1 1 COUNTY OF HUDSON PLANNING BOARD 2 _________________________ 3 : TRANSCRIPT MEETING OF THE COUNTY OF : OF 4 HUDSON PLANNING BOARD : PROCEEDINGS _________________________ 5 6:30 p.m. 6 Wednesday, October 15, 2008 567 Pavonia Avenue 7 Jersey City, New Jersey 8 B E F O R E: 9 JUDE FITZGIBBONS, Chairperson DEMETRIO ARENCIBIA, Commissioner 10 MARY E. AVAGLIANO, Commissioner DANIEL CHOFFO, Commissioner 11 DOREEN DiDOMENICO, Commissioner MICHAEL HOLLOWAY, COMMISSIONER 12 RUSHABH MEHTA, COMMISSIONER JOSE MUNOZ, COMMISSIONER 13 14 A L S O P R E S E N T: 15 THOMAS P. CALVANICO, ESQ. Board Attorney 16 STEPHEN MARKS, PP, AICP 17 Planning Director 18 19 20 21 PROUT & CAMMAROTA, L.L.C. CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS 22 147 COLUMBIA TURNPIKE FLORHAM PARK, NJ 07932 23 TEL: (973) 660-0600 FAX: (973) 660-1966 24 25 2 1 CERTIFICATE OF OFFICER 2 I, CAREY ANN SHAFTAN, a Certified 3 Shorthand Reporter and a Notary Public of the 4 State of New Jersey, do hereby certify that 5 prior to the commencement of the examination, 6 that the following is a true and accurate 7 transcript of the testimony as taken 8 stenographically by me and before me at the date, 9 time and place aforementioned. 10 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither a 11 relative nor employee, nor attorney or counsel to 12 any parties involved; that I am neither related 13 to nor employed by any such attorney or counsel, 14 and that I am not financially interested in the 15 action. 16 17 _________________________________________ 18 A NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 19 My Commission Expires 20 May 1, 2011 21 Notary No. 2016121 22 23 24 25 3 1 (Time noted: 6:45 p.m.) 2 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Please be 3 seated. Before we begin I would ask everyone 4 to turn off their cell phones. If you have to 5 make a call, just step outside. 6 I call to order the evening 7 meeting of the Hudson County Planning Board. 8 Has this been duly advertised? 9 MR. CALVANICO: Yes, Mr. 10 Chairman, the meeting has been properly 11 advertised in accordance with the Open Public 12 Meetings Act and advertised and forwarded for 13 publication to the Jersey Journal and to the 14 clerk for posting on the bulletin boards of 15 both the Board of Chosen Freeholders and the 16 County of Hudson. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Please 18 stand. 19 (All rise to salute the Flag.) 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Roll 21 call. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 Arencibia? 24 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Here. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 1 Avagliano? 2 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Here. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 Bettinger is not present. 5 Commissioner Choffo? 6 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Here. 7 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 8 DiDomenico? 9 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Here. 10 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 11 Holloway? 12 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Here. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 14 Munoz? 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Here. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner Ng 17 not present. 18 Commissioner Mehta? 19 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Here. 20 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 21 Fitzgibbons? 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Present. 23 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 24 we have a quorum. 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 5 1 have a motion on the minutes of the last 2 session? 3 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Motion 4 to accept. 5 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Second. 6 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 7 on a motion to accept the minutes from 8 September 17, 2008 made by Commissioner 9 Avagliano and seconded by Commissioner Munoz, 10 Commissioner Arencibia? 11 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 12 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 13 Avagliano? 14 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 15 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 16 Choffo? 17 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 19 DiDomenico? 20 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 21 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 22 Holloway? 23 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Yes. 24 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 25 Munoz? 6 1 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 2 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 3 Mehta? 4 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 5 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 6 Fitzgibbons? 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 8 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 9 the motion passes. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We have 11 representatives of the Township here? Who 12 would like to speak? 13 MR. STONE: Maurice Stone from 14 DeCotiis, Fitzpatrick, Cole and Wisler 15 representing the Authority, and I have Rich 16 McBurnie here -- 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Who is 18 he? 19 MR. STONE: Rich McBurnie is the 20 right of way manager from the Turnpike 21 Authority. 22 We are here because we need 23 confirmation from the Board that the new 24 community road grade separation project which 25 the Turnpike undertook on behalf of the County 7 1 is exempt from the subdivision approval under 2 the Land Use Act. 3 The reason we need this, we are 4 in the middle of a condemnation on a property 5 and the owner wants confirmation as part of 6 the settlement and the judge advised us to go 7 here and get either a letter from the Board or 8 a resolution confirming this. 9 I had sent some correspondence 10 on to Mr. Marks and Mr. Calvanico explaining 11 our position citing the case law that we are 12 entitled to the exemption and they advised us 13 to come in here and explain the project to the 14 Board and go into a little bit of explanation 15 an so you can understand it. 16 I guess the way would be for Mr. 17 McBurnie to explain the project and take 18 questions. 19 MR. CALVANICO: Raise your right 20 hand. 21 (Rich McBurnie was duly sworn.) 22 MR. CALVANICO: State your name 23 and spell your last name. 24 MR. McBURNIE: Rich McBurnie, 25 M-C-B-U-R-N-I-E and I am the right of way 8 1 manager for the New Jersey Turnpike Authority. 2 The New County Road project is a 3 grade separation project, was a project 4 undertaken by the Turnpike Authority under a 5 joint agreement between Norfolk Southern 6 Railroad, Hudson County, the Port Authority 7 and the Turnpike Authority. 8 The project was to alleviate a 9 grade railroad crossing on New County Road, 10 at-grade railroad crossing on New County Road 11 by building a bridge over the crossing thereby 12 alleviating backup for traffic. 13 The projects consists of three 14 County roads; County Avenue, County Road, and 15 New County Road. 16 The bridge was built over -- on 17 New County Road over the railroad crossing. 18 One reason we are here is because of part -- 19 one piece of property we are acquiring through 20 condemnation was severed -- actually their 21 frontage was taking -- their access was taken 22 to the street because of this bridge. 23 We are building a driveway 24 underneath the new bridge to allow them access 25 to their property thereby not taking their 9 1 whole property, just diverting their driveway. 2 Their driveway comes off -- 3 their new driveway comes off County Road, goes 4 under New County Road and accesses their 5 property here (indicating). 6 Before their access was directly 7 onto New County Road. 8 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. McBurnie, 9 can you just identify the drawing. 10 MR. McBURNIE: This is as-built 11 drawing for the overall project. It is shown 12 as a traffic control and construction sequence 13 plan, but it is the one plan that I had that 14 shows the whole project on one sheet. 15 MR. CALVANICO: Can we have that 16 marked. 17 (Marked A-1.) 18 MR. McBURNIE: I also have two 19 other plans here which show the property that 20 we acquired, this property here, from Norfolk 21 Southern Railroad to allow the driveway to 22 come through under New County Road to get to 23 this property on the other side of New County 24 Road. 25 There is a bridge right now, 10 1 there is a bridge that comes up and over here 2 (indicating). 3 Ultimately their property is 4 going to look like this where they own this 5 piece. 6 We have -- we were condemning 7 property up in here (indicating). For this 8 project ultimately they are going to own this 9 and this (indicating) and have an access under 10 the New County Road Bridge. 11 MR. STONE: And the Freeholder 12 Board already approved the application 13 granting the access easement? 14 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. McBurnie, 15 could you please identify those drawings for 16 me. Mark them as A-2. 17 (Marked as A-2.) 18 (Marked as A-3.) 19 MR. McBURNIE: A-2 is property 20 map for Block 25, Lot 1, and it shows the 21 different parcels that they are going to 22 ultimately own. 23 And A-3 is identified as the 24 same, with the same identification but it 25 shows their fee owned property and the access 11 1 easement property. 2 MR. STONE: Ultimately at the 3 end what is going to happen is a piece of the 4 property I guess towards the top is going to 5 be taken at this point in the project? 6 MR. McBURNIE: This point up in 7 here is being taken. Their property was 8 originally triangle shaped. We are taking 9 this portion here for the project 10 (indicating). 11 MR. STONE: And on the bottom 12 where you could see, there is a piece that 13 used to be part of the Norfolk Southern Line 14 which is -- which the Turnpike has acquired 15 already and that is going to be given to the 16 owners and merged in with that lot to help 17 provide access or adjust additional -- 18 MR. McBURNIE: Just for 19 additional parking because they are losing 20 parking space up in here. 21 MR. STONE: And the concern that 22 the Realty had is to make sure they didn't 23 need to go through Board approval to do this 24 and, as I said, I sent the case law over to 25 Mr. Calvanico in case they just had follow-up 12 1 questions as to the project showing that is 2 where we are today. 3 What I would like the Board to 4 do is issue a resolution or letter or 5 something that confirms for two reasons we 6 don't need to get approval. 7 One is that the Turnpike 8 Authority is not subject to the Municipal Land 9 Use Law and there is case law supporting that, 10 and second is that this is being done on 11 behalf of the County and it is really a County 12 project and not done by the Authority on 13 behalf of itself. 14 Do you have anything else? 15 MR. McBURNIE: That's basically 16 it in a nutshell. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Can we 18 have a letter? 19 MR. CALVANICO: I would 20 recommend that the Board do a resolution 21 indicating that we reviewed the project and 22 that we deem it exempt from Board approval. 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What type 24 of property is that, commercial? 25 MR. McBURNIE: It is commercial, 13 1 yes. 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What kind? 3 MR. McBURNIE: Mechanical 4 engineers, heating, air conditioner. I think. 5 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What type 6 of traffic would we have? 7 MR. McBURNIE: They have -- I 8 think it is somewhere around a hundred parking 9 spaces in here right now for their trucks and 10 their employees. There is also a few parking 11 spaces along this driveway. 12 I believe this driveway is 13 roughly fifty feet wide. The pavement area is 14 thirty feet or more. 15 As far as traffic, I don't think 16 it is anything significant in the morning and 17 evening. 18 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The 19 overpass close to the Turnpike? 20 MR. McBURNIE: No. The Turnpike 21 is an elevated road right through here 22 (indicating). There is no direct access from 23 the Turnpike through this. 24 We agreed to design and 25 construct it, the County put up money, Port 14 1 Authority put up money, and Norfolk Southern 2 had donated land. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It is a 4 joint packet, right? 5 MR. McBURNIE: A joint 6 agreement, yes. 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Being 8 that the Freeholders approved it, do we have a 9 recommendation to approve? 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Motion. 11 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: 12 Second. 13 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: 14 Second. 15 DIRECTOR MARKS: Seconded by? 16 MR. CALVANICO: Commissioner 17 Avagliano. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 on a -- just one procedural question for the 20 attorney. 21 How should we refer to this? It 22 is a nonapplication, so just for future 23 reference. 24 MR. CALVANICO: Resolution 25 authorization exception. 15 1 DIRECTOR MARKS: Of what? 2 MR. STONE: Of requirements to 3 file for subdivision on site plan approval -- 4 for subdivision approval and site plan 5 approval. 6 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 7 if I may, just for the record, the current 8 block and lot. 9 MR. McBURNIE: It is Block 25, 10 Lot 1. 11 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 12 on a motion to approve a resolution for an 13 exception of the subdivision for Block 25, Lot 14 1, the motion was made by Commissioner Munoz 15 and seconded by Commissioner Avagliano. 16 Commissioner Arencibia? 17 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 19 Avagliano? 20 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 21 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 22 Choffo? 23 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 24 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 25 DiDomenico? 16 1 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Yes. 2 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 3 Holloway? 4 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 5 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 6 Mehta? 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 8 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 9 Munoz? 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 11 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman? 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 13 MR. STONE: Can I ask you to 14 mention in the resolution, to mention it is 15 exempt because the Authority is exempt and 16 because it is a County project? 17 Thank you. Thank you. 18 MR. McBURNIE: I have other 19 copies that are not attached to the Board's, 20 so I will give you that. 21 DIRECTOR MARKS: The next part 22 of the agenda should be 5-A, not 8-A, which is 23 the Memorialization of Applications which were 24 heard at last meeting. 25 The first application which was 17 1 dismissed without prejudice is 2007-027-SP, 2 Appleview, LLC, located at 7009 and 7101 River 3 Road which is Block 316, Lots 1 through 3 and 4 5.02 in the Township of North Bergen. 5 An application conditionally 6 approving -- a resolution conditionally 7 approving application 2008-064-SP, City of 8 Union City. 9 Application for 906 Palisade 10 Avenue which is Blocks 186 and 188, Lots 26 11 through 31 and Lot 6 respectively in the City 12 of Union City. 13 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: I will 14 make a motion. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We have a 16 motion. Do we have a second? 17 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Second. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 on a motion made by Commissioner Choffo and 20 seconded by Commissioner Munoz, Commissioner 21 Arencibia? 22 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 23 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 24 Avagliano? 25 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 18 1 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 2 Choffo? 3 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 4 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 5 DiDomenico? 6 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 7 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 8 Holloway? 9 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 10 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 11 Mehta? 12 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 14 Munoz? 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman? 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 the motion passed. 20 Mr. Chairman, the next matter is 21 reserved for 5-B, reserved for applications to 22 be declared exempt. 23 There is a lot, so please bear 24 with me. 25 Beginning with application 19 1 2008-105-SP, Metro PCS New York, LLC, located 2 at 6200 Grand Avenue which is Block 205, Lot 3 68, in the Township of North Bergen. 4 Application 2008-107-SP, Metro 5 PCS New York, LLC, located at 24 Kearny Avenue 6 which is Block 38, Lots 36 and 37 in the Town 7 of Kearny. 8 Application 2008-108-SP, Metro 9 PCS New York, LLC, located at 86-88 Charles 10 Street which is Block 869, Lot 105 in the City 11 of Jersey City. 12 Next is application 2008-109-SP, 13 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 615 14 Palisade Avenue which is Block 796, Lot 138 in 15 the City of Jersey City. 16 Next is application 2008-110-SP, 17 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 215 Coles 18 Street which is Block 361, Lot 2 in the City 19 of Jersey City. 20 Next is application 2008-111-SP, 21 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 430 22 Communipaw Avenue which is Block 2057, Lot 15D 23 in the City of Jersey City. 24 Next is application 2008-112-SP, 25 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 450 Grand 20 1 Street which is Block 2140, Lot 12 in the City 2 of Jersey City. 3 Next is application 2008-113-SP, 4 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 168 5 Clinton Avenue which is Block 1804, Lot 18 in 6 the City of Jersey City. 7 Next is application 2008-114-SP, 8 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 425 Ocean 9 Avenue which is Block 1333, Lot 4 in the City 10 of Jersey City. 11 Next is application 2008-115-SP, 12 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 888 Newark 13 Avenue, which is Block 613.1, Lot L-1 in the 14 City of Jersey City. 15 Next is application 2008-116-SP, 16 Metro PCS New York, LLC located at 201 17 Claremont Avenue which is Block 1985, Lot 12A 18 in the City of Jersey City. 19 Next is application 2008-117-SP, 20 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 291 21 Central Avenue which is Block 828, Lot 5 in 22 the City of Jersey City. 23 Next is application 2008-118-SP, 24 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 550 Newark 25 Avenue which is Block 528.5, Lot 85.10 in the 21 1 City of Jersey City. 2 Next is application 2008-119-SP, 3 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 195 New 4 York Avenue which is Block 747, Lot M-2 in the 5 City of Jersey City. 6 Next is application 2008-120-SP, 7 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 94 Union 8 Street which is Block 1962.1, Lot 1 in the 9 City of Jersey City. 10 Next is application 2008-121-SP, 11 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 192 12 Danforth Avenue which is Block 1365, Lot 30 in 13 the City of Jersey City. 14 Next is application 2008-122-SP, 15 Metro PCS New York, LLC, located at 15 16 Wilkinson Avenue which is Block 1480, Lot E-6 17 in the City of Jersey City. 18 Next is application is 19 2008-123-SP, Metro PCS New York, LLC, located 20 at 591 Summit Avenue which is Block 588, Lot 21 89B in the City of Jersey City. 22 And finally application 23 2008-124-SP, Metro PCS New York, LLC, located 24 at 500 Manila Avenue which is Block 215, Lot 3 25 in the City of Jersey City. 22 1 MR. SHAW: Excuse me. The 2 previous one to last the address in the 3 newspaper is Jersey City, not Union City. 4 MR. CALVANICO: Sir, if you want 5 to address the Board, please stand up so we 6 can identify you. 7 MR. SHAW: I don't know if it is 8 important, but I think Mr. Marks said on 9 2008-123-SP, Metro PCS New York, LLC, he gave 10 the address as 591 Summit Avenue Block 588, 11 Lot 89B, he said Union City but the newspaper 12 said Jersey City. