? Mr. Chair, see what public I move to close. Second. Okay. Motion made and seconded. Public is closed. Council, do you want to address the commercial parking situation? Is there one that you're aware of? Um, that was actually how I uh became aware that the paving had been done because my client received a ticket for not registering the parking lot. Uh, I'm not aware that he's running a business or offering the parking spots to anybody at this time. It's my understanding that he does have some vehicles that are his personal vehicles there. Um I was not made aware by him or anybody else that he's been trying to hold those places out for commercial uses. Um I can tell you that he has received a ticket for the parking uh for failing to register the parking lot. He's received tickets for the garbage. He's gone and plead guilty to those. He's paid paid his fines. I've routinely told him about keeping the property in good order. I spoke with him just yesterday. He said he had pulled a bunch of the trucks off of the property. Um, but that's all I can say. I'm I'm not out there every day looking at the property, but you know, that is what he has represented to me. Okay. So, are these commercial trucks? Are there personal trucks, pickup trucks? What are we talking about here? Uh, I think he has a couple vans that he owns that are on the site. Um, when you say van, you mean uh passenger van or Okay. Yeah. Um, but you know, I mean, I' I've been out to the property two or three times. Yes, there are some uh cars parked on the property. Um, I can't speak to whose cars are parked along Merit Street. Uh, there's not a curb there. Now, obviously, the proposal here would provide a curb, which would hopefully prevent uh that kind of activity. Um, but I I can speak to who's parking on Merit Street. I can say that yes, he he has parked a few of his personal vehicles on the property. He's received tickets for that. He's plead guilty to that and he's paid his fine for that. Okay. But it's ongoing. I I don't know. Okay. Mr. Chair, just for the record, I I did go to the site a week and a half ago and there were multiple cars there. Not just vans, but there are multiple cars parked there. So, I mean, I don't know if they're his I don't know either. Yeah, I don't either. Well, but there's multiple cars there. just just for Rick but um I guess it's it's a a lot of area right now that wants wants to get developed. I understand that. Um so many years now we've been talking about this. Um see but um to make the state for him to make the statement that that his vehicles he owns a lot of vehicles and uh a lot of beat up vehicles too because that it's always trucks there, vans there, personal cars, but also too uh the planner stated there's no sidewalk, there's no street. It like blends. And I gotta admit some of the neighbors park facing outside that fence. Sure. And that could be where lights go thing. So hopefully having everything inside the space would prevent lights from flashing up people's houses because across the street are residential homes, you know. Um but the um there there's always been a mess there the last three years it got out of hand after the bus company officially left there you know uh it became a mess you know and that's what uh very bad I saw and I got to agree with the neighbors from the community first thing you look at when you turn off of Avenue C it's a it's a it's is it's it's a major major eyes saw on the piece of property that boggles my mind what you could do with it. I don't you know that's that's that's the one thing too I I would like to say that for the record. It's not much you could do with that property. And you know just addressing some of the the light shining out of the property again that's that's the point of some of the fencing the landscaping we're putting in. Um and and I'm I'm not here to tell you that my client has been a saint and kept the property in in great condition. What I can say is is that he has spent a lot of money and time paying experts, paying architects, paying me to try to get this done. And I don't think he would be doing that unless he was serious about actually trying to to make this piece of property work. Okay. Thank you. Council Matt, you have anything you want to uh Yes. Thank you, chairman. Um so this is as uh Mr. Lean and Miss Worstell both mentioned this is in the port industrial district. Um and the purpose of that district is to provide for port related industry and industry supporting logistical uses while providing standards that successfully um you know separate the potential impacts of those uses from adjacent residential areas. Um and so that's where some of these standards around minimum perimeter setback landscape buffer from a residential use came up. Um I just have a a quick question for Miss Worstelle. Um so if the given the size of the lot, if the minimum perimeter setback and landscape buffer from residential use variances were not granted, in your opinion, would that deprive the property of all reasonable use? I think so. I don't know that you could fit anything on this lot. I mean, it the the narrowest part is 50 feet wide. If that whole 50t has to be a buffer because all the residential uses are across the street from Merit, you're left with like, you know, about a 10-ft wide strip at the very rear of the property adjacent to Conrail. Uh there's nothing you're not allowed to do anything else with the property. And um council, I'm obviously um I'm a planning professional. You're a legal professional. I guess are there any does the board have jurisdiction to deny property of all reasonable use? So the application before the board is the application before the board. We're not going to entertain hypotheticals as to whether or not that there's a no vital use of the property. Okay. So I would say that the variances being sought or what are being sought. I think that uh Mr. Warcel's testimony is her testimony. I think if the board has questions as to the legal issues implicated based on the testimony, that's appropriate for me to respond to. Okay. Certainly understood. Um and then Miss Worstelle, I guess given the purposes of the perimeter setback and landscape buffer from residential use to insulate um these types of industrial and commercial uses from residential impact, I guess. What are some potential negative impacts here? And how does this and maybe um and how does this this site plan as proposed um mitigate those potential negative impacts? Sure. Um so yeah obviously the the intent of the buffer is to provide sufficient space to provide landscaping and you know fencing and whatever to provide that buffer. Um and you know 50 ft may be very appropriate when it's a very very large scale port industrial use. Um we can't fit 50 ft on this property. It just doesn't work. What has been done here um is multiple changes to the condition or is proposed here is multiple changes to the condition. Uh the first is again the establishment of a curb and a sidewalk which do not exist today. Um so again that sort of establishes an edge to the street which doesn't exist and again provides to the start that visual buffer. You're going to get street trees, you're going to get a curb, you get a sidewalk. So again creating that edge of the street um which will address a lot of the concerns from the community about people parking there illegally uh because there won't be any space for them to park. Um then we are proposing um you know fencing along and then landscaping along that edge. Um so again that's providing that visual buffer um you know where we we are able to to stack as as dense as we can. Um which is on that sort of upper end of the parking lot to the I guess the eastern side. Um, you know, again, you're sort of seeing some of the the the elevation change there, but we're we've got the fencing that and the landscaping. So, again, that that goes up high that should help to prevent some of the light glare that that is there. Um, you are also going to have, you know, at the lower end. That's where um the facility is, you know, and it has doors. So, again, when cars are being worked on, they were at the end of the night, those doors go down. And so you shouldn't be getting the same, you know, light glare. You know, there shouldn't be seeing some of those same impacts. So, um, we're seeing the the way that the operation of the facility is, the way that it has been designed to have all of the parking, you know, close to the tracks. Um, so again, so all of that should hopefully reduce um the likelihood or instances where there's light glare. Um and then um you know so I think that there's just the multiple ways those mitigation measures to be that are being added and layered at this property should hopefully really address and mitigate those major issues that are that are happening or or where they're raised as a concerns. Um and so that that's sort of how it's being dealt with on the fact that we have a very narrow skinny lot here. Scorcel, there's nothing that prevents the applicant from providing a larger buffer on that interior side off of uh merit that was proposed originally. Uh so I'm sorry, where where are we looking off of? I don't have it on the Are you talking about on the eastern end of it? Are you talking about a thicker buffer along the roadway? Are we talking about the I have to I have to pull it up because somebody took it off the screen. So I will tell you exactly what I'm talking about. Is it this um council? Were you referring to the the previously approved site plan or the current proposed site plan? Can I see the site plan? So, this was the previously approved site plan. Can I see the whole site plan sheet? I can't see the arrow. Oh, sorry. So directly opposite Avenue C along Merited A or Merit Street, right? It's not your testimony that more buffering cannot be placed other side where on the eastern side of the property. Eastern side of the property. It's not your testimony that more buffering cannot be placed over there where the proposed roundabout is, where the additional parking spaces are. There's no testimony that says that buffering cannot be provided there. Uh saying we can't meet the requirement. Okay. Um you can't meet what requirement, Mr. Lewis. No, let me I I Did you just say you can't meet the requirement? We definitely can't meet the requirement, you know. Um I'm just trying to think about how the requirement works. The requirement works. The buffer is from the residential uses and the residential use is across the street on merit. So the so the testimony is not that more buffering cannot be provided on that portion of the site, the easterly portion of the site. That's what I'm after. We can provide more buffer and we were proposing to by removing the portion of removing the roundabout and ending in that. So we could provide more buffer and landscaping in that portion and there is nothing to say that that buffer cannot go all the way west and take out those parking spaces. Um council is there I believe there's a parking requirement for this parcel as well. Thank you, madam. Asking the witness. Yeah. And and I was about to say that if we were to start pushing that further west, taking all that space up, you then start running into the issue of then you don't have space for parking. You don't have space for sight circulation. What are the numbers? So, it's 18 spaces required, correct? Or can we bring up the previously approved plan? What are the 18 spaces based on? I actually number of bays have that right here. It's the number of bays. Number of bays. No, there's actually there's a little office space that needs some extra parking as well. Okay. So, for the parking, we actually do need 20 in total. It's 18 for the service station and two for the office. Two for the office. So, it is to So, we're at the requirement of 20 right now for based on the size use that you're proposing. Number of bays and the size of the office. Correct. Correct. And if we had four less bays and no office, we wouldn't require as much parking. Do we agree with that? Yes. Yes, we do agree with that. So, we can put more buffering on the easterly side of the lot. We could. Not saying we are. I'm not saying that's what's proposed, but it would be a different application. It would be a different application, but it is what's propo or what could be done, not what's proposed. Correct. Okay. Chairman, I have no further questions. I just needed that for purposes of the record to help the board. Sure. And to help understand utilization of property. So, Mr. Lewis, how if you could go just bring the previously approved plan up again. I want to touch the screen so bad. How many spots were proposed on the original approval? There's I think it's eight or 10. Let me zoom in on this one. I think there's more than 10 there shown in the drawing. It was a total of six bases total. Okay. So, the cars that are drawn on that drawing, that's queuing up for the car wash. Correct. Okay. Does anybody have any other questions? So, we're going to we'll do a public discussion. Yeah. We'll do uh we'll have a board deliberation as soon as we're done with um yeah, I'm just happy to add really