Ice to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you everybody. Could we have a sunshine announcement, please? Cam. >> Yes. Good evening, chairman. Today is Tuesday, January 13th in the year 2026. 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 January 9th 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, Cam. Could we have roll call, please? >> Yes. Acting Vice Chair Gangaden, >> here. Commissioner Wick >> here, >> Commissioner Stamato >> here, >> Commissioner Patel >> here, >> and Chairman Langston >> here. >> All right, we have five commissioners present. We have a quorum. >> All right, thank you. Could we swear in the staff, please, Mike? >> I see Sophia, Joe, Ben, Matt, Cam, you guys going to be the truth, the whole truth nothing? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> And do we have any correspondence? >> Yes, chairman. Um so starting under new business item 13 um they have requested a carry um so item 13 case P20 2024-00008 a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances at 33 division street is requested and carry with preservation of notice to March 10th. So item 13 will be heard on March 10th. Um item 14, the next case, case P2025-000073 for a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances at 569 Palisade Avenue. Dave requested a carry with preservation of notice to March 10th as well. Um so March 10th for 569 Palisade. and two more. Item 21, case P2025-0150. This is a minor site plan at 202 Planefield Avenue and they've requested a carry with preservation of notice to February 24th. Um and then the very last case 22 is completely um completely withdrawing. So, this case is terminated and they will not have a hearing. >> 22. Yep. >> All right. Thank you, Cam. I do have an announcement. First of all, I hope everybody's holidays were good and uh happy new year to everybody. Um, we have a security issue again tonight. Uh, and I'm being totally serious. I'm not making this up. Uh, no testimony after 10 PM tonight. We're back a half hour from usual. So, we're not going to open anything new after 9:30. No new or no testimony whatsoever after 10. Okay. Uh, so with that said, and just for the record, the sunshine announcement is B1. >> Okay. Thank you, Cam. >> Yep. Thank you. >> All right. So, let's get into old business. Uh, case P2025-0219 is a one-year extension for 200 Kellogg Street. >> Good evening, council. Good evening, commissioners. For the record, Tom Lean from Connell Foley. This is a second extension request, though notice is not required under our ordinance. I did provide it and uploaded the attach the uh the affidavit that I'm going to hand to your council to the portal. >> Thank you, council. Chair, see the affidavit know proof of publication with respect to the Bayront partners 32 LP matter on Kellogg Street. Had the opportunity to review it. It did appear to be in order. This does appear to be the original of that notice. We're going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. >> Thank you, council. Uh and just for the purposes of somewhat correcting our agenda, uh this is listed as 200 Kellogg. Um within this has been sort of a moving target with uh naming all these properties. This is part of Bayfront. Uh these are all carved out of three lots that have been there for quite some time. So, while this was listed at 200 Kellogg when it originally got approved, it's now finally got a new tax lot and it's going to be known as one Bayfront Avenue. So, just to get that out of the way. Um, so that said, this is the first phase of Bayfront uh that was approved by the board back in uh 2022. Uh just as a reminder, six-story mixeduse building, 210 dwelling units, uh 74 of those units will be affordable. Uh 52 parking spaces, and there is some ground floor retail. Um this is our second request for an extension. We did come back to the board last year and told you that we were probably going to need a little extra time to close with the JC. I can happily report that the developer has closed with the JCA. They did so right before the new year. So now this is really just a matter of getting this extended. so they can go and pull permits. Uh just to give you the the dates, this would put us from November 15, 2025 to November uh 15th of 2026. >> All right. Thank you, council. Any questions? Anyone? >> No. >> Okay. Is there anybody here from public that wants to comment? Anyone here from public? >> Chair, see no one from the public. I would like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. public is closed. Matt, you have anything uh you want to add? >> This is uh was originally case P22-057. Um staff did prepare a memo dated Janu January 6, 2026 and staff just recommends approval and with all conditions of approval being in force and full effect. >> Uh we are in receipt of that memo and we agree to the conditions there. >> Excellent. Thank you, council. So I'll entertain a motion. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case P205-0219 as presented to the board together with the previous case um with conditions P22-057. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and second for approval. Uh Commissioner Gen >> I. >> Commissioner Wick >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato >> I. >> Commissioner Patel >> I. >> And Chairman Langston >> I. >> Motion carries. All in favor. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you, council. Let's move on to new business. This is the review and discussion of certified artist Jazz Graph and Chantel Martin. Uh formal action may be taken. Um Cam, are you handling this? >> Yes. >> Um so the artists before us, Jazz Graph and Chantel Martin, um have met criterias one through five. um as reviewed by the artist certification board and they are being recommended for the artist housing in Jersey City. Um planning staff has reviewed their applications and we agree and we would recommend that the board approve the certification of Jazzgraph and Shantel Martin as certified artists. >> All right. Thank you. Any questions? Anyone? >> No. >> All right. Is there anybody here from public that wants to comment? Anyone from public? >> Sharers, see no one from the public. I would like to close the public portion. >> All right, we have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. Public's closed. Cam, we have your recommendation. So, I'll entertain a motion. >> Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the certified artists as recommended. Um, Jazz Graph and Chantel Martin. >> Second. >> All right. Motion and second for approval. >> All right. Acting chair, acting vice chair Gungadan, >> I. >> Commissioner Wick, >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato, >> I. >> Commissioner Patel, >> I. >> And Chairman Langston, >> I. >> All right. Motion carries. All in favor. >> All right. Thank you. Let's call item 10 is case P204-0215. It's a minor site plan with C variances for 230 First Street. >> Yes. Uh good evening, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. Uh for the record, Charles Harrington of Connell Foley. on behalf of the applicant. Uh this is a notice case, so I do have uh notices to give to council. >> Oh, yeah. >> Thank you, council. Chair received the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 2301st Street. I've had the opportunity to review it. This matter has been continued from a prior meeting and carried with the preservation of the notice. It does appear to be in order. So, we are going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. >> All right. Thank you, council. >> Okay. Thank you. So, uh the application before you tonight as we've been working on for some time, um it uh was initially listed in August and has been carried uh since then, but uh it is a minor site plan with two C variances. Uh a height variance asking for 43 feet 11 in versus the permitted 40T. and we'll uh explain why we're asking for that during the presentation. And then there's a small um building coverage variance 63% versus 60. Um it is located within the Haramus Cove Historic District. So uh we had uh we have presented to the uh historic preservation commission in July and we were approved for a certificate of appropriateness uh for the project. Um so you know along with with the variances that that are being presented uh tonight we have been working um with uh staff um closely on this specifically with Mr. Beasley who's no longer with uh planning. Um he he left I think prior to the holidays but uh it has been a um a very constructive uh working uh relationship on on this project. Uh it's an infill project that uh we think is appropriate for for the block. So with that said, I'm I have our um architect uh Mr. Wman will be testifying and then uh Mr. Bellamy will address the uh requested variances. >> Okay. Thank you, council. >> Good evening. >> Yes, I do. >> Sure. It's William Wackenman. last name we cn mn. >> Mr. Wckman, good evening. Always a pleasure. Uh, your license is current tonight? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. >> Uh, okay. Thank you. Um, so uh as Chuck mentioned, this is a a nice um uh infill project uh on the north side of uh First Street. Um the property is currently a uh vacant surface parking lot and we're proposing a uh fourstory four-unit building. Um the variances that that Chuck mentioned um the first is for a height variance. Um and the the reason for the height variance I'll get to later in the presentation. Um but the the reason for that was uh in working with uh historic staff um it was uh the consensus was that uh raising the first floor up to align with the other uh other adjacent buildings on the block would would give the facade a more harmonious appearance. So um the height variance is related to um uh the the facade design and uh having it uh relate to uh the neighboring context um which you'll see in in the elevations. Um so um as I mentioned the site is currently uh vacant uh used as surface parking. Uh we're proposing a um a zero foot uh front yard to align with the with the adjoining neighbors. Um and we have a slightly over uh 30 foot rear yard um with a with a building coverage of approximately 63%. Um we are proposing the usual sidewalk and curb improvements um along with a new street tree. Um we do have a stoop that uh does project into the the public rightway. Uh but this does align with um the the adjacent neighbors and um all the other uh town houses on the block. Uh so again, this is uh something that we we designed so that it was um uh contextually appropriate. Um we also have a small landscape front yard as well as access to a cellar uh from the from the from the front yard of the building. Um on the main roof we have uh a green roof uh at the front and the rear. Uh and the center of the roof will be is uh designated as um uh roof decks for the uh top floor apartments. Um the the paving in the the rear yard will be removed. Uh the rear yard will be landscaped um rellandscaped and we're proposing a a a small uh patio in the rear for the first floor apartment. Uh these are just some of our standard details and specifications. I'll just skip over those unless there's any specific questions. Uh moving on to the floor plans. Um we do have a partial cellar uh in the building which will be used as a as utility uh and refu refu. Um this this project is interestingly it's not in the flood zone. Um it's just outside of the flood zone. So that's we're able to take advantage of some space on the on the on the cellar. Um the first floor I mentioned the stoop. We have a small vestibule when you first come in as well as a stair to the upper floors. Um, and the first floor houses a uh two bed, two bath uh unit um with the bedrooms in the front and in the middle with a uh living room uh and kitchen that opens up to the rear yard. The second floor is a similar configuration, although it's a three-bedroom unit. Um, and here we have the kitchen and living room in the front uh with the bedrooms uh oriented towards the rear and the bathrooms uh in the center of the plan. The third and fourth floors are split down the middle. Uh so instead of having stacked units on floors three and four, we have two duplex units. So the front half of uh the third floor and the fourth floor will be one unit. And then the back half of the third floor and the fourth floor will be a second unit. Uh we have the main living spaces on the lower level along with the third bedroom. And then the upper level houses uh two two bedrooms uh for both units as well as access to the uh to the roof. Um and here we just have a a more detailed plan of the roof. Um as I mentioned uh green roof towards the perimeter with a deck towards the center and each of the units has a small bulkhead uh to access the access their these private decks. Uh the facade that we're proposing is is fairly simple. Uh it's a a brick brick facade. Um with cast stone accents. Um we're pulling some of the design elements from the adjacent building. Uh this horizontal banding uh the proportions of the windows, the proportions of the cornice. Um so we're proposing a contemporary looking building um that does reference some of the um adjacent historic buildings on the block. Uh the rear facade is similar uh although it's a little bit um a little bit simpler um with with some larger windows. Um just want to mention too that we are continuing the the facade material on the rear and the side of the building. So uh the rear will have a a thin brick veneer uh to match the front. So the building will have a harmonious appearance uh on all three of the exposed sides. This is the uh east elevation which is right up against the neighbor. Uh so this really won't be visible. Um we do have an access alley to to the rear yard and then a small uh courtyard uh for some of those bedrooms at the center of the floor plan. This is the uh west elevation. Um we are because the buildings uh next to the property are a little bit shorter. Um the upper portion of the facade will be visible obliquely visible from portions of first street. So we are again continuing that primary facade material uh along the side elevations as well. Um so that when you see it from an angle it does appear to to be you know one give one harmonious appearance from the street. Uh here we have a a section through the building with the sight lines um that's required uh for the HPC application checklist uh just indicating um the visibility of some of the the rooftop improvements and uh this project also has a um a streetscape elevation showing it in some of the context. So, um, in addition to raising this first floor up to align with the the neighbors, um, we're also matching roughly matching the height of the the adjacent building, um, the adjacent four-story building on the block. So, um, it the the block has some shorter buildings, but it steps up towards the center and, uh, with this this uh, historic five-story building at the center of the block. So, um, the increased height here, uh, creates a nice stepping effect, uh, along the block front, uh, up to this, uh, this this five-story building. So, contextually, it fits in, uh, rather nicely. Um, here we have our, uh, shadow study. Um, pretty straightforward. Happy to answer any questions if there are any. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Wackman. Um, believe it or not, the only question I do have, I believe it's to the west, uh, the side where there's no alleyway, right? West side. >> Mhm. >> Is there a gap between the buildings? >> Um, an inch or two. >> Okay. And in honor of Commissioner Torres that's usually here, we can close that gap at the top so nothing falls down. No garbage. >> I'll prepare a detail. Yep. >> Okay. That's my only question. Anybody else? >> No. No. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Then we're just going to move right along with Mr. Bellamy to address the requested variances. >> Good evening. >> Yes, I do. >> Samuel Bellamy. Last name B E L L A M Y. >> Mr. Bellamy. Good evening. Your license is current. >> Good evening. Yes, it's current and in good standing. >> Okay, thank you. You're qualified. >> Great. Um, so getting right into the variance relief, we are in the Horsesmith Cove Historic District. There's two bulk C variances related to this application. One for building height and the other for building coverage. Um, as you heard from Mr. Wackman, um, that's really related to the um, interplay between the zoning standards and the historic design standards. So, as part of the back and forth with planning staff and historic staff, um you know, we thought this would be a better project to create a harmonious um visual environment, have the raised ground floor entry and match the the stoop appearance of the adjacent historic buildings. So, we do have an overall building height of four stories, 43 feet, 11 in. A maximum of four stories and 40 ft is permitted. The additional 3T 11 in is because of the raised ground floor entry. Um, and we're not getting any uh increased residential area with that height. It's really just the the seller level which provides for some garbage and storage areas that that was pointed out during the architectural testimony. Um, as I mentioned, there's a number of historic design standards that this project does meet. I won't go through them verbatim. They're found in 34571H of the zoning ordinance and they speak to creating harmonious visual environments u matching the scale and height of adjacent structures and even include uh requirements for projections creating stoops um front yard landscaping which are some of the other aspects of this project that we're proposing um and would be going for a franchise ordinance to have those improvements in the in the right of way that are consistent with the uh neighboring buildings. Um with respect to the the bulk of the building, the coverage variance is for 63.8% where a maximum of 60% is permitted. Uh with respect to setbacks, we're complying with all the setbacks. We have a 0 foot uh front setback which matches the adjacent buildings. Uh it's an attached building with 0 foot side setbacks. And then the rear yard setback is 32 feet um which exceeds uh the requirement of 30 ft. Um the additional coverage here is um the difference between the maximum and minimum front yard setback. So because we're matching the adjacent buildings, we have a zero foot front yard setback and um we're able to increase the the coverage a little bit while maintaining consistency with all the other setback requirements. Um I will also mention the the building to the east of this property does um protrude further into the block. So we're not creating an additional um building mass in the that goes out further than the adjacent buildings. Um so with that I really don't see any impacts from a from a bulk perspective. Um from an impervious coverage perspective we are compliant at 70% where 80%'s permitted and that's also reducing the existing 92.2%. So along with reducing impervious coverage, adding green roofing and landscaping, I think we're overall improving the uh the storm water conditions on the property. Uh this project does promote promote the purposes of the municipal land use law. It's a permitted use at a permitted density and is in scale with the adjacent building. So I think it is a permitted um an appropriate use and development of the property consistent with purpose A. I think infilling a currently vacant lot with an appropriate uh multif family building does promote purpose I by creating a desirable visual environment. Um and then overall just reducing uh existing non-conforming parking on the property, removing a fencing and barb wire at the top I think will really complete the streetscape uh consistent with the historic design standards. Um with respect to the negative criteria, I don't see a substantial detriment to general welfare. Um, again, I think the setbacks are appropriate, um, and provide for adequate light, air, and open space. Um, we're also providing a street tree and other improvements in the in the front of the building, improving the streetscape, and I likewise don't see a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone planner and zoning ordinance. I think this is directly in line with what the historic district calls for. Um, so with that, I think this project does meet the uh C2 criteria where the benefits would outweigh the detriments and I don't see any um substantial detriments uh with what we're proposing. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Bellamy. >> Thank you. >> Any questions? Anyone? >> No. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, council. Is that your presentation? >> Yes. Uh that that completes our presentation. And I'd note for the record that we did receive a staff report letter dated September 18th, 2025 with proposed conditions of approval. That would be acceptable in the event this is approved. All right. Thank you, council. Uh so with that said, let's open it up for public comment. Is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Anyone? >> Chair see no one from public. I would like to close the public portion. Second. >> All right. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Ben, you have anything you want to add? Staff agrees with the applicant's testimony uh and agrees with Mr. Bellamy about purpose I being met of the MLUL. Um staff recommends approval uh provided that the applicant does agree to those conditions dated in the or the staff memo dated September 18th, 2025. >> All right. Thank you. And council already stated that he's going to agree to those conditions. So I'll entertain a motion. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case P204-0215 as presented to the board with staff recommendations and condition. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second for an approval. >> All right. Uh, Vice Chair Congenan >> I. >> Commissioner Wick, >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato, >> I. >> Commissioner Patel, >> I. >> Chairman Langston, >> yeah, I don't think there's any detriment to the master plan or the zone plan. So, uh, it's a good addition to the block. I vote I. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, council. Let's move on to item 11 is case2025-000038. It's a preliminary and final major site plan with C variance for 427 Bergen Avenue. Uh for the record again, Tom Lean of Connell Foley. This is a notice case. Uh, and my affidavit was posted to the portal. Thank you, council. Chairman, I may receive the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 425 to 427 Bergen A here in the city. This is another matter that was previously scheduled for a hearing and carried with the continued uh preservation of the notice. I've had the opportunity to review the notice. It does appear to be in order and we will mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. >> Thank you, council. >> Yeah, and just for the record, our agenda tonight did say this was carried from October 28th. Uh it was actually carried from August 26th. I went back and made sure it was carried every night. So, I believe jurisdiction is proper before the board. Um the application before you this evening is located in the R3 zone. Um we are limited um based on the size of the property to how build big we can build here. Normally in the R3 you're allowed to uh to build up to eight stories. If you get to 6,000 square ft, we're a little bit below that. So we are limited to four stories, which is what we're proposing here this evening. We would also normally be limited on our density um because of the limited size of the property. Uh but we are going to use the affordable housing overlay here. So the project before you is a four-story residential building, 23 units. Uh the result uh of using the affordable housing overlay is two affordable units that will go with the building. Um it otherwise complies with all the requirements of the LDO. We are asking for one variance which is the bicycle storage location. We're actually putting the bicycles in a shed in the rear of the yard which has easy access uh through a path on the side of the building and from the rear of the building to all of the residents. Uh other than that, this is a totally compliant project. Um and I'm going to have Mr. Lewis just run you through the site plans. >> Okay. Thank you, council. >> The whole truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Jeffrey Lewis. J FF R E Y L E W I S. >> Mr. Lewis, good evening. Your license is current tonight. >> Yes, sir, it is. >> All right. Thank you. You're qualified. >> Thank you. Okay. So, as was mentioned, we are an oversized lot on the R3. Uh there was an existing two family home with two garages on the site which will be demolished, and we're proposing a new four-story 23-un residential building. Um, in all that breaks down as one three-bedroom apartment, five two-bedroom apartments, 16 one-bedroom apartments, and one studio apartment. And we do have the one variance that, uh, Mr. Lean mentioned. Uh, walking through the site plan, uh, there is an existing curb cut that we will be removing. Uh, so there'll be no curb cut for this property. Um, we'll provide new concrete curbs, new concrete sidewalks, and two, uh, new street trees. Uh, the building itself has a 2.42 42 foot front yard setback. It's a little exact, but it's actually to match the building to our right, and we're using that space to provide a little extra landscaping at the street frontage. Uh we have 5 foot setbacks on each side. On the right side, we're using that area mostly for landscaping and also for a few smaller uh patios, private patios for those ground floor apartments. Then on the left side, we have an egress walkway. This leads to our second stairway uh entrance which is over here um most kind of towards the back of the building as well as to the rear yard. Uh the rear yard has a private a smaller private patio here for the ground floor apartment. It has a whole bunch of landscaping. Uh we have a common patio which can be used by all the building tenants as well as that accessory shed all of which is enclosed by a 6ft tall wood board on board fence. Um, so getting into that shed, I do have plans to show you of that later. Um, it's being used for our trash and recycling as well as 14 uh bicycle parking spaces. Uh, as was mentioned, it was deemed to be uh not particularly convenient space. Uh, we do have a 5-ft setback, a 44 in uh 44inch wide paver walk uh walkway to get to that space and it is fairly close to the side door of the building. So, we do think it's an appropriate uh location for the bike storage, but of course that's up to you to decide. Um, uh, beyond that, uh, we also have a storm water detention system here. I do have the engineering plans if anyone's interested in seeing them. With that, I'm going to jump right into the floor plans. Uh, starting with the seller. It's a very small seller space. It's only being used for our meters as well as our sprinkler room as this will be a fully sprinklered building. Uh looking to the right, we have our first floor plan. The main entrance is in the center of the building. And as I mentioned, we have that secondary entrance on the left side. They're connected by a central hallway. Uh also off of this hallway, we have a trash room and a laundry room, and we have one of each of those on every floor of the building. And then, of course, we have two staircases. Uh on this floor we have five apartments. One is they're all accessible ADA accessible units. One of them is a studio. There's one one-bedroom, two twobedrooms, and one threebedroom. And just to note, the brown apartment in the front here is the three-bedroom, which is an affordable unit. And the apartment on the right here in green is a two-bedroom affordable unit. So those are the two affordable units. Uh we do also have uh three apartments that have private patios. Again, it's this apartment in the back here. It's the two-bedroom on the right side here, which I just noted is the affordable unit, as well as the one-bedroom apartment to the right here. Uh, and then lastly on this floor, uh, we do have the floor plan of that shed. Uh, it has, uh, bike storage, uh, with hanging racks on the left side and then trash and recycling bins lined up on the right side. So the upper levels uh again we have six so we have six apartments on this floor. One of them is a two-bedroom and five of them are onebedrooms. That's typical for each upper floor. Uh we have again a laundry closet and a trash closet on on each floor off of the main hallway. Uh in the front of the building we have two small cantal levers uh and a and each of those cantal levers has a 12-in uh stepout balcony. Uh we also have three smaller balconies in the rear of the building. Each of them is 5 foot deep by 6 foot wide. Um okay. And then so I'm looking here at the fourth floor. There's one small difference between the fourth floor and the two floors below. And that's in the main staircase where we added a second doorway. And that's just to restrict access to our roof. Uh the roof shown here on the right is mostly a pitched roof. However, we do have a a small it's a 20ft by 13 ft uh flat area which is just used for our air conditioning condensers. With that, we're going to move on to the elevations. We have the rear on the left and the front on the right. So, I'm going to start with the front elevation. Our main finish here is a brown gray uh ground and a gray uh brick blend. We're using mostly a standard pattern. However, on the ground floor, we're doing recessed brick bands to provide a little extra depth and interest. Uh, and we also have a 10 foot 10 foot a 10in wide aluminum wrap border which is framing both of these cantal levers and mimicking the A-frame that's located behind. We're actually have a 4ft parapit which parapit which is hiding the actual roof and hiding the rooftop structure as well. Um, other than that, we have black framed windows and doors, black aluminum railings. Uh, the balcony floors are, uh, black fiber cement panel wrapped. Um, and then looking moving on to that rear elevation, you can see the pitched roof that we're hiding, uh, behind our parapit. The main finish here is white fiber cement siding. Uh, those balcony floors we're actually also doing with white fiber cement to match. We're keeping the same black frame windows and doors, black aluminum uh railings, and you can also see over here on the right a wood slat detail. And we're using that uh to screen all of our condensers. That's the few of them that are located on the ground floor here and most of them which are on the roof here. Here we're looking at the side elevations. These are pretty simple. It's that same white siding wrapped around uh from the back on both sides. Uh the other thing to note is that both sides we are returning the brick from the front. So we're wrapping that around about 2 feet on each side. You can see that on both. Uh and then lastly, we do have the shed elevations shown independently. Uh this is going to be built with 6x6 wood posts which will be painted light gray. Then we have some infill panels that are finished with light gray vinyl siding. We have a black asphalt roof, a mechanical roof vent since we do have the trash and recycling in here, and a light gray metal door that can lock. And that concludes my presentation. If anyone wants to see the engineering drawings or anything else, I can do that for you. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Um, architecturally, I have no questions. Anybody else? >> No. >> Okay. And does anybody want to see civil plans for Mr. Lewis? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, >> council. Anything else? >> That's all we have. I don't have any planning testimony as uh regarding the variance because I do think it kind of speaks to personal taste and whether they people believe that's accessible or not. Um so really it is just a benefits outweigh the the negatives determination for the board. U but other than that uh you know the project uh is pretty much fully conforming. Uh we've worked extensively with planning on this and uh we hope it's approved. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Anyone from public? >> Chair, see no one from public. I would like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Joe, anything you want to add? >> Of course, chair. Um, yeah, as uh Mr. As mentioned, um the applicant did work with me specifically um and ensuring that the submitt is um compliant with all the standards within the R3 as well as all the other um applicable standards to this project. Um just to kind of get to the variance. Yeah, in our analysis, we saw that the storage uh shed in the back for the bikes is built at grade and doesn't pose any sort of issues with terms of egress for any of the residents. So, we had no problem recommending approval for that. Um the bulk and mass of the building is consistent with that of the neighborhood and the design is as well. And um before I provide my recommendation, I would like to confirm with the applicant that the um rooftop the rooftop access is limited to just the maintenance people for the building and not residents. >> That's right. We added the door with a lock on it and only the maintenance staff will be able to go there. >> Okay, great. And then um lastly, I'd like to confirm uh with the applicant that they've um were able to review the conditions within this staff memo dated July 30, 2025 and whether they would agree to set conditions. >> Yes. Uh I have reviewed them. I will note I'm sure the chairman is going to add a condition regarding the materials used for the affordable housing that they stay the same as the uh the market rate units. We can also agree to that. >> Excellent. Wonderful. Yes. Uh, with that said, staff recommends approval. >> Okay. Thank you. I would entertain a motion then. >> Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case 2025-000038 is presented to the board. >> Second. >> All right. Motion made and seconded for approval. >> All right. Acting vice chair Gangadan. >> This is a great addition to the neighborhood. Um, having two affordable units, which is three bedroomedroom and twobedroom is really a plus to the neighborhood as well. Um, my vote is I >> Commissioner Wick. I >> Commissioner Stamato >> I >> Commissioner Patel >> I >> and Chairman Langston. >> Yeah, it's I agree with uh Commissioner Gangan. It's great project. Um I have no problem with the bike uh parking being moved to the back and I'm very impressed that there is a private patio also on an affordable unit. That's nice to see. So uh my votes I motion carries 5-0. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Let's move on to item 12 is case P2025-000025 is a minor site plan for 114 Lincoln Street. Uh chairman, my my architect just walked in the door. I don't know if you want to move on to another matter so she can she can get herself together and then we'll go right after that. Uh I also have item 15. So maybe you want to move to item 17 which is Mr. Wine. >> Oh, okay. Gotcha. She said she's ready. >> Oh, he did. >> That's okay. We'll um >> My architect's ready to go then. So, >> okay, let's do it. >> Hi. I'll let you. >> Okay. Is there a a converter for this? >> Oh, yeah. >> Do you have one? I'm sorry. I didn't bring one. >> Good for you. Okay. Sure. >> Truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Your name? >> It's Nicole. N I C O L E Robertson. R O B E R T S O N. Thank you. >> Good evening. >> Miss Robertson. Good evening. Uh your license is current tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. We're qualified. >> Let me just do a little intro here. Um, this is a project located at 114 Lincoln Street. It is uh a slightly oversized lot, approximately 50 by 113. It is in the R1 district. Um, there was a prior approval here um from the zoning board for a much larger project. At the time, my uh my client wasn't ready to move forward with that development. So, they've come back now with a conforming project that complies with um what's now permitted in the R1 after our latest revisions after the master plan. So, it is a three-story building. They are going to utilize the ground floor as an adult daycare or senior daycare. Um, there are eight units in this building also using the affordable housing overlay limited to five units jumping up to eight. Uh, with one affordable unit provided. Uh, it is my understanding that that some of those units will probably be provided to some of the people who are um utilizing the uh the adult daycare. Uh, but it is a fully conforming building. Um, and it is a minor site plan only. So, I'm going to have Mr. Robertson just run you through the uh the site plans. Um, notice case. My affidavit was uploaded, but let me provide to councel. J see the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 114 Lincoln Street. This is another matter that was set some time ago and has been carried through with the preservation of the notice. I've had the opportunity to review it. It does appear to be in order. It does appear to be the original of the one that was uploaded on the portal. We're going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. >> All right. Thank you, councel. >> Thank you, council. >> Um, Miss Robertson, you have uh testified before this board uh previously. >> Yes, I have. >> And you are a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. >> Correct. >> And your license is in good standing. >> Yes, it is. >> Oh, okay. All right. We're good. >> Okay, great. Um, so, as Mr. Lean uh described, uh you know, tonight we're presenting and as of right a new construction three-story building. Um I'll just zoom in on the zoning tabulation chart so that you can see we're um requesting no variances at this time. Um the existing lot is 50 by 113 ft approximately. Um and we are proposing uh you can see that we are proposing uh 60% building coverage, 65% lot coverage while um 85% is is permitted. Um, we're proposing eight uh new units, one of which is an affordable housing unit. So, we are therefore meeting the standards for density um as allowed by the affordable housing um requirements. I have a um rendered view that just will preview what I'm presenting tonight, which is a three-story building with um adult daycare on the ground floor and then a uh residential entrance also on the ground floor, which leads to the residential units. Um and then we have two stories of residential units above. The total height of the building at three stories is 32 feet. So, we're well within compliance. This is the existing uh property. Now it's a vacant lot. Um the existing buildings on either side. We have uh three stories, three-story structures on either side, residential buildings. Um this drawing here shows uh the site, the overall site plan and how we're relating to the street. We have um one existing street tree which we are removing and replacing with two street trees which are in compliance with um the Jersey City standards. And this site plan also shows that we are in alignment with the existing um building frontage um to the right on the plan and then the building on the other side uh steps back. But our building is in alignment with the adjacent buildings. And then we have some uh recessed entrances into the adult daycare. And then the um lobby, residential lobby entrance on the left. This plan also shows our um trash removal plan showing how we have a dedicated trash room which um leads out to the residential lobby. So trash is well managed in the proposed uh plan. We have a basement um here for utilities and storage which um is shown here. This is our first floor plan. So you can see um towards the bottom of the plan or kind of taking up the majority of the ground floor is the adult daycare with a reception area at the entrance access through um a glass aluminum storefront. Um and then a large open space which will serve um the the clients for the adult daycare along with adequate um restroom facilities and then an outdoor patio at the rear. Um that's what has really allowed us to be below the um allowable lot coverage but still provide for you know a very useful space for the adult daycare. And then on the plan at the top, we have the residential entrance which is really differentiated by um being set back at an angle. There's an entrance lobby, the trash room as I mentioned, and then at the ground floor we do have a studio unit. Um because this building does not have an elevator, we're required to provide an ADA accessible unit. So that's what this um ground floor unit is. This is our ADA accessible unit, which also does have a designated outdoor patio space, which is screened from the adult daycare space by a board-on board um fence. On the second floor, uh we have three units. At the front, we have the affordable um unit, which is a three-bedroom unit, very large in size, threebedroom, two baths, large kitchen and and living space. And then the two units at the rear are both onebedrooms which have um you know accessing light and you light and air at the rear uh facade. And then at the third floor we have four one-bedroom units which are um similar in layout to what we saw in the floor below. So the total is eight eight units um six of which are uh onebedrooms. We have the three-bedroom affordable unit and then um a studio on the ground floor. We also have a roof deck which is accessed from the stair and then a small mechanical area which will be screened and then the front facade um is utilizing a red brick which is very similar to what is seen on the street. Um this was one of the updates also that was requested as we were working with the planning board. I think previously we had proposed a darker brick. We're proposing now a red brick which is more in keeping with um the other buildings on the street. And then at the rear facade we have um we're proposing a hardy panel batten system which looks kind of like wood. It creates a sort of warmer feel. Um double hung windows and then at the sides we have Hardy panel as well. These are flat architectural panels in a in a gray a medium gray color. This is a section drawing which shows um the higher uh floor to ceiling height that we have at the ground floor which is um 11 ft and then floor to ceiling height on the second and third floors um is 9 ft which is all in compliance with the plan. And then we have some detailed images that just show detail about um required signage. I'll point out that the signage for the adult daycare is um in accordance with the the plan and that it's just mounted a little bit lower. It's um maximum four feet above grades. That was some feedback that we had received from planning. And then we have some 3D views that really show how we've articulated um the facade. So that while it looks very simple in the front elevation, you can see that um three-dimensionally, it's actually a really um interesting facade that differentiates the two entrances um the two uses for the building by creating different um setbacks um from the sidewalk. And this is a view of the rear. So you can see actually we have a step back. So the units on the second floor have access to a small outdoor space. But this really shows um this large outdoor space which serves the adult daycare and then the small smaller kind of screened in um fence space for the studio apartment on the ground floor. This is our street elevation which shows how our project relates to the existing context. Um we're similar in height to the existing buildings really between um the building that we have to um the left the town houses and then uh the building to the right. So we're our height is mediating between those and materially um with the red brick we're consistent with what we've observed on the street. These are just our shadow studies as well. You think that's it? >> All right. Thank you, Miss Robinson. Any questions? Anyone? >> No. >> Um I I do I'm curious about the adult daycare situation. Is it a medical use? So I I'm going to read the exact definition from the uh the LDO which is a facility for supervised care of adults with physical or me mental limitations providing activities such as meals, socialization one or more days a week during specified daytime hours and which may also include care by ancillary medical staff. So there is a component to it that might be medical. Obviously if they're going to have that on site that's going to have to be subject to lensure from the state. Um, but it is a permitted use in the R1 zone. Um, it's something that our client feels is is somewhat lacking actually in Jersey City. Uh, a place for adults who might not be able to take care of themselves fully during the day. Um, and can have professional staff on site to take care of them. So, that was the the concept behind here. He thought it would be better than, you know, trying to squeeze some of the other uses that are permitted in there or some ground flooror units. He he thought it was a necessary use. So, >> okay. >> And is that baked into the plan itself? That's not just a separate retail space that could become something else down the road. >> No, no. This this is what the permitted use is. So, I mean, he it couldn't retail is not a permitted use here. So, it's not like they could go and get a CO and, you know, pull a switcheroo and make this into something else. I mean, it's it's going to be pretty clear what would have to be here. Otherwise, we would have to come back to the board and ask for approval on another use or go to the zoning board and ask for a use that's not permitted. >> Okay. Gotcha. Thank you. Um, that's my only question. So if there's nothing else, >> no. >> All right. Thank you, Miss Robertson. We appreciate it. >> I have nothing further for the board. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, is there anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Anyone from public? >> Sure. See no one from the public. I would like to close the public portion. >> All right. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Cam, do you uh have any concerns here? Um, first I'm just going to ask that attorney Lean agree to the planner's staff memo that was uploaded to the portal. >> Yes, I am in receipt of the October 22nd 2025 uh memo and we agree to the conditions therein and would also agree because there is an affordable unit in here regarding the materials to comply with the other market rate units. Okay, now that we got that out of the way, um planning staff um had a good time working with the applicant. Um they were amendable to our request to uh change certain aesthetics and we were able to um finagle the two street trees in there. Um, we feel that the adult daycare use is arguably inherently beneficial to the city at whole and we're excited to see the use come. Um, the installation of the affordable units also is in compliance with the master plan and the purpose of the affordable housing overlay um to provide ample opportunities for mixed income housing and the creation of affordable housing. Um, planning staff recommends approval with conditions. >> Okay. Thanks, Kim. All right. I'll entertain a motion then. >> Chair like to make a motion to approve case speed 2025-000025 as presented to the board. >> Seconded. >> Okay. Motion made and seconded for approval. Acting vice chair Gangadan. >> This is a very nice project. Much needed. um the adult daycare in the area and I'm happy to see that there is an affordable unit at the same time. My vote is I. >> Commissioner Wick. >> Yeah, I really like the use of the adult daycare as well. Um so I'm going to vote I. >> Commissioner Stamato, >> I love the project. I'm definitely voting I. >> Commissioner Patel >> I. >> And Chairman Langston >> I. >> All right. Motion carries. All in favor with conditions. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, let's move on to item 15 now. Right. Okay, let's call case P2024-0213 is a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances for 33 Pacific Avenue. >> Chairman, I am going to now ask uh if you would move to Mr. Wine. My civil engineer is here, but I don't see my architect. That's my fault. I didn't know that the two matters in front of us were going to be carried, so I might have given some bad advice on timing here. >> No problem. Council, you're skipping right over Mr. Okonnell. So, >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Not going to do that to him. All right. So, let's call item 16 is case P2025-000070 is a minor site plan for 28-30 Winfield Avenue. >> Good evening, council. >> Good evening, chairman and board. Um, this is a minor side plan on oversized lot about 5,000 square ft. Um, it is a notice case. Um, have my notices on the portal, but these are the originals. That's right. Chairman, I received the affidavit publication proof of mailing for the property located at 28-30 Winfield Avenue here in the city. I've had the opportunity to review it. It does appear to be in order. We are going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. I will note that this is another matter that had previously been scheduled and carried forward with the preservation of the notice. Uh, chairman, in addition to that, uh, I had the opportunity while reviewing the list and I noticed that the neighboring property was owned by a man and I've had the opportunity to speak to Commissioner Stamato regarding his relation to the property and if there's any type of a conflict and uh, Commissioner Stamato did advise me that the property was the adjacent property which was on the list was owned by his mother-in-law. He has no interest in that property and uh therefore he does not believe that there's any type of conflict that would require recusal. Is that correct, Commissioner? >> Totally. >> So with that chairman, we can proceed with the hearing tonight. >> Okay. Thank you. >> No problem with it. >> Thank you. Thank you. I understood. So, yeah, it's a minor site plan. No variances as of right. And um I think I'll just go right into it with our architect, Jeffrey Lewis. >> And Mr. Lewis has been qualified and sworn in is still under >> oath. Yes, sir. >> That's the word I'm looking for. Thank you. >> Look at that. Finishing each other's sentences. >> I know, right? Starting off the new year right? >> Okay. So, as Gene mentioned, this is an oversized lot in the R1. It's 40t wide, 125 ft deep. There's an existing one family home with a garage on the rear of the property. This will all be demolished. And we're proposing a new threestory 5-unit residential building. Uh all five of these units are three-bedroom units. The smaller are 1,434 ft and the largest is 1,633 ft. So these are pretty large three-bedroom units. Uh looking to the site plan on the left here, there is an existing curb cut in the property. We're going to be removing that and replacing it with a new 10-ft curb cut. This curb cut is going to uh serve a new fourcar garage. We're doing new concrete curbs, new concrete sidewalks, uh two new street trees. Uh our front yard setback is 6' 8 and 1/2 in. This is to match the neighbor to the right. Um, and this space on the left will be uh open grid pavers which are going to act as a driveway for that garage area. Uh, to the right we have a paver walkway which is our leads to our main entry to the building. That walkway is flanked with planting areas on each side. Uh, the left side of the building we have a zero foot uh sideyard setback uh with just a court in the middle to provide uh light and air for some windows. On the right side of the building, we have a three-foot setback. Uh, and we're using that space for a concrete walkway which leads to the rear yard. It also provides us access on the sideyard uh to our meter room, our bicycle storage room, our trash and recycling room, as well as a secondary entry to the building. It's actually our uh accessible entry to the to the building. Uh in the rear yard we have a 315 ft patio and a 911 ft landscape area. All enclosed with a 6ft wood board onboard fence. This area is all going to be dedicated to the ground floor apartment. So moving on to that ground floor plan. Uh so as you can see we have the fourcar garage at the bottom of the drawing here. Above that we have our residential entry. Uh steps up to a covered exterior porch. Uh inside the building we have our sprinkler room as this is again a fully sprinklered building. We have access directly from the garage. There's that secondary entrance from the sideyard. Uh a stair up to the second floor. And then the rest of this ground floor is for our ground floor apartment. Again, it's a uh three-bedroom apartment. This is the largest apartment. It's 1,633 ft. Uh it's a three-bedroom, excuse me, three-bedroom, two bath ADA accessible apartment. There is laundry in the unit. Uh ducted heat and air conditioning. Uh we have sliding doors from both the living dining kitchen area as well as from the main bedroom. Both out to the back. Uh which again is going to be a private yard and patio for this ground floor apartment. Following that stair up to the second floor, it leads to a