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It is 14 Jersey City. 15 MR. SHAW: It is a technicality. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It is not 17 important because these are exempt. 18 MR. SHAW: Okay. 19 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It is 20 Jersey City. 21 MR. CALVANICO: If you could 22 please identify yourself for the record. 23 MR. SHAW: Herb Shaw. 24 You know how lawyers are in 25 these things. Thank you. 23 1 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Mr. 2 Chairman, I have been driving around. 3 Sometimes I have seen buildings that have the 4 antennas all over the place. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: They will 6 have to get a permit. 7 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Let me ask 8 you a question. Do we have authorization to 9 ask do they wire with the trees to hide 10 esthetically. 11 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Steve? 12 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 the applications that were just read off are 14 not along County roads or impact County 15 drainage facilities, so they are exempt. 16 Those applications for 17 telecommunications, facilities, antennas or 18 otherwise located along County roads depending 19 on where they are located, the County has 20 jurisdiction and depending upon the layout of 21 the facilities, may or may not have 22 jurisdiction over these applications. 23 These ones have no impact on 24 County roads or drainage facilities and are 25 exempt. 24 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Actually 2 they would have to go before the local 3 municipality. 4 DIRECTOR MARKS: They all go 5 before the local municipalities. 6 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And they 7 would have to get permits to put these things 8 up. 9 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: We talk 10 about creating a tree fund, there is one 11 already but they donate when we have 12 authorization, two or three funds. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 14 for those applications which are not located 15 along County roads. 16 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: I am 17 talking about the ones that are. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: They wouldn't 19 be affected. Once the Freeholder Board, when 20 the Freeholder Board considers the draft land 21 development recommendations which have been -- 22 land development regulations which have been 23 recommended by this Board and are pending, I 24 believe they should be up to the Freeholder 25 Board next week, then those telecommunication 25 1 applications that come before this Board, we 2 could ask them to also put in those trees. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 4 have a motion? 5 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, I 6 don't believe there is a motion now. 7 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: I will 8 make a motion. 9 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Second. 10 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 11 on a motion by Commissioner Choffo to declare 12 all those applications exempt seconded by 13 Commissioner Avagliano, Commissioner 14 Arencibia? 15 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 17 Avagliano? 18 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 20 Choffo? 21 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 DiDomenico? 24 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 26 1 Holloway? 2 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 Mehta? 5 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 6 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 7 Munoz? 8 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 9 DIRECTOR MARKS: And Chairman 10 Fitzgibbons? 11 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 12 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 the motion passed. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We are 15 going to start off with the case of North 16 Bergen. 17 DIRECTOR MARKS: Well, Mr. 18 Chairman, we publicly advertised -- just a 19 housekeeping note, we had publicly advertised 20 the municipal storm water management plan 21 which was 07, it was the seventh municipal 22 plan that we received from the City of Jersey 23 City. 24 They were before the Board 25 either a year or two ago with their original 27 1 draft of their municipal storm water 2 management plan. 3 Through DCP regulations, all 4 municipalities have to submit it to the County 5 and be approved by the County. 6 The County had some technical 7 comments on the application. It was revised. 8 Before this Board could consider the revised 9 municipal storm water management plan it has 10 to be adopted by the governing body, in this 11 case the city council of the City of Jersey 12 City. 13 Therefore, the revised municipal 14 storm water plan for Jersey City at this point 15 has not been adopted by the city counsel 16 therefore it would be premature to consider it 17 tonight and hopefully it could be back on the 18 agenda for next month's meeting. 19 So I would probably by a formal 20 vote -- 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Postpone. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: By a formal 23 vote to postpone, that is probably the best 24 bet since it was publicly advertised. 25 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: I will make 28 1 a motion to table it to the next meeting. 2 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I 3 second. 4 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 5 on a motion to table Jersey City's municipal 6 storm water management plan made by 7 Commissioner Munoz and seconded by 8 Commissioner Holloway, Commissioner Arencibia? 9 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 10 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 11 Avagliano? 12 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 14 Choffo? 15 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 17 DiDomenico? 18 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 20 Holloway? 21 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 Mehta? 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 29 1 Munoz? 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 4 Fitzgibbons? 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 6 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 7 the next application which was continued from 8 last month is 2006-012-SP, Riverview 9 Development, LLC, located on River Road which 10 is Block 438 and lots 4-A, 4-B and 1 in the 11 Township of North Bergen. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I am 13 going to limit it to five minutes each party. 14 MR. OURY: That is fine, Mr. 15 Chairman. 16 If I can say, since at the last 17 meeting where I had an associate here -- 18 Dennis Oury appearing on behalf of the 19 applicant -- I have had occasion to speak to 20 Mr. Calvanico, your legal counsel, and my 21 adversary, Mr. Lamb. 22 There is a preliminary legal 23 jurisdictional issue that's been raised by Mr. 24 Lamb that I think you have all been made aware 25 of. 30 1 Since the last meeting Mr. Lamb 2 and my office submitted to you various 3 documents. I know they have gone to both Mr. 4 Marks and Mr. Calvanico. 5 In speaking to Mr. Calvanico and 6 Mr. Lamb, for this evening's purposes both of 7 us would like to put on the record a couple of 8 comments, five minutes. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Fine. 10 MR. STONE: I would ask Mr. 11 Lamb, since he is the objector, to place his 12 comments on the record first. I will respond 13 and then you would rule based upon the advice 14 that Mr. Calvanico gives you on the issue, if 15 that is acceptable. 16 MR. LAMB: John J. Lamb from the 17 office of Beattie Padovano. We represent the 18 Berkenridge Homeowner's Association. Five 19 minutes is fine. 20 I tried to submit in advance the 21 documents and -- the numerous documents so 22 that we wouldn't clog up the hearing with 23 hours of going over documents for the first 24 time. 25 I have sent three letters to the 31 1 Board, a letter dated October 3rd, a letter 2 dated October 10, and a letter dated October 3 14th, and part of that submission was all the 4 documents in advance which is this one and a 5 half to two-inch thick document which lays out 6 all the information both pro or con that we 7 had available so that the Board and its 8 attorney could review that. 9 Essentially in a nutshell it is 10 our position that Lot 1 which is clearly part 11 of this project is owned by the County of 12 Hudson. We said that the last time but this 13 time I provided what I believe to be the 14 relevant documents to confirm that, and the 15 key thing in this application is, for purposes 16 of jurisdiction, who before this Board for 17 these applications tonight has to prove the 18 application? Who is the property owner that 19 have to consent? Because applicants can't 20 come up before you and submit an application 21 without the owners consenting, and so that is 22 why the ownership, at least prima facie 23 ownership of all the properties is important. 24 In this particular case we have 25 submitted in several forms not only in this 32 1 book but attached to one of our letters 2 probably the most important document, what I 3 call the smoking gun, and that is the deed to 4 the County of Hudson and the deed to the 5 County of Hudson was located by our title 6 expert after the developer came up with this 7 argument that because it was a 1930's 8 foreclosure somehow the developer, because Lot 9 1 was adjacent to the subject property, Lots 10 4-A and 4-B -- that somehow the developer can 11 annex Lot 1 to it. 12 And also what we showed, 13 interesting, if the developer owned Lot 1 the 14 developer certainly never acted like it owned 15 Lot 1 because very simply it provided a survey 16 and a site plan without Lot 1, it made 17 submissions to the North Bergen Planning Board 18 without Lot 1, so it never acted like it owned 19 Lot 1. 20 When I stood up before the North 21 Bergen Planning Board hearings I said will 22 somebody please show me a deed. If you are 23 the owner of Lot 1, show me the deed. 24 We all know how properties are 25 conveyed and it is done by deed. Show me the 33 1 deed. 2 And we got this, well, we are 3 waiting, we are getting it. And what happened 4 was in this period of time I stood up at maybe 5 four or five consecutive North Bergen Planning 6 Board hearings and I said, well, where is the 7 deed? How difficult is this? 8 Well, the developer's counsel 9 and it wasn't Mr. Oury, it was a co-counsel, 10 was trying to get a deed from Hudson County 11 and, matter of fact, I was the one that got 12 the deed from Hudson County and sent it to the 13 North Bergen Planning Board before the 14 developer did because we were monitoring it. 15 And respectfully, that deed from 16 Hudson County was a quitclaim deed and it 17 specifically said in the deed this is only a 18 right of way or easement which means it is not 19 the fee -- there are different types of 20 ownership of property and fee and easement 21 holders, you can have a hundred fee holders 22 but someone had to own the fee. 23 It is only an easement of right 24 of way and it said the County of Hudson does 25 not grant any conveyance or ownership interest 34 1 in the property to this developer. This only 2 confirms what the developer gave us. 3 So to make a long story short, 4 the County protected itself by that particular 5 disclaimer and because of that disclaimer what 6 that means, based upon the documents that we 7 have, is the County owns the fee and there is 8 an easement from the County for right of way 9 but the easement was procured by a title 10 search which didn't show the County or the 11 County's legal department, the smoking gun. 12 The deed that says the County of 13 Bergen hereby gets transferred all of Lot 1. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: The 15 County of Hudson? 16 MR. LAMB: Hudson. That is the 17 first issue. 18 Second issue is whoever owns Lot 19 1, Lot 1 is a long sliver that is a former 20 railroad property that starts from the North 21 Bergen border and goes south to the Guttenberg 22 border and the deed that we produced from 23 Romulus Development Corp, that particular 24 deed, it is a little over five acres and if 25 you look at the tax map and look at all the 35 1 maps we looked at, it is one long piece of 2 property. 3 We also said -- again, this is a 4 jurisdictional issue before we get to the 5 merits, the applicant has to cut off the piece 6 of Lot 1 in front of the square that it owns 7 from what I call the tail, the long tail that 8 goes down to the Guttenberg border. You need 9 a subdivision. 10 What I have also said in one of 11 the letters just as a reminder is after you 12 get that subdivision and cut off the tail of 13 Lot 1 from the Lot 1 portion in front of Lot 14 4-A and 4-B, you have to take the little piece 15 of Lot 1, Lot 4-A and 4-B and consolidate them 16 into one lot. That is called in municipal 17 land use law and land use land in general is a 18 reverse subdivision or revision. 19 That deed is a type of 20 subdivision that was not applied for to this 21 Board. Not only did they not subdivide the 22 tail off, they didn't ask for the 23 consolidation amount, therefore a site plan 24 application without those other applications 25 is respectfully deficient. 36 1 Again, we submitted this all in 2 advance. I wanted to keep my comments short. 3 We believe that the Board should 4 acknowledge that there is no jurisdiction here 5 until this issue is resolved, and that Lot 1 6 is owned by the County. 7 Remember, we are advocating for 8 the County of Hudson. You own the five acres, 9 you own this valuable piece along the Hudson 10 River, the Hudson County does, and if the 11 developer is ever to use this Lot 1, first of 12 all Hudson County gets to control what goes 13 there because they are a stakeholder, part 14 owner, number one, and number two, if you do 15 say we prefer for you to look at your Hudson 16 County master plan recreational studies and 17 say this is a particular use, this is a 18 property that is identified in your own master 19 plan as being open space and recreation hall, 20 but if you do decide to do anything with it 21 and let this developer do it, at least get the 22 multi-million dollars if you sell it. 23 I am not suggesting you sell it, 24 but it is a valuable property interest and we 25 think Hudson County should exercise its rights 37 1 and claim ownership and review what's best for 2 Hudson County and its citizens. 3 Thank you. 4 (Applause.) 5 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Before we 6 hear the application, do you have a title 7 insurance policy? 8 MR. OURY: Do I have one? We 9 have requested that the policy be reissued to 10 address this issue of vested title and we are 11 waiting on that since this issue came up. 12 The answer is no, but I have an 13 opinion from the -- 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: My other 15 request, do you have the copy when the 16 Freeholder approve it? 17 MR. OURY: There is a deed. It 18 is in the package, as Mr. Lamb just pointed 19 out. 20 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Did I get a 21 copy of it? 22 MR. OURY: It has been submitted 23 to the Board. 24 MR. LAMB: I could give you. If 25 I may? 38 1 (Handing.) 2 MR. OURY: If I may, I had just 3 a couple of comments I want to place on the 4 record. 5 The issue of title to Lot 1 has 6 been raised before by the objectors and it has 7 been raised to the North Bergen Planning 8 Board. 9 The North Bergen Planning Board, 10 I guess it is about a year ago now, heard the 11 testimony of Mr. Lamb's expert, who is a title 12 expert, testify for some two or three hours 13 before the Planning Board. 14 I made the argument before the 15 local planning board that I am making to you 16 this evening and that is once the applicant 17 makes a prima facie showing of title being in 18 the applicant's name, an objection by an 19 objector to title should not be recognized by 20 the Board. It is not something that this 21 Board or a local planning board has 22 jurisdiction over. 23 You can't decide the issue of 24 title. It is something that a court should 25 decide, and I will get to that in a moment 39 1 because in this particular case there was in 2 fact a complaint filed in court by Mr. Lamb's 3 clients on this very issue which was never 4 served on my client or Hudson County who was 5 also sued. 6 That case, my understanding was 7 it was dismissed for lack of prosecution and 8 that case, had it proceeded and had it been 9 aggressively prosecuted by Mr. Lamb's client, 10 would have determined the answer to the title 11 issue. 12 We are convinced we would have 13 been successful in that. Be that as it may, 14 the following are the comments I would like to 15 make. 16 The issue was raised before the 17 local planning board, the local planning board 18 heard the testimony of their expert and 19 declined to consider that testimony because 20 they felt it was beyond their jurisdiction to 21 make a decision as to who has title. That is 22 not what planning boards or boards of 23 adjustment do. 24 Since that time we have learned, 25 I have learned that a complaint was filed 40 1 sometime in -- I will give you the exact date, 2 actually -- March 13, Berkenridge Homeowner's 3 Association versus the County of Bergen and my 4 client with some John Does attached to it and 5 the issue of title to Lot 1 was raised. 6 That complaint was never served 7 on my client or as I understand it, on Hudson 8 County, and was dismissed, as I said to you. 9 I suggest to you that the 10 failure of Berkenridge Homeowner's to move 11 forward on that complaint is evidence of the 12 fact that they don't believe, I don't think, 13 truly believe, that there is a title issue 14 here. 15 It is an issue that they can 16 keep raising until a court decides that issue 17 which will probably be in the near future. 18 With regard to the substantive 19 issue, I am not going to address the 20 voluminous documents that Mr. Lamb submitted 21 to you. His office did a good job in putting 22 together all of the relevant documents. I 23 think I saw most of the documents that a court 24 would need to decide title, but I have also 25 submitted to I think Mr. Calvanico and Mr. 41 1 Marks, the testimony of Steven Flateau to you 2 who is an attorney and is associated with 3 vested title who gave an opinion that my 4 client does own the property. 5 I won't go into the details 6 about it, I am not only boring, but it is 7 probably not relevant to the threshold issue 8 of whether or not this Board has jurisdiction 9 to decide who has title once I have at least 10 shown in a prima facie way that my client owns 11 title. 