quick that um staff produced a memo um dated 96204. It was in response to the original submission as part of this application. Um the principles explored in that memo still stand um as the you know broader proposed uses and density still stand. Um that memo recommended six conditions. Um and it um and I don't know if council is happy to agree to those six conditions I've reviewed and we would agree. And it sounds like the board is interested in deliberating further conditions. So I will uh I will uh sit back and let you guys deliberate. Okay. Thank you. So yeah, let's um for we don't do this often. anybody that's here. Um, this is the most democratic thing that can ever happen where we just talk about it on public record and, uh, right out in the open. So, I love this. Uh, anybody want to start the last part of this proposal just now that was brought up? Um the fact that on the east side with the roundabout, yes, they could put more I understand what council was saying they could put more landscape in there, but also it becomes an eyesore and you see it at the public service sites and stuff like that when we have all these shrubs and they're not clean because of the wind blowing and the debris in the neighborhood. you know, uh that there's somebody not out there all the time maintaining them. Uh and you know, the contractor is going to maintain them, but it's not going to be an everyday thing and it becomes an an eyesaw on a corner like that. So, as much as you put shrubs for me when we have all the garbage blowing underneath them and nobody's addressing it, it's is it becomes an eyesaw in the neighborhood. uh you know uh so that I understood when the landscape presented and and and brought that up the the deeper we go so the harder it is to maintain a dream. Uh with that um I understand the neighborhood's concern right now. Yeah. The guy's not being able to do what he wanted to do at first with the property or whoever owns this property. But the thing is, you know, he made it harder on himself to achieve that because he was approved. But with that, for for me, um, I don't live on those blocks, but I do consider that my neighborhood. You know, I'm walking distance. I'm there. Uh, Dr. Gaza got a kick out of this. I drive by there about, you know, 10 10 to 15 times a week. I have to look at this all the time and it always boggles my mind that you could fit anything in there, never mind a car wash at the time. Um, but the fact that he's trying to do something once it I feel is established then you can maintain it. then the people from across the street won't be parking on that road facing their cars those because if you go there on a Saturday and Sunday they're hanging out in front of their cars they're cleaning their cars they're hanging out there you know and but it's facing the people's houses across the street and I'm not saying that's right but the the current condition encourages that. Yes. But it's been like that for the last 20 years. Exactly. Right. Exactly. So by having this buffer now and a sidewalk and a curb Yeah. I think it's a it's a good thing. So for me, that's what I'm saying. So this is the first step. Yeah. You know, I I believe me, I hear the public. This is and they're absolutely right. This is I want to swear so bad right now, but I can't. um you're not they're not going to have room to park in front facing the buildings across the street. So if they if their venting spaces inside later on after everything is developed, yeah, that's where they're going to have to park inside. You're not going to have a room on the outside. And the way the parking's configured, it's on the opposite. It's not on the merit side of the lot. Not that people aren't going to back into those spaces and the shrubs are going to cover. So it it's it's not that the cars are parking directly on the Merit Street side of the lot. They're on the other side. They're on the Conrail side of the lot. Right. So I I you know I think the landscape buffer it so the the spots to the east which way is east. Yeah. East is to the right. Um so the spots from the conrail cutth through that's on there to the right. you know what's appropriate there. What's what's appro what's an appropriate number and also to to have the buffer to those houses across the street. Another thing let's keep in mind that the buffer is not for the sound of the conveil trains. You're never going to stop that. No, absolutely not. I am six blocks maybe away, five blocks away and I hear it in my in my bedroom. Uh you're not going to stop that. That's that's going to happen. Um, as the application was approved before with that whole area in the east side landscape whatever would that have provided the buffer from the lights correct? Right. Yes. So, so I think that's my issue Mr. J is that you know what we you know how much we hate this when we approve something and it's not done the the way that we've approved it of course but also that [Music] um I mean I I I I'm taking a line from Commissioner Torres. I drive by and I've seen many cars parked there. Never gets old. Never gets old. And um you know I I just I mean I it's it's a it's a bit of a problem for me to be honest. Chair I I share the same um issue here. I think the buffer is very important to the neighborhood as well. Um and I think that variance that's requested. I for me it seems to be a big issue for me. I think it would be very detrimental um for the neighborhood as well. Um, what I would have liked to see is a confirming application. I don't know that they can. Yeah. I don't think they make this lot conforming. And this is that's part of the problem. This is the tough part, right? Is you know what what's worse? Yeah. And I hear the concerns of the community as well. And and what's worse, you know, saying that nothing goes there and the condition of that site never improves. Improves. Yeah. I mean, I think if nothing goes there, that would always stay the way it is that way, right? That's that that's so so you don't So, so you don't want blight, right? Which is what I think everyone can agree is what this looks like now and has looked like in past. However, the challenge for me is again there was an application that was approved. It wasn't followed and they brought us back something that in my opinion doesn't even really sort of split the difference between the two. And I don't know that that you could right based on the variances you're requesting. But I also know too when you have cars that are parked illegally, when you have commercial vehicles that are parked in spaces where they're not supposed to go, the buffer is really important because you're talking about different heights of headlights. You're talking about different kinds of cars moving in and out. You're talking about, you know, different kinds of exhaust that people have to subject themselves to the sound of in addition to what's already happening with Conrail, right? And I and I understand, you know, and I've had this problem with properties in my ward where they've done things, we've asked them to move it, they've cleared it out, and they've been good neighbors, right? So, I think part of this too is that the applicant has is is professing to now be a good neighbor, but it's still is not to where I think it it it should be. So, that's, you know, I feel like I feel like the they're trying to split the difference, but but not in a way that is that it could be done a little bit more. And remember, it's been said that this is a good first step. The first step was back in 2022. Yeah. when we approved it and then it wasn't we approved something there that was going to be what we thought was good for that area, right? There was going to be a car wash as some type of repair, but w with with all that greenery there that was whatever it was going to be, but then nothing happened because it wasn't built that way. Well, the car wash was a was an issue for traffic. So, as it came back and readjusted it, I get that. But I'm saying then he started doing stuff that were not was not approved. That's my issue. So we we take another step today. We approve this one. I I I mean I don't know. I I I feel the only thing that he did that really was a smack in our face was the fact that he paved some of the gravel approve. Mhm. But I'll be honest with you, not till you showed me an overview of it that I ever knew there was a gravel area back there. You cannot see it from Mer Street. You're not going to see it when you make the turn off of Avenue C. Yeah, but that's not the point, Commissioner. I understand that. I understand that. But that spot that we are talking better for it, but it's very hard to see now. And what are we going to get? I mean, once he if he develops this, because we approve it, if he doesn't, the fact is that you're going to have a garage. Mhm. And there is no way you're going to have trucks and cars sitting in the middle of that road that in that lot the way they are now. Yeah. They have parking spots otherwise nobody's going to be able to move in and out. Mhm. You know, and I don't know. Um I don't know. Landscape. The last time the landscape I want to say for the record, the last time the landscape came to mind, I mean I I I stood a little quiet on it. I should have said something more, but I don't know what you guys talking about when you say there's landscape there. It's a it's a jungle. It's a mess. That's my opinion. That is not Well, that's originally presented to us. And and I think just because just because currently it's it's a jungle does not mean that they cannot do additional landscaping to better manicure it. Right. So it's overgrown trees and weeds that that you know when we were kids we had these weeds that grow and they became trees eventually. But what obviously we can do better than that. Yes. And hoping this would do and Tom Lean hit the nail on the head. You know this isn't a cheap team sitting in front of us. So obviously the applicant's not hiring this team to get out of a couple parking tickets, you know. I think that the intent is to actually improve the lot. Yes. And improving the lot to me means changing the landscaping, not being okay with what it used to be. Can't you not you can't leave what's there? Yes. The shrubs and stuff is a start. The tree shade for shades are start. Yeah. You know, the actual trees and you know my feelings aren't hurt because he paved the lot over because we know, you know, we've had far worse done to us. We seem far worse. But paving can be taken up. That that can be corrected. It's not that there's a 50story building that appeared on that site while nobody was looking. So, you know, paving can be taken care of. That's not the end of the world. But the buffer is still pisses me off. The buffer is important. The buffer is massive to me. Well, the first one is too, but yeah, I don't know what you're saying. Say, let's move it forward and see what happens. Take it for a vote. What we do. Okay. And uh No, I mean, we're obviously not going to tell everybody what our vote is before we vote. So, but we I mean, if we're all satisfied with the discussion, let's entertain a motion then. Um, and staff isn't quite clear on the board's intention with regards to the roundabout versus further landscaping and if that would be a vote and if that would be a condition here as part of what is being voted on. That'll be in the motion. Okay, doc. Incorrect chairman. Right now, the application is as presented to the board. Okay. With the roundabout. Okay. So, we'll do a motion on Whatever. What was presented to us tonight? I don't make motions. Okay. I know you're not adjusting the roundabout at all. Before we call for the motion, chairman, Mr. Lean, do you disagree with the fact that the roundabout is still in the application? I I believe the testimony was that we would be okay with removing the roundabout and providing landscaping. You heard testimony from our landscape uh architect who who provided a path forward on that. So if that's a condition of approval, are you amending the application to remove the roundabout? We would be willing to amend the application and agree to that as a condition of approval. So you want this board to decide whether they're going to vote with the roundabout or without it? I I am saying that what we are putting forward to the board is the testimony that was provided which is we can remove the roundabout and rep uh and replace it with landscaping. So I think the application before the board is without the roundabout with landscaping as testified to by Miss Venon. Okay. in the So, it sounds like the application has been amended to remove the roundabout and only the roundabout and provide some additional landscaping that we don't know what that would be, but that could be accomplished with some lawn and some canopy of some sort is the testimony as I recall it. That's correct. So, Mr. Chair, the application has been amended. We just we're clear on that. So, I will I will make a motion I'll make a motion to approve case P2023-0106 um with the condition that the roundabout will be removed and replaced with landscaping. That's my motion. Do we have a second? Second. Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Right. Um Commissioner Torres to the public that came out. Thank you. Thank you. We We like hearing from the public. We'd like to let you um you know, this is a start. You know, hopefully, yes, we need this area cleaned up. something to be done with it for the very the vises that they're seeking and stuff. I for me is not such u temperamental. Um I actually the curb cuts could even be a little bigger because there's no parking on that block. There's no parking on those streets. All it's going to do is make traffic go smoothly. People go in, people get out smoother. So I agree with making the curb cut bigger. you know, I think it's a good idea. Um, and um, to the developer, um, thank you for hanging in there and trying to get this thing accomplished. I mean, that's what I can say as a neighbor from a neighbor. Um, it could just be abandoned and you could have walked away uh, and not do nothing with this property. It's it's a very hard property to work on. So, um, I hope the developer works with the neighbors and accomplishes what was approved here tonight. And with that, I vote a big eye. Commissioner, Councilwoman Prince Harry. All right. So, so I am pleased to hear that the roundabout is coming out and there's going to be more buffer. I When you purchase a property and you get approvals to the property, you're supposed to build to what is approved. So, it is a I have difficulty, right, with them coming back and asking for a second bite at the apple was something that maybe could have pencled out a little bit differently. Um, and and I and knowing the problems we have with negligent property owners and it's it's it's a bane to a neighborhood when every day you walk out of your house and you see how filthy a spot is. I understand that they want to develop it to get rid of the blight, but when they come in and say that they're going to clean it and then they don't clean it or they come in and they say that they are not going to allow cars to park there and they allow there like that, that is not an issue for this board to adjudicate. But I want to get on the record that it is a serious problem across the city and I've, you know, dealt with plenty of it in my own ward. Um, I I also know too though that there is value to to having something there and so with the condition that the roundabout will be removed, I will vote I. Commissioner Gangadin. So, I want to thank the public for coming out this evening and voicing your concerns as well. Um, based on what's there and what's been proposed, it's totally two different things. And um since the roundabout is going to be removed, that gives a little more buffer. Um and with that said, we asked the developer to really um work in good faith with the community as well and to clean up all that garbage as quickly as possible. Um and respect the neighborhood. Respect everyone that lives within the neighborhood. Um, with that I'll vote I. Vice Chair, Dr. Gonzalez. Yes. So, I had a problem initially with this application uh until we decided to amend it and uh that's really the only reason I'm voting for it. Um, as you know, we've been I think uh chairman and I have been on the board longer than than a lot of people have probably been alive here in this building. I'm just kidding. And one of our problems is the that you know when you for the owners and developers out there we're we're we're we're taking our time to come here. We're not getting paid. Uh this is not easy. Every Tuesday I know chairman puts a lot more time than than I do and uh you know we we really care about the community, but when we're doing something and we vote on something and we amend it or we do this or we do that, we and then we find out that it wasn't built that way, it kind of it's kind of a slap to our face. Um, and so I think this is probably going to be the first time that I'm going to vote on a uh project that came back to us where the developer did something that was not approved. I'm very big on that. It doesn't matter if it was just a parking lot or 50 stories. And as councilwoman um just just said, uh this we take this very seriously and I personally take it very seriously. But again, uh there's nothing there. And I hope this time there was nothing there before two years ago when we approved it and I'm hoping that still nothing there. And um you know we'll we'll be keeping a close eye on this uh property and make sure that it's built the way that we've now approved it. And um and that that uh with that I'm going to vote I and Chairman Langston. So first of all, let me let me thank all you guys. I I appreciate the the honest deliberation on record. you know, that's not an easy thing to do, but I know we're all very comfortable together and uh I think it's interesting to see. Um, as far as the applicant, you know, paving over the lot, I, you know, I don't take it personally. I check my feelings at the door every night. It I if if I considered that, um, you know, I think I'd be doing a disservice to this position. Um, I I believe me, I understand the neighborhood's concern there. There's got to be a first step to clean up the property. It's obviously not okay the way it is now, and it needs to change. Um, and this is the person that owns the property now. So, that's who we're betting on here. Um, and it really sounds like my votes going to be I, but it's not. It's a no for me. Um, I I I appreciate council. I appreciate the removal of the roundabout, but I think we could do better with that buffer. I think that buffer should be bigger. I think we're almost there, but I don't think this current plan with the roundabout removed is it. I just think there there needs to be more of a buffer that at least comes out to, you know, the neighboring property across the street, that first residential property. So, I know it it's approved, but and I get the honor of voting last. Uh, but it was a no either way for me. So, uh, that's my vote. It's a no. Great. Motion carries. Uh, as amended for one. Um, so they there will be seven conditions. the sixth in the staff memo plus the seventh regarding the um removal of the roundabout in exchange for further landscaping in line with Miss Bennon's testimony. Okay. All right. Thank you everybody. Um it is 7:35. We're going to take 10, I guess. All right. We'll see you in a few. Okay. Could we come to order again, please? Uh we're just going to jump out of order. We have one item that wants to carry. Um so we're going to call item 11 is case P2024-0178. It's a review and review and discussion of uh fire Broadway redevelopment plan amendment. Good evening council. Good evening. Gene Palino Gova Burns on behalf of the applicant. I understand there's a quorum issue. Um and if that's correct, council, then I'll assume that unfortunately. Yeah, I understand. We'll talk about it later. Well, you can now. Now, um but I assume you're carrying it, so that's fine with me. Thank you, council chairman. I think for for the edification of everybody here, uh this is a review and discussion of the uh FET Broadway redevelopment plan amendment. In order for this to be heard by the body, there have to be five eligible commissioners to vote. one commissioner does have uh a conflict that requires recusal on the matter which would leave the board with four members and therefore uh there isn't a quorum for the board to hear that particular amendment. So uh I think it's imperative upon the board and possibly yourself Mr. Chairman to make sure that uh we can we can have a quorum at the next hearing. has been lingering and I I think it's only fair that that we reach out and make sure we uh we have five eligible voters for it at the I think council we filed 22nd October I I think we we did file this in October. Oh so it's not that old before that there was discussions well before that believe me Cam um we can give this the next hearing date which is April 22nd. Okay. So, we'll carry to a date certain April 22nd. This is uh notice for that. You will not receive new notice. I I don't think there's any There is no notice. What am I saying? Don't listen to me. Okay. Thank you, council. Thank you. All right. So, let's move on to the review and discussion of certified artist Susie Laauo and Michelle Vatitali. Formal action may be taken. Okay. So, the ABC artist uh board of certification um no no ACB ACV um anyway the artist certification board certified Michelle and Susie as artists using criteria 1 2 3 4 and 5 and the planning department um recognizes their certifications and would recommend that you approve them as certified artists so that they can get the certified artist housing that they are granted under the zoning and planning staff recommends approval. Okay, thanks Cam. Any questions? No, forgot Eddie moved. Um, okay. Is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment? Anyone from public? Chair, seeing no public, I move to close. Second. Okay. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. We have staff's recommendations. So, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the review and discussion of uh certified artists Susie Luo and Michelle Vatel. Um and uh it's presented to the board tonight and forward to uh city council for formal adoption. Second. Okay. Motion made and seconded for approval. Vice Chair Dr. Gonzalez. I. Commissioner Gangadan. I. Councilwoman Prince Arie. Hi. Commissioner Torres. I. Chairman Langston. I. Motion carries. All in favor? Okay. Thank you. Let's move on to item 10 is case P205-000059. Is a review agent procedure amendment? We're getting Sophia. She's going to be right here. Okay. Hi. Hi, everyone. Sorry, I'm also in the environmental commission right now. Um, so these are proposed changes to our ordinance to clarify our review agent procedures. Of course, with using Tyler, the way that we involve review agents in our development review process has changed. So, we added uh some of those changes clarifying the process in the ordinance and we also added something specifically talking about JCMUA's involvement in review procedures in connection with storm water ordinance requirements which are already existing. And that is the summary of the changes that are before you guys today. Okay. Thank you. Any questions? Anybody? All right. Is there anybody here from public that wants to comment? Anyone from public? Seeing no public, I move to close. Second. All right. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. So, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case P205-0059 presented to the board tonight and forward to city council for formal adoption. Second. All right. Motion made and seconded for approval. Vice Chair Dr. Gonzalez. Hi. Commissioner Gangadan. Hi. Councilwoman Prince Erie. Hi. Commissioner Torres. And Chairman Links. I. Motion carries. All in favor? Thank you. All right. Uh we'll call case P2024-0180 is a preliminary and final major subdivision uh for Harborside Place. Okay. Thank you. Um for the record, Charles Harrington of Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant. And if I can indulge the board quickly before I go into this case, I I'm also uh the attorney on on case number 21 tonight. And um I'm I'm requesting that that be carried. Um asking uh for the May 6th date if possible with preservation of notices. Cam, yes, we can still arrange that. Okay. So we'll carry case P2024-0208 a preliminary and final major site plan for 158 Van Wagon and A. Uh we'll carry that to a date certain May 6 with preservation of notice. Thank you councel. Okay. Thank you. So uh I do have notices for uh this matter uh P2024-180 that I'll give to council for review. Thank you. Thank you. I always forget to do that. Chairman, I received the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application before the board this evening. It does appear to be in order. We're going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record. Okay. Uh, thank you. For the record, uh, what I've just handed out what I would like to mark as A2. It's, uh, two pages. It's an aerial photograph of the uh project, the property site, and and a reduced copy of the subdivision plan that's before you tonight with highlights with regard to the small lot or lots that are the subject of of this application. I I think this this just kind of helps you um you know uh understand the the subdivision better. This is very very briefly. I I I know I gave half my presentation at the last meeting. Um this the purpose of the subdivision before you tonight uh it is a major subdivision. The reason it's a major subdivision is because there have been prior subdivisions uh related to this property within the last 5 years. So it has to be a major. It can't be a minor even though it's it's uh rather insubstantial. And it's a reversal of a subdivision that was approved in 2021. And in the 2021 subdivision, what we did is we we carved out a piece of property uh from the access road to the north pier uh residential development and we made that part of the north pier development. Uh so that property owner uh we'll call EQR equity residential now became the owner of this little parcel. But in the meantime, uh there are some encumbrances and requirements uh of ownership as part of this parcel with regard to the waterfront walkway and some environmental conditions. And the long and short of it is uh uh Equity Residential said we don't want to do that. We don't want to be responsible for that. So Varys uh is is the property owner said take it back. Um, so essentially what we're doing is we're we're taking that parcel back because even though the the subdivision was perfected, we're going to carve this back. Uh, they never accepted ownership of the of the parcel and we're going to take it back and and uh and uh then record this and now everything's, you know, back at square one where my client owns the property again and then would be responsible for all those conditions. And that's that's it. I have uh Mr. Tom Golden here on behalf of the applicant in the event you have any questions, but there's there's nothing more than that. Council, from a legal standpoint, how are we going to perfect that? We're going to deed. We're going to do it by map and then most likely by deed uh to clean it up. Um, we have to do it by map because it's a major subdivision. And then we'll follow up with a deed to to um move it back into ownership of Varys Residential. Yes, chairman. Anybody any questions? Okay. Thank you, council. Uh, is there anybody here from public that wants to comment? Anyone from public? There seeing no public. I move to close. Second. All right. Motion made and seconded. Public is closed. Eric, anything you want to add? Yeah, staff agrees with the testimony provided by uh Mr. Chuck Harrington. Um it's a pretty straightforward uh application. Um staff just requests that the applicant agree to the conditions enumerated in the staff memo dated April 3rd uh 2025. Yes, we would. And with that, staff recommends approval. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion at this time to approve case P2024-0180 as presented to the board here tonight. Second. Motion made and seconded for approval. Vice Chair Dr. Gonzalez I. Councilwoman Prince. I. Commissioner Gangadan. I. Commissioner Torres. I. And Chairman Langson. I. Motion carries. All in favor? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I will call case P2023-000017 is a preliminary and final major site plan with variances for 650 Grove Street. Good evening. Good evening, commissioners, um, staff, and council. My name is Jim McCann from the law firm of Connell Foley in Jersey City. I'm here on a P uh 2023-0017. Um, this property is located at block 6101, lot 2. It's commonly known as 650 Grove. Uh, it's in the Jersey Avenue light rail redevelopment plan area, the high-rise district. Um, it's owned by Grove Street Partners LLC. Um, this is an application for a preliminary and final site plan approval. That's the relief requested. Um, and council, this is a notice case. I do have my affidavit of service and publication to tender to you. Thank you, council. Council, you have a copy of our agenda tonight? Yes, I do. This is case P20230017. It's improperly identified as 650 Grove LLC on the agenda. Yes. Okay. This was a carry from uh the March 11th meeting with preservation of notice. 13650 Grove LLC is the applicant. 14 is Grove Street Partners LLC is the applicant. I just want to make sure it's our error. Oh. So, um, council, I'm not sure if I have a current agenda, but 650 Grove is item 13 on the agenda, right? Yes. Yes. Okay. But the applicant you said was Grove Street Partners LLC, correct? Yes. Okay, they got 659. Yeah, there's one or two typos in the agenda. Okay, that's what I thought. I see what you're saying now. Yes, that that that's not correct. Okay. Chair, receive the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 650 Grove Street. It does appear to be in order. I've marked it as A1 for purposes of the record. Thank you, council. So, um just a a quick summary of uh of the project. Uh the property is currently vacant land. Uh the proposal tonight is a new five-story building with uh 108 market rate residential units. Um approximately 3752 square ft of retail in two different locations in the building. Um there are 57 parking spaces, which that's another typo that's in the uh in the agenda. And the performative green roof being proposed tonight is 14,928 square ft which is much larger than the one listed in the agenda. Uh the parking spaces also include ADA spaces and EV spaces. The architect will give you the exact numbers for that. Um this project complies with the redevelopment plan. Um there are no deviations requested or required. Uh it is a project that's seeking a density bonus under the density bonus provisions of the light Jersey City Light Jersey light rail redevelopment plan. Um the density bonus um basically allows the project to have um 30 additional units um per acre from the standard in the redevelopment plan. If the developer does the following, signs a redevelopment agreement with the JC and becomes a designated redeveloper, which this developer has done both of those things. they have uh signed a redevelopment agreement with the JC dated September 5th uh 2024. Um they have also agreed in that redevelopment agreement to make a contribution to an open space fund uh to be used in this redevelopment plan area. The amount of the contribution is set forth in the um redevelopment agreement. uh it's to be paid upon the earlier of receipt of construction permits or the end of December 2026. There's also a lot coverage bonus being requested. Um because of the size of the green roof, um the project is allowed to have a lot coverage bonus of um the the standard is 75%. The project is seeking 87% 80 85.7% um it's based upon the size of the um of the performative green roof. You get an extra 1% for every 300 square feet of performative green roof project actually qualifies for 125% lot coverage but the request is uh 85.7. There's one variance required. It's for an ATA ATS box which is required by PSENG for this project and for other projects in the neighborhood. Um my project engineer will give you a little bit more detail on that but the boxes itself is permitted but it's not to be pre it's not permitted to be located in the front yard. This one has to be because of PSEG requirements. We'll tell you more about that um in a few minutes. There's also um a request for a forestry standard waiver for tree pits and we also have a slight deficiency in the number of trees that we're planting because of utilities and telephone poles etc. Um so the project is prepared to pay for the seven tree deficiency. They're going to pay uh the city of Jersey City the monetary contribution for the seven trees and uh the landscape architect will tell you more a little more about that. Um I have uh my first witness is Eric Baloo from Insight Engineering. He's the civil engineer for the project. So if there are no questions about my summary, I'll just bring him right up. Okay. Thank you council. Council, the affidavit of service is 81, correct? Yes. So, we're going to make a slide presentation. Almost everything in the presentation are plans that have been filed with the board. Um, they may be colorized to make the presentation easier, but whatever you see right now would be my A2 that I propose for A2 for identification. Do we know how many slides? Uh, yes, we do. I don't know how many for us, I think. Okay, you'll know about that. So, so let's do it this way. We have civil slides. We'll call those A2. The architectural slides will make A3 because they're separately uh set up. Very good. Okay. And there's how many civil slides? I'm planning on using two civil slides. Okay. And one of which will actually be a landscape. I'll explain it when I get to it. All right. Yes. I do. Uh Eric Belaloo. E R I C last name Belaloo B- A L L O U. Mr. Belaloo, good evening. Your license is current and my license is current and in good standing. Okay, thank you. You're qualified. Excellent. Eric, your firm is the civil engineer for this project? We are. And your firm prepared the uh civil plans that are before the board tonight. That is correct. You plan prepared them based upon your uh analysis of the redevelopment plan that's applicable to the property as well as the Jersey City zoning ordinance. I did. Thank you. Excellent. All right. So, exhibit A2, the first exhibit is an aerial photo showing the existing conditions of the property. Uh, you can see the property is outlined in yellow with 18th Street border grass site to the north and then Marin Boulevard to the east, Grove Street to the west, and then there's an existing private driveway at the rear portion of our property. Uh, the property is approximately 0.9 acres. It's it's almost an acre in size. So how do you Okay. So this exhibit I guess as start of the same civil presentation is a colored rendering of landscape sheet L1. So this is a rendered landscape plan of the ground level of the project. Uh so for the project is that you can see that the the building basically is covering a majority of the site. Uh we have the lobby area is located off of the intersection of 18th and Grove. Then we have retail that's along 18th Street. Also along 18th Street is a uh the entrance into the internal parking is really in the center of the building on 8th Street. 18th Street. Then we also have another retail portion along Marin Boulevard. To give an orientation of this uh what we're doing on Grove Street, we are proposing a uh striped loading area that will allow drop off pickup as well as also loading activities for the project. So that will be done on Grove Street. Also, as part of the project on Marin Boulevard, we're actually widening the street by approximately six feet. uh and that's to accommodate a new bike lane. So to be part of the compliance with the zoning, we've widened Marin by six feet. Uh regards to parking uh within the zone, they have minimum and maximum requirements. Uh minimum parking required is 25 spaces. Maximum amount allowed is 64 spaces. We're proposing 57 spaces to comply with the parking requirement. And within those internal parking spaces, we'll also have EV spaces uh that conform with the present state legislation for EV parking requirements. Uh we we are within a flood zone, so we do have to address the green area ratio, which is 0.25. Uh we're exceeding that based upon numerous green infrastructure improvements that we're doing. So we we have the G and we're exceeding that. uh this area is approximately elevation for the preliminary flood maps is what we need to go by. It's at elevation 11. So what we've done is that we placed all the residential uses as well as the parking level is at one foot above that at elevation 12. So they'll be in conformance with the New Jersey flood hazard requirements. So we have the retail on 18th Street as well as Marin Boulevard. Since the roadway is lower, we're proposing to keep those retails at the streetscape level so easily accessible. So those will be dry floodproof to address the flood regulations which is very common. We raise the residential and keep the retail at the streetscape levels. Uh another improvement that we have is in regards to storm water management. Uh so we're achieving a reduction of the two-year storm of 50%. The 10-year is 75% of predevelopment and the 100year is 80% of of predevelopment. And these are the state and Jersey City rules and regulations. How we're addressing that now with the last few years we've had to address this. We're really addressing this with what's called green storm water infrastructure. So we're addressing this as as you heard the large green roof. That's part of storm water green infrastructure. We also have permeable pavement proposed as part of this project. Another green infrastructure storm water practice. And then we even have some small bio retention basins as part of the storm water management. So we're really addressing with three different green infrastructure to achieve the reductions that are required. Uh regards to utilities, you know, we have water, sewer, jary approval, all standard utility connections that's within any project. The one thing that is unique to our project is electric service. So the good part is that we met with PSNG well in advance of preparing these and submitting these these plans. So we were able to place the transformers internal to the building as as normally done to address our transformer locations. But there's a piece of equipment we call it abbreviated ATS, but it's really a automatic transfer switch. So the ATS switches are used to help with reliability and redundancy of the electrical distribution system. If one circuit was to go down, this switch would allow it to be connected to a different circuit to help maintain some reliability in the electrical distribution. ATS switches cannot be placed inside buildings based upon our conversations with PHCNG. They also have proximity requirements. They need to be able to be in line with other transformers that are being serviced. So this ATS switch is not only servicing this project as part of its electrical infrastructure, it's also serving the transformers as part of the 659 project as well. So the ATS switch has to be located, we have it here on 18th Street