central corridor. There are four more apartments in the building. All of them are duplex apartments. So on this floor, they all are going to have their living, dining, kitchen area, as well as a half bath and a stair up to the third floor. One of the apartments, this front apartment here, does have the laundry on this floor. Uh the other three have it on the floor up above. Uh and then lastly on this uh excuse me, we also at the front of the building have uh two bay windows which protrude about 2 feet out uh from the front of the building. So here we're looking at the third floor. Again, we have all four apartments. Uh each of them have three bedrooms and two baths on this floor. These three do have their washerdryer closet on this floor. Um and again, the stair also continues up to the roof as each of those four apartments is going to have their own private roof deck. So we did set back everything 10 ft from the front property line. I mean, excuse me, from the front facade of the building. Uh there are four roof decks. Uh two of them are 435 ft. The rear two are a little larger. They're 512 ft. Uh we have a total of 467 ft of green roof trays. And I guess I should also mention each of the four apartments has their mechanical closet located up here and their condenser located up here as well. These are our front and rear elevations. On the left we have the front elevation. Uh the main finish is a red brick. Uh the one uh little interesting thing here is this three strip, this three-foot vertical strip on the left is going to be finished with black aluminum panels. Uh and this was kind of done just to provide the uh illusion of symmetry here instead of having this side being a little longer than the other. Um the cantal levered bays up above right here are finished with Coventry gray uh fiber cement panels. We have a black metal entry door with half transparency glass. Uh the garage door is also the same. It's black frames with mostly half transparency glass. Uh black frame windows. Uh we have the dark gray aluminum railing at that front porch. Looking to the rear elevation, we have a smooth stucco finish at the base and then vinyl siding above. And both of these are that same gray color that we're using at the front, the Coventry gray. This is the right side of the building. So, you get a better look at that covered porch here with a brick with it brick column. Uh, moving back, we have our inset area for our meters. We have a double black door, excuse me, black aluminum door, which serves for our bicycle storage room. Then, we have that accessible entry door. It's a single door. And then these last double doors which are a little larger are for the trash and recycling room. And lastly here we have the left side which is pretty antilimactic. It has the same finishes as the rear and the other side. And that concludes my presentation. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Um there's no access from that alleyway to the rear yard. Correct. >> There's a gate there. >> Okay. >> Uh just for egress purposes, but it wouldn't be used. Right. the the the rear yard is meant to be private and accessed directly from the ground floor unit. >> Okay. So, that gate is locked. >> I think we would probably it probably Yes, it would be locked. It can be locked. >> Okay. And the only access would be from that tenant that >> correct >> has that yard. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um that's my only question. Anybody else? >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Thank you, council. Uh is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Anyone from public? >> Chair see no one from public. I would like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Uh Sophia, anything you want to add? Yeah, I would like to say that um the R1 does have some design standards and the applicant did work with staff to comply with the design standards including uh the design of the porch and the bay windows and we do appreciate that staff does ask that the applicant agree to the conditions in the staff report dated November 21st, 2025. Yes, we enjoyed working with Sophia and thanks for all her comments and help on the project and we do agree to the conditions in the um November 21st, 2025 report. >> Okay. Staff recommends approval. >> All right. Thank you. >> Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve KP 2025-000070 as presented to the board with staff recommendation and conditions. >> Second. >> Okay. Motion made and seconded for approval. Acting Vice Chair Gungadan, >> I. >> Commissioner Wick, >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato, >> I. >> Commissioner Patel, >> hi. >> And Chairman Langston, >> I. >> Motion carries. All in favor with conditions. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, council. >> It's okay, >> Mr. Wine. Okay, let's skip ahead to item 17. Is case P2025-0141 is a minor site plan with C variances for 421 New York Avenue. She stole my spot. Happy New Year everybody. >> You too. >> Good evening, Chair Langston. Um, commissioners, for the record, Benjamin Wine of Prime Toull and Misselli. Here on behalf of the applicant, 421 New York A JC LLC. The application before you this evening is for the property located at 421 New York Avenue, block 1705, lot 8, and we are in the R1 zone. We're here this evening seeking minor site plan approval along with two bulk variances in order to expand adaptively reuse exp and expand the existing forf family residential structure at the property um without increasing the density on the property. It will remain a four family house at the property. We're just seeking to provide a little bit more space for each of the units uh within the confines of the R1 zoning requirements which I'll get to momentarily. But before I do that, I see uh council staring daggers at me, so I will hand him the uh the affidavit package that we can get marked as. >> Thank you, council. current see the affidavit publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 421 New York Avenue here in the city uh was scheduled for this evening and noticed for this evening. It does appear to be in order. We're going to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. Thank you, councel. >> Thank you. Um before I move on, uh just a couple of other housekeeping items that I'd like to go over. Uh first and foremost, we have worked very closely with uh with Sophia. We have received her staff report dated January 9th, 2026 and uh and take no exception to complying with the recommended conditions should the board seek to approve our application this evening. I also want to indicate that as we are located within the RNA neighborhood association uh area, we have had some good correspondence and back and forth with Mr. Weissman. Um, I did initially reach out to him several months ago and uh, hearing nothing, which which I know is typically a little bit unusual, I reached back out to him a few weeks ago and uh, we did go back and forth a little. He said that the RNA is uh, is supportive of the application, appreciates that it is a good way to reuse an existing structure rather than demolish an existing structure. Um, but did actually provide us with a little bit of context which was helpful for our own applicant. And we'll get into the detail this evening, but suffice it to say the existing site um we understand from the neighbors has some uh has some drainage concerns uh interior to the site. So the actual the building that was there had a number of drainage problems over the years. And so we appreciated that feedback and are are actively going to introduce some techniques which um Mr. Dominguez, our architect, momentarily will go over to uh to address that. Uh otherwise, it was a it was a pleasant conversation back and forth both by phone and email. Um, and then lastly, uh, Mr. Dominguez is going to present plans to you this evening that, uh, that mirror what's on the portal with the exception of one change, which is why I'd like to have them marked into evidence. Uh when we did complete our most recent prep call as a team earlier today, we did identify that as an oversight, we had proposed to shift the uh the trash area actually below the stairs, which would have required tenants to roll trash cans up about six or seven stairs, which is not ideal from a safety perspective. And so what we've done is we've revised that to uh ensure that the trash cans will be at ground level. So that will be a change and I want to just put that on the record so that we can mark that into evidence as an exhibit. Beyond that, the only relief that we have for you this evening, we are height compliant with the R1 standards, but we are not story compliant. So we are seeking four stories to expand this from a three to a fourstory building technically. Um, but we will remain within the 35 ft height. The reason for that is that the lowest level on this existing structure is a basement uh as opposed to a seller. it is slightly above that uh that 50% requirement triggering a basement which which considers it a story. And so for that reason by adding a living story to the uh to the building it will technically be four stories will appear as three and a half stories like a number of the other properties. And the only other relief that we have is actually a reduction of an existing uh non-conforming condition. There is a front yard coverage requirement to not exceed 50%. Um, currently it is fully paved and at 100% and we are dropping that to 66%. Um, so it's much closer to the 50% but it's really the most that we can do uh in order to maintain the stoop and some of the other uh required access requirements. So that's the relief for you this evening and uh unless you have any further questions of me at this time, I'm happy to proceed with my first witness. >> Thank you. Council testimony tonight. >> I do. >> Arlennis Dominguez. A R L E N I S D O O M I N G U E Z. >> Miss Dominguez, good evening. Your license is current tonight. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. >> Thank you. So, Arlennis, if you can please walk the board through the existing and proposed conditions and uh council, this I just for the sake of the record, as I indicated before, I suggest that we mark the entire package um as A2. Again, the vast majority of the sheets are unchanged from what's on the portal, but just to be safe, uh if that's okay with you, >> we will mark it as A2. Can you just for purpose of the record identify which of the 13 sheets has that revision to it? It would be on It shows on sheet A001 and also on sheet A100. >> A2 it is. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, Arnus, if you can walk the board through the existing conditions at the property and what we're proposing here this evening. >> Um, quickly, uh, the title sheet is showing our proposed um, rendering for the property. This is an existing three-story um building four units and we are proposing a fourstory um with uh maintaining that 4unit use. On the second sheet we have the site plan. Um the property has a couple of um existing non-conforming conditions that we would be maintaining being sideyards and front yard. Um, we are adding a 6-foot addition at the rear, which brings us to our minimum rear yard of 26 feet. Um, the um mention of the trash enclosure, we did have it. So, the stoop was 7 ft wide prior and we had the trash cans below it. But again, in reviewing and seeing the um effort to have to bring those totes up from below, we did reduce the stoop to 4 ft and um have the trash enclosures next to it, which would be screened off. Um we also increase the landscaping on the property. So um majority of increases at the rear um coming all the way up to the stairs here and then um at the front we added some landscaping on the lower level. So another uh improvement on this site is we are depressing um this portion for entry to that lower unit and that in front of that door we will have a landscaped area. We have one site street uh one um street tree sorry and that summarizes our proposed site plan. Our next sheet is just illustrating the foot handle study of the proposed light fixture at the front. um to street we are at 0.1 um this is for the street tree installation A 100 is now showing the floor plans I've colorcoded them um to clarify the first two floors are a scissor um design existing currently in the basement level is a two-bedroom um one bathroom space. Our proposed design um you enter from these front stairs. Um and the first unit, unit number one, uh you enter into a living area, kitchen area, den space with a bedroom. As you proceed towards the rear of the of the building, you have a half bath, a washerdryer closet, and then stairs that will progress to the next floor. I'm going to go to the next page just to finish that unit number one. Um, unit number one proceeds at the rear of the building which has two more bedrooms making it a total of a three-bedroom and there are two bathrooms on this floor. One being an ensuite and one being the common bathroom for the other two bedrooms. Back to uh sheet A100. Um, actually, sorry, I'm going to go back here. Um so the front unit on the first floor would be a access from the front door which you would enter um from going up the front stoops at street level. Um you enter into the unit the green shaded unit. You have a kitchen dining room area one bedroom and a half bath. So similar um programat program programmatic layout. As you progress to the back, you do enter your stairs and then the rest of our unit is towards the rear. Um, we did this so that our lower unit can also have appreciation of um, more daylight and access to a rear property. Um and then on this level we also have two bedrooms, two bathrooms um which one is an on suite and one would be shared. The unit one and unit two are uh threebedroom units. As we proceed to the second floor, um these are also a duplex style um but they are stacked there. It will not have the same scissor orientation. So once you go up the common stairwell, you do enter a hallway, you enter unit number three and same pro program where it's a kitchen, a living, dining area, one bedroom and a half bath. Um at the rear unit, unit number four, you enter and have the same program of kitchen, living, dining, bedroom, and a half bath. As you proceed to the third floor, we have two more bedrooms for each unit, an on suite, and um a common bath. Each unit does have a washerd dryer and a mechanical room. Um the top two units do have access to the roof, uh where we're proposing a roof deck for each of them, um and they're separated by their bulkheads. We are also proposing a screened in mechanical area. We have a planter area that um barriers our 10-ft required roof setback. And we are also proposing a green roof. So together with the landscaped area uh and the green roof, we are um improving the drainage and the runoff on site um which we hope to alleviate the current uh flooding issue. uh front elevation. Uh to the right we are we see our existing there are two existing bays with the uh main entrance being centered. Um and on our proposed we are shifting the entry over to the right. Um this allows us to have a more complete unit layout on all floors. Um the current units are more railroaded because of that center entrance and the way that the units were divided. Um we will have a fenced off area uh that would barrier that drop. Um here is the the stairs that would go down to that unit number one. And then these are the stairs that would go up to the remaining units. uh material. We are proposing majority fiber cement panels in white. We are also proposing a composite wood plank on the uh one bay and at the entry of the building. Um we did maintain the bays, but we did uh square off one of them in the um hopes to modernize uh the aesthetic. And lastly, we are uh proposing a gray brick on the lower level of um like the base level of the building on the front. At the rear, we are proposing fiber cement um siding in its entirety and our side elevations will be updated to a fiber cement sighting. Um there is a recess on um one of the side facads because there's an existing adjacent window um in the neighboring property. So we did a small jog just to maintain our required setback uh fire setback and that summarizes. >> Sure. Just a couple of follow-ups. Uh, in terms of the mechanical units, um, can you confirm where those will be located? >> Yes, those would be on the rooftop and they would be screened in. >> Okay. So, there's no PTAX or window units, uh, even though I believe there's window units today. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, those will be removed. I also want to confirm and uh I blame myself for not mentioning this in my opening, but we do have an existing condition that's a non-conforming overall lot coverage um where I believe uh 75% is permitted and uh we're currently at I believe 83%. So can you confirm that we are dropping the overall lot coverage into compliance? >> Yes, we are dropping it to 72%. >> So we are eliminating that uh nonconformity. Okay. Um, I also want to confirm as this is a reuse and an expansion of an existing building that uh it will be compliant with all building code and I know that's a requirement, but I'd like to confirm that as well. >> Yes. >> Okay. And then uh in terms of just some of the overall site improvements that you addressed, um I also want to as I indicated in my opening that there were concerns about drainage on the site. So what exactly is being implemented to help alleviate that concern? Um so the added landscaping and the green roof we believe will um reduce runoff and improve the current drainage situation. >> Are we also capturing the building in the uh yeah the entirety of the building and roof leaders? >> Yes. >> Okay. And then last question for and I believe there was also uh an indication that we'd be providing a French drain system. Is that correct? >> We don't have that in the drawing but we're happy to include that. >> Okay. And then my last question for you, given as an architect, given that these are four units currently and we're not proposing to increase the density, but to to use your terminology, modernize them, would you do you believe that uh these units will be a lot more livable for uh people in 2020 at this point 2026 and beyond than they are today? >> Yes. Like I mentioned, the existing is a railroad fashion, which isn't ideal for privacy purposes and um living surf um purposes. There's also a lot of hallway, so it's not a very efficient plan. So, yes. >> Okay. And then I lied. Last question. Um, so just to uh just to also follow up and really ask um as an architect, do you feel that when you come to a building that is older and has a certain program that it's uh when given the opportunity to do so, it's better to modernize and work with the existing building rather than demolish it and start fresh? >> Yes, it keeps a little bit of what's existing there, history, and we're just improving and enhancing it. >> Thank you. That's all my questions. >> Okay, thank you. Any questions? Anybody? Council, do we know the age of the uh current building? >> I do not. Um but it might be in Miss Pereira's report. >> It is not. I do not know offhand. I would have to look at the tax records. >> And when you say you're rehabbing, what are we talking about? Down to studs? Are we keeping the framing in place? >> We are maintaining the two side walls. Um but and majority of front um besides the one bay that we're squaring off, the rear is coming off because we're doing that addition. And then the floor is going to get manipulated with the stair the new stair um openings and and whatnot. So majority of the shell would be maintained, but the interior and the rear would be removed. >> Thank you. All right. Okay. Anybody else questions? Nothing. >> Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. So, my next and final witness is Carolyn Worstelle, our professional planner. >> All right. >> Good evening. >> Truth. The whole truth. Truth. >> I do. >> It's Carolyn. C A R O L Y N. Worstelle. W O R S T E L L. >> Miss Worstelle, good evening. Your license is current. >> It is current and in good standing this evening. >> All right. Thank you. You're qualified. >> So Caroline, you heard the testimony from Miss Dominguez. Um I'd like to for you if possible to walk through the two variances that we have for the number of stories as well as for the still a variance but reduction in the front yard lot coverage as well as the master plan and the purposes of zoning and anything you feel helps justify the relief here this evening. >> Right. Um so yes. So uh we're here for this evening. There's two variances associated with this project. Uh building height and stories is the first one. So we are proposing four stories and that really relates to the fact that there is this existing uh uh basement space um and um because we're reusing the the building. We are going to be reusing that space, but we are trying to add that additional story um which again creates more space. allows for more livable uh uh units and more livable um layouts. Uh overall the building's proposed height is 35 ft is conforming. Um so uh you know I think overall that this building and and the height is uh it there's no substantial detriments here. Um if you were to knock this building down today and redo, which is again what we're trying not to do, you could build a building that would have the exact same height, the exact same bulk. So, we're really not seeing a change here in terms of the actual bulk of the building. It's how that space is sort of distributed on the different floors. Um, and I I think that uh the design and the way that they're redoing the facade and they're redoing this, you're going to sort of get a more compatible facade of the building. Um, because when you look at it the way they've redone the facade and with the windows, they're lining up better with the adjacent structures. Uh right now they're kind of off. Um the the windows are small and they're not at quite the same height. So I think this really creates a more coherent uh visual impact with the adjacent structures uh to the it would be a plan left. Um when we're looking at the maximum front yard lot coverage. Um, so this is a requirement where the space between the building and the lot line, you're supposed to create those landscaped front yards. Um, and the requirement is that uh no more than 50% of your front yard can be uh covered with pvious pavements or or whatnot. Uh, right now we're proposing 66%. Um, and that's a little bit more than what we had originally because of that change with how we're uh using and and storing the garbage. uh but this is still an improvement over what's there today. Today it's 100% lot coverage. So we are still reducing that. We are incorporating and and going to be providing some uh new landscaping at that front reducing the lot coverage. And then I think overall the project itself um between what's going on at the front and what's happening in the rear we are going to be reducing that overall lot coverage from 83 to uh which is now 72%. So again, that's that's um 11%. So that that's a pretty significant drop in coverage for this proposed project. Um so really again, I don't see that there's a substantial detriment here with this front yard uh variance because again we we are bringing it more into conformity, but we are still trying to deal with the access issues and that's sort of where we've landed. Um, but I think again that the overall improvements for uh the front and the rear outweigh the the detriment there for that that variance. Uh, when granting uh the requested variances, I think this is uh advancing the per purposes of the municipal land use law. Um, it's an appropriate residential use. Um, consistent with purpose A. Um, we we are maintaining that for family character of this building. Um we are um I I think this was this meets purpose B that security securing from safety from fire, flood and panic. Um so again with this we're taking this older building that is probably not up to current fire code standards and you're going to be doing a major re renovation. It has to meet current fire code and building code standards. So I think overall this allows us to have a much better product and improved safety for residents of of Jersey City. Um and then again in terms of flood with the fact that we are going to be reducing that coverage, we are going to be having more formal you know drainage of the roof. We're going to be having more green roof. Again we are going to have less runoff which is always a better better thing in the in the um uh uh is always a better thing. Um, and then, uh, I do look and say think that this is, uh, creating, um, a more desirable visual environment, uh, consistent with purpose I. So, we're really updating that facade, um, and creating that new streetscape improvements, uh, that new landscaping in the front yard. Um, we are going to be creating, uh, new street trees, you know, updated sidewalks. So I think overall uh the view of that that building will be improved with with the uh the project. I don't see there being any substantial detriment to the general welfare. Um you know overall again it's a consistent residential use in a residential neighborhood. That bulk overall is conforming in terms of the height. Um, and I think that the re the redesign of the facade and the redesign of the building creates a more consistent character in terms of how it relates to its neighbors. Uh, and then again, overall, we have the benefits in storm water, uh, with the reduced coverages, um, which I think benefits not only this property owner, but everyone in the neighborhood. I don't see there being uh, resulting in a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of zone plan. uh you know it's consistent with the R1 uh uh district standards to provide for you know residential housing um and infill housing and I think it advances the Jersey City master plan's goals to provide unique attractive and highquality residential uh areas. So I think overall this project meets both those positive and negative criteria for the variances requested. >> Thank you Carolyn. Just one final question for you um in terms of some of the uh the overall site improvements that Mr. Dominguez went through as well as that you identified um reducing or eliminating the non-conforming lot coverage and non-conforming lack of street trees, reducing the non-conforming front yard coverage and uh as well as adding green infrastructure, um adding outdoor space for the residents in the rear and on the roof and bringing the building up to code. with all of those as well as some of the other, you know, smaller scale but improvements nonetheless that have been mentioned. Would it be your your opinion as a professional planner that these upgrades for for family residential living would create a better environment for the four families that are intended to live in there as well as the overall neighborhood? >> Uh yeah, I mean I certainly this is modernizing the building. You're going to be creating more modern layouts. it's going to meet, you know, modern building codes, uh, better storm water drainage, better visual impacts, uh, you know, better streetscape, uh, visuals. So, I think, yeah, it's it's definitely a benefit to going to be the residents of the building as well as to the neighborhood as a whole. >> Thank you, Caroline. All right. Thank you council. >> Sure. I just have a quick question. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> For clarification, um, the maximum front yard lot coverage is what, 60 or 66? >> 66. So once we made the decision, >> I see on the memo from staff it says 60. Correct. >> So yeah, that that relates to the one change we mentioned which is when we pulled the garbage cans up from underneath the stoop, it changed how the stairs down into the to the lower area, the lower yard functioned. And so we lost a couple square feet. So we went from 60% imperous coverage to 66% imperous coverage. So we did slightly increase our um imperous coverage at the front yard, but we are making some additional changes to the rear yard. And so overall, we're going to actually be dropping our imperous coverage from 75% which was what part of the original application down to 72. So, we are increasing it slightly at the front yard, but overall we're going to have an even greater reduction in coverage for the whole site. Can I ask to see those changes to have that highlighted? >> Uh, that was exactly one of my followup questions. So um before we had this portion is what what uh made it go from 60 to 66. So, it was about a little bit more landscape here because the stairs were a little further right. In order to for me to make a sufficient platform for these four totes, I had to shift it over a little bit. Um, prior we presented this area paved. So, um, I even I forgot to remove the text here, but um, I removed that to increase. So before we had a total 75% um impervious with 60 at the front. When I shifted the stair over it became 66 at the front, but in total now we're at 72. So although we're not meeting um or didn't have as great as a case in the front, we have a better overall landscape design. Does that make sense? I have no other questions. >> Okay. >> For now. >> All right. Thank you. Any other questions? Anybody? >> Anything else? >> Okay. Thank you. And uh council, we talked about a French drain before. Would you be comfortable putting that as a condition of approval? >> Yes, absolutely. That's one of the things we discussed today as well. >> Okay. Excellent. All right. And that's your presentation, council. >> That is my present presentation. I would respectfully request the right to sum up at the conclusion for any comment. >> All right. Thank you. Uh is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? Anyone from public? >> Chair, see no one from public. I would like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> All right. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Sophia, anything you want to add? >> Um well, uh my question concerning the change in law coverage was answered. I think it does not change my overall opinion about this project concerning the variances. Uh when it concerns the number of stories, staff does not see substantial detriment to the public good in granting this variance. Um the building will still conform to the maximum permitted height which is 35 ft making it that such that the bulk of the building is consistent with the zoning standards and the additional story will allow for more square footage to accommodate the dwelling units. When it concerns the front yard lock coverage where the maximum permitted is 50%, it is now 66% proposed. Yet the overall permitted law coverage is still within the zoning standard. So staff does not see any substantial detriment to the public good considering that variance. In addition to the conditions listed in the staff memo dated January 9, 2026, >> uh, which I understand the applicant has agreed to. We are going to add a condition to revise the plans to show the details of the additional storm water mitigation such as the French drain drawing. And I also want to make sure there is a detail including the screening of the refuge area just to review before we grant any um signed approved planning sets. >> Sure. And I see no detriment uh to compliance with those additional conditions as well. I will just offer to the board as well. Uh unless you had anything else, Miss Per, I'm sorry. Uh well uh otherwise staff recommends approval. >> Sure. So chairman I'll just add I had an opportunity to confirm with my client as well that those additional conditions are are in fact uh acceptable. The other thing he did mention to me and he did text me as well to say if the board would prefer we go back to the 60% plan that had been initially proposed and keep the trash cans below. Um we're happy to do that. We really just saw that as a safety improvement for the residents, but uh we're we're certainly not going to uh to die on that hill. Um and even if we did do that, we would still maintain that in the rear yard. We would still propose the additional landscaping that is proposed. So, I just wanted to offer that. I'm not a fan of last minute changes. This really was born out of a out of a safety comment that came up earlier today. And so, I apologize about that. But beyond that, you know, you've heard the testimony here this evening. And um and given that uh there we have no problem with the conditions as proposed, we would respectfully request that the board grant the application for minor site plan approval along with the number of stories as well as the front yard lot coverage relief. >> Okay. Thank you, council. And um I think we'll be voting on what was presented to us tonight. >> That's fine. Sure. >> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. I'll I'll entertain a motion then. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case B205-0141 as presented to the board with staff recommendation and conditions. >> Okay. Motion made and seconded for approval. >> Acting Vice Chair Gungardan. >> No. >> Commissioner Wick >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Patel. >> I. >> And Chairman Langston. >> I. >> Motion carries. Four in favor. One oppose. >> Okay. >> Thank you everybody. Have a good evening. >> You too. All right. All right, we're going to take a 10-minute break, everybody. Back in a couple, >> exactly. >> Yeah, I work. Good to go. All right. So, let's go back to item 15 is case P2024-0213 is a preliminary and final major site plan with C variances for 33 Pacific Avenue. Okay. Again, for the record, Tom Lean from Connell Foley. This is a notice matter. Uh I posted my affidavit and proof of notice to the portal, but I will provide same to council. Thank you, councel. Chairman, I received the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to 33 Pacific Avenue here in the city. I've had the opportunity to review it. It does appear to be in order. This is another matter that had been previously scheduled and carried through to tonight with the preservation of that notice. A1 for purpose of the record. >> Thank you, council. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um >> I can't get this to go higher, so I'm gonna go off this one. Okay. The application before you this evening is located at 33 Pacific Avenue. We are in the canal crossing redevelopment plan area. That is not a redevelopment plan that this board sees very often. There's only been kind of a trickle of projects and approved in that area. And that's because it was an area where there was substantial uh uh environmental cleanup over the last 30 or 40 years. And only now are we starting to see um the remediation finalizing and uh people putting in applications for development. Uh so this is really one of the first uh developments that's going to move forward in this area. We're very proud of it. We think it's going to kind of set the tone for some of the other development in this zone. Uh it is located at the corner of Pacific Avenue and Caven Point Road. That is uh in the southeast area of this redevelopment plan. It's uh somewhat removed from Garfield Avenue which sort of sets the western boundary for this redevelopment plan. Uh the project uh in some is an eight-story building. There are 99 dwelling units and groundf flooror um commercial spaces. Um we are uh we do have an affordable component here. It's a required 15%. So 99 units, 15 affordable units. Um and then we also have um parking and we have a total parking of uh 29 spaces. Um just to give a little bit further background on the project here, as I said, there is not a lot of development in this area. There's still uh sub substantial uh infrastructure improvements that need to be um made in this area. Part of the redevelopment plan requires everybody who's developing in this zone to basically give their prorat a share based on the size of the parcel to work with the MUA to um not only build the necessary uh sewers uh water connections and the curbing and the street lines here. Um the MUA and the JC are still kind of working out that formula. Uh but we have been designated. Uh we did recently amend our RDA to include language basically saying that we will work with the JC and the JCMUA on whatever formula that they come up with and we will pay pay our prorish air. So we've worked out a lot of the the kinks in this plan. We're kind of the first new ones here dealing with some of this stuff, but like I said, we are excited to uh to present the uh the application this evening. Uh I have two witnesses. Roco Maruchcci is my uh civil engineer and I'm going to have him come up and not only go over um some of those issues I talked about about infrastructure but also give you uh existing site conditions and uh our ingress and egress for the garage. >> Sure. >> Tonight is going to be the truth. >> I do. >> Sure. Roco Maruji. It's RoCCO M A R U CCI. >> Good evening sir. Uh, your license is in good standing in New Jersey. Okay, thank you. >> All right, so >> I guess you don't see my screen here. Let me see if I can >> um, let me reopen it. >> It's on here. Yeah, but >> drag it. There you go. >> Okay. So, that's a problem because now I don't see it, but >> Okay. >> All right. >> You had that problem before? >> Of course. Right. Display. It's not how you want to start, huh? >> Do you want to just kind of drag it over? >> Yeah. Let me um let me open it back up. >> All right. Here we go. There we go. All right. I got it. So, I'll I'll just go off that screen. It's going to be a little tricky because I'm looking up there. Um, so as as you said, um 33 Pacific Avenue, also is known as uh block 21509 tax slot 3. Um it is in the canal crossing redevelopment area. Um I'm going to jump down to the aerial. This is all everything in here is was submitted as part of the site plan application. There's no uh exhibits, so everything's in part of the package. As you can see, uh we are situated at the north um western intersection of Ps Avenue, Cabin Point Avenue. It is highly industrial area. Um going to zoom in here a little bit. You can kind of see um first residential project in this kind of area. Uh to the south you have Sinnelise Studios. Um, a couple still active recycling industrial sites going on. Um, and I believe to the north there's a school that just got rid of got approved. Um, but that's obviously still not there. >> Correct. That's correct. Yep. Um, going to go down to my existing conditions here. So obviously you can see it is vacant. The uh area here was actually formally a warehouse. Uh the warehouse has been demolished. Um the site is elevationwise is located uh probably in the elevation 9 to 11. Um I just want to highlight and note that the area is actually in a title flood zone. um and is part of the redevelopment um which the whole redevelopment area you have to deal with the NJD to get a flood hazard area permit an individual permit. Um the JCMUA had uh designed drawings for this entire neighborhood. They never actually secured that permit. So the applicant went ahead and secured a permit from the D to develop this site um under the the rules when we got the permit. The rules require the building to be raised um above the flood zone. Um the rule is FEMA the FEMA elevation which is elevation 13 plus one. So if I jump down I'm going to next I'm going to go to the actual site plan. As you can see there is significant um you know improvements that have to happen here as far as the roadway network. Um it's an eightstory uh residential building, 99 units, 15 affordable. Um first ground floor level will be retail with parking. The parking lot at the first level. Levels two through eight will be residential. That'll be the residential component of the 99 units. Um we do have two driveway cuts. um one driveway on the cabin point side is for the garage for the parking and then the um driveway on the uh Pacific Avenue side will be for loading. Now um like I said this area because we >> before you go on Sure. >> I just want to point out that's a deviation we're requesting. Correct. The two different curb cuts. >> Correct. So could you just basically explain to the board what led to the decision to have the layout the way it is, which I think would go a long way in explaining why we're requesting. >> Yes. The one deviation was two curb cuts. First off, we're on a corner. Um so one curb cut on CP point. Uh one curb cut on um Pacific. Um the Pacific one will be loading zone only. Um the garage access just for the the cars will be on the um cabin point side. Um the decision was to the idea is that any loading move in move out um deliveries it gets it off the road. It actually brings it into a loading zone. So that's why we're asking for the second access. Um also trash pickup. Everything is inside the building. Um they'll be able to pick up trash off the road. Um everything will be able to be handled, you know, without blocking traffic or blocking parking and loading zones and stuff like that on the road. Um, as far as the road infrastructure, we will be creating um in accordance with the uh redevelopment area um a travel lane, uh a bicycle lane, street parking, um and then streetscape. Um as far as the grades, like I said, we are required to raise the finish floor to be above the flood zones. So, in order to achieve that um and to maintain where the roads are in the current state, like I said, we're at 910 elevation. Um the actual building first floor will be raised. Um there are series of staircases as you can see with handicap ramps that will take you up off of the sidewalk level. This will be like kind of like a raised terrace underneath the building here. another um uh staircase access in the middle and another one at the corner. Um the retail elevations, the retail finish floor will all be at elevation 14, so it's about 4 ft off the ground. Um the garage itself will meet the grade at the roadways and then it'll be ramped up internally. So all the parking is at the same elevation as the finished finished floors. that that allows you to have your, you know, ADA accessibility, handicap parking, um access to the elevators to the residential uh component above and also to the retail. Um I'm just going to jump next to the grading. As you can see how the grading works. Sidewalk elevation 10.5. that um terrace area with the staircase to the finished floor 14. So, it's raised above and and the testimony later with the building. You'll be able to see more of that in the renderings and how the building actually lays out. Um and then like I said, the applicant actually um went to the D and we got a permit to construct it in this manner to, you know, leave the roadway network to where it is, you know, until future however they decide to develop this this um redevelopment area. Um Mr. Lean, when did we get that permit? And is that permit per the latest set of regulations or have the regulations changed since we've secured that permit? >> So we got it off based off the original regulations. I guess uh it was about a year ago. I know the regulations are in talks of changing. They haven't actually changed yet. Um but we are based on we're grandfathered in based on the original rules. the rules plus >> the permits you rolled I think council in June they had changed some of the regs I don't know which ones in particular but >> I I believe that they they put them out for comment I don't know if they've actually promulgated them correct >> yes so I don't think that they are actually on the book yet but they my understanding is that they are pending very soon >> uh but how long is the permit good for and does the issue with the JC pose a problem for the project. >> It's going to be conditioned upon obviously >> the JC and the MUA. >> That's correct. And that's why we that's why we built in some of those protections into the RDA as we have it now because >> as Mr. Maruchi mentioned uh there was design elements for this entire redevelopment plan that um were done by the MUA that they have not actually sought the permits for it. they would have sought them under the same guidelines that we put up. So, we we took some initiative here. >> Um, but in in essence, we just did it for this site instead of the expanded uh project that the MUA was planning to do for this entire district. Again, we we've had two separate meetings with the MUA. Um, we we tried to design the RDA so that their council would be happy with with the way that we're going to work with them in the future. There's a lot of unknowns here because there's a lot of unknown with what the rest of the the redevelopment plan looks like and how this infrastructure is going to get to this site. All we can do is design for our site and there's an understanding with the MUA that that's basically what we did here. >> Don't disagree with any of those comments. I'm just generally concerned that obviously what's going on under the redevelopment plan and with the infrastructure improvements that the MUA is going to be I guess spearheading that it matches what the DP is approving and reviewing. Right. Uh so that was the purpose of my comment. The board understands obviously that it will be subject to those things happening, but I >> I'd hate for you to have to come back and get an amendment because of >> there's no question that there's going to be some growing pains here, but I mean, this board is fully aware. There's rarely a building that gets developed where we're not coming back and seeking some type of amendment at some point. Uh, again, we can only design to what we know right now and design based on our individual project. And that's the conversations we've had with the MUA, which is, you know, you guys go ahead because we're not where we are, where we need to be right now as far as talking about how we're going to fund all this stuff, talking about how all these individual sites are connected with each other. They understand that we're somewhat setting the the trend here on what some of this stuff is going to look like, and that's all that's all we can advance to the board at this point. >> And will you be able to actually construct the project without the other infrastructure improvements having happened? Is that would that physically be possible or you need the other improvements to happen in order to connect? >> So, um we would have to do infrastructure improvements and we're working through the that with the JCMA as far as utilities, um water, sewer. Um as far as elevation, they're kind of stuck with some of the elevations in the road here because if you look at the Sinnol Studios right across the street, you can't just raise the roads because then it puts them in a hole. So realistically, there's there's going to be areas where you have to meet grades that are there now, and I don't think it's really going to affect our site that much. But ultimately, as they develop the rest of the redevelopment, there are areas where the grades are going to have to come up. I believe even as you head north on Pacific Avenue, there's a brewery, a brewing company, you know, so those things those things are there. You can't just raise the roads and then put them in a hole and that causes a problem with it. So, you know, either way, because we're one of the first buildings that comes in here, um, and we have the D permit, um, there are elevations that as part of that ultimate final design, things are going to have to get met. Now, if they need to raise some of the areas along our project, it can be done, you know, as we work with work through those elevations with them. Um, but the the main things that we need to work through with the JCMA way is utilities. Um and we've had discussions with them as far as extent of water lines and where they need to go. Um and we're working that out with them. So >> bringing them bringing those utilities to the site you're saying? >> Well, in combination either them and us together, >> you know, there would be components, >> but I guess it's not at the site. So it's got to get to the site and where >> it's got to get into correct what it looks like. So the short answer is yes, we can. Uh is the final design of how those utilities connect here done to this moment? No, it's not. But we've had those conversations with the MUA. We've proposed several ideas on how it can make it work. >> So the answer is yes. >> Not at all. at where >> so the de the current the way our permit is issued is we're one foot above the base foot elevation so the base foot elevation is 13 our building's at 14 my understanding is they're talking in the range of almost 4t above the baseoot elevation >> so that would make it 17 so yeah so it's a significant the the rules right now that are um in front of the D for comment is a significant change in raising a lot of things. But again, like I said, um you're not going to be able to change certain areas that are already developed. You know, you know, the Sinnel studios there, you can't raise the grades five feet because then it puts them in a hole and they're just going to flood and they're going to be stuck. Um the brewery company. So, >> correct. >> Yeah. Now, as you develop, you know, further um, you know, north and and east of here where there's nothing else, yeah, those grades can come up as long as there's nothing there that's already been built. Um, so >> warehouses, correct? But if that does become redevelopment as part of this whole thing, it's >> Yeah. So utility wise, we we understand and we know that there are things we're working out with the JCM way, but it's it can be done. Yes. Um I'm just going to jump back to the site plan. Um again, like I said, there's roadway improvements, um driveway cuts, the the garage, again, we already went through that. Um, I'm just going to jump now through I'll bring up the um the landscaping, you know, streetscape. We're doing, you know, street lighting, uh, decorative sidewalks, uh, street trees, you know, similar to any downtown redevelopment area. Um, and then this is just a color rendering that kind of shows you, you know, you know, the trees long and the driveway cuts and all that stuff. So that's really all I have as far as the application. >> When you say well >> um so the contamination I believe has been dealt with on this property. Um and it would be capped. So I don't think there's going to be wells because it's a capped site at that at the moment. >> Okay. Okay. Anything else? >> I have nothing further for this witness. >> Any questions? >> No. >> Anyone? >> Okay. Thank you, sir. >> Yeah. I'm just going to pull up the um >> Yeah, don't move that computer. >> Yeah, >> let me do this. I'm gonna actually minimize this one and then I'm going to pull up the architecture, >> right? >> Yeah, I think we all want to do that. There we go. >> There you go. Then you can just kind of scroll through. >> Uh I only have one other witness and it's Jim Montafford who is our architect. >> Okay. Thank you. >> The truth, the whole truth. >> I do. >> Spell your name. >> Yes. James J. Montaport. M O N T E F O R T E. >> Good evening, sir. Your license in New Jersey is current in good standing. >> Yes. Yes, it is. >> Okay. Thank you. You're qualified. >> Okay. So, this is our building. Uh we're an eight-story building and um the concept I had here was to marry the industrial area to what the future will bring. So, it's a little bit of a past marrying with the future. So, the first five stories are uh brick and um kind of black u industrial type windows. And then you can see on the bottom level here, this is where our arcade is for the retail. This is a our brick bulkhead that raises us above the street. Uh we have uh seating areas up here like benches and entrances to the store. We have a 20 foot floor to floor height on the first floor to create um extra high ceilings in the in the retail spaces with lofts up up top. So they would have little loft space on top. Um this is um our sign band comes across here. And then you can see how our materials kind of changed to a more contemporary more glass uh and anodized kind of aluminum look with glass railings. Um our project the first sheet that you have is our project data sheet. Uh eightstory building. We're 99 units. I have how do you zoom in here? How do we zoom in? Oh. >> Oh, yeah. Look at that. Get rid of that. So, our breakdown is um 99 units. We have 15 affordables. The chart that is the unit breakdown shows the affordables. Um how many we have. We have um we have two very low income. We have six low income and we have seven moderate income units. They're dispersed throughout the whole building. I didn't even designate them at this point because they're just going to go all over the building and I didn't really pull out which units because they're all uh pretty nice units. It's just a matter of where they're going to go. They're pretty much all the same. Um our materials again are are brick and metal panels. The building itself is 100,000 136,000 10 square feet. Um the first