12 What I mean by that is not just 13 Dennis Oury standing up here saying there is 14 title. There was testimony from North Bergen 15 before I got into this case from Mr. Flateau 16 and his testimony was that my client has good 17 title to this property. 18 Mr. Lamb of course has an expert 19 that says something different. It seems to me 20 a planning board should not be put in the 21 position of determining who is right or wrong 22 on a title issue because this is beyond I 23 think your jurisdiction. 24 That is the sum and substance of 25 my argument to you I don't want to get 42 1 involved nor does Mr. Lamb, I believe, whether 2 Lot 1 is owned by the County or us. 3 I can submit to you that -- Mr. 4 Munoz is now looking at the quitclaim deed. 5 It is my understanding, again, 6 this is before I got on the case, there was an 7 issue raised about title to Lot 1 and to 8 finally put it to bed. I think it was Don 9 Batista who was the county council, had the 10 Freeholders pass a resolution authorizing the 11 issuance of a quitclaim deed to my client to 12 put to bed that issue of ownership to the 13 property. 14 Now, I noted and I promised I 15 wouldn't get involved in the substance, but I 16 have to comment that in one of Mr. Lamb's 17 letters he indicates that we must have 18 committed a fraud on the Freeholders. 19 Now, I don't see Mr. Batista 20 here, I don't see the Hudson County 21 Freeholders complaining about it, but he 22 acknowledges that that deed was in fact 23 delivered, that that deed gave whatever 24 interest the County had in that Lot 1 to my 25 client. 43 1 I would submit to you, to this 2 Board, that if the Board feels that they have 3 to get involved in the substantive issue, it 4 is truly beyond your jurisdiction to get 5 involved with that. 6 It is really something a court 7 needs to be involved with. Other than that, 8 unless there are any questions, I have nothing 9 else to submit to the Board. 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Mr. 11 Chairman? 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 13 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Let me put 14 something on record. 15 You say the Freeholders haven't 16 said anything about this. I am a Freeholder, 17 I am an elected Freeholder and I don't agree 18 with the County transferring a property owned 19 by the County for one dollar to a developer 20 and that is what it says in here, transferred 21 for one dollar. 22 MR. OURY: It is our opinion and 23 the opinion of vested title that the County 24 never owned that property. 25 What happened when the railroads 44 1 were coming into Hudson County, they would go 2 to property owners to either get fee title to 3 the strip of land or they would get an 4 easement. 5 It is my understanding from our 6 title expert they did not get fee simple title 7 to this particular piece of property in front 8 of where we want to develop. They only had an 9 easement, the ability to use it, a license. 10 Those tracks have been up -- I 11 guess those tracks were pulled up ten years 12 ago. 13 The County didn't give up 14 anything. The County was well aware of the 15 situation at the time that that deed was 16 issued. They didn't give it away, they cannot 17 give it away. There is a Constitutional 18 provision in New Jersey which says that 19 municipal and government agencies cannot give 20 away property that they own. 21 So the point I am making to you, 22 and you could take this up with Mr. Batista, 23 the property wasn't given to anybody for free. 24 There was just an 25 acknowledgement the County did not have fee 45 1 title to the property, it recognized there is 2 a difference of opinion between title experts, 3 but I submit to you that the County planning 4 board doesn't have jurisdiction to decide that 5 issue. 6 But as a Freeholder you 7 certainly have a right to call Mr. Batista who 8 was involved, I think, with the transfer at 9 the time. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I am 11 going to say something. When any public 12 entity or city or any government gives an 13 easement for a dollar, the county or that city 14 still owns that property. 15 MR. OURY: No, no. Our position 16 is the County never owned this property. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: How can 18 you give it an easement if you didn't own it? 19 MR. OURY: What happened was you 20 can give -- first of all, there is nothing 21 that shows in any of those records that the 22 County gave an easement. There is nothing 23 that shows that. And I really think it is, 24 Mr. Chairman, if we get involved tonight -- 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I know, I 46 1 know I know. We are. 2 MR. OURY: The County never 3 owned it. 4 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We are 5 not lawyers here. 6 MR. OURY: Or judges. 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: This 8 thing is going to be over our heads. This is 9 a civil suit or something to that effect 10 settled in court. 11 MR. OURY: Probably. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And I 13 don't think we have, I don't think we should 14 get involved with this until we could find out 15 who really owns it. I hope the County owns it 16 because that means the County gets some kind 17 of ratables or some kind of money involved and 18 it will trickle down to the citizens of Hudson 19 County. 20 But, I think we have to talk to 21 our lawyer about this. 22 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. Chairman, as 23 I indicated in the letter that I sent to the 24 Board, my position at is this point is that 25 the Board does not have an indication of clear 47 1 title to this property. 2 The issue was raised before us. 3 We generally don't consider the issue of title 4 to the property, but it was brought before the 5 Board and we certainly can't ignore something 6 as significant as this, especially in light of 7 the fact that this is the County planning 8 board and there is a potential that the County 9 actually has title to this property which is 10 actually what the objector is recommending 11 here. 12 My recommendation is the Board 13 dismiss this application because we don't have 14 clear title that rests with this applicant. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Without 16 prejudice. 17 MR. CALVANICO: Without 18 prejudice. He can certainly come back once 19 the title matter is cleared up completely and 20 make his application again. 21 Our dismissal won't impact the 22 project in terms of timing, because they still 23 don't have an approval from North Bergen and 24 it is not as if they are eminent next week. 25 So that is my recommendation to 48 1 the Board, that we dismiss the application 2 without prejudice at this point. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And we 4 would have to, they would have to battle it 5 out themselves. 6 MR. CALVANICO: Yes. 7 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 8 have a motion? 9 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Mr. 10 Chairman, I make a motion to dismiss this 11 without prejudice. 12 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Before we 13 make a motion I wanted to ask, who actually 14 holds title to this? When would we know that? 15 MR. CALVANICO: We probably 16 won't know that until a judge at some point 17 makes the determination. 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And I 19 think the County should find out if we do own 20 it, too. I think we should do our homework, 21 too. 22 MR. CALVANICO: Yes, Mr. 23 Chairman. 24 Just so that the record is 25 clear, I have been in touch with the County 49 1 counsel on this matter. They are looking at 2 it. Their outside counsel, title people, are 3 all looking at this matter under the light of 4 the new allegations that have been raised 5 about this. They brought the old files up, 6 doing a lot of background work on this now. 7 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Motion 8 to dismiss without prejudice. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We have a 10 motion. 11 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Second. 12 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 13 who seconded? 14 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I 15 seconded. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 17 on a motion to dismiss application 2006-012-SP 18 made by Commissioner Holloway and seconded by 19 Commissioner Avagliano, Commissioner 20 Arencibia? 21 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 Avagliano? 24 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 50 1 Choffo? 2 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 DiDomenico? 5 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 6 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 7 Holloway? 8 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 9 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 10 Mehta? 11 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 12 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 13 Munoz? 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 15 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 16 Fitzgibbons? 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 19 the motion passed. 20 MR. LAMB: Thank you, members of 21 the Board. 22 MR. OURY: Thank you, members of 23 the Board. 24 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 25 the next application is 2008-106-SP, it is 51 1 just skipping ahead, Leber Rivera Funeral Home 2 located at 4541 and 4543 Kennedy Boulevard 3 which is Block 148, Lots 1 through 4, 5A, 28-B 4 through C, 29-A through B, and 30-A through C 5 in the Township of North Bergen. 6 MR. OURY: Thank you, Mr. Marks. 7 Dennis Oury appearing again on 8 behalf of the applicant. This is Leber Rivera 9 Funeral Home on Kennedy Boulevard. I think it 10 is 42nd and Kennedy. 11 The application -- 48th is it? 12 48th and Kennedy. The application before the 13 local board was to create a new parking lot. 14 We bought some property next door and added a 15 second-story addition to the second part of 16 the property. 17 I received from Mr. Marks today 18 a review letter. There were three items that 19 Mr. Marks requested of our engineer to submit 20 redrafted plans. We are in agreement with 21 that one hundred percent. 22 Mr. Marks clarified to me 23 tonight since it is a corner property he wants 24 to have the curb depressed and I think you 25 have to put some kind of striping for 52 1 handicapped. We are fine with doing that. 2 As well as three trees and one 3 other item we will agree to. I don't know if 4 you want to hear from the engineer what the 5 project is since we agreed with Mr. Marks' 6 review letter. 7 MR. CALVANICO: Yes, you can go 8 through a presentation so the Board can 9 understand the project. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Please 11 swear him in. 12 MR. STINSON: Engineering 13 manager of Bohler Engineering. 14 (Mr. Stinson was duly sworn.) 15 MR. OURY: You are an engineer 16 and you appeared before the local board with 17 regard to this project, is that correct? 18 MR. STINSON: Correct. 19 MR. OURY: You are very familiar 20 with it? 21 MR. STINSON: Yes. 22 MR. OURY: Can you describe to 23 the Board what this application entailed? 24 MR. STINSON: It is basically 25 two things that the funeral home wants to add 53 1 that will increase the capacity of the viewing 2 room. They are not increasing the number of 3 viewing rooms, but increasing a lobby in the 4 front that would be a lounge for the patrons 5 and adding to a viewing room in the back 6 extending the second story of the building. 7 Along with that, the other 8 portion of the he project as Mr. Oury pointed 9 out, the applicant has purchased the property 10 next door to provide additional parking. 11 MR. OURY: Are how many 12 additional parking spaces are we providing? 13 MR. STINSON: The parking spaces 14 that were in now weren't really striped so 15 that it was hard to tell, but I guess they did 16 have some existing numbers. 17 MR. OURY: Generally the idea is 18 to get cars off the street in an area that is 19 relatively congested? 20 MR. STINSON: Right. Parking 21 was unorganized and unmarked. We now have 22 thirty-seven parking spaces. We have one-way 23 traffic through underneath -- the addition 24 underneath where they will have an attendant 25 parking the cars. 54 1 MR. OURY: You reviewed the 2 letter from Mr. Marks? 3 MR. STINSON: No. 4 MR. OURY: But you have no 5 objection to what he said? 6 MR. STINSON: No. 7 MR. CALVANICO: Can you identify 8 the document? 9 MR. STINSON: This is our 10 landscaped rendering which is a drawing that 11 highlights the addition of the building and 12 the landscaping and the parking lot layout. 13 It has the zoning notes and landscaping and 14 lighting on it. I can mark this as A-1. 15 MR. CALVANICO: Please. 16 MR. STINSON: A-1 dated with 17 today's date. 18 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Mr. 19 Chairman, I want to verify something for the 20 record. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 22 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: 23 Thirty-seven parking spaces, you have two 24 handicapped? 25 MR. STINSON: Correct. 55 1 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: 2 Including? 3 MR. STINSON: The number 4 thirty-seven includes the two. 5 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Thank 6 you. 7 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Mr. 8 Chairman? 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: How many 11 occupants can the building have? 12 MR. STINSON: How many 13 occupants? I am not sure. The parking 14 requirement in North Bergen is based on the 15 number of viewing rooms. There are two 16 viewing rooms, so that would be ten parking 17 spaces per viewing room. 18 They do have some apartments 19 upstairs. The required parking number is 20 thirty-two and we are providing thirty-seven 21 parking spaces so we do meet the local 22 township requirements for the number of 23 parking spaces. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It would 25 be an upgrade. I know the facilities very 56 1 well. 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: To get to 3 the parking it would be behind the building, 4 right? 5 MR. STINSON: There is actually 6 two lots because of the grade difference. We 7 have a wall separating the upper parking lot 8 from the lower parking lot. 9 People will enter, it will be 10 attendant parking so that they can drive 11 underneath the addition and out to Kennedy 12 Boulevard. 13 The lower lot is a stand-alone 14 parking lot with a standard sixty-foot bay 15 width which has double entrance and exit in 16 the lower lot. 17 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Has this 18 been approved by the North Bergen Planning 19 Board? 20 MR. STINSON: Yes. 21 MR. OURY: It was a board of 22 adjustment application, but it was approved. 23 MR. STINSON: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Mr. 25 Chairman, can I ask a question on the 57 1 direction of the driveways. 2 Is it possible that you can 3 reverse the direction of the driveway from 4 Kennedy? 5 MR. STINSON: The idea is to 6 have one attendant in this general area that 7 keeps an eye on both park lots. One attendant 8 would be here directing people to park the 9 car. 10 Also, they sometimes have a 11 progression for the funerals which would 12 proceed out this way and leave exiting on 13 Kennedy Boulevard, so it is the desire of our 14 applicant to have it in that direction. 15 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: How 16 would they exit onto Kennedy Boulevard and 17 make a left turn out of the driveway? 18 MR. STINSON: Proposed left or 19 right turn. 20 MR. OURY: The local board did 21 not put any restrictions I think on right or 22 left out. 23 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: When 24 you have a local funeral procession, you would 25 have someone stopping traffic? 58 1 MR. OURY: Yes, yes, yes. You 2 would never get a funeral procession out on 3 Kennedy Boulevard without that. 4 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: How 5 often would that happen? 6 MR. OURY: Two viewing rooms, 7 maybe two times a week maybe? Three maybe. 8 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Most of 9 the time it is during the middle part of the 10 day after the rush hour. I went to a funeral 11 so it is usually 10:00, 11:00 in the morning 12 that the procession would go in and come out. 13 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Mr. 14 Chairman? 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 16 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: On the 17 amount of trees, only going to be one tree in 18 the front? 19 MR. OURY: The County has asked 20 for a total of three trees, which we are going 21 to accommodate. We have to find out where we 22 are going to put them. 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Would they 24 block the -- 25 MR. OURY: No. 59 1 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The tree 2 guards does it include? 3 MR. STINSON: To answer your 4 question, we are requested to have three trees 5 provided, shade trees a large caliper 6 diameter. 7 We do have a tree guard here. 8 If it is acceptable to the County we would 9 propose to put two on Kennedy Boulevard as 10 requested. 11 We have a fifty-foot frontage. 12 There should be plenty of room to put the tree 13 and we can put tree guards. 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I have 15 an understanding on the tree guards. Before 16 you do the construction you can confirm which 17 type to use. 18 MR. STINSON: Very good. 19 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I make a 20 motion to approve. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Do we 22 have a second? 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Second. 24 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 25 on a motion to approve application 2008-106-SP 60 1 made by Commissioner Holloway and second by 2 Commissioner Munoz, Commissioner Arencibia? 3 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 4 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 5 Avagliano? 6 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 7 And it is a great improvement and it is a 8 great funeral home. 9 MR. OURY: Thank you. I will 10 pass it on to my client. 11 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 12 Choffo? 13 MR. STINSON: Aye. 14 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 15 DiDomenico? 16 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 17 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 18 Holloway? 19 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 20 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 21 Mehta? 22 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 23 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 24 Munoz? 25 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Yes. 61 1 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 2 Fitzgibbons? 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 4 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 5 the motion passed. 6 MR. OURY: Thank you, members of 7 the Board. It was a pleasure seeing you 8 again. 9 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 10 the next application scheduled for public 11 hearing is 2008-028-SP, MEPT Journal Square 12 Urban Renewal, LLC, located at Journal Square 13 and the corner of Bergen and Sip Avenue which 14 is Block 1866, Lots B3, B4, C1, 16, 17A, 19, 15 20 and 25H in the City of Jersey City. 16 MR. PAOLINO: Eugene Paolino 17 from the firm of Schumann Hanlon. I represent 18 MEPT Journal Square Urban Renewal, LLC. 19 We have a lot of exhibits so if 20 you can bear with me for one minute while we 21 bring them out and you can see what we are 22 talking about. So hold on. 23 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 24 just before Mr. Paolino starts, we did get a 25 revised application from the initial 62 1 submission. The application had been slightly 2 amended according to the -- I guess the 3 changes that Jersey City had made, so I do 4 have a letter from Mr. Paolino dated October 5 10th with the revised numbers. 