and we show it sort of towards the corner of Marin Boulevard. So PSENG has evaluated the situation and determined this is the location that it needs to be at. The switches are very similar to transformers. Uh they have that same PSNG green color and they're almost the size same size as a large transformers. The one thing that's a little bit unique with an ATS is that transformer you just need to have access to the doors in the front of it where an ATS you actually have to have access on three sides. There's doors on three sides of this which means you need to have a minimum clearance of 10 feet on all sides to properly access the equipment. So that's what you can see in the picture. We have the white box representing the ATS. But then you can see the green area and then approximately I believe probably 10 feet away is that where we have the screening opportunities. We place them as close as we can and still be compliant. But based upon the proximity of this, we do need a variance for its location. I have no further questions. Uh Mr. Blue, does that ATS have to be raised up any higher? No, it's basically set on a gravel pad similar to a transformer and they're about approximately six feet high. So, it's not elevated above. It's at the grade level is where it's placed. It's not like placed at 10t and up from there. It's at grade level is where it starts and placed. Okay. But at flood level, it has to be what? A foot above the 11. It has to be at 12, right? The this equipment actually is I guess it's uh waterproof. So it's actually not above the flood elevations. It's within the flood elevations based upon it design. Okay. Gotcha. Interesting. So the the equipment itself that like a transformer will be public service says it's okay if it's in flooded area. Correct. This is uh this is specific to their designs or aware is flooding and they say all our stuff is waterproof because it's electrical is what they tell us. and somebody physically has to flip a switch or it's automated. I think it's automated, but I believe there's certain situations where maybe maintenance potential or if something needs to be adjusted, that's why they have access to three sides of the structure, but it's supposed to be automated per its definition. Okay. So, I I did do a little research on it. Go. And it is automated. It automatically in the event of a flood or some other kind of event where there's a power failure, it automatically switches the power to another circuit so that the properties in the vicinity can maintain electric power. Look at you. Can you believe it? No, I appreciate that. Okay. Anybody else? Anything? All right. Thank you, Mr. Willie. Appreciate it. Okay. And my next witness are the project architects. Um, two gentlemen from Thriving Design. So, I'd like to bring them up now. What have I done here? That's nice. There we go. Thank you. Okay. The whole truth. I do. Yes. Sure. Uh, my name is Matthew Bartner. Last name is B A R T N R. My name is Dan Stoker, D- N S T O I CA. So, Mr. Bartner is the New Jersey licensed architect who prepared the plans with his colleague um Dan Stoka who is also an architect. We're going to qualify Mr. Bartner and then he's going to defer his presentation to Mr. Stoka if that pleases the board. Sorry, my mic wasn't on. Uh Mr. Mr. Bartner, your license is current and in good standing in New Jersey tonight. Yes, it is. Okay. Thank you. So, you're qualified, Mr. Mr. Bartner, your firm prepared these architectural plans, correct? That are before the board tonight. Yes, that is correct. And you've done it after an analysis and review of the redevelopment plan that's applicable to the project. Yes. As well as the JCLDO. Yes. And you've worked on those on these plans with your colleague, Mr. Dan Stoka. Yes. For two plus years. Yes. And you're requesting that uh he assist you with the presentation and move forward with it? Yes, please. Okay. All right, Dan, come on up. All right. Good evening. Good evening, sir. Mr. Stoker, you're an architect, correct? You you have an architectural degree, correct? Okay. How many years experience do you have in uh in design and architecture? Over 20. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Okay, go ahead, Mr. Stoka. Good evening, everyone. Good evening. Um, so 650 Grove Street, we are proposing a uh five-story approximately 65 ft tall building at the intersection of uh Grove Street and 18th Street on a site that, as we just learned, spans from uh Grove Street all the way to um Marane Boulevard. So, the building is um 65 ft tall. It contains, as um as Mr. Belaloo has told us, 108 units in a mix of 36 studios, 58 onebedrooms, and 14 twobedrooms and 3,792 ft of retail all along 18th Street. Uh the main entrance is elevated above the flood plane, approximately 5T, and we see it in in the rendering here. It's the has a monumental stair and a and a ramp that leads us up to the to lobby with a large floor to ceiling glass uh covered by a canopy um with a title of the building which is for now 650 Grove Street. The building is um predominantly brick brick and uh and dark metal panel as mandated by the uh redevelopment plan. And at the very top floor to highlight and to accentuate and punctuate the the corner in the entry of the building, we have the structure element that completes the volume of the building where we have a tenants use amenity deck up here. We'll see that in plan and we'll see that in the landscape drawings that um will be presented. The building's corner, I mean the building's entry is at the corner and it's diagonally across from the 659 project that we're also proposing we'll talk about next. and it's across the street from the Lacawana building across um Grove Street. So, we're proposing uh brick and we'll move on to the to the elevations. We're proposing a predominantly brick material on the facade with metal panels and oversized um gray metal uh oversized windows that hearken and and reflect what's going on at the Lacawana building across across the street. And as is mentioned in the in the redevelopment plan, the the building marches along and it's periodically the materials are interrupted by this metal panel in order to create vibrance in the facade and to give a sense of texture and a little bit of variation as we move along. We proposing a variegated uh brick material. Whoops. This is I apologize. uh of variegated brick material and the windows will be highlighted with caststone sills and caststone um headers at the ground floor. Glass and the building will also have a gray uh granite base, a sort of water table that serves to sort of separate the the brick material from the concrete of the street. The retail stores are along 18th Street as we learned from Mr. Belaloo and as well as at the corner of um Marram Boulevard and 18th Street. will take us to the the more detailed elevations. We see here the the sill and um rather the header and sill and the granite base that we are proposing at the at the ground floor the a portion of the garage of the building towards um 18th street is uh exposed to to the street. So at that and it's also but as we learned it's elevated. It's about 5 ft above above the pedestrian walkway pedestrian sidewalk. But this uh these will not be windows. This is going to these are going to be a light like the storefront windows but it's a metal panel. It's a metal mesh rather in a in a dark metal frame with a louvered uh bottom panel that is to 42 in to prevent uh glare from from cars as as they are parking in the garage. uh the ground floor plan again the same one we saw in um in the civil presentation but in the lobby area here we have um certain programming we have leasing co-working spaces we have a mail room right beside it is the bike room 54 bikes uh which is the requirement to service the 108 units in our building the first of the two retail spaces as they come along 18th street the garage entry point there are there's a small utility room here. And then this where the building steps away and sweeps along with the curvature of 18th Street, we have our garage. And this is the location of the ATS we just reviewed. And the second of the two retail spaces beyond that towards the corner of the driveway to the Lacawana building, uh the electrical vault and the electrical switch gear room. So the parking garage accommodates 57 57 parking stalls uh three handicapped uh nine charging stations and about 15 uh compact stalls as well. We have a other utility spaces at the ground floor are the water fire room and the trash room and um yeah the second floor excuse me the second floor steps away from the base volume of the building. So we create a reduction in the volume up here. And that affords us the opportunity for private patios for units at both sides. So some along 18th Street, others along the south elevation um of of of the building. And also at the second floor, we have tenant amenities. We have a fitness room. We have another lounge. We have um more co-working spaces, tenant storage, and generally speaking, spaces for the for the tenants to avail of the building. The Whoops. The typical floor plans, third and fourth, are only units and a small tenant storage room. And then the next um floor plan, the next change in floor plan happens at the fifth floor where we saw the the carveout and the of the exterior roof deck here with a club room for the tenants as well. So this faces across the street toif to 659 and um and the rest of the this floor is also units and then the roof which will be occupied for a portion of it immediately adjacent the elevators with various amenities. The landscape um architects our colleagues will talk about that and um but briefly speaking there's going to be a dog run. There's going to be some drilling stations and then this very large green roof, the performative green roof and uh some mechanical equipment equipment here and then equipment again on top of the elevator bulkhead and um and that is in um that is our our proposal. So, we do have some material boards if uh if any of the members of the board would like to touch and feel some of the materials that are being used for the project. So, that's the size of the screening for the garage. We are so Okay. It's not a tighter square. at the expense that is going to be I feel like it's it's a very decorative it should be a pretty we're proposing well we'll the presentation will follow for 659 we're proposing the same the same screening at both buildings at 59 there is a ventilation requirement okay concern about a hand or something no I'm concerned about just the level of screening meaning that you know a a wire gauge it's not really the wire gauge it's it's just the space in between the wire you know it doesn't provide that much screening Matt is that okay does that conflict with the redevelopment plan um for screening so um the applicant and planning staff work together through several iterations of this project as uh maybe some discrepancies in the project description in the uh agenda reveal. Um and there was always you know it was represented to me that there was this ventilation need and accommodating that ventilation need within the design standards of the plan that require um you know these active uses. um you know minimizing you know not having like just straight up vents um was something we worked through. Um additional retail was added to the project at the corner of Marin as part of these discussions. Um and this vet and this screening as proposed felt um staff felt was um preferable to sort of the strict ventilation type requirements would which would involve your typical open parking deck. Okay. Um and so this this screening essentially straddles the gap between each proposed retail space um and is also buffered by landscaping on both sides and street trees. Okay. Yeah. It's just not visible in this um in the board is that we we did not have an opportunity to finish the material, but it will also be painted the dark color that will match the windows and the metal panel on the project as well. Okay. So it'll be more homog. Yeah. just I didn't know if that created a variance in the redevelopment, you know, from the redevelopment plans, a screening like that. No. Um screening is explicitly required to screen um any sort of automobile parking from the public facads of the building. And so this was part of um marrying that design standard with you know anytime ventilation requirements when you're storing uh internal combustion engines inside and having them run. Sure. Okay. Thank you. So, um, Matt, it was hard for me to hear, Matt, but, um, just so I could be clear, the screening for the garage is at the rear of the building facing 18 at Street. Yes, facing at Street. You're saying that the um there's some type of landscape in front of that screener. um or cuz I understand the combustion of air and stuff, but what happens with car lights that come on? So, in order to prevent uh the glare of the headlights, the the um the windows, these window-like elements have a much more opaque louver at the very base of at the bottom of it. That's right. So the screen is actually from 42 in up, right? But the very bottom of it is 42 in