floor, I want to show you that. So I don't know if So this is how the first floor works. It's a little more detailed. Um so you could see um the back half of the building is all parking and then it has a two it's it's basically two stories high. So I have a a a lofted area for storage gates for all the tenants. So that's on a mezzanine level there. These are our retail spaces and they have little lofts in each of these retail spaces. Our main lobby is in the front of the building uh for the residential tower. And then we have the stairs. And then I tuck the um the ramp into the building. So you don't see the handicap ramp, but you can come in off the street level and come up to the ramp and onto the prominade in a in a wheelchair. And then as you go up the building, uh this is the second floor level which has um private uh gardens in the back of each unit. Uh the unit the building is set back off of the um the north side enough so that it has a a full facade here. No matter what happens in the future, um even if someone builds up to the property line, we still have enough room to have a nice facade. Uh we have balconies and windows. And I was trying to think about what's going to happen to this area in the future if somebody builds a zero lot line. Um, so all of these units in the back have these terraces in the back. We have double elevators that take you up to the the upper floors. The only place where zero lot line is on the um believe this is the east side. And as we go up the building, the units just keep mimicking themselves. So, on the roof, uh, we have a, um, a finished roof area for amenities. It's, uh, it's about 4,226 square feet of amenity space. Um, 1300 of it is actually enclosed, which is permitted by, uh, the percentage of the floor below it. the um there's a covered Loia area where it says covered area uh for seating and and other um events that could happen underneath that covered area and get out of the sun. We have a garden patio on the on the side and then 6,000 square feet of plantable planted surface for um grabbing rain water and and filtering it and sending it back into the system. So, it's a rather large um green roof. And these are our building elevations. Um, as you can see the um the the way the building lays out, the the brick portion of the building kind of stops before the end and then is wrapped with this contemporary structure that goes around it. And our signage is all um block letters that are applied to the building. This is the um the the other side on Caven Caven court. Uh you can see we have um the building again wraps back down around the building and then we have balconies that stick out to the side and then this is our terrace area. This is our this is our blown up first floor showing where you go into the garage. This is in uh the south side of the building. I keep doing that. We have lighting fixtures speced out. They're pretty much uh wall mounted up and down. This is our zero lot line side. Um someone could build right up to us. So, we have to fire rate this portion. So, I'm doing a series of metal panels with a little uh color change. And then there's a recessed piece that runs up the center and over the top that's recessed enough to create windows. I have these um open air uh masonry units that allow air to come into the garage, but if someone builds up against us, we visually don't have to see them. So, um I added that. And then we have Stucco. These are the other two sides. This is the blow up of our first floor. The building is 90 ft tall. These are our materials. We have brick that's kind of industrial looking. And then we have a series of these metal panels and we have some stucco. And then these are the open air um blocks for the garage to allow ventilation in and out. And we have a couple pages of shadow study. This was required. And I think that's that's the end of my presentation for the building itself. 48 inches 40 I'm sorry 42 inch >> bottom rail that's >> the bottom rail to where >> the bottom of the rail >> to the finish floor >> what's the gap >> oh it's less than four inches some of them are the glass railings actually go to the ground >> okay >> yeah the the row iron railings stick up about two to three inches >> yeah that's required by the code. >> Sure. It's not really detailed yet. If you want them to be two inches or less, that's fine. >> Yes, sir. >> It is a matter of how it's detailed. >> So, the railings on the lower >> that's not here tonight was very emphatic and brought up a lot of good points. >> Well, things rolling off the things rolling off the balcony >> rolling underneath. >> Yeah. Well, the spacing is is designed for children's heads so they don't stick their head in there. But you're right, something smaller. >> Something that something rolls underneath a bottle or >> Okay, I'll make sure that's on the drawing. >> Bitcoin or something like that. >> Bitcoin, council, the height. What's the permitted height under the redevelopment plan? >> 90. >> That's 90. >> And what are we at? 90. 90. >> Does that factor in the >> that is taking into account all the exemptions >> under the >> the supplemental code? Yes. >> And is that based on the flood plane elevation too? >> Yes. >> Yes. And I actually actually was just in a seminar with the D and the new regulations are being adopted in July. But since we've already got our approval, we're considered a legacy property. So this runs contiguous with the property, our approval. >> But that permit does expire, right? >> No, not the approval. >> Okay. >> Yeah, because we're actively working on it, too. So I guess if the project dies for, you know, 10 years, might lose it. I want, we don't plan on that happening. I'm not sure how everybody's going to handle this extra five feet because it's four feet plus one foot of freeboard. It's a lot. >> That's what they're talking about, right? >> That's what they're Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> It's a lot. And it pushes like I'm I'm like I'm in a short town. So, basically pushes everybody that was in an Azone is now going to be in a is going to be in a flood zone, >> right? It's just gonna it's going to play havoc on small towns with retail. I'm not sure how they're going to do it. So, this was hard enough just to get people up four feet. >> Wow. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> It's Thank you. >> So, I have a question in regards to the parking. Um, so there's 29 ground floor parking spaces. Are those spaces for the commercial or for the residential? >> They're residential parking. the resial >> except for the handicap spaces. Oh, >> okay. And for the affordable units, is this going to be selected throughout all the floors? >> Yes, the eight floors. >> Yeah, I believe I didn't that's what I was saying. I didn't really designate them yet, but I was planning on doing uh throughout the building on each floor. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> they they are subject to U-Hack. So there's a breakdown this studio ones, two, three, bedrooms. And when we go to enter into an affordable housing agreement with the city, they will require us to designate each of the units. And they do not allow you to have them on one floor. They have to be spread out through throughout the building. So >> thank you. >> Uh couple quick questions. Um council, I know I'm going to say it sooner or later. You're going to say it for me that all the affordable units should be built from the same materials, same fit and finish, everything. >> That's correct. Yes. and we will add that as a condition. >> Okay. Um the roof deck that's private only to the units or that's not going to be just for the res anything, right? >> Not for the public. >> Okay. Looks like >> not that I know of. I >> looks like a pretty big size. >> Well, we have 100 units that's going to generate probably >> 100 units. We move 100 units in in 10 minutes around here. people. >> I have I've had I' I have roof decks this big on smaller units actually. >> So, um >> but our lobby for the residential is totally separate and so are the elevators. Okay. So, it's >> not public. >> Okay. >> And I would also point out chairman that we have 46 two bedrooms and 10 threebs. So, we do have a good breakdown of the larger units in this building. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um, my last question is the ventilation to the garage. >> Let's say someone builds up against that lot line. How do you ventilate your garage now? >> Well, we would have to mechanically ventilate the garage if that's the case. Okay. >> It's pretty open. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Right now, we qualify for an open garage. >> Gotcha. >> And I also have mechanical penthouse in there, too. So, that that too is uh that's just for the units for the retail component. Okay. So, >> they're within the garage. >> Gotcha. All right. That's it for me. Anybody else? Anything. >> All right. Thank you, sir. We appreciate it. >> Thank you very much for your time, >> council. >> Yeah, I have nothing further other than I did note the one deviation we have. Again, I believe that's a design element that was working with transportation and their comments, too, to try and keep some of the loading out of the new cartway, parking, bike lane that we're all building. So, I do believe it speaks for itself as far as the relief, but other than that, uh, like I said, we're very excited for this project. Someone has to be the first one to put down legs here, and we're hoping it's us. So, >> yeah, we don't want to take parking spaces away before they get built. Right. >> That's correct. Yes. >> All right. Okay. Uh, is there anybody here from the public that wants to comment on this? Anyone from the public? >> Sure. I see no one from the public. I would like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> All right. Motion is made and seconded. Public is closed. Joe, you have anything? Certainly, chair. Um, yes. So, we've been working with the applicants team for the better part of a year uh on this uh pioneering multifamily residential project uh to ensure that it co uh complies with all the relevant standards within the canal crossing redevelopment plan as well as supplement uh all other applicable standards in the LDO. Um the bulk and mass of the the bulk and mass of the building complies with the canal crossing redevelopment plan. The so does the density. Um I would like to point out a small point of correction with regards to the variances. They are requesting two points of relief. One with the number of egresses but the second one is the um the width of the two-way egress. Um 20 ft is the maximum. They're proposing 24. That's correct. >> Uh staff has no problem supporting uh both of these um variances given that they would provide smooth egress and ingress uh for park uh residents looking to park or any um handicap people looking to park in uh and use the retail aspect of the building as well while also being able to um facilitate the refuse removal. Um we are monitoring uh I guess the in terms of like the the flood plane heights and standards. So we'll keep an eye on that and whether down the road an amendment would be necessary. But uh yeah, we're working with the applicants there and um and we had been working with uh affordable housing and ensuring all the um requisite affordable housing provisions have been provided by the project. Um so given all of that I would just like to confirm with the applicant that they agree to the nine stated conditions uh as well as the additional one that chairman Langston brought up uh regarding the affordable unit materials um from the staff memo dated October 8 28th 2025. >> Yes I am in receipt. We are uh okay with all of the conditions therein. We are also going to add the condition regarding bringing the railings down to two inches or less to prevent anything from falling off. >> Great. Yeah, we'll be on the lookout for those plans. And uh with that said, staff recommends approval. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve KP 2024-0213 um with staff recommendation and conditions. Second. >> All right. Motion is made and seconded for approval. >> All right. of vice chair, acting vice chair Gangadan. >> This is such a great start to the residential um housing there in that neighborhood. Beautiful design building. Um I'm very happy to see that with the start of 15 affordable units that's going to be in this building. Gladly vote I. >> Commissioner Wick, >> it's a beautiful building. I love the design. I will vote I. Commissioner Stamato, >> I love the building. I love the idea with affordable housing. I love your design. I vote I >> Commissioner Patel >> and Chairman Langston. >> I motion carries 5. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you everybody. >> All right, let's move on to item 18. In this case, P2024-019 is a conditional use for 3169 JFK Boulevard. >> Seeing a lot of me tonight. Seeing a lot of me tonight. >> Too much. All righty. Okay. Again, for the record, Tom Lane from Connell Foley. This is a notice case. I have posted the affidavit to the portal, but we'll provide same to council. Thank you. Chairman, I'm received the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 3169 Kennedy Boulevard here in the city. Had the opportunity to review it. It does appear to be in order to mark it as A1 for purpose of the record. >> Thank you, councel. So, uh, the application before you is another somewhat unique application. Uh, I don't recall if this has actually been, uh, presented to the board previously. Uh, when the amendments were recently made to the LDO back in 2024, uh, they added some conditional uses to the R1 district. One of those is uh the per uh permission to have a commercial space on the corner in certain uh lots in the R1 district, namely lots that are already in an area where there's uh some existing commercial spaces, usually either caddy cornered or on the same side of the street, also at corners. So, uh, the type of places we're looking at are exactly where this project is, along Kennedy Boulevard, where there's a lot of professional offices and even some commercial spaces on corners and sometimes midblock on um, in places that have one and two family homes. Uh, the application before you is essentially requesting just that. It is a three-story building. Uh, we are requesting uh, the conditional use for commercial at the corner. Uh, and then there will be two units above the commercial space. Um there is a number of uh items you need to hit in order to meet the conditional use. Uh we've uh provided all those on our plans, but I'll just quickly go through them. Uh you're limited to cafes, laundrymats, or retail retail sales of goods and services and offices and medical uses. There must be an existing commercial space either on the same side of the street across the street or caddy cornered. We have that here. Limited to ground floor or seller. We're on the ground floor. lock coverage 90%, we're below the 90%. Um, and that is the majority of it. Uh, we're not proposing a cannabis use. We're not trying to use a existing garage. Um, so we've worked extensively with planning uh on this. Uh, this is another one that's been in the hopper for a while to to try and get this right. Uh we are on a bit of an undersized lot, so there are some variances related to the rear yard and also our setbacks for the rooftop. Uh I do have some planning testimony for that, but other than that, I'm going to let uh Mr. Lewis uh sh run through the uh architectural plans. And I recognize that I am also still under oath. Again, this is the last time you'll have to deal with me tonight. Okay. So, as was mentioned, we are an undersized corner lot in the R1. It's 25 ft wide, but only 80 feet deep. There was an existing one family building on the property, which has already been demolished. And we're proposing a new three-story, two family home with two garages in the rear uh as well as ground flooror retail located at the corner uh fronting on JFK Boulevard. We're asking for variances for rear setback as well as the roof deck setback. Uh so, let me just jump right into the site plan here. Um, and I just I also want to mention that Floyd Street is a short deadend street off of JFK. Um, and the other thing I want to mention about this site, which will be clear when I show the elevations, is it's it's a pretty sloped site. We're sloping down towards the corner on JFK and then down even further along uh Floyd Street. So, when we get to the elevations, that'll be very obvious. Um so on JFK there is one existing tree which we will be keeping and providing with a new tree pit and we're proposing two new trees along Floyd Street. Uh we have one new 10-ft concrete um excuse me one new 10-ft curb cut along Floyd Street that is back here and that's to uh provide access to two new garages, onecar garages, one for each apartment. Uh we're doing new concrete curbs and new concrete sidewalks. And I do also want to note, you can see it on the small survey here, probably can't see it. Uh there is a small block wall which is kind of a raised planter that's protruding out into the public right of way a few feet and that's another condition that we will be uh rectifying by eliminating that uh planter. Um we actually have a 5'9 in setback at JFK and that's matching the building to our right. Uh in this space we're providing a 98 square foot lawn area uh in the middle of the building. At the corner of the building we're providing a concrete pad which will provide access to uh the commercial space which the front door will be facing JFK Boulevard. Um we have a three-foot setback along the right side of the building and that's