6 MR. PAOLINO: May I start, Mr. 7 Chairman? 8 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes, you 9 may. 10 MR. PAOLINO: Let me tell you a 11 little bit about this project. It is located 12 at Journal Square at the intersection of Sip 13 Avenue and Bergen Avenue right at the point 14 where Bergen Avenue merges into Kennedy 15 Boulevard. You are all familiar already with 16 that, I am sure. 17 As a result of that, because of 18 the proximity to Kennedy Boulevard, it is 19 necessary for us to appear before you today. 20 We have appeared a number of 21 times, frankly three previous times before the 22 Jersey City Planning Board. The reason for 23 that is there were changes along the way as to 24 the building, the statistics of the building 25 that in our view required site plan approval 63 1 from the City. 2 The property is subject to a 3 redevelopment plan. Jersey City passed a 4 Journal Square Redevelopment Plan which you 5 know is a large redevelopment plan. This is 6 district five in that redevelopment area. 7 We have consistently received -- 8 I say we, my client has consistently received 9 approvals from Jersey City. We have gone 10 through their planning process fairly 11 thoroughly. 12 The last approval which results 13 in the documents you have before you now was 14 submitted to the City and approved by the 15 Jersey City Planning Board on October 7th, a 16 couple of weeks ago. That received unanimous 17 approval at that point in time. 18 We are doing tonight as a matter 19 of fact the same presentation that we did 20 there. 21 I would point out to you that a 22 PATH representative was present at that time 23 and indicated that they wanted some approval 24 rights with respect to the plan and the 25 Planning Board of Jersey City, in my view 64 1 quite appropriately, advised them that a 2 Planning Board, a Board like yours can't 3 delegate to a private entity, though PATH is a 4 bi-state entity, it can't. 5 The planning board makes 6 planning board decisions. Other people don't 7 make planning board decisions and the same 8 holds true here. 9 I just want you to be aware of 10 that. I have three witnesses. I have Fred 11 Worstell from Dresdner Robin who is going to 12 testify as to the engineering aspects and 13 architectural aspects. 14 I also have Mark Vizzini of 15 Dresdner Robin who is going to tell you about 16 the amenities. 17 I think the part of the plan 18 that you might find interesting and that I 19 found interesting is the plaza level because 20 that is going to be highly impacted by this 21 development. 22 And the third is a traffic 23 expert who is going to talk about what this 24 means in terms of traffic. I would like to 25 run through them as quickly as I can with your 65 1 permission. 2 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 3 MR. PAOLINO: We have a number 4 of exhibits. Do you want me to mark each of 5 them or describe them during the course of 6 testimony? Whatever you wish. 7 MR. CALVANICO: Have the 8 documents previously been submitted to us? 9 Have all these documents you are going to 10 refer previously been submitted? 11 MR. PAOLINO: They have not. 12 What has been submitted is the architectural 13 and engineering drawings. 14 MR. CALVANICO: Okay. Let's 15 mark each one. If it has been already 16 submitted, just identify the drawing and the 17 date and all that otherwise let's mark all the 18 other ones. 19 (Marked A-1 through A-6.) 20 MR. PAOLINO: Thank you for your 21 patience. Let me call my first witness Fred 22 Worstell from Dresdner Robin. 23 MR. CALVANICO: State your name 24 and spell your last name. 25 MR. WORSTELL: Fred Worstell, 66 1 W-O-R-S-T-E-L-L. 2 (Fred Worstell was duly sworn.) 3 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Worstell, just 4 give the board a quick benefit of your 5 background. 6 MR. WORSTELL: I am president of 7 Dresdner Robin. We are a land use engineering 8 firm located in Jersey City. I am a 9 registered professional engineer registered in 10 the State of New Jersey. 11 I have been in professional 12 practice for almost thirty years. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You are 14 okay. 15 MR. PAOLINO: Thank you, Mr. 16 Chairman. 17 Mr. Worstell, just give the 18 Board a sense from an engineering perspective 19 what the present existing site description is. 20 MR. WORSTELL: This is Block 21 1866, Lots B3, B4, C1, 16, 17A, 18A, 19, 20, 22 25H and 25J. And the site comprises 23 approximately 1.5 acres. 24 The site presently is bounded, 25 as already testified to, Sip Avenue and 67 1 Kennedy Boulevard. It is also bounded on the 2 north by the transit station. 3 MR. PAOLINO: The witness is 4 referring to Exhibit A-3. 5 MR. WORSTELL: And by the Hudson 6 County Community College building to the east. 7 The site generally right now is vacant. It 8 was previously -- it has about 93 percent 9 impervious to a hundred percent impervious 10 coverage. Existing along Kennedy Boulevard is 11 a parking area and an existing public plaza. 12 The remainder of the site has 13 several buildings that are slated for 14 demolition pending approval of the project and 15 the balance of the site has been cleared. 16 MR. PAOLINO: This project was 17 acquired through condemnation through the 18 Jersey City utility authority, correct? 19 MR. WORSTELL: Parts of it, yes. 20 MR. PAOLINO: And it is subject 21 to the Journal Square redevelopment plan, is 22 that correct? 23 MR. WORSTELL: Yes. 24 MR. PAOLINO: In a redevelopment 25 area? 68 1 MR. WORSTELL: Correct. 2 MR. PAOLINO: Subject to the 3 zoning restrictions and the land use 4 requirements of a redevelopment area as 5 specified in that plan? 6 MR. WORSTELL: That's correct. 7 MR. PAOLINO: Would you take us 8 through -- did you complete the site 9 description? 10 MR. WORSTELL: I think of the 11 existing conditions, yes, unless you want more 12 detail on the roadways, but I think the Board 13 is probably familiar with it. 14 MR. PAOLINO: Let's go directly 15 to the general description of the project. If 16 am I correct it is a pedestal of seven stories 17 with two residential towers; is that correct? 18 MR. WORSTELL: Correct. 19 MR. PAOLINO: Let's discuss the 20 pedestal. Tell this Board what the pedestal 21 looks like. 22 MR. WORSTELL: Again, on the 23 Exhibit A-3, generally what is shown, this a 24 pink, green, and gray color that is the seven 25 story pedestal. 69 1 The first two levels of the 2 pedestal primarily consist of -- this is the 3 ground floor, which are represented here, 4 consist of a retail space, lobby entrances for 5 the two residential towers, back of house 6 space for both of those residential towers, 7 and a common loading area to service both 8 residential and the retail space, the loading, 9 and it is off of Sip Avenue and all of the 10 truck movements are within the building and 11 there is a four -- three slot loading dock in 12 the center part of the building. 13 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Worstell, this 14 is a seven-story pedestal, is that right? 15 MR. WORSTELL: That is correct. 16 MR. PAOLINO: On the west side 17 of the building facing Kennedy Boulevard in 18 the lower part of A-3, is that the retail 19 area, the entry to the retail area? Is that 20 correct? 21 MR. WORSTELL: The retail is 22 along Kennedy Boulevard with portions on Sip 23 and what we are calling concourse north by the 24 PATH station. 25 MR. PAOLINO: The area to the 70 1 east, the top of A-3, that shows Hudson County 2 Community College, correct? 3 MR. WORSTELL: Right. 4 MR. PAOLINO: There is a path 5 from Sip Avenue to the PATH station, is that 6 right? 7 MR. WORSTELL: Correct. 8 MR. PAOLINO: That is a pink 9 area, that is a retail area as well? 10 MR. WORSTELL: Yes, retail along 11 that space. 12 MR. PAOLINO: Total retail is 13 how much? 14 MR. WORSTELL: Total retail in 15 the project is seventy thousand -- 16 approximately 70,400 square feet. 17 MR. PAOLINO: And how many 18 parking spaces are there? 19 MR. WORSTELL: Total parking in 20 the project of 687 spaces which are placed on 21 levels two and three and four -- three, four 22 and five above. 23 MR. PAOLINO: Are those numbers 24 consistent with the Jersey City plan? 25 MR. WORSTELL: The Journal 71 1 Square redevelopment plan speaks in bases of 2 maximum, not minimums. It is approximately 3 fifty percent of the parking that is specified 4 as the maximum within the plan. 5 MR. PAOLINO: Okay. Take us 6 through the two residential buildings. Am I 7 correct that there is a north tower and a 8 south tower? 9 MR. WORSTELL: That is correct. 10 MR. PAOLINO: Can we call those 11 Phase I and Phase II? 12 MR. WORSTELL: Yes, they are. 13 MR. PAOLINO: Tell the Board the 14 height of the first tower, Phase I Tower, 15 Tower North. 16 MR. WORSTELL: Okay. Well, from 17 grade, first tower, North Tower is going to be 18 sixty-eight -- from grade, the North Tower is 19 sixty-eight total stories or sixty-one stories 20 above the seven-story base. 21 Tower II -- 22 MR. PAOLINO: Before you get to 23 Tower II, could you tell the Board how many 24 units, how many residential units are going to 25 be in the Tower I, the North Tower. 72 1 MR. WORSTELL: Tower 1 has 922 2 residential units. 3 MR. PAOLINO: And the second 4 phase is a South Tower, is that right? It is 5 a smaller tower. 6 MR. WORSTELL: Correct. 7 MR. PAOLINO: What is the height 8 of that, number of stories? 9 MR. WORSTELL: Fifty stories 10 from grade or again forty-two stories above 11 the pedestal. 12 MR. PAOLINO: And how many units 13 are -- 14 MR. WORSTELL: Sorry, 15 forty-three stories. 16 MR. PAOLINO: How many units are 17 in that building? 18 MR. WORSTELL: That tower 19 consists of 693 residential units. 20 MR. PAOLINO: Could you go 21 through if you could on top -- I know we will 22 have witnesses later on this, but on top of 23 the pedestal between the two buildings, are 24 there any amenities? 25 MR. WORSTELL: Yes, there are. 73 1 As indicated on Exhibit Number A-4, shows the 2 rooftop amenity area between -- this is the 3 first phase. Then there will be a second 4 tower built eventually on the first phase. 5 This is the amenity tower as it will look 6 prior to construction of the second phase 7 (indicating). 8 MR. PAOLINO: We will have a 9 witness that will go through the amenities in 10 great detail, but the drawing that you have, 11 A-4, just shows the North Tower, it doesn't 12 show the South Tower yet? 13 MR. WORSTELL: Right. 14 MR. PAOLINO: That is a Phase II 15 issue? 16 MR. WORSTELL: Yes. 17 MR. PAOLINO: Do you have a 18 material board? 19 MR. WORSTELL: This is the 20 material board. 21 MR. PAOLINO: This is marked 22 A-2? 23 MR. WORSTELL: That is correct. 24 MR. PAOLINO: I will hold it for 25 you. Can you tell the Board, using this 74 1 material board, where the materials are going 2 to be located and what they are. 3 MR. WORSTELL: Okay. So the 4 retail, the first two levels of the base are 5 basically cast stone and glass. Two different 6 shades of the cass stone, one is burnt umber 7 and the other is a natural stone which have 8 been set up to basically break the base up and 9 bring the effect of the tower all the way down 10 to the grade. 11 I think the landscape architect 12 will take you further how this entry has been 13 brought out to the street. 14 It is a modern looking building. 15 The parking is clad in an expanded metal mesh 16 phase accented with the cass stone and above 17 the base we are a brick, basically brick tower 18 with accent strips, glass which is clear 19 glass. Unfortunately the glass broke off the 20 board. 21 MR. PAOLINO: It was my fault. 22 MR. WORSTELL: And we have a 23 matching aluminum bullion for all of the 24 windows. 25 MR. PAOLINO: Now, Mr. Worstell, 75 1 it is my understanding the developer aims to 2 make this a lead certified building, is that 3 right? 4 MR. WORSTELL: Yes. 5 MR. PAOLINO: And that means 6 what? 7 MR. WORSTELL: Lead certified 8 means they willing be looking at energy 9 conservation measures. Also looking to 10 recover storm water in the rooftop areas, 11 reuse that. He landscapes using energy 12 efficient glass products. 13 MR. PAOLINO: And you are also 14 using energy efficient equipment, is that 15 correct? 16 MR. WORSTELL: Correct. 17 MR. PAOLINO: And also having a 18 green roof, a green amenities roof on the 19 pedestal and you also have reconstructed the 20 plaza area, is that correct? 21 MR. WORSTELL: The landscape 22 witness will go through that. 23 MR. PAOLINO: That is all I 24 have. If the Board has any questions please 25 feel free. 76 1 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Isn't it 2 the State saying you have to have a certain 3 amount of parking spaces? 4 MR. PAOLINO: I didn't hear the 5 question. 6 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The State 7 regulation says the -- states the amounts of 8 parking spaces per unit. 9 MR. PAOLINO: RSAS standards 10 don't apply to this project. It is a 11 multi-use project and really a single project 12 structure, a unified project structure and it 13 also, it -- RSAS, it is our opinion and I 14 don't think anybody has challenged us straight 15 through the City through any discussions that 16 we have had with the County, perhaps you are, 17 but the RSAS standards don't apply. 18 In fact, and it is my 19 understanding, that in Jersey City the intent 20 is to attempt to lower the number of parking 21 garages and parking spaces. 22 If you were present today as I 23 had the benefit of being present at the 24 Journal Square -- the new Journal Square 25 Vision conference, I don't know what they 77 1 called it, that was one of the primary 2 objectives of this area. 3 The County and the City agreed 4 that the intent was to lower traffic, and one 5 of the ways of doing that is by encouraging 6 pedestrian access, walkways, green areas and 7 to reduce the amount of parking garages 8 throughout the city. 9 I think Tony Nelson who gave the 10 introductory demonstration and walked us 11 through the videos was saying something there 12 will be no parking lots at all in Jersey City. 13 I don't believe that will be 14 true, but certainly what we have tried do 15 here, what the redevelopment plan tries to do 16 is reduce -- not increase, reduce the amount 17 of cars that are in the area and that is done 18 by reducing the parking garage. 19 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: How many 20 square footage of commercial area is there 21 going to be? 22 MR. PAOLINO: 70,384 square 23 feet, I understand. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And the 25 parking facilities, are they going to be for 78 1 commercial use and residential use? 2 MR. PAOLINO: Yes. In fact, I 3 think one of the conditions of the Jersey City 4 Planning Board was that the location of the 5 parking be near, be a shopper's section. 6 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Rental 7 units or condos? 8 MR. PAOLINO: These are rentals. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: What are 10 the size of the apartments? 11 MR. PAOLINO: I think they vary. 12 MR. WORSTELL: I don't have the 13 square footage. 14 MR. PAOLINO: They attempt to 15 make the units not cookie cutter so you won't 16 have the same units at any time, but it is 17 five hundred to a thousand square feet. Nine 18 hundred square feet for the units. 19 Incidentally, I wanted to point 20 out one thing missed earlier. There was a 21 strong intent here, very strong intent to make 22 this a transit oriented project; in other 23 words, the intent is to make everybody use 24 public transportation. 25 PATH, there is going to be, as 79 1 Commissioner Bass-Levin said this morning, the 2 intent is to make PATH, the PATH train station 3 even bigger than it is today, more cars, 4 greater capacity to carry more people, and 5 this project is consistent with that aim. 6 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Is it a 7 commercial area? Will it be more for the 8 residents or more for the -- 9 MR. PAOLINO: No. Certainly 10 used by the residents, but it is meant to be, 11 the intent here, Commissioner, is -- Chairman, 12 is to restore Journal Square to what it was 13 when, at least when I was a kid, to make it a 14 commercial hub, a vibrant commercial hub and 15 it is not to -- this developer is pouring a 16 substantial amount of dollars into this 17 project and the vision, just as it was for the 18 City and the State this morning, is to make 19 this, to bring this back because Journal 20 Square is not what it once was and we all want 21 it to be what it once was. 22 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Mr. 23 Paolino, I have a question. There is a 24 Christopher Columbus statue right in front of 25 the project. Any idea what they are going to 80 1 do before they start? 2 MR. PAOLINO: Remove it and 3 replace it -- I am joking. They intend to 4 keep it there. 5 As I understand it, it is 6 getting relocated and it will also be restored 7 and as I understand it now, it is not fully 8 functioning it is not chlorinated, the 9 mechanism is not done well and the developer 10 is taking on the responsibility of making it a 11 working fountain, chlorinated and useful. 12 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I 13 thought originally when the Christopher 14 Columbus statue was removed from the center of 15 Journal Square in front of the Lowes and went 16 to the new spot eventually it was going to go 17 back on the bridge where it came from. That 18 was in the books. 19 I think that was proposed by the 20 former Judge Edward Zampella that it would go 21 back to the center of the Boulevard. That is 22 where it belonged, on the Columbus Bridge. 23 That is where the statue belonged. 24 I was hoping that is where it 25 was going to go back to once you started the 81 1 project. 2 MR. PAOLINO: Commissioner, I 3 think that the developer will do whatever the 4 City or the County directs it to do with 5 respect to the statue. I have the same 6 feeling you do. 7 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: That is 8 where it should be. I would like to see it 9 there, believe me. It belongs there right in 10 the center where it came from. 11 When I went to school in Journal 12 Square I saw it every day. I seen it. 13 Anyway, give it a thought. 14 MR. PAOLINO: I will pass it 15 along. 16 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Mr. 17 Chairman? 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 19 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: This type 20 of development reminds me back of September 21 11. 22 There is going to be a lot of 23 people in there. What emergency plan you have 24 in case of fires, any type of -- 25 MR. PAOLINO: My understanding 82 1 is that -- my understanding Jersey City has 2 implemented revised fire plans related to 3 terrorism issues and this project will comply 4 with all of them and probably exceed them, but 5 maybe the witness has more information. 6 MR. WORSTELL: I think that is 7 the basic answer to it. This is going to be a 8 state-of-the-art building. It will meet all 9 of the building codes as far as egress, fire 10 access, but there is not anything beyond that 11 that is specifically related to terrorism. 12 It is a monitored building, the 13 garage will be monitored. There will be -- 14 the idea creating this as a twenty-four-hour 15 space. 16 But it is not -- the parking 17 garage will act as a standard commercial 18 parking garage. 19 In terms of residential egress 20 and shoppers -- 21 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The PATH 22 train would be underneath? 