high. So that should be above any and the car lights will be protected from that is specifically stipulated in the redevelopment plan and we and that louver is not up there. The louver is not that is not that is not shown up there. That louver is not there color but it looks solid from the street. Right. That louver is not is not in that. That's what I was concerned about. Not just the air but the light too that goes through. Uh, thank you. So, you've got garage screen one and garage screen two on the board. Yes. Can you just show us on the elevation where one is and where two is? There is a there is a slight discrepancy on that board. I apologize for that. But garage screen one is the screen that faces 18th Street. Garage screen two is the screen facing the ramp to the Lacawana building that is also not shown here. That screen should be a little bit more open and less decorative because it's a rear elevation of the building and it sh it will not be seen to the to the pedestrian there. This the much denser screen that we show up there will play in when we present the um 659 project because there are portions of that project that warrant a tighter screen to limit visibility into into what is otherwise a mechanical area. Okay. Anybody else? I'm not sure if I missed that. Um, the variance, the accessory structure in the front yard. Do you have a slide with it? A slide of the ATS box. The accessory structure in the front yard um anywhere on a show, but we don't have a illustration of the box with us because it's PSENG but that's where it appears. So where's that's the location? Yes, because it has to be on 18th Street, Commissioner. Okay. Thank you. Per PSEG standards. Oh, we have a photo of it. I could walk it around to you. We can mark it if you'd like. It's not very pretty, but it's a different color than the photo, right? You want to mark it, council? A4. A4. A3. Yeah, these plans will be A3. The plans that are the architect is presenting will be A3. Yeah, clearly Does the DP have that called out in their regulation? So, that's a question we would have to ask Mr. Balloo. Um, that requirement came strictly from PSEG. We actually sent a group of people out to meet with them because we know that you're not generally allowed in this before this board to place those kinds of things in front of your project on the street corner. So, we did the best that we could to avoid it, but we were told, "Nope, it's got to be there. You got to have it in this part of the neighborhood. You we need that automatic uh that that that box to automatically transfer the power in the event of a flood or some other catastrophe." So, Eric, you attended the meeting with PSENG, right? I I did not but but my colleague did and gave me very detailed as well as the architects attended as well. So we don't really want it there either but we don't have a choice. I don't know Mr. Harrington had a contact at PSEG that was very tight lipped about that he got something moved and uh was up in Journal Square happened about four weeks ago. Tried to get a name out of him. he wasn't giving it up, but he was very happy about where he was able to move that off of uh and not to complicate things further, like not every portion of Jersey City needs these ATS switches. There's a called the network distribution system and then there's the radial spoke version. So, we're in the radial version is why ATS switches are needed for this radial power distribution by PSNG to add to that. So, it's not everywhere in the city either that these are needed. Do you know anything about this? Oh, no. I don't have any further research. That was bullet five on my list. That was what we were told at the PSNG meeting. Yes. And Mr. Belaloo, did they mention anything about D in terms of whether or not do you have to get approval at a D? Well, I I'll say this. U it's actually going to be shown. We have to go for NJP flood hazard. It's on there. Uh but we've had we've obtained numerous flood hazard permits for urban areas with these and we've never DP's never had issues with them. Uh because I think it's because it's PSAG it's their uh infrastructure system. Okay. Okay. Anybody else? Any questions? Okay. Thank you. Okay. So my next witness is a landscape architect. Why is this happen? Is it? So, Milo and Bower are the landscape architects for this project. And I have uh Gates Kelty here tonight, a landscape architect to testify about the plans. I do. Yes. My name is Gates. G A Tely. K I E L T Y. I L Y. Good evening. Um I don't believe we have ever qualified you. That's correct. Okay. If you could just give us your background, your educational background and your licensing in the state. Yes, absolutely. Um so I am a project manager at Malo Bower Karman. I have been licensed in New Jersey since 2021. My license is in good standing. I graduated from the Penn State University in 2014 with a degree in landscape architecture. Um, I have testified in front of the Asbury Park board in the past and I have been with Malilla Barman for the last 10 plus years. Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. Great. And Gates, your fir your firm is the landscape architect for the project, correct? Yes, that's correct. And you've prepared the plans that are before the board tonight, the landscape architectural plans. Yes. And you've taken into consider consideration the redevelopment plan for this project? Yes, we have. As well as the JCLDO, correct? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, I'm going to start uh at the street level. Here we are showing a richly detailed landscape plan including a hearty pallet of both ornamental and native plant material along the streetscape and at the building entry. We have two types of permeable concrete pavers used along the majority of the streetscape and uh gray colored concrete at the driveways and ADA ramps. All these will complement the architectural materials. We have a number of shade trees along the streets totaling 15 street trees. We are deficient in that due to a number of utility driveway and light clearance requirements by the forestry standards. Um, additionally, we do deviate in the size of the tree pits along each of the streets. Um, where 5x10 would normally be required by forestry standards. Um, I believe we have about a 4x10 size tree pit. And we've been working with forestry engineering and engineering to um come up with a solution so that we can provide an adequately sized sidewalk and uh tree pits based on their recommendations. Along 18th Street, there are also several bio retention areas as noted by Eric earlier that will help store and slow the release of storm water. The planting for these areas were selected from the NJD list of plants for bio retention areas within their BMP manual. Also, as noted by Eric, we are exceeding the G requirements. Uh there are two bike racks along the streetscape, namely at the lobby entry. Um they will provide parking for four bikes at that area. In terms of lighting at the street, we conform to the city standard light fixtures and are they are proposed along the curb line. We do meet the minimum 0.5 foot candles required. Uh we also utilize a number of building mounted lights along the rear of the building and at key architectural moments like doorways and columns. Moving up to the second floor landscape plan, we have a number of private terraces along the northern and southern portions of the building. And we utilize intensive green roof planting at this level at the south side with plants hearty for the application. At the fifth floor, we have uh an exterior amenity space that comes off of the interior amenity space. And the amenities at this level include a gas fireplace with lounge seating, string lights, and a dining table. Additionally, we have a number of intensive green roof plants at this level as well, hardy for the application. Then finally at the upper roof we have uh additional green roof both intensive and extensive. Um and a number of amenities at this level that include a synthetic lawn with a movie wall, a dog run which is approximately 950 square ft, fire pits, a grill station and bar with bar counter seating, shade structures, game tables and artistic lighting. This is a composite of all of the levels here. So, the project green roof totals are 11,935 ft of extensive green roof and 2,993 square ft of intensive green roof totaling the 14,928 ft of planting uh for the total site. So Gates, just real quick, so the tree pits, basically your office communicated with the foresters in Jersey City and and the issue was, do you want us to comply with the tree pit dimension size or maintain the full width of the sidewalk that's required and the forestry department said you can reduce the size of the tree pits because we prefer the sidewalk to uh comply with the redevelopment plan. That's correct. Okay. reduce the size of the the uh tree that's going to be planted on that pit. Uh no, it wouldn't. Okay. So, would still be the same? Mhm. Okay. Anybody else? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Uh my last witness is uh Miss Carolyn Worstelle from Dresnner Robin Planner. Okay. Thank you. Good evening again. Good evening. And uh Miss Worstelle, if you could just say for the record that you understand that you have been sworn in already and are still under oath. Yes, I understand that I have been sworn in already and I am still under oath. And you are still qualified as well. Yes. Yes. And my license is still in good standing. Thank you. Um so yes, you you've heard about the project. Um we're here for um a single variance. There are no deviations from the redevelopment plan. We are seeking a variance from the LDO related to that accessory structure which is the ATS switch that that's what the structure is is the switching um uh equipment plus the the cover um under section uh 34560 which is the supplementary standard section talks about accessory structures um and within that um it prohibits accessory structures from being in a front guard. Um we are required by PSENG to provide this equipment. Um it services not just this building but other places uh other buildings along the block. Um as you heard the testimony, we really don't have a lot of um we can't move it. This is the location has been told that we have to provide it. Um and we're sort of in a a situation where we have a cap lot. We have three frontages. So we really are very limited in terms of what isn't a front yard for this um application. Um so we're really sort of looking at this this is a hardship. Um we're required to provide the equipment. The only place we can provide it is in a front yard. Um and uh really the the we're we're trying to um provide as much um buffer as we can for this. We are trying to provide it within a green area. we are trying to provide what landscaping buffer and and screening we are permitted to um provide as you heard we we do have to have certain minimum distances from landscaping in order to meet the requirements by PSEG for access. Um so we are trying to to mitigate um that location as best as we can. Um but this is this is location that we have been told that it has to be provided. Um I think we also built and suspenders want to just discuss that waiver for the tree pits. Sure. Yes, please. Um basically the the redevelopment plan says that street trees will be regulated pursuant to the new the Jersey City forestry standards. The Jersey C Jersey City Forestry standards has their standards tree pit is 5 by 10 but it does allow that alternative dimensions are permitted upon consultation and approval by the forester. We are in the process and have reached out to the forester and and are still in the process of finalizing those those tree pits but uh we will get that approval by the forester for the reduced tree pits. Um, so you know, we we believe that, you know, the the waiver can be granted um and that we are we're working within what the Jersey City Forestry standards process is. Um, I think, you know, overall this project advances the per uh municipal land use law. Um, it's consistent with purpose A. Um the proposed use of uh mixed use of you know ground floor retail and residential uses is permitted uh and envisioned on this site by the redevelopment plan. Um consistent with purpose E establishment of appropriate population density is it's a permitted number of units um and uh consistent with purpose I you know uh desirable visual environment. Um again the building has been designed um to add uh landscaping uh between the building and the sidewalk where we can. Uh we have the you know new street trees we'll have new sidewalks um you know trying to add those um uh uh I'm blinking on the term the um bioailes uh is where where we can as well. Um, so I think overall the the the design here um is very appropriate. Um, it's consistent with um the redevelopment plan. Uh, it won't result in a substantial detriment to the public good or general welfare. Again, it's consistent with the redevelopment plan. Um, providing all of the setbacks as required to allow for a light air and open space. Um and then then new um commercial uses will provide new retail um spaces along uh both 