because there are some windows on that existing building located on the property line. Uh we're using this FE. We're uh providing permeable pavers in this space and that's going to provide access to our sprinkler room as this again is a fully sprinkler building. Uh as well as our uh trash and recycling room. Uh along Floyd Street, we have a smaller setback. It's only like 4 in and it's actually really just so that we can have a small cantal lever above without protruding that can lever out into the public right away. Uh we also have both of our residential entries uh in about the middle of the building along Floyd Street and those are further inset at the first floor. So we'll have a bit of a covered entry for each of those residential units. Uh also at the rear of the building we have another three-foot setback and we're using this space uh for our access to our meters. So our um gas and electric meters will be back there. Okay, with that I'm going to move on to the floor plans. So, here we're looking at the ground floor. Uh, so again, fronting on JFK, we have a 504 ft retail space. This has an ADA bathroom. It's mostly windows on both sides. Uh, not the bathroom, the retail space. Uh, and we also have a stair which goes down to the cellar. We're showing that seller space here. It's a very small space. It's uh 437 square ft in total and it's only for the retail space and they only have access to it directly from uh the interior of their space. At the back of the building, we do have those two garages. Uh they are separate and there's one for each of the apartments. And then in the center of the building, uh we have those two entries uh for the residential units. They each have their own uh entry. Uh each of these apartments is a four bedroomedroom three-bath apartment uh with each has their own private roof deck. Uh unit number one is 1592 ft². Unit 2 is slightly smaller at 1512 ft. On this first floor, each of these apartments has a hallway with a closet and a staircase going up to the second floor. Here we're showing the second floor plan. Uh we do have those small cantal levers at both corners of the front of the building fronting on uh Floyd Street. Uh again, it's only a 4-in cantal lever facing Floyd Street and then it's 12 in at the rear and at the front facing uh JFK Boulevard. Uh each of the apartments here have a living, dining, kitchen on this floor, as well as one bedroom, one bathroom, a laundry closet, as well as a stair going up to the third floor. Uh I should also mention that uh the front apartment has a Juliet balcony facing uh JFK Boulevard. Here we're looking at the third floor. Again, each part now each apartment here has uh an additional three bedrooms. So for four total and two bathrooms for three total. And also again there's a small uh Juliet balcony facing JFK Boulevard. And then lastly, each of these apartments has the stair continuing up to their roof decks. Uh looking at the roof plan, uh each plan does have each apartment has a small mechanical closet on the roof. Um and each has their own HVAC unit that is uh screened and we're showing a detail of that screen right over here. Um and they each also have their own private roof decks. The front roof deck is 255 square f feet. The rear roof deck is 379 square f feet. We are providing a 10-ft setback from JFK, but only a three-foot setback uh from Floyd Street. Um and the reason for that is it's just there's not enough width here to provide a useful roof deck and that 10-ft setback from Floyd Street. There's actually only 13 ft in total in between the staircase here and the front facade of our building. So, if we provided that 10 ft that we'd only have 3 ft left over for the roof deck, which isn't really a roof deck. Um, so we're hopeful, we would like to provide that outdoor space for our clients. So, we're hopeful that uh we can get that approved here. Um, in addition, we're also providing a little over 400 square ft of green roof trays on the roof. Uh, looking at the building elevations, this is the front and the rear elevation. You can see that they kind of mirror each other. Um the main finish that we're using is a light gray brick. Um we're also at the cantal levers. We're we're finishing those with light gray metal panels. We have uh two sets of cornises, both of which are wrapped in slate gray metal paneling. Uh we have black frame windows and doors, black aluminum railings for the Juliet balcony. Uh and we have a gray cast base. And here we kept we kept the top line of that cast base consistent. So, it really emphasizes how much of a grade difference we have. You can see at this JFK corner here, it's almost at grade and then by the time you get to the rear, it's substantially higher than it was at the at the front of the building. Oh, I'm sorry. The last thing I need to mention, the rear elevation, we do have generally the same finishes as we have facing JFK. The only difference is about 15 feet back uh that finish changes just to a white vinyl siding and that's going to wrap around the side of the building as well. Uh here we're looking at the Floyd Street elevation. Again, the same finishes as we're providing at uh the JFK elevation. Uh we have our two residential entry doors as well as our two garage doors. Both of which have black aluminum frames and are half transparency glass. They're really mostly glass. And again, you can see sub that substantial slope down from uh JFK along Floyd Street. Then lastly here, we're looking at the right side of the building. Uh this has a gray smooth stuckco finish at the base and white vinyl siding above. Uh we have a door here which is for the sprinkler room. And then we really just have kind of a open covered area tucked in underneath the staircase which is going to be for our trash and recycling area. And that actually concludes my uh presentation of the building. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Any questions? Anyone? >> All right. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> And finally, I have Mr. Bellamy who's going to go over the two uh variances we're seeking here. >> Sure. And just for the record, Mr. Bellamy's been sworn in and is still on the road tonight. >> Agreed. All right. So, this property is in the R1 district. It's a permitted conditional use to retail that meets all the conditions. We are seeking two bulk variances. One for rear yard setback. The requirement is 30% of the lot depth. So you take that off um both dimensions. It amounts to 24 ft by 7 1/2 ft. We're proposing 3 ft by 3.8 ft. Um we are exceeding the sideyard setback requirement. So where you typically can have an attached building given the uh lot line window condition um to the north of the property, we are providing a full 3-foot setback. And then we're also doing that on the west side of the property which allows us to wrap the rear facade with windows providing more light into the units. Um so I think overall by adding the uh sideyard setbacks versus the rear yard setback area we are providing adequate light air and open space and I don't see any substantial detriments with the rear yard setback variance that we're seeking. Um we are consistent with the permitted building coverage here. Um, so I think overall the masking is consistent with the zoning. Um, we also have the bulk variance for the rooftop uh, setback. Um, we're proposing 3 feet from the Floyd Street facade where 10 ft's required. As Mr. Lewis mentioned, we are conforming from Kennedy and overall the roof deck area is consistent with the supplemental section of the zoning and all the pertinances and and green uh, roofing is also consistent with what the zoning calls for. Um, so overall I think the benefits here do outweigh the detriments. I don't see any substantial detriment to the general welfare. I likewise don't see any substantial impairment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance. As Mr. Lean mentioned, this is one of the uh recommended master plan uh amendments. Um, so I think it's nice to see these projects come in and add some neighborhood retail along this Kennedy corridor. Um, and then finally that the project does promote the purposes of the municipal land use law. Again, it's a permitted use. Um, seeking conditional use approval. Um, so it is an appropriate use and development of the property and there is sufficient space and appropriate location uh for a mixeduse building consistent with purpose G. Um, so with that, this project does meet both the positive and negative criteria and I'd be happy to answer any questions you guys might have. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Bell. May I have no questions? Anybody else? >> Anything? >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, council. >> Uh, that's all I have. Again, uh you know, this wouldn't this project wouldn't have met the criteria for a site plan, but we're kind of presenting it in toto the board given that it is a conditional use that requires your approval. So, uh we think we put together a really good-look project here and uh we think the variance requests are minimal. >> Okay. Thank you. So, uh with that being said, is anybody here from public that wants to comment on this application? >> Anybody from public? >> Chair see no one from the public. I'd like to close the public portion. >> Second. >> Second. Okay. Motion made and seconded. Public is closed. Sophia, anything? >> So, this application was originally reviewed by Eric Beasley and he's no longer with us. I took it over. I can speak to the minimum roof deck setback. uh we don't we do not see any uh detriment to the public good in allowing for this variance. It does increase the roof deck which will allow for the residents of the building to have some additional recreational space which we like to see. And I do want to just state that the variances being asked do not uh in any way in uh relate to the conditions of the conditional use. They are still all being met. Uh and with that staff recommends approval. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh I will also say that I'm in receipt of the January 9th, 2026 staff report and we couldn't agree to the conditions therein. >> Great. Thank you councel. >> Chair. I'd like to make a motion to approve KP2024-019 as presented to the board with staff recommendation and conditions. >> All right, we have a motion and a second for approval. >> Acting Vice Chair Gungardan >> I. >> Commissioner Wick >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato >> I. >> Commissioner Patel >> I. >> And Chairman Langston >> I. >> Motion carries. All in favor with conditions. >> Okay. Thank you everyone. Good evening. >> Council, don't you have one more item 20? >> Oh. Um, >> that was >> I I had advised staff that we were going to carry that, but I don't know if that uh made it all the way to Cameron. >> I don't think it's it. >> Yeah. So, uh I'm going to request that be uh carried uh to a date certain. We're going to renotice. It was originally listed as prelim and final. We're just coming in with prelim. I could have gone tonight, but I think it's just safer to to notice it as a prelim only application. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Item 20. >> Ma'am, are you are you people here for case number 20, the 89 Ocean >> A? >> Oh god. >> Yeah, that's not going. Ah, >> so that we're not hearing that until February >> I'm sorry, not in the mic. Uh, February 14th, we're hearing that. >> I apologize. I'm sorry. Yeah, February 24th. >> I'm sorry. Um, yeah, we announced at the beginning of the meeting that that was carried. I apologize. >> I hope you enjoyed yourselves. It wasn't terrible right? Thank you for coming. We appreciate it. >> Okay. So, let's uh call item >> So, sir, sir, I just want to be clear that if you got a notice, you're not going to get another notice on that case. That case is going to be go ahead >> on for February 24th. So, you will not get another notice in the mail about that date. >> 14 or 24. >> 24. >> 20. Yeah, I screwed up. Okay. Thank you, council. >> Um, do you want to just give me a date certain just in case for uh item 20? It >> would be 24th. >> The 24th is fine. Okay. Thank you. Have a good night. >> Okay. Mr. Burke. Uh, item 19, Case P2025-0216 is a minor subdivision for 203. >> Good evening, chairman. Good evening, board council. Um, first this was a notice matter, so I do have the original. The It was also uploaded onto the portal. I'll hand it to council. >> Look at this. >> Yes. 19. >> Thank you, Mr. Burke. >> Can't believe we made Mr. Burke sit here all night. Unfortunately, um, my surveyor had an issue, so he could not. Uh but I did have a sidebar before and we've discussed this and uh the matter is fully compliant. It's a two lot subdivision. Uh presently the lot is 110 ft long by 50 ft wide. So it'll be divided into two lots. No curb cut, no deviations and no variances. So um hopefully we can get through this without it. But that's basically if if the surve got through it, Mr. Bur. >> Yeah. Yeah. If the surveyor came up, if the surveyor came up, he would say just exactly that. Um, and just so there's uh, you know, I I hate hate to use the word simple because sometimes things aren't, but in this case, it I'll say straightforward. It's a straightforward two lot subdivision. Let's not talk ourselves out of anything. Mr. Burke, so first, for purpose of the record, chairman, I am in receive the affidavit of publication proof of mailing with respect to the application at 203 Danfort here in the city. appears to be in order. We are going to mark it as A1 for purposes of the record. Uh chairman, based on Mr. Burke's comments, uh we do have the site plan or the subdivision drawing up on the screen. This was provided in connection with the application. Uh, can you move it over to the title block so I can So this is the Behar survey prepared by Mr. Clapper and as stated by Mr. Burke. Uh it is a existing lot being subdivided into two uh conforming lots. The existing lot is 50 ft by 110 and it is going to result in two lots 25 by 110 where the required is 25 by 100. So uh to Mr. Burke's point it's pretty self-explanatory. Mr. Burke, normally, as you're aware, we address curb cut and street parking uh in accordance with the subdivision. I suspect you have no objection to one curb cut and the shared driveway configuration that we we usually request here in the city. >> There is no curb cut, I thought. Right, >> council? You're not proposing a curb? >> No. Yeah, we're not proposing a curb cut. Not on 25 by 25 foot wide. We're okay. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Any questions? Anybody? >> No. >> All right. Thank you, council. >> Um, is there anybody here from public that have that want >> there? There's no one in the public, so close the public motion. >> Second. >> All right. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. Motion made and seconded. Public's closed. Camp. Anything else? Um so planning staff would just ask that you agree to the conditions um in Juru's staff report dated November 25th of 2025 and um do you find those conditions to be acceptable? >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. Uh planning staff recommends approval. >> Great. Thank you. >> Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve case 2025-0216 as presented to the board with staff recommendation and conditions. Second it. >> All right. Uh motion made and seconded for approval. >> Thank you all. >> Acting. >> Acting vice chair Gangaden. >> I. >> Commissioner Wick. >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato. >> I. >> Commissioner Patel. >> Hi. >> Chairman Langston. >> I. >> Motion carries. All in favor with conditions. >> All right. Now I can. Thank you. >> Thank you council. >> Good night. You too. >> Chair. I have five um resolution for um memorization. >> Great. Resolution of the planning board for the city of Jersey City. Applicant is 427 Bergen LLC for preliminary and final major site plan approval with variance 427 Bergen Avenue, block 1 9401, lot 19.05. That case number is P205-0038. Planning board of city of Jersey City case number is P2023-07. The applicant is Mecca Realy Properties Inc. Address is 590 Grand Street, Jersey City, New Jersey. Block 15401, lots 12 to 25 decided on Tuesday, October 9, 2025, which is for preliminary and major site plan with C variances. Planning for the city of Jersey City. Applicant is PR BRP Cove Point LLC for preliminary and major fi for final and major subdivision approval. 445 Route 440 Route 440 Kellogg Street, Jersey City, New Jersey, block 21901.01, lots 4.01, 5.01, and 6.01. Case number is P2023-000013. Planning board for the city of Jersey City, BRP Cove Point LLC. Preliminary and final major site plan approval with deviation. A portion of former Kellogg Street, Jersey City, New Jersey. Block 21901.04. Lot one, also known as a portion of block 2901.01. Lot 6.0 01 case number is P2023-000014. Resolution for the planning board for the city of Jersey City. Case number is P2025-000048. Applicant is Mecca Realy Property Inc. Address is 590 Grand Street, Jersey City, New Jersey. Block 15401, lots 12 to 25. Decided on October 9, 2025 for preliminary and major site subdivision approval. >> Okay. Do I have a second? Please. >> All right. Cam, can we have a roll call, please? >> Acting Vice Chair Gangadan. >> I. >> Commissioner Wick. >> I. >> Commissioner Stamato. >> Hi. >> Commissioner Patel. >> Hi. >> And Chairman Langston. Motion carries. All in favor to memorialize resolutions. >> Thank you everybody. Uh executive session. Anybody? We good? All right. Do we have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> All right. Thank you guys. Appreciate you. >> Wow.