23 MR. WORSTELL: The PATH train 24 actually is to the north. We actually do not 25 pass on to any PATH property or any of the 83 1 rail system whatsoever. 2 There is actually -- the reason 3 we have an unusual shape, this is the 4 construction drawing between this project and 5 the PATH which is actually all one structure. 6 MR. PAOLINO: Maybe you can show 7 where the PATH transportation center is 8 located. 9 MR. WORSTELL: Right here 10 (indicating). 11 MR. PAOLINO: A-3? 12 MR. WORSTELL: A-3 this is the 13 PATH transportation center and the bridge 14 here, and the rail is passing through like 15 that (indicating.) 16 MR. PAOLINO: You should be 17 aware that the area around the building, this 18 walkway including the plaza here is all going 19 to be redone and monitored by the developer, 20 so this is going to be an actual passageway 21 from -- right now it is a ten-foot passageway, 22 is that correct? 23 MR. WORSTELL: Which, the 24 existing? 25 MR. PAOLINO: The existing 84 1 pathway between Sip and PATH? 2 MR. WORSTELL: This existing? 3 MR. PAOLINO: This here 4 (indicating). 5 MR. WORSTELL: This is going to 6 stay. This one is the covered canopy in 7 front. 8 MR. PAOLINO: It is going to be 9 expanded by ten feet? 10 MR. WORSTELL: Expanded twenty, 11 thirty percent which is indicated here. 12 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I have 13 one question. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: During 16 construction Sip Avenue going east and west on 17 the north side, is there any overpass coverage 18 for the college students to walk to the 19 school? Because you are right next to them. 20 MR. WORSTELL: There will be. 21 We actually have been working with Jersey City 22 and we will confirm that with all of our 23 permitting plans, but we have a basic plan for 24 covered walkways all around the property. 25 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: They 85 1 won't be walking on the street? 2 MR. WORSTELL: On the sidewalk 3 in a covered area. There will be portions of 4 time where we are proposing that there is, 5 that we will be doing a temporary lane shift 6 in here while we do parts of the construction 7 until we get that covered walkway in and then 8 we will be moving back. 9 The principal staging of the 10 project is all going to come off of the 11 existing plaza area. 12 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Thank 13 you. 14 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Mr. 15 Chairman? 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 17 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: You 18 mentioned 687 car parking available and out of 19 that as for the other standard for the 20 handicapped. 21 You have handicapped located on 22 one place or different spaces, places? 23 MR. WORSTELL: There will be 24 handicapped spaces within the garage, is that 25 what your question was? 86 1 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: My point is 2 all the handicapped parking spaces is located 3 in one place or spread out throughout the 4 parking lot? 5 MR. WORSTELL: Disbursed around 6 the parking lot based on elevator and various 7 access points. 8 MR. PAOLINO: Located near the 9 elevators. 10 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Are you 11 going to be separating out for the parking for 12 the shopping area and the residential parking 13 or it will be a common parking total? 14 MR. WORSTELL: There will be 15 areas of the parking that will probably be 16 done -- there will be permanent areas of the 17 parking lot for residents that will be on a 18 monthly or some other form, at least, basis 19 and then there will be turnover parking, more 20 retail oriented. 21 How that is going to find its 22 level ground in terms of the operation -- 23 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: In other 24 words, you are not separating this out that 25 this will be a certain part, number of parking 87 1 will be located strictly for the shopping or 2 consumer purposes and certain parts will be 3 for the -- 4 MR. WORSTELL: The experience 5 has been within the lower areas where you have 6 a lot of these lots operating right now is 7 that you are going to get a certain amount of 8 residential, be it turnover space. Most of it 9 is permanent, people aren't using the vehicles 10 during the day. That is going to be permanent 11 parking. It is going to find its level based 12 on how many people actually choose to own cars 13 and lease cars. 14 We find most of the projects in 15 downtown or lower Jersey City, all of the 16 newer projects are basically all overparked. 17 Most of the developments, they 18 are actually prohibited from putting them out 19 on the market because Jersey is trying to keep 20 traffic numbers out but they are actually 21 underutilized. 22 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: In other 23 words, the seventy-eight thousand square feet 24 of consumer space, any loading or unloading 25 going on? 88 1 MR. WORSTELL: Seventy thousand 2 feet of retail space and all of that is 3 internal to the building. 4 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: How big 5 truck will be able to go inside? 6 MR. WORSTELL: This is set up to 7 handle a WB 40. I think it was set up WB 40, 8 which is typical for this. 9 There are larger trucks, but 10 those are not really used for this type of 11 retail operation. But this is handling large 12 semi trailer trucks. 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And another 14 question is regarding the -- now you are 15 having a big project. How much are you going 16 to have a green building? 17 MR. PAOLINO: Lead certified. 18 As we get through details we are monitoring. 19 I don't know that we sent a complete final 20 objective of where, what level lead 21 certification that the building is going to 22 be. 23 We are look at maximizing leads 24 to the maximum point that we can with this, 25 with this building meeting the needs or the 89 1 price points of the marketplace. But we are 2 looking at green roofs, looking at high 3 efficiency energy systems. Energy efficient 4 glass. All of this will be incorporated into 5 this plan. 6 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Most of the 7 new projects in Hudson County we are 8 requesting put the cycle, bicycle rack in the 9 parking area. 10 MR. PAOLINO: We have that. 11 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Do you have 12 any specific area? 13 MR. WORSTELL: Yes, we are going 14 to have them. They will be outside the 15 building as well as bicycle storage within the 16 inside. 17 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Is there a 18 tax abatement on this property? 19 MR. PAOLINO: There will be a 20 tax abatement application. Has it been 21 passed? No. 22 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: For how 23 long do you plan to put? 24 MR. PAOLINO: What is the length 25 of the tax abatement? Probably thirty years, 90 1 twenty or thirty years. 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Are you 3 going to be providing any low income? 4 MR. PAOLINO: Affordable 5 housing? No. Under Jersey City rules as you 6 know the requirement is that a developer 7 building new contribute to the affordable 8 housing trust fund in an amount of 1,500 9 dollars per unit and a dollar fifty per foot 10 for retail, and retail garage is included and 11 that is what we are doing here. 12 That is what we would do if we 13 get the tax abatement. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Is that 15 going to be a payment in lieu -- 16 MR. PAOLINO: Payment in lieu of 17 taxes, yes. 18 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: One more 19 question. During the construction is there 20 any interruption of traffic going either Sip 21 or Kennedy Boulevard while it is under 22 construction? Any traffic detouring anywhere? 23 MR. WORSTELL: Not looking at 24 anything that is a permanent disruption of 25 traffic in the area. There will be lane 91 1 changes at certain periods of time off peak. 2 All of that will be worked out. 3 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Not 4 totally closed? 5 MR. WORSTELL: We are not 6 looking to close anything, no. 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: In the 8 report it says you are going to -- this eleven 9 taxi parking space, are you going to replace 10 it or are you planning to do anything for 11 that? 12 MR. PAOLINO: Actually that is 13 part of the Jersey City study right now. The 14 PATH stop, the taxi stand is actually in front 15 of the PATH train station and I think Tony 16 Nelson who did the drawings for the Journal 17 Square Vision has the taxi stand there, so I 18 think that is how that is going to be taken 19 care of. 20 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: So it will 21 be relocated or with your project it is not 22 affected at all? 23 MR. PAOLINO: I can't tell you 24 exactly where because that is not part of this 25 project, but it will be relocated. They have 92 1 to be relocated because the intent -- 2 remember, the intent is for people not to use 3 cars and one of the things they are going to 4 be using is taxis, buses, trains. 5 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I think 6 the understanding is the taxi stand will be 7 moved toward the PSE&G building -- the PATH. 8 MR. PAOLINO: The transportation 9 center. 10 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Mr. 11 Chairman, there is already a taxi stand there, 12 about three or four cars. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I know. 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Are you 15 looking to expand that? 16 MR. PAOLINO: No. Expand the 17 taxi stand? No. 18 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: There 19 is one there already. Right now what was 20 asked of you was about the current parking lot 21 at your sight that there is a taxi station in 22 there, is that right? 23 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Mr. 24 Chairman, I think there is a temporary taxi 25 stand. I don't think it is a permanent. 93 1 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Not a 2 taxi stand, but they are cuing. 3 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Cuing. 4 MR. PAOLINO: I think that is 5 going to stay the same but I think, as I said 6 to you earlier, I think there are plans by the 7 City and the PATH people to address that 8 issue. 9 I can't address that now because 10 it is not part of our plans, but that has to 11 be addressed. Somewhere. 12 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Another 13 question regarding the garbage, are you going 14 to have Jersey City garbage or the private 15 pickup? 16 MR. PAOLINO: Projects of this 17 size usually have the Jersey City Incinerater 18 Authority do trash pickup for certain days and 19 usually excessive trash and they enter into an 20 agreement with a private trash supplier. 21 Both. 22 It is done at the Beacon, most 23 of the major projects, even the projects along 24 the waterfront. 25 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Separate 94 1 area and there will be -- 2 MR. PAOLINO: The designated 3 areas, absolutely. 4 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: And that 5 will be enough access for garbage truck? 6 MR. PAOLINO: Absolutely. 7 MR. WORSTELL: Trash and 8 recycling areas are located on the plans, they 9 are off the internal service court leaving the 10 area. 11 MR. PAOLINO: The witness is 12 looking at A-3. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 14 Commissioner Munoz? 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: You are 16 going to put through on the front? 17 MR. WORSTELL: I will go through 18 the landscaping in detail and you will like it 19 very much. 20 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: One 21 question the Commissioner Mehta had a comment 22 on, the statue. If we make it as a condition 23 to move that, will there be an objection? 24 MR. PAOLINO: I think that is a 25 discussion the County needs to have with the 95 1 City. We don't own the statue, it is where it 2 is. If the County wants to relocate it from 3 one place -- 4 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Who owns 5 the statue? 6 MR. PAOLINO: My understanding 7 is that the City does. I didn't do a title 8 search on the statue. 9 You know, there is a kiosk there 10 the City built as kind of like a parisian 11 kiosk. They told us where it goes. They told 12 us where the statue goes. 13 If you would like the statue to 14 go elsewhere we would love to put it wherever 15 the appropriate party tells us to put it and, 16 Mary, I know your feelings. I will pass it 17 along. 18 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I am 19 pretty sure when the late Judge Eddie Zampella 20 died that it would go back to the Columbus 21 Bridge where it came from on there in front of 22 the Highland Hotel temporary while the bridge 23 was being completed because it was really all 24 broken down and widened and repaired. 25 MR. PAOLINO: Sure. 96 1 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: As soon 2 as that is completed, the statue can come back 3 MR. PAOLINO: I will let the 4 City know, and just to take it from the 5 developer's perspective, we get more space in 6 the plaza. 7 I think we wouldn't mind if the 8 statue was moved to the right place, but the 9 developer can't make that determination. It 10 is beyond his jurisdiction. 11 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I would 12 love to see that happen. 13 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Can we have 14 the clerk of the Planning Board send a letter 15 to the municipality letting them know about 16 the request for the statue? 17 MR. PAOLINO: Is that it for 18 this witness? I have another witness from the 19 same firm. His name is Mark Vizzini. Mark is 20 going to testify with respect to the amenities 21 on the pedestal on the top of the garage in 22 the retail area and he is going to testify 23 with respect to the plaza area which is 24 significantly changed. Okay. 25 MR. CALVANICO: State your name, 97 1 spell your last name for the record, please, 2 sir. 3 MR. VIZZINI: Mark Anthony 4 Vizzini, V-I-Z-Z-I-N-I. 5 (Mark Vizzini was duly sworn.) 6 MR. PAOLINO: Give the Board the 7 benefit of your background. 8 MR. VIZZINI: I have a Bachelor 9 of Science degree in landscape architecture 10 from West Virginia University. I have been 11 practicing since 1996. I have been licensed 12 since 2001 where I worked on very similar 13 projects in the urban environment. 14 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. 15 Proceed. 16 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Vizzini, which 17 drawing will you be using? 18 MR. VIZZINI: I will work off of 19 for now A-3 to discuss the plaza and the area 20 around the site. 21 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Vizzini, could 22 you describe to the Board the applicant's 23 plans with respect to the plaza. 24 MR. VIZZINI: As Mr. Worstell 25 stated earlier, in our meetings with the City 98 1 and the community college we decided the best 2 approach was to shift the building down to 3 provide a ten-foot walkway in addition to the 4 covered walkway of the community college in a 5 sense acting as one larger unified walkway. 6 We designed it so our elevations 7 meet flush with the county college's walkway 8 providing a nice pedestrian thoroughfare. 9 We have provided free-standing 10 planters, planters to dress up the facade in 11 areas where there is the retail on the corners 12 which help anchor the building with the 13 community and play well with the community 14 college. 15 Along Sip Avenue concourse, what 16 we are calling concourse east because it is 17 east of our building and concourse north 18 because it is -- actually concourse east on 19 the tax map will be paved in the one by two 20 cass concrete paver currently used by the 21 Journal Square area during the Journal Square 22 streetscape rehabilitation. 23 One of the things we tried to do 24 with the modern project in an area that was 25 done with a relatively historic streetscape in 99 1 2000 is how do we blend the two, and what we 2 decided and how can we carry the theme across 3 with the streetscape which is consistent 4 throughout Journal Square and we decided we 5 are going to remove the curbing and put back 6 granite curbing which was there. 7 We are going to carry along 8 granite cobble strip, three rolls of four by 9 eight granite cobble and along Sip Avenue to a 10 point along the precast concrete paver then 11 switch to the blue stone pavement which was 12 used throughout the entire main bulk of the 13 plaza. 14 So we are going to carry that 15 same theme throughout the Journal Square 16 granite curb, granite cobble utility strip and 17 the one by two concrete paver and in the area 18 starting from approximately at the corner of 19 the building along Bergen and Kennedy 20 Boulevard, this gray colored area will be blue 21 stone pavement which was hopefully from the 22 stock that was removed from the existing 23 plaza. 24 The existing fountain is to 25 remain and be protected during the 100 1 construction. 2 As Mr. Paolino stated earlier, 3 the existing fountain doesn't have a 4 chlorination system and there has been some 5 maintenance problems with it. We intend to 6 install a chlorination system from the same 7 company that will fit this and take care of 8 that maintenance problem for the City. 9 The statue as we just talked 10 about currently has been relocated in a 11 planter on a pedestal similar to the pedestal 12 it is on today. 13 The existing kiosk that sits on 14 the raised plaza, there was a raised plaza 15 right about here (indicating.) 16 We are moving that slightly 17 redesigning the plaza but we are going to put 18 the kiosk back complete with the utilities it 19 has today; water, sanitary hookup and power. 20 One of the main differences is 21 we have added two drop-off lanes in front of 22 the building for drop off and pickup. 23 This indicates about ten feet 24 will be paved with the pavement typically used 25 by crosswalks in the City typically to 101 1 identify it is not a driving lane and signed 2 for no parking. 3 The interior of the plaza we 4 decided the more modern way to go. Colored 5 concrete, all these different versions, all 6 the concrete, but it will be a couple 7 different shades of concrete and this main 8 swirling band will be a colored concrete with 9 a carbide silicon in it which kind of gives it 10 a shimmering effect and one of the other 11 things we wanted to do was extend some of the 12 paving patterns out towards the sidewalk to 13 kind of invite people to walk into the plaza 14 and one of the other ways we carried some of 15 the original design details from the Journal 16 Square streetscape is bordered some of these 17 pavements with a twelve-inch wide band of 18 granite seats which is a four by four granite 19 seat that was used in a bench of the tree pits 20 that currently exist in the plaza. 21 We added a considerable amount 22 of landscaping which will be bound by a 23 protective square picket fencing found in the 24 Journal Square area. This will provide 25 seating, outdoor dining. 102 1 We provided benches, trash 2 receptacles, site lighting. Again we have 3 provided a raised terrace with kiosk that will 4 have benches and hopefully service the kiosk. 5 Our project -- we do have a bike 6 rack outside in addition to bike storage 7 within the facility and we plan on stopping 8 right at the expansion joint between our 9 property and the Port Authority. 10 So that is it for the site. 11 MR. PAOLINO: I want you now to 12 describe -- why don't I break it up like this. 13 Does anybody have any questions about the 14 plaza? 