18th Street and uh Marin Boulevard. And um granting the deviation or the variance would likewise not result in a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone planner zoning ordinance. Uh it's promoting the purpose of that high-rise district that that it's located in which is to encourage and reinforce street wall design and develop active ground floor uses. It's also advancing several of the redevelopment plan objectives. Objective H uh provision of land and parcels of sufficient size and configuration so as to permit economic redevelopment. Uh objective I provision of site improvements for the beautifification of the plan and surrounding neighborhoods. and objective M, creation of new major employment and housing opportunities for residents of Jersey City. Um, so I think you know overall this project uh meets both positive and negative criteria for the variance uh required for that um uh front yard uh accessory structure. And Caroline, just real quick, two last things. So, you can confirm for us that the uh 14,928 square foot performative green roof um justifies the lot coverage bonus of 85.7%. Correct. Right. Um let's see. Actually justifies 125% lock coverage. Right. So, the the lot coverage, I think it's section 4E, lot coverage bonuses. Um, it says for parcels greater than 2,000 square feet. Uh, you can increase uh your coverage by a factor of 1% for every 300 ft of performative green roof. Um, green infrastructure, rain garden on site. I mean, we're providing a lot of those items, but um base coverage was 75%. Um, we are providing that 14,928 ft, which equates to a 49% housing bonus or bonus of coverage, which would have gotten us to 125%. Can't cover more than 100%. Um, and we're only proposing 85.3. So, we're definitely more than comfortable with that bonus. And we have also qualified for the density bonus because we have executed a redevelopment agreement and agreed to make a monetary contribution of one almost one point around $1.9 million to the open space fund. Correct. Yeah, that's consistent with bonus A. Thank you. Anything else, council? Uh, that completes our presentation. Okay. Any questions for Miss Worstell? Anyone? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, at this time, let's open it up for public comment. If anybody's here from the public that wants to comment, please come on up. Anyone from public? Mr. Chair, see no public. I move to close. Okay. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Matt, you have anything you want to add? Uh, planning staff substantiates the accuracy of Miss Wristell's testimony and has satisfied the bonus conditions are met. Um, as far as the ATS variance goes, um, it has to go somewhere. And there's three there's three front yards here and then one yard that's right up against the, um, the Lacawana Center industrial facility. And so, um, I think, you know, it's pretty apparent that, you know, they meet the required proofs here and the negative criteria is mitigated, um, by their, you know, placing it within the landscaping and not having it foul the public right of way or be the prominent focus of this long facade along 18th Street, which um, has retail frontage on both corners. um um which is envisioned which is in line with the um objectives of the Jersey Avenue light rail redevelopment plan which is going to see this neighborhood transformed into a uh mixeduse commercial residential transitoriented development hopefully with an infill light rail station one day. That's all. Okay. Thanks, Matt. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion at this time to approve. Could I just say two things? Go ahead. Um I do have actually one thing. Sure. I uh Mr. I thought so. Yes. Um so staff prepared a memo dated April 4th, 2025. Um within that memo, there are six proposed conditions. Um staff is proposing to strike condition six. Prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy, the property shall be insec inspected and receive sign off in the office of historic preservation. That was a scrivener's error. um related to um a condition intended for another application making it into the document. And so the staff is proposing the first five conditions within the memo. So thank you Matt for doing that. And yes, we we agree to comply with the first five conditions. I also should probably say that um we received a JCMUA comment letter um of August 14th, 2024. We had the projects the civil engineers, Mr. Ballow's group has either already complied with it on the plans or they will address any remaining comments. The last thing is traffic engineering uh submitted a final report or comment letter dated August 15, 2024. They wanted raised bike lanes um in front of this project on 18th Street. Eric has done a ton of work with the D and with the MUA and that raised bike lanes would create a drainage problem in front of this project, a flooding problem basically the potential for it. So, um Gary Dean's office has been working with the traffic engineering department and what they've agreed is to take the raised bike lanes off the table. We will work with the Division of Traffic Engineering to come to a solution to provide a safe and passable bike lane in front of the project and around the project on 18th Street, probably with um with barriers that are either more aesthetically pleasing than the ones that are out there right now or some other um type of barrier, but we do not have to raise the bike lanes. Okay, understood. Thank you, council. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion at this time to approve case P203-000017 as presented to our board tonight. Second. All right. Motion made and seconded for approval. Commissioner Torres. Commissioner Councilman Princei. Hi. Commissioner Gangadin. I. Vice Chair Dr. Gonzalez. I. And Chairman Langston. I. Motion carries. All in favor? Okay. Thank you everybody. Thank you for your time, commissioners. Thank you. [Music] Okay, so council, uh, you are up next, but before we do that, we do have a a 9:30 hard cutoff here. We lose our security at the front, so we do need to lock the doors. Once we lose that security and we cannot hold a public meeting at that point with the doors locked. So we do not take any testimony after 9:30 if there's anybody past and I assume council you need more than 20 minutes. Chairman, I'm sorry. I I actually I thought you were informed. So we've been told that we can go to 10 now. However, I'm going to confirm and then uh I'll have to come back and reconfirm. But well, is security here until 10:00 or are they here until after 10:00? They would stay here till 10:30 so that we can all leave. But we we get an extra half an hour. But let me let me confirm. Sorry about Okay. Right back. So in the meantime, Mike, does that change your break? Okay. Yeah. Let's take a quick five minute break and uh All right. I suppose heard do karaoke. karaoke. I can't park my truck down there. I'm singing. Do we have everybody that we need to? Depends on who you consider because we I'll wait for council. It's not bad me. It's not bad for us. So, we do have confirmation that it is a 9:30 cutoff tonight. Apologize. So, if anybody wants to carry Mr. Joseph, I assume I don't think Mr. McCann's going to step out of the way for you tonight. Uh, all right. He doesn't do anything. Oh, I have cases uh 15, that's P2024-0173 uh 359 Johnson Avenue. I also have uh it's also listed as 15. I think it's just a typo, though. Uh case P2024-0207 89 Neptune Avenue. I have case 16 uh P2024-0227209 Holiday Street and I have You're all going to me uh number 22 P2024-0165 221 to 223 Nunda Avenue Cam. Yeah, we'll do May 6th. We're gonna have to push items that didn't notice for that meeting and accommodate um items being carried. I'll uh let's carry preservation to May 6, but Cam, I'll connect with you this week and we'll figure out what we're doing about the 22nd and about the 6th. Um but I uh appreciate it. Thank you so much. All right. Thank you, council. Pleasure this evening. Sorry. Thanks. I feel like something big is May 6th. Sorry. Hi, good evening. Linda Hurley with Riker Danzig. Um, I have number 17. It's P20240199. Cam. Um, May 6th. May 6th. With preservation of notice, of course. Yes, with preservation of notice. Thank you, council. Thank you very much. She's got a sign application. Okay. Council, do you want to carry your last item before we continue? Yes, I'll carry my item. Um, 301 West Side case uh uh item 18 on the agenda. Carry with preservation of notice May 6th. All right. Yeah, it'll be a post Cinco de Mayo celebration. Okay, got it. Cam, did we have something big on May 6th? We did. Um, we do have an item carried. I I can't remember what. Kennedy. Okay. Uh, the Pep Boy site. Yeah, that's May 6, correct? Oh, I was thinking of uh April 22nd. Okay. So, let's uh move on with case P2023-000018 uh site plan amendment for 659 Grove Street Council. Hi, James McCann from the law firm of Connell Foley on behalf of the applicant Grove Street Partners LLC. Uh this is another project that's in the Jersey Avenue light rail redevelopment plan, the high-rise district, commonly known as 60 659 Grove Street block 62, lot 8. Uh this is a notice case. Um council, I'm going to tender my affidavit of service and publication for uh marking as A1. Sure. That's okay. We'll leave it for him. bouncer duty. So this project was approved initially in 2017. It received a preliminary site plan approval at that time. Um it received a final site plan approval in 2021. Both of those approvals were from the predecessor in title. my client purchased the project and is basically amend is requesting that the uh site plan approval uh be amended. So the the relief requested is an amended pre preliminary and final site plan approval. Um but basically this is a refinement of the existing project and um just to run you through a few things very quickly. Um it was approved as a 10-story building that is not changing. It was approved at 139 residential units. That is not changing. Um the retail square footage square square footage is changing from 11,050 square ft to an increase to 14,563 square ft. parking garage initially approved at 102 parking spaces decreasing to 99 spaces um which still complies with the redevelopment plan and this project was approved with a density bonus in 2017. Um again uh the standard is 90 dwelling units per acre with the density bonus provision. It's 120 acre uh units per dwelling units per acre that was previously approved. That is not changing at all. Um basically there's one new waiver. There's a tree pit waiver very similar to the project that we just talked about that was just approved. Um having said that, I'm just going to bring Mr. uh Baloo up who's also the project engineer on this project and he will quickly run through you run you through a few changes to the project. Okay. Thank you. and council. For purpose of the record, I'm in receip the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to 659 Grove. It does appear to be in order A1 for purposes of record. Thank you. Thank you. And for the record, Mr. Blue is uh been sworn in already tonight. He is still under oath and is still qualified. I acknowledge that. Thank you. Thank you. So, I believe we have exhibit A2 on the board right now. Yes, let's call that A2 council. And this is a rendered uh sheet Ellen landscape sheet L1. U so I'm going to go through the the plan changes. Uh you know one there were some minor changes to the footprint and some modifications as explained before just accommodations. Uh in regards to parking what we're minimum required is 85 maximum allowed is 162 and we're at 99 spaces. So we we're still fully compliant with parking. As with the other projects, we had to add green infrastructure storm water management. So for this project, we also have green roof and permeable pavers uh to meet the D and Jersey City runoff rate reductions. So there's some changes to the storm water management system that will get approved by both JUA and the state of New Jersey. There's no ATS switches. We have our transformer inside, but this project would be serviced by that ATS switch that was just approved. So, this is one of the buildings that that benefits from that use. Um, there are some small grading changes along the back. There's a small retaining wall along the back of the property necessary for grading changes. Um, so that was something that was added as part of this. Uh, we will also have EV spaces in accordance to state requirements. I'm not sure if that was on the original approval. So from a site perspective, those were the the changes that occurred. Thank you, Mr. Bellow. Any questions? Anyone? Yes, Mr. B. What was the um in original approval? What was the parking spaces? How many? 102 spaces. There was 102. So it was a three space reduction that occurred. Just a three space reduction. I thought you said I heard 200. I was like, why why such a major reduction? Okay, thank you. Anybody else? Okay, thank you. Uh, next witness is the project architect Thriving Design and uh would like the board to recognize the same process. Mr. Bartell um on at Thrive and Design. The New Jersey licensed architect has prepared