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: How many 16 trees in total out there? How many are there 17 going to be? 18 MR. VIZZINI: I can tell you in 19 a second. I have to look at the plans. 20 MR. PAOLINO: I think we 21 indicated it on the application. If you hold 22 on one second I can give you that answer. 23 MR. CALVANICO: Thirty-five. 24 MR. VIZZINI: There are proposed 25 thirty-five trees. 103 1 MR. PAOLINO: The number, I 2 believe, is correct. Existing thirty-five 3 trees. In Phase I which is the building of 4 the pedestal, and in the Tower North, there 5 will be a total of eighty-nine trees. 6 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: In the 7 front? 8 MR. PAOLINO: That is going to 9 include the front, the plaza area, as well as 10 the amenities area on the pedestal. 11 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Around the 12 area? 13 MR. VIZZINI: Sip Avenue is a 14 narrow sidewalk and the narrow width and 15 utilities intrude on the large depressed curb 16 for loading. There is no room for trees. 17 Same thing within this walkway. 18 If we put trees in there between the podium 19 and the college it would have felt very 20 confined, that's why we added the rows of low 21 planters and we did not have any trees within 22 the City right of way to the north. 23 Again, there are some utilities 24 that run through there and it would kind of be 25 forced to put the trees right in the middle of 104 1 the walkway and break it up and this is a main 2 thoroughfare and it needs to have adequate 3 width. 4 MR. PAOLINO: That was Phase I. 5 With Phase II there are forty-eight more. 6 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: I am 7 looking at the size of the development. Would 8 you have any problem donating to the tree fund 9 to plant trees? 10 MR. PAOLINO: I am sure they 11 will consider it. I can't speak for the 12 developer now, but I am sure they will 13 consider it. 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The size of 15 like this, how many trees can the County ask 16 for? 17 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 18 the County has established a standard of one 19 tree for every thirty feet, but in looking at 20 the plans it appears the applicant meets the 21 County's threshold for one tree every thirty 22 feet. 23 MR. PAOLINO: I would like to 24 direct this witness now to the next level. 25 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I had a 105 1 question going back to that drawing, doing 2 streetscape improvements on Kennedy Boulevard 3 and say up to the expansion joint. 4 MR. VIZZINI: Within the plaza 5 we are stopping at the expansion joint. This 6 is marked A-6. That is the existing expansion 7 joint up to the concrete collar that houses 8 the expansion joint and the curb return will 9 again tie in right at the concrete collar at 10 the expansion joint and mill and pave full 11 width on the northbound side. 12 In accordance with our last 13 meeting, we have agreed the northern portion 14 which will identify the limits and get 15 approval from your engineer, we will improve 16 it. 17 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Are you 18 proposing any improvements to the medians? 19 MR. VIZZINI: No. 20 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: The 21 only word of advice, JFK Boulevard over the 22 PATH, we have a structure and the expansion 23 joint is clearly visible on the street but on 24 the south abutment there is a chamber, 25 structural chamber that I can't tell you 106 1 exactly where it terminates, but it is right 2 in front of the Lowes so that you would have 3 to look and find exactly where it is. 4 MR. VIZZINI: I worked with 5 McKinley who did the streetscape back with Mr. 6 Arencibia representing the County we have the 7 bridge abutment located. We located all the 8 utilities south and the only improvements we 9 are doing on Kennedy Boulevard is mill and 10 pave and whatever full depth replacement we 11 have for the asphalt, and these trees are 12 raised planters. We didn't put anything that 13 had foundations. 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Thank 15 you. 16 MR. PAOLINO: Let's go to the 17 amenities on the roof of the pedestal between 18 the two buildings. 19 Mr. Vizzini,, just describe the 20 amenities as they will be built. 21 MR. VIZZINI: The large gray 22 area is the Tower area of Phase 1. The brown 23 line would be the limit of the podium, so what 24 we have got north of the podium, we provided a 25 fenced in dog run with benches and the doggy 107 1 liter box and doggy water fountain. 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: That is 3 going to be open for the public? 4 MR. VIZZINI: That is strictly 5 for the residents of the Tower. You will 6 access the walkway which will feed into the 7 dog run. The rest of this area in this color 8 is green roof planted with seed jumps and 9 other type of roof plants hooked up with our 10 storm water management. 11 Those plans are low maintenance 12 and survive in harsh alpine conditions which 13 are simulated in the their conditions. 14 To the south of the tower you 15 will come out of the residential building into 16 a precast paver, a pedestal -- precast paver 17 pedestal, two by two paver set on pedestals. 18 Water goes between the joints and into the 19 roof drains. It will be covered by a 20 continued large pergala which will provide for 21 plants to grow under the pergala. 22 We provided benches, tables and 23 chairs and seating opportunities and that will 24 extend eventually to what will be the Phase II 25 Tower to kind of act as the connection between 108 1 the two. 2 Centrally located is a raised 3 lawn area about fourteen inches which can be 4 used for passive recreation, Yoga and other 5 activities on the roof bound by raised tree 6 planters. 7 To the north, the eastern facade 8 is flanked with two steps which can be used 9 with seating and pavers flush with the lawn 10 for tables, chairs, coffee tables providing 11 existing table areas for the residential 12 inhabitants providing a large area if they 13 wanted to have a gathering. There is a 14 masonry wall. 15 As you can see, all the green 16 areas are various landscaping. We tried to 17 stick to a strict native plant palate again 18 reducing maintenance and going towards our 19 lead certification to try and get some 20 credits. 21 We provided an additional lawn 22 area with a crushed granite walkway with 23 seating areas and another curved walkway which 24 will have benches and game tables like chess 25 or checkers and whatnot, eventually coming 109 1 down to the fenced-in pool area. 2 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The 3 blueprint information for the second tower is 4 where? 5 MR. VIZZINI: Basically a mirror 6 image. These are the stair bulkheads from the 7 tower that had to be brought up and will be 8 used as emergency areas. 9 This green space, basically the 10 new tower will start along this edge and the 11 building jets out here (indicating), so 12 anything within this footprint will be a 13 sliver and a five foot wide band along the 14 edge that will remain, but you will lose a 15 large part of it. 16 The area south of the pool to 17 the second tower -- 18 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The second 19 tower is planning to be built or you are doing 20 it by phase? 21 MR. PAOLINO: It is a phase. 22 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: If you 23 decide in the future if you want it? 24 MR. VIZZINI: The market is 25 going to drive it. 110 1 MR. PAOLINO: Your planner has 2 received drawings from the architect's 3 engineers. SP-7.2 is a drawing that shows the 4 location of the South Tower on the amenities 5 pedestal. Unfortunately we don't have a 6 rendering of it, but it is where Mr. Vizzini 7 is -- 8 MR. VIZZINI: You can see it 9 here (indicating). This portion of the green 10 will remain. Anything on the north of it. 11 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Vizzini 12 throughout has been referring with respect to 13 the amenities to A-4. 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The spread, 15 how long each phase is going to be 16 constructed? 17 MR. VIZZINI: Phase I will be 18 approximately thirty-six months. 19 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: And that is 20 the base? 21 MR. VIZZINI: The base with the 22 North Tower. 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: And the 24 second phase? 25 MR. VIZZINI: Twenty-four, 111 1 months approximately. 2 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Okay. Do 3 you want to move on? 4 MR. PAOLINO: I have one more 5 witness that I will go through very quickly. 6 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Sir, you 7 have a traffic expert? 8 MR. PAOLINO: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Before that 10 can I ask one or two questions to engineer. 11 MR. PAOLINO: Which one, Mr. 12 Vizzini that just left? 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Engineer. 14 Architect and engineer. 15 MR. PAOLINO: Fred Worstell, 16 yes. Come back. 17 MR. WORSTELL: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I just want 19 to -- does the Jersey City Municipal 20 Authority, not municipal authority -- MUA, has 21 the MUA approved this project? 22 MR. WORSTELL: Yes, they have. 23 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Because the 24 site of the project, what about the sewer line 25 and the storm water and the rain water? Are 112 1 you going to dispose of? In Journal Square 2 when you have the big sewer and water line. 3 MR. WORSTELL: The answer is 4 yes. We have reviewed all of these drawings. 5 All the plans have been reviewed with the 6 Jersey City engineering as well as JCMUA. We 7 confirmed there is adequate capacity in the 8 water system and in the storm sanitary system 9 for this project. 10 It is a combined system up 11 there. We are providing storm water 12 mitigation as is required both at the State 13 level and by Jersey City MUA under their 14 ordinances and it is a separated system 15 discharging from the project but it does go to 16 a combined system. 17 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: So storm 18 water and rain water you are going to hook up 19 directly to the -- 20 MR. WORSTELL: Storm and 21 sanitary come up out as separated systems and 22 come out as a combined system out in the 23 street. 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Because I 25 think that the size of the project should have 113 1 it like a seepage pit. 2 MR. PAOLINO: No. 3 MR. WORSTELL: We can't have a 4 seepage pit for this size project. 5 MR. PAOLINO: This has been 6 thoroughly reviewed by the Jersey City 7 Municipal Authority many, many times. 8 MR. WORSTELL: I think the 9 answer to your question is we have storm water 10 mitigation on the east side of the project so 11 we are providing the detention that is 12 required by ordinance for the project. 13 We are also further reducing 14 storm water as a result of the green room. 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Is there 16 storm water going into any County sewer line. 17 MR. PAOLINO: No. 18 MR. WORSTELL: No. Not from the 19 building. The plaza. 20 The plaza discharges into the 21 storm water system in Kennedy Boulevard but 22 only the plaza not the building. In fact, the 23 current buildings do connect into Kennedy 24 Boulevard and they are being taken out. 25 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Also 114 1 they are combined systems in the Jersey City 2 MUA. 3 MR. WORSTELL: We are also 4 harvesting some of the rain water from the 5 rooftop. All the roof drains will tie in when 6 we irrigate the storm water further taking it 7 out of the system. 8 MR. PAOLINO: Can I bring out my 9 last witness? Mr. Pavlovich. 10 State your name and get sworn 11 in. 12 MR. PAVLOVICH: John Pavlovich, 13 P-A-V-L-O-V-I-C-H. 14 (John Pavlovich was duly sworn.) 15 MR. PAOLINO: Quickly give the 16 Board the benefit of your background as an 17 expert. 18 MR. PAVLOVICH: Licensed 19 professional engineer in the State of New 20 Jersey. 21 I have testified before this 22 Board many times and other City and Hudson 23 County Boards. 24 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Pavlovich, is 25 there any effect of this project in terms of 115 1 traffic, and could you describe it for the 2 Board. 3 MR. PAVLOVICH: There is no 4 impact at the intersection along Kennedy 5 Boulevard. 6 The intersection at Sip Avenue 7 where there is going to be an access point for 8 the frame in the vicinity of Enos Place, there 9 are impacts at that intersection. 10 We already submitted a letter to 11 the City traffic engineer requesting 12 authorization to revise the signal and also 13 signal timing and phasing modifications to 14 make traffic flow more smoothly along Sip 15 Avenue. 16 MR. PAOLINO: I have no more 17 questions. 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Demetrie? 19 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I know 20 we had a consulting engineer look at the 21 traffic report, and I had some comments as 22 well. But I will let Edwin go first to see if 23 I have any. 24 MR. REIMON: Edwin Reimon from 25 Medina Consultants. 116 1 We have reviewed the traffic 2 report that was provided to us by John 3 Pavlovich and we have some comments that we 4 have been discussing from the data we received 5 on the report. 6 While the concern we have is the 7 traffic that is going to be impacted by the 8 relocation of the taxi stand that has been 9 already spoken about in this meeting, I 10 believe that years ago when the streetscape 11 projects of Journal Square took place, that 12 taxi stand was relocated. I am not sure where 13 it was relocated. 14 I know that the City and the 15 Journal Square Redevelopment Agency took the 16 initiative to select the location for this 17 taxi stand. 18 I recommend the applicant 19 approach the City and the Journal Square 20 Redevelopment Agency to find a location for 21 this taxi stand and cuing of taxicabs that are 22 right now in the Journal Square area. 23 MR. PAOLINO: Mr. Reimon, we 24 will do that. We have already done that. We 25 have spoken to the, Don Smith at the Business 117 1 Improvement District Bob Antonelli at the 2 Redevelopment Agency and talked of course to 3 Bob Cater, the executive director of Planning, 4 so we will continue those discussions. 5 If you are asking will we 6 continue to address the taxi issue, we 7 certainly will. 8 MR. REIMON: The only issue we 9 have with that is we want to make sure the 10 taxi stand or cuing of the taxicabs doesn't 11 happen on Kennedy Boulevard. 12 MR. PAOLINO: That is my 13 understanding. 14 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: This 15 issue has to get resolved before those taxis 16 are removed before you start construction. 17 MR. PAOLINO: I don't know 18 whether that can be achieved. 19 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: You 20 might get a fight by the taxicab drivers. 21 There are a lot of them on the property and if 22 you decide to close them off one day, what are 23 they going to do? 24 MR. PAOLINO: I know that the 25 City is working on the issue. Where they will 118 1 come out, you have to talk to the City people 2 about that. 3 But I know they are aware of the 4 issue. I know that the Mayor is aware of the 5 taxicab drivers' concerns. 6 All I can tell you is that we 7 will accommodate as much as we can and that we 8 will work to resolve it. How it is going to 9 be resolved, when it will be resolved, I can't 10 give you any answers and I don't think anybody 11 can. I wish they could, but we can't. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We are 13 saying we don't want the taxis to pile up on 14 Kennedy Boulevard. 15 MR. PAOLINO: Absolutely. If 16 you are concerned about the taxi impinging on 17 traffic flow on Kennedy Boulevard, that will 18 not occur. 19 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Can we make 20 this as a condition? 21 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Mr. 22 Chairman, if I could, that is an enforcement 23 problem. You can put all the statements you 24 want on the record, but that is an enforcement 25 issue. 119 1 You can say only five or six 2 taxicabs, it can be twenty. Unless the police 3 officers enforce it, there is nothing you can 4 do. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: It would 6 be under the jurisdiction of the sheriff's 7 office. 8 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I would 9 agree it should be a condition. The applicant 10 will work towards a solution with the taxis. 11 MR. PAOLINO: No problem with 12 that. We will do that. 13 MR. REIMON: Another issue we 14 have, and I don't believe it is a traffic 15 report itself, is the construction stages. 16 I heard it is going to be two 17 phases for the construction of the project and 18 one phase is going to take approximately about 19 thirty-six months. 20 I believe that part of the 21 project eventually is going to impact Kennedy 22 Boulevard, too, so my recommendation is that 23 the applicant submit a traffic control plan 24 for the construction of this project 25 specifically for the section of Kennedy 120 1 Boulevard. 2 The engineer mentioned already a 3 section of Kennedy Boulevard is going to have 4 full depth pavement reconstruction because of 5 a utility reconstruction. 6 It is true it is a very small 7 section of Kennedy Boulevard, but how is this 8 going to be done? A plan has to be prepared 9 and shown to the County engineer for approval 10 prior to. 11 MR. PAOLINO: We understood 12 that, Mr. Reimon. We understood that we would 13 have to submit appropriate plans based upon 14 what is being done, and I understand you will 15 look at it. 16 That would be in the normal 17 course anyway, wouldn't it? 18 MR. REIMON: It is going to be 19 County. 20 MR. PAOLINO: I understand that 21 to be the case, Mr. Reimon. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Another 23 thing, looking at -- you are going to have 24 hundreds of workers there. Where are they 25 going to park their vehicles? 121 1 MR. PAOLINO: I don't think the 2 construction worker parking issue, we are at 3 that stage. I don't know where they are. 4 They are going to comply with the law. 5 MR. REIMON: Let me just say 6 something about that. In one of the plans we 7 received from the applicant, let me just take 8 the liberty of saying that they show in a 9 specific area within the plaza that is being 10 assigned for staging and also have an access 11 drive so vehicles can come in and go out and 12 it is also protected. 13 So I understand that that area 14 can be also used and is always the case it is 15 used by the construction workers. 16 So to me that is not really the 17 issue. I mean, you may have other issues, 18 too, but my main concern is the impeding of 19 traffic on Kennedy Boulevard during the 20 installation of manhole, pipes, and PSE&G is 21 going to have a mess down there. 22 That is a specific section. All 23 we need to know is how they are going to 24 address the stage of construction for that 25 renovation. 122 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Sit down 2 with the engineer -- 3 MR. PAOLINO: We understand 4 that. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: -- and 6 formulate some kind of planning, control plan. 7 We don't want -- Kennedy 8 Boulevard is actually the heart road of Jersey 9 City. To go anywhere in Jersey City if you 10 want to move, in Jersey City, Union City, 11 North Bergen, anywhere you want to go, that is 12 where you go. You go through Kennedy 13 Boulevard. 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Chairman, 15 during the phase of construction, who is going 16 to say the sheriff is going to be the one 17 responsible for the parking? 18 MR. PAOLINO: I don't understand 19 the question. 20 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: During the 21 construction period, who is going to be 22 providing the law enforcement like traffic, 23 the City or the sherrif's department? 24 MR. PAOLINO: Probably a 25 combination of both. 123 1 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: 2 Probably both because there are two 3 jurisdictions, Sip, Kennedy, and JFK 4 Boulevard, but you would have to submit your 5 plan to Joe DiSicis and the county engineer 6 for permit approval. 7 MR. PAOLINO: Absolutely. 8 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Who is 9 going to pay for that? The builder pays for 10 the enforcement or taxpayers? 11 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Traffic 12 directors. 13 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Who is 14 going pay for the officers enforcing the 15 traffic? This is a big project. This is 16 going to be the taxpayers or the developers 17 going to be paying for? 18 MR. PAOLINO: Commissioner, I 19 think that is part of the street opening 20 permit process, so I think that is covered. 21 And I understand your concern, but I think we 22 have to apply for a street opening permit and 23 once we do that, those issues come into play 24 and we have to resolve them. 25 MR. REIMON: Yeah. 124 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I think 2 when you do that, I am not sure, at the time 3 you do submit to the County or the 4 municipality they have some kind of program 5 set where an off-duty officer, you are charged 6 a fee and the City gets something and the 7 police officer gets something. 8 MR. PAOLINO: You are right. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: So the 10 taxpayers really don't get hit over the head. 11 It is an off-duty police officer that does 12 that. 13 MR. PAOLINO: That is all I 14 have. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Mr. 16 Chairman, I still had some questions. One has 17 to do with the traffic. 18 I know you did a traffic study 19 and you are promoting the use of public 20 transportation being right there and 21 discouraging vehicle use and your base -- you 22 are going to have thousands of people living 23 in this complex, but the trip generation you 24 have in your report is based on a reduction 25 rate of nearly eighty-eight percent. 125 1 MR. PAOLINO: Eighty-five. 2 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: 3 Eighty-five percent, and it seems quite a lot 4 to be reducing the trips. That figure is 5 based on the census you did. 6 MR. PAVLOVICH: Based on two 7 components. If you are looking at residential 8 trips during the peak hours, that is a journey 9 to work trip. To make your trip account for 10 commuting during those hours we looked at 11 census data that indicated twelve and a half 12 people in Hudson County -- and this is two 13 hundred census numbers -- commute to work by 14 transit. 15 Twelve and a half percent 16 commute by automobile and about eighty-five 17 percent commute by other means. And once 18 again, that was 2000. 19 Since 2007 New Jersey Transit 20 sees higher increases for transit uses for a 21 whole host of reasons for people living in the 22 Hudson County area, and it has the highest use 23 of transit use and also the richest network in 24 all of the counties in the State. 25 So that assessment of fifteen 126 1 percent auto usage for the peak hour for the 2 residential is very reasonable and it may even 3 be on the conservative side. 4 On the retail side, seventy 5 thousand feet of retail, is less than half of 6 the retail space that was in the original site 7 plan application. 8 This retail space is such that 9 it is not going to be the space -- it is 10 larger type of stores, more the neighborhood 11 retail and transit and like the kind of retail 12 they used to have at the Square. 13 When I lived in the City when I 14 was small people came to the Square. I can't 15 remember as a kid ever coming to the Square by 16 automobile. You came by bus. And I think 17 they are looking to do -- the City is trying 18 to encourage that. They are reducing parking 19 requirements and encourage people to come to 20 the Square by automobile. 21 If I was going to look at the 22 trip generation trip for retail, the 23 unadjusted was 497 peak and I will talk about 24 the p.m. peak because that is the higher 25 number. 127 1 If you apply the eighty-five 2 percent transit to that, you have 3 seventy-five, seventy-six trips coming by 4 automobile. 5 Now, that is an 6 eight-five/fifteen split. When I was talking 7 to Mr. Reimon before the hearing tonight he 8 was saying why not seventy percent? 9 If you look at seventy percent, 10 for every fifteen percent of the trips, you 11 are talking seventy, seventy-five additional 12 auto trips. Less than two auto trips a 13 minute, and network that, one and a half auto 14 trips a minute, and some making a left turn 15 and right turn coming out of the driveways at 16 a garage, it is not going to have an 17 appreciable service, especially beyond Bergen 18 and Sip which is what we analyzed, and the 19 intersections along Kennedy Boulevard. 20 The levels of service, when we 21 did the assessment with the numbers we are 22 talking about a change of less than a second 23 in terms of average vehicle delay at the 24 intersection of Kennedy and Bergen and Kennedy 25 and Pavonia. 128 1 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Now, 2 will the parking be assigned? Say you have 3 tenants, how do they go about requesting the 4 parking space? 5 MR. PAVLOVICH: In looking at 6 the parking based on the Journal Square 7 Redevelopment Plan, there is a requirement for 8 the parking for the retail of sixty-four to 9 sixty-five spaces. The number of spaces as I 10 think Mr. Worstell had testified earlier, is 11 that the City planning board had requested 12 that the retail parking be situated close to 13 the retail. 14 My understanding is that it will 15 either be put on the perimeter for the parking 16 or if it requires a major portion of the first 17 floor, the parking would be there for the 18 retail and it would be short-term park for 19 that retail use. 20 The balance of the parking would 21 be for residents and other public uses. 22 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: If you 23 don't have enough parking for residents, the 24 residents that want parking, what will happen 25 to them? They will have to go somewhere else 129 1 for a parking space? 2 MR. PAOLINO: Again, the 3 experience has been in the City, recent 4 experience in the City, talking about the last 5 probably twenty-four to thirty-six months, has 6 been that the garages around have been 7 underutilized not, overutilized. We don't 8 expect we will run out of parking spaces. We 9 don't expect that to occur. 10 MR. PAVLOVICH: In terms of the 11 data, Mr. Arencibia, the data from the garage 12 is that it operates on the State facility, the 13 old State theater showing that twenty-five 14 percent of the residents adjacent to the 15 garage utilize the parking on where they have 16 monthly passes. Only twenty-five percent. 17 Looking at the same data, you 18 are seeing four hundred to four hundred twenty 19 people using the parking. Sixty-four patrons 20 for the retail. That is four hundred sixty, 21 so that gives you another two hundred twenty 22 spaces that would be available for monthly use 23 and those people are going to be coming in 24 after 9:00. 25 Subsequently you have a 130 1 distribution through the evening when people 2 are returning with automobiles and by the time 3 you will see the people that want to come in, 4 the shopping prospects are closed down and it 5 is a true shared parking operation for the 6 garage. It prevents overparking on the site. 7 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: You 8 recommend signal timing changes? 9 MR. PAVLOVICH: For Sip Avenue, 10 correct. 11 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I think 12 you did analysis of Pavonia and JFK. 13 MR. PAVLOVICH: We analyzed 14 Pavonia at JFK and Bergen at JFK, but the 15 changes weren't -- in terms -- it was less 16 than a second in terms of signal timing. We 17 didn't want to touch those signals. It didn't 18 seem warranted. 19 In addition, most of the signals 20 are in closed-loop extension and once you 21 start touching one, you have to go further 22 north or south of that location. 23 What we did do with the signal 24 timing along Sip Avenue for what we are 25 proposing was increments for the cycle lanes 131 1 on Kennedy Boulevard so they are best 2 coordinated with the signals on Kennedy 3 Boulevard, some kind of coordination, what 4 they call establish the oversets in terms of 5 when signals turn green at successive 6 intersections with Kennedy or Pavonia, but 7 that is the time of modification. 8 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: What 9 stage along the construction -- will the 10 modifications be completed when the project is 11 completed? 12 MR. PAVLOVICH: The recommended 13 changes, they would be done at the time the 14 project would be completed. There may be a 15 need for a look at signal timing changes as 16 part of the construction plans, but we haven't 17 addressed that issue yet. 18 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I think 19 we ought to make it as a condition at such 20 time you evaluate the signal times or the 21 operation of the traffic to see what 22 improvements need to be made. 23 MR. PAVLOVICH: You establish 24 the conditions. 25 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: That is 132 1 what I am recommending. We really don't know 2 what you are going to need at this point. 3 MR. PAVLOVICH: Correct. 4 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Until 5 you have the project completed and at that 6 point is when you are going to be evaluating 7 the traffic signals to see what needs to get 8 changed. 9 MR. PAVLOVICH: Correct. 10 MR. REIMON: What traffic 11 signals? 12 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: JFK at 13 Pavonia, and JFK at Bergen. At Sip and 14 Bergen. 15 MR. REIMON: Sip and Bergen is 16 already taken care of. We have two, Bergen 17 and Kennedy and then Bergen and Pavonia. 18 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Right. 19 MR. PAVLOVICH: That would be 20 part of the construction plans with the 21 traffic control plans during that 22 construction. 23 MR. PAOLINO: You can make it as 24 a condition, but I don't think you need it as 25 a condition. 133 1 We are going to have to do that 2 anyway, but if you want to make it -- 3 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: 4 Otherwise the County would have to do it and 5 the taxpayers would have to pay for those 6 modifications. 7 MR. PAOLINO: Significant 8 changes. 9 MR. REIMON: The timing changes. 10 MR. PAOLINO: That is fine. If 11 you want it as a condition. 12 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: If it 13 comes down you have to change a lane or a 14 signal display or something like that, that 15 you will agree to do, as well? 16 MR. PAOLINO: Yes. 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: In other 18 words, whatever changes have to be made you 19 will make it? 20 MR. PAOLINO: Yes, Mr. Chairman. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And the 22 County would make sure if they are needed, you 23 would tell them. 24 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Based 25 on Mr. Pavlovich's analysis at the time of the 134 1 project's completion or at the end of the 2 first phase, right? 3 MR. PAOLINO: Probably at end of 4 the first phase, I would think. 5 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: What 6 year would that be? 7 MR. PAOLINO: Probably 8 thirty-six months out. 9 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Three 10 years from now? 11 MR. PAVLOVICH: In the analysis 12 it was 2011. When the original report was 13 done December of '06 the buildout year was 14 2009 and requested that we extend that out and 15 2011 was used as the design year. 16 Also, a rather generous growth 17 rate in there if you were to take this and 18 take the 2011 analysis or 2013, if you look at 19 the compound growth it will probably be the 20 same because it doesn't look like many newer 21 projects are going to be going at any quick 22 pace at Journal Square because of the economy. 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Somebody 24 want to make a motion? 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 135 1 did Mr. Reimon have any more comments or 2 questions? 3 MR. REIMON: I have seen the 4 comments and reserve my comments based on the 5 latest plans we received and what we are 6 planning to do actually is have another round 7 of meetings with Dresdner Robin to discuss the 8 comments because they are not fatal flaws to 9 the project or impediment for the 10 Commissioners to vote today. They are 11 basically comments related to the consistency 12 between the plans that were submitted 13 previously, the plans that we have now, the 14 comments we made before, all the drainage 15 storm water management, to respond to one of 16 the Commissioner's questions about the storm 17 water management. Storm water management 18 issue is resolved. 19 The traffic issues, based on the 20 traffic issues I myself raised in this meeting 21 today, what we have here on the plans is 22 basically minor things we want to take care of 23 which are basically signs that are not shown 24 on the plans and need to be shown on the 25 plans, marking on the signing and striping 136 1 plan that are not shown on the plans, 2 inconsistencies between the plan that is 3 called maintenance or traffic control plan 4 that shows some markings on pavement we 5 believe should be shown on the final signing 6 and striping plan and some minor items in the 7 landscaping plan. 8 That's all we have. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We could 10 approve this on the conditions that you said, 11 plus that they revise the plans the way Medina 12 Consultants, the minor plan, the minor 13 provisions. 14 MR. CALVANICO: Mr. Chairman, I 15 wanted to, before we take a motion, I just 16 want to make sure we have the conditions laid 17 out that the Board wants to put on the 18 conditions. Specifically Mr. Reimon 19 mentioned, which I believe that is reasonable, 20 we include conditions that the final plan 21 submitted meet with the approval of the 22 County's consulting engineer and the County 23 engineer. 24 MR. PAOLINO: I have no 25 objection to that at all. 137 1 MR. CALVANICO: The other 2 conditions, one was with respect to the 3 traffic, that they would do an evaluation of 4 signal timing changes once the construction 5 was completed. 6 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: 7 Whatever traffic signal modifications that 8 were necessary. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Anybody 10 want to make that motion? 11 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: There 12 was one other condition, too, having to do 13 with the taxi staging area. 14 MR. PAOLINO: We will work with 15 the City on that. 16 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: I will 17 make a motion based on those conditions. 18 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: I 19 second. 20 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 21 on a motion made by Commissioner DiDomenico 22 and seconded by Commissioner Holloway to 23 conditionally approve application 2008-028-SP, 24 Commissioner Arencibia? 25 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 138 1 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 2 Avagliano? 3 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Yes, I 4 vote aye and I would like to congratulate 5 everyone that was involved in this 6 application. Indeed it is really going to 7 enhance Journal Square and bring it back to 8 where it was and it is a good job. 9 Let's also hope it will be a 10 better job if the Columbus statue moves back 11 to the Columbus Bridge. 12 MR. PAOLINO: I will walk him 13 there myself. 14 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: It is 15 beautiful and congratulations to you all. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 17 Choffo? 18 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 20 DiDomenico? 21 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 Holloway? 24 COMMISSIONER HOLLOWAY: Aye. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 139 1 Mehta? 2 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 Munoz? 5 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: It is the 6 future. We are going up. We have nowhere to 7 go but up, so I vote yes. 8 MR. PAOLINO: Thank you. 9 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 10 Fitzgibbons? 11 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I vote 12 aye. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 14 the motion passed. 15 Mr. Paolino, can you leave the 16 exhibits for the application follow-up, the 17 exhibits that were marked in, please. 18 MR. PAOLINO: Sure. 19 COURT CLERK: Mr. Chairman, the 20 next application is 2008-053-SP/SD, MPTCR 21 Hoboken LLC, located at 300 Observer Highway 22 which is Blocks 2 and 2.01, Lots 12 through 23 23, 24 through 26 and 1 through 4, 9 and 10 24 respectively in the City of Hoboken. 25 In your folders for this evening 140 1 there is a letter from attorney Jim Burke who 2 represents the applicants. He requested a 3 thirty-day extension on this application. 4 Also on the letter is a consent 5 from Fred Bado who is the Municipal Community 6 Development Director for the City of Hoboken, 7 so he requested both the applicant and the 8 municipality requested a 30-day extension on 9 this application. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I have 11 been following this, being a resident of 12 Hoboken. There are a few problems that are 13 occurring. And there might be contaminants in 14 the soil, stuff like that. 15 Actually this should probably be 16 handled in the courts, the way I seen the 17 opposition to the project. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Again, Mr. 19 Chairman, the Board's jurisdiction is over the 20 traffic and drainage impacts, and the 21 environmental traffic and the remediation 22 really isn't subject to the Board's -- 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: But if 24 the contaminants are leaking into our sewer 25 system. 141 1 DIRECTOR MARKS: If it is a 2 matter of storm water runoff, sure. 3 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Once it is 4 approved by the planning board -- 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: They are 6 having a problem. 7 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 8 that is why the County completeness 9 essentially was ahead of the City municipal 10 completeness, so that is why the applicant 11 requested the 30-day extension. 12 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: We should 13 grant them the extension. 14 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Can we have 15 a consensus, one board to the other? Can we 16 send a letter to the planning board letting 17 them know we know about the issue and we 18 brought that issue up in the meeting? 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Which issue? 20 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The issue 21 that the Chairman brought up. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: The City 23 knows about it. 24 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: The City 25 itself is requesting the actions. 