the plans and is everything being done tonight is under his license and we'd like to have Mr. Stoker do the presentation. Okay. Um Bartell, I thought it was Bartner. Okay. Thank you. Just checking my notes here. That's okay. Um Okay. So, just for the record, you understand that you have been sworn in, qualified, are still under oath, and you as well, sir? Yes, I acknowledge. Okay. Thank you. Council, we're going to mark the architectural drawings as A3. Yes, please. And just tell me how many, please. Um, again, bear with me. Please, we will have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Thank you. So 659 Grove Street um diagonally across the street from 650 Grove which we just saw. Um uh the two buildings were were designed and uh to to complement and engage in a dialogue with each other. So, our entry as in the previous approval is sits on the corner of 18th Street and and Grove Street just across the street from from 650. And the lobbies really reflect each other and and are engaging in this in a in a dialogue of of a relationship between the pedestrian traffic there. So, we really anticipate this intersection to be um a a really great place in in between these two streets. The building is 10 stories as as previous and as the previous design, the building steps back at the fourth floor level um above the parking garage and creates uh so the base of the building creates a sort of a pediment and then we have this tower element that goes up for the full height of the building. And at the top floor, at the 10th floor, as at the 650 project, we have this carveout tenant amenity space here that has a structural element that completes the volume and the two buildings really uh reflect each other. This space here is going to obviously have a much nicer view. It faces souththeast, so the Jersey City skyline, the Manhattan skyline are all right there. The material pallet is um the same as at uh 650. So we have the predominant brick, the very large windows. Uh the Lacawana building is across the street from here across 18th Street. Um so the similar color palette and the materiality that is mandated by the uh redevelopment plan. The brick is interrupted every so often by a metal panel to create a variation in the facade. And we have obviously the fourth floor uh step back here which creates a uh a roof which uh were are going to be the outdoor amenity areas for the project. There's also at the fourth floor an indoor amenity area for the tenants and we see this large uh glass glazed um element here that separates the tower portion of the building from from the base portion from the lower portion of the building. As we march along 18th Street, we have our storefronts. They're in the same location more or less as they were before, just that we have slightly more storefront. And uh because of the of the increase in area and here towards the rear of the building, towards the west side of the building where the plaza will be for the hopefully the right lit uh the right light rail station in the near future. Um, one difference, um, is that this wall was previously curved and now it's it's zigzagged and stepped back. It creates a landscaping opportunity at the front of the building and we thought that would be very beneficial. The enlarged elevations we see the same as before. So, a monumental lobby area with monumental stairs and the ramp that leads up to it. building mountain lighting floor to ceiling glass at the lobby that reflects what's going on across the street at 650 and a and a large canopy that covers all this again reflective of what we have across the street. So the variegated brick the dark metal panel at the top of the building um we in the longer portion of of the building we interrupt the the brick and we have a metal panel top floor which you serves once again to articulate the building well and to create more visual interest as we as we go along. I'll walk you through the plans. The ground floor plan, um main entry, lobby, mail area, leasing and co-working spaces in this area are back of house spaces are along Grove but away from the intersection. So, generator room, um electrical room, electrical vault, trash, and um an electric switch gear, gas room. There is a a bike room in the garage at the first tier. We only have I believe is six parking stalls. Yep. and um EV parking as well and bike storage for tenants for 139 bicycles. And then towards the west along 18th Street, we have the we said 14,5633 square ft of of retail and the pedestrian plaza towards the end. Second floor is the first residential floor and a parking tier. So the residential units are towards the east and the south of the building over here. So directly above the lobby facing the 650 Grove project and the parking tier is uh towards the west and the building steps back slightly over the a portion of the retail roof at the excuse me there. Which way this? No. At the third floor, again, seven residential units. This is directly above the second and the third and last parking tier. This one is slightly fewer parking stalls than that. Then the the one below and a large storage room directly below the pool area where we have the pool mechanical room storage and maintenance. And uh to the question that came up earlier, this portion of the uh facade here, the mesh is going to be the denser mesh that's going to be a little bit more obscure for lights and stuff that are going to be in here so that pedestrians won't will have less visual queue in here. Our parking tiers are naturally ventilated at the upper floor. So the larger um the larger mesh is intended for here so that we can achieve natural ventilation through the garage and obiate the need for mechanical ventilation up here. The let me go back one please. No the fourth floor the building steps back yet again. So this this is the beginning of our tower portion of the building. So two amenity decks here. two amended decks for tenants used gener uh one facing south in the Lacawana building, one facing west towards uh the palisades. This is the one that has the pool and a large amenity area for tenant use, fitness, kids room and other lounges for the tenants. Because the building steps back here, this also affords the opportunity along the whole perimeter of the building virtually except for above the entry for private uh patios for for the units. And then the typical floors, sixth, uh, fifth, sixth, and and up to the ninth floor, they're all typical 100% units. And some, you know, trash trash room, electrical meter room, and other utility closets along the way. And Whoops. At the ninth floor, uh almost largely residential, but as at 650, we have a private club room and that sky deck that we we saw in the renderings fa facing southeast. And then the roof where uh there is a rooftop mechanical room and a large portion of performative green roof which is necessary for for storm water management and uh the elevator machine room above that. And um I'll leave you with the last rendering. The building, we've kept the columns away from the corner so we can have these um large windows that articulate each of the corners along the the facade. And um as I said, the geometry of the sighting is as before questions. Thank you. Any questions? Anybody? Eddie? Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Next witness is uh Milo and Bower, landscape architects. Council, we have four minutes left. Do you think we can make this happen and I have to do an hard 9:30? Uh yeah. Yes, I think we can. Could you Do you have planning testimony as well? I don't because I don't have any deviations or variances. Perfect. Good evening again. And uh if you could just just round four. Okay. You've been you've been qualified, sworn in, and are still under oath. Yes, I can. Thank you. Um Okay. So, our plans essentially were revised to respond to the D requirement changes. Um so, similar to 650, we uh utilize the same hardscape treatment. uh along the street level. We have a total of 18 street trees at this level and a number of additional trees within the plaza to the west that I'll expand upon a little bit more in a bit. Um we have six bike racks along the streetscape and provide parking for 12 bikes near the lobby entry and at the plaza space. Um, the plaza space to the west was designed to respond to plans for the light rail that will ultimately be constructed to the north of the site. We have movable planters proposed to delineate the spaces. Oops. uh which can easily be moved to provide opportunity for pedestrian and public pass through to the future light rail. Within the plaza, there's also an 800 square ft dog run space for residents of the building which is proposed with a synthetic turf material specifically manufactured for the application. Um and also similarly to the 659 uh or sorry 650 proposal um we do deviate from the standard tree pit sizes with this project as well. Um but you've also communicated on this project with um with forestry forestry and they have again said make the dimensions a little smaller and maintain the sidewalk width. Correct. Yes, that's correct. And that's what we're doing. Yes. Correct. Under their supervision. Exactly. Okay. Thank you. Yes. That's uh that's our completes our testimony and our presentation. Okay. Thank you. Uh any questions? Anybody on landscaping? Okay. Council, we got to mark this as A4 for the record. Yes, please. Thank you, council, for reminding me. Okay. Is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Seeing no public. I move to close. Okay. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Matt, I need to wrap you up in a minute. Yeah. Super quick. Um so staff published a memo dated 442025. Um noted this is an as of right application still with the amendments. Um seven conditions are listed of which um staff is recommending condition six be struck um similar to the previous application. It was a scrivener's error uh for an adaptive reuse project on a on an application template. Um, so staff is uh supports approval with those six conditions. Okay. Thanks, Matt. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion at this. Just got to just say one thing real quick. So, um, regarding those conditions, um, one of Matt's conditions is that we comply with conditions from the final site plan that was originally granted, which I agree to with one caveat. There's a require there's a condition in that um in that approval that the developer pay the monetary contribution. I just want to enter enter this into the record. This is payment of the monetary contribution. It's already been paid. It was delivered to Joanne Morales uh coordinator on moni monitoring evaluation dated it's a letter dated April 22nd 2022 and I would tender it to you council as the next exhibit as proof that the monetary contributions already been paid. Other than that we agree to all Matt's conditions. So I that's proof that the condition has been satisfied. Yes, the condition remains. We can mark it as satisfied if yes. Okay, we'll mark that as A5 for that purpose. Council, we have the same commitment from traffic engineering on the bike lanes. They also wanted raised bike lanes here. We have the same commitment that we will work with them to provide bike lanes, but they will not have to be raised bike lanes. Okay. Thank you, councel. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion at this time to approve case P203 D- 0018 as presented to our board tonight. Motion made and seconded for approval. Commissioner Torres. Yes. Commissioner Councilman Prince Harry I. Commissioner Gangadin. I. Vice Chair Dr. Gonzalez I. And Chair Langston. Hi. Motion carries. All in favor? All right. Thank you. So let's move on to memorialization of resolution. Chair I'd like to make a motion to approve. Thank you council. the following uh resolutions. I have four. Resolution number one of the city of Jersey City is extending preliminary major site plan approval for one year uh P2025-000026 submitted by Newport Associates Development Company at 1086 Street, block 7302, lot 55.01 and 16-60th Street, block 7302, lot 55.02, 02, formerly known as 26th Street, block 7302, lots 43 and 55. Second resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City, amendments to the zoning map regarding reszoning lots on Palside Avenue from R2 to RC2, case number P205-0041. Third resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City for approval and recommendation of amendments to chapter 345-31 of the land development ordinance regarding the general development checklist case and this is P2025-0042. The fourth and final resolution is corrective resolution. A resolution of the planning board of the city of Jersey City applicant 285 Newark Avenue LLC for a final major site plan amendment approval at 285 Newark Avenue block 100004 lot 6, New Jersey, case number P204-0119. Okay. Do I have a second? All right. Motion and second. Cam. Vice chair. Dr. Gonzalez. Hi. Commissioner Gangadan. Hi. Councilwoman Prince. Hi. Commissioner Torres, Chairman Langston. Motion carries. All in favor to memorialize resolutions. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to second. Okay. Thank you guys. We'rejourned.