142 1 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Okay. 2 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Actually 3 the City and the developer want to postpone 4 this. 5 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Basically 6 table it. 7 DIRECTOR MARKS: It would 8 probably be appropriate just to have a roll 9 call on a motion to table it. 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: I make a 11 motion table it to the next meeting. 12 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Second. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 14 on a motion to table application 15 2008-053-SP/SD made by Commissioner Munoz and 16 seconded by Commissioner Mehta, Commissioner 17 Arencibia? 18 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 20 Avagliano? 21 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 22 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 23 Choffo? 24 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 143 1 DiDomenico? 2 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 3 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 4 Holloway? 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: He wished 6 to be excused. 7 DIRECTOR MARKS: Okay. 8 Commissioner Mehta? 9 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 10 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 11 Munoz? 12 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Aye. 13 DIRECTOR MARKS: And Chairman 14 Fitzgibbons? 15 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Aye. 16 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 17 the motion passed. 18 Mr. Chairman, the next 19 application scheduled for public hearing is 20 2008-089-SP/SD, River Terminal Development. 21 MR. BENNETT: Gary Bennett and I 22 am here this evening on behalf of River 23 Terminal Development, the applicant with 24 regard to property at 100 Central Avenue. 25 We are setting up some aerial 144 1 photographs and the plans have been prepared 2 by Bohler Engineering. 3 I have by way of witnesses Keith 4 Cahill who submitted the plans on behalf of 5 Bohler Engineering and Charles Oliva from 6 Atlantic Traffic and Design Engineers who 7 submitted a traffic impact study to the Board 8 and, in addition, Al Lambiase who is the 9 Director of Marketing for River Terminal. 10 River Terminal Development is a 11 three hundred acre development in Kearny, the 12 former Western Electric site taken over and is 13 a multi-tenanted facility. Of the three 14 hundred acres we come before you for one 15 section. 16 This is a company that has taken 17 a facility in literally a ghost town and 18 developed it into an ongoing and thriving 19 warehouse as well as office facility. This 20 proposal is to construct three new warehouses 21 on Lot 10.02 and in order to do that it 22 couples with it what is characterized as a 23 subdivision but what is really nothing more 24 than a lot line adjustment between lots 10.01 25 and 10.02 to add an additional 72,686 square 145 1 feet onto Lot 10.02 to accommodate the 2 development on that site. 3 What we have are three 4 buildings, two that are basically the similar 5 if not identical buildings of 235,120 square 6 feet and then one of 10,510 square feet. This 7 involves the construction of 571,750 square 8 feet of new warehousing facility. 9 Again bearing in mind these two 10 lots combined total over six million square 11 feet, we are not talking about a real dense 12 use of the property and we are talking about 13 an area that provides a high degree of green 14 area as well as parking that will adequately 15 and amply support the proposed development. 16 This application had been 17 presented and approved by the Kearny Planning 18 Board and we come before the County looking 19 for your endorsement of the project so that 20 even in this tough economic time a company 21 with the strength, vision and future of River 22 Development can move forward with their plan 23 to continue developing this site and restoring 24 it, revitalizing it by bringing in new 25 buildings with new tenants that are solid 146 1 tenants that occupy many of these buildings. 2 With these opening comments and 3 in light of the hour, what I would like to do 4 is first call Keith Cahill and have him 5 briefly walk you through the site so you can 6 orient yourselves to where the facility is. 7 Mr. Cahill. 8 MR. CALVANICO: State your name, 9 spell your last name for the record. 10 MR. CAHILL: Keith Cahill, 11 C-A-H-I-L-L with the firm of Bowler 12 Engineering out of Warren, New Jersey. 13 (Keith Cahill was duly sworn.) 14 MR. BENNETT: You are a licensed 15 professional engineer? 16 MR. CAHILL: Yes, I am. 17 MR. BENNETT: Licensed in the 18 State of New Jersey? 19 MR. CAHILL: Yes. 20 MR. BENNETT: How long have you 21 held that designation? 22 MR. CAHILL: Nine years. 23 MR. BENNETT: You are with 24 Bowler Engineering currently? 25 MR. CAHILL: Yes. 147 1 MR. BENNETT: And have you 2 testified before boards in both the County and 3 municipalities in the State of New Jersey? 4 MR. CAHILL: Yes, and testified 5 before over a hundred boards and have been 6 accepted as a professional engineer in all the 7 cases. 8 MR. BENNETT: I would offer Mr. 9 Cahill as an expert. 10 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: He is 11 qualified. 12 MR. CAHILL: Thank you. 13 MR. BENNETT: This is not the 14 first project you have had the fortunate 15 benefit of designing for River Terminal, is 16 it? 17 MR. CAHILL: No, numerous 18 projects. 19 MR. BENNETT: And you are 20 intimately familiar with the site, are you 21 not? 22 MR. CAHILL: Yes. 23 MR. BENNETT: I would ask you, 24 and we don't need to mark the plans we refer 25 to because they are part of the plans that 148 1 were submitted, but the two aerial photographs 2 I would like to mark as A-1 and A-2. 3 MR. CAHILL: This is an aerial 4 photo taken in the spring of '08. 5 MR. BENNETT: If you would 6 orient the board in relation to the rivers 7 that surround the property and the location. 8 MR. CAHILL: Absolutely. The 9 top of the page will be north. What we see 10 along the left side of the page is the river, 11 the Passaic River, and along the right side of 12 the page is the Hackensack River. 13 You may see the Pulaski Skyway 14 heading across the peninsula as well as 1 & 15 9. 16 The property known as Riverview 17 Development is essentially ninety percent of 18 the peninsula below the Truck Route 1 & 9, as 19 mentioned three hundred acres, and in regards 20 to this, specifically the thirty-five acre 21 track that was part of the minor subdivision 22 or lot line adjustments as mentioned, three 23 buildings totaling 571,750 square feet. 24 This is pretty zoomed out. I 25 have one more aerial I would like to show you 149 1 to give you a tighter view. 2 MR. BENNETT: Would you mark 3 that as A-2. This is prepared by Bowler 4 Engineering dated 10-15-08. Aerial view again 5 basically the same photo but zoomed in and for 6 reference to the top of the page is north. 7 Running through the center -- 8 excuse me, top of the -- change the directions 9 here. 10 North is to the right of the 11 page. Through the center of the page running 12 top to bottom is Route -- the Truck Route 1 & 13 9 and through the center of the page left and 14 right is Central Avenue. 15 What you are seeing here, this 16 large rectangular parking lot is the property 17 that we are dealing with this evening. So 18 just to give you reference, Central Avenue to 19 the south of Truck Route 1 & 9 is actually a 20 County road. Town of Kearny's Road. To the 21 north or right of Truck Route 1 & 9 it 22 transitions over to the County road. 23 Everything to the south as I 24 mentioned, the town road, the development, the 25 access point and everything is actually on the 150 1 Town's road. There is no access on to the 2 County road. 3 Also I want to point out, 4 everything in terms of storm water management 5 and drainage all sheds off to the Passaic 6 River to the west, so no drainage structures 7 from the County are impacted by this proposal. 8 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: It is going 9 to be draining into the river? 10 MR. CAHILL: Water capacity 11 devices, but it drains into the river. 12 On-site drainage because they 13 have waterfront property and discharges into 14 the river, so there is -- none of the 15 facilities will go through the County's 16 structures under any of their jurisdiction. 17 Everything is on County property and 18 discharges into the river. 19 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What was 20 the environment on that? 21 MR. CALVANICO: Just storm 22 water, not the sewers. 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What type 24 of merchandise were you looking to store in 25 this warehouse? 151 1 MR. CAHILL: Right now they are 2 spec buildings. We have no tenants. People 3 usually come in and store any type, like the 4 U.S. Postal Service is on the property. Could 5 be anything in there. 6 Just so you understand, we had 7 to go to the DEP for a permit, which we have. 8 They evaluate our storm water management so 9 all of that has been reviewed by not only the 10 Town, but also the State and is in accordance 11 with the regulations. 12 So this is just to give you an 13 orientation so you understand where our 14 development is and I think the key point here 15 and the main reason we wanted to discuss this 16 project with you is that the access to Truck 17 Route 1 & 9 is -- everything that is coming in 18 and out of this property is going to be 19 utilized by the State highway and using the 20 clover leaf style access points and currently 21 as mentioned there is in excess of five and a 22 half million square feet of existing truck 23 terminals, tractor trailers running in and out 24 operating since 1960. 25 The impact or the existing 152 1 facility using this highway network is not new 2 and if you can see in this aerial, it is a 3 good aerial to show what type of uses are 4 already on it. 5 You can see a significant amount 6 of number of trailers already on there. The 7 parking lot is already leased out to other 8 tenants. There is a moving company that has 9 Schneider moving trucks on there, two other 10 tenants that have a significant volume of 11 storage trucks and other cars, so in essence 12 our development is going to replace those 13 trucks. 14 There is no significant increase 15 in the amount of truck traffic in this area 16 and our traffic engineer is here. He will 17 briefly describe in general terms what type of 18 change in traffic patterns and you will see 19 there is an insignificant change. 20 Also, the network of lanes and 21 access points which is already designed for 22 tractor trailers, that is what is using it and 23 will continue to use it. No negative impact 24 to the existing roadway system. 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You said 153 1 it has no effect on any County road? 2 MR. CAHILL: In regards to where 3 we are located, we are on the town road, and 4 in our view most of the people coming to and 5 from our site are utilizing the Truck Route 1 6 & 9. The County Road system is to the side of 7 it. 8 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: New 9 Jersey Transit? 10 MR. KLEIN: New Jersey DOT. 11 MR. CAHILL: But again it is in 12 the master plan of both the County and in the 13 Town to be developed as a truck facility. 14 As I mentioned, it is being 15 utilized currently now -- not in essence a new 16 development because the land we are building 17 on is leased and used for trucking -- 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 19 Pre-existing. 20 MR. BENNETT: It is just a 21 parking lot. Unfortunately it is just used 22 with trucks and as many as they can fit on 23 there will go on the site. 24 This will lay out properly, have 25 it striped and developed and utilized by 154 1 companies that will occupy and revitalize the 2 site. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: And bring 4 jobs to the County. 5 MR. BENNETT: We sure hope so. 6 MR. CAHILL: Correct. So this 7 is a good aerial to show where we are talking 8 about. 9 I also want to point out a 10 couple of other things. I know there are 11 notes in the report. You notice Central 12 Avenue and along Truck Route 1 & 9 it is 13 entirely lined with shade trees. 14 My client has done an excellent 15 job in terms of planting here. They are 16 mature trees. We plan on saving every tree. 17 We have it completely stored with iron gate 18 fence style. It is not a chain link fence, 19 it is a very nice attractive look. 20 If you ever go by the facility 21 you will call it a crown jewel in an 22 industrial area. 23 I would like to now bring up -- 24 do I need to mark this? 25 MR. BENNETT: Nothing that was 155 1 submitted to the Board as part of the record. 2 MR. CALVANICO: Just make sure 3 you refer to them specifically. 4 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: When you 5 say trees, how many are you planting? 6 MR. CAHILL: We are not planting 7 anything. They are existing and mature trees. 8 We are not taking any down. 9 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: How many 10 are there? 11 MR. CAHILL: It is over three 12 hundred linear feet and planted every 13 twenty-five feet. So if you would like to 14 look at the exhibit, it is a significant 15 amount of trees. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Existing 17 trees. 18 MR. CAHILL: All existing trees, 19 and we plan to keep them all. 20 MR. BENNETT: Some were as a 21 result of site plan approval, but many on a 22 voluntary basis. It is a city and they take 23 pride in the perimeter and they planted a high 24 volume of trees voluntarily. 25 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 156 1 the site plans had fifty-six existing shade 2 trees. Fifty-six. 3 MR. CAHILL: We intend to 4 maintain them all and not disturb them. 5 Like I mentioned, it not only is 6 along our frontage and where we are 7 developing, but continues along the on and off 8 ramp of 1 & 9 all along our property. It is 9 well landscaped and maintained and will 10 continue to stay that way. 11 MR. BENNETT: If you would, just 12 go over the plan, show the subdivision of it 13 and where the movement of the property line is 14 proposed. 15 MR. CAHILL: Again, it is a lot 16 line adjustment and just to give a brief 17 description, give the exact dimension, we 18 basically add the eighty feet of width on the 19 south end of the existing lot, 10.02. 20 There are two lots, 10.01, 21 10.02. Existing is 10.02, 33.717 acres; 10.01 22 is 105.24 acres. We basically added eighty 23 feet along the south, eighty feet by nine 24 hundred fifteen feet triangular. Just moved 25 the line so your result into the new lot 157 1 acreage 10.02, 35.386 acres and the Lot 10.01 2 is 103.575 acres. 3 Again, it is the same person 4 operating both sides of it. We just moved the 5 line in terms of some building code issues, 6 the separation of the building. 7 MR. BENNETT: If you would now 8 -- obviously there are three separate 9 buildings, two that mirror and one larger one, 10 A, B and C. 11 Would you indicate the type of 12 facility these are construction-wise and also 13 orient it with regard to the traffic flow that 14 comes into the site. 15 MR. CAHILL: Certainly. And I 16 want to refer -- this is the site plan sheet 17 that is in your package dated 7-11-08 and I 18 call it site plan sheet one of one because we 19 colorized it. 20 It is colored to the same 21 drawing in your package, and for reference, 22 north is to the right side of the page, 23 Central Avenue is running along the bottom, 24 and the odd shape along the north side, that 25 is the on/off ramp for Truck Route 1 and 9. 158 1 We are constructing three 2 buildings which we are calling Building A in 3 the center top, Building B center bottom, and 4 Building C to the right side of the facility. 5 As mentioned, these three will 6 add up to 571,750 square feet. The individual 7 ones, Building A and B are identical buildings 8 235,120 square feet. It is mentioned here 9 that it is a truck terminal facility. 10 We have loading docks in the 11 courtyard between the two buildings and 12 parking for people to be working, general 13 population working in the warehouse facilities 14 both on the east and the west side isolated to 15 keep safe circulation from the trucks 16 separated from the car circulation. 17 The access point as mentioned is 18 on Central Avenue where it is a Town road at 19 that location and provides adequate stacking 20 and access point for tractor trailers cueing 21 up more than two trucks before it comes out 22 onto our road but we don't feel it has any 23 impact to Central Avenue or any negative 24 impact and we have a secure fenced-in location 25 and it is a manned guarded house 24-7. 159 1 Couple of quick points, this 2 will be a lead certified project. We believe 3 it is the first lead, the first industrial 4 buildings in the South Kearny, industrial zone 5 lead certified. 6 The property owner is putting a 7 significant investment to utilize the roofs 8 for solar power utilizing recycled materials 9 and a lot of natural light through glass on 10 the top parts of the building really adding a 11 premium on the construction but he is 12 environmentally sensitive. 13 The other thing, if you looked 14 at the area prior, we are putting 3.5 acres of 15 grass back onto this property, putting up 16 asphalt and putting acres of grass which will 17 provide natural enhancement to the existing 18 watering requirement reducing the water 19 leaving the site and a benefit to the South 20 Kearny industrial zone. 21 As I mentioned, there is a 22 circulation adequate for both the tractor 23 trailers throughout the site as well as 24 vehicles, and we have been careful to make 25 sure we have separation between passive 160 1 vehicles versus trucks. 2 Also provided adequate 3 pedestrian access in all locations from 4 Central Avenue into the site with handicapped 5 ramps, et cetera. 6 We are providing ADA accessible 7 accesses across each front of the building so 8 no matter how the building is cut up in terms 9 of the tenants, there is adequate ADA 10 accessibility. 11 Also provided spaces for bikes 12 which is also part of the intent of the County 13 to hopefully minimize some vehicles being used 14 if we have a biking facility as well as energy 15 efficient -- special spaces for energy 16 conserving cars and car pools, so again it is 17 all part of the lead certification process 18 that we are going through. 19 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: This 20 might be the first project like this, 21 commercial piece of property that I ever seen 22 as far as going green and I don't know of 23 anybody in the County and I don't know of 24 anybody in the State that has gone this far. 25 MR. CAHILL: Another nice thing 161 1 is the amount of energy that we will generate 2 through the solar we will be selling back to 3 the power companies so it will be 4 self-sustaining buildings themselves. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Way to 6 go, the way of the future. 7 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Mr. 8 Chairman, Mr. Cahill, the building to the 9 north, is that an office building? 10 MR. CAHILL: No, also a 11 warehouse facility and, again, the loading 12 docks would be to the north side of it and the 13 car parking would be along the south and east 14 side. 15 MR. BENNETT: That is the baby 16 brother of the other two buildings. 17 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: I am 18 familiar with the area because I notice when I 19 go over the bridge I see it on the right hand 20 side. 21 Every garage is well painted, it 22 is well taken care of, and that area is kept 23 well cleaned whether there are ships on the 24 side of it or not. But it is a very well kept 25 area. I was always proud of that in Kearny. 162 1 MR. CAHILL: Thank you. 2 MR. BENNETT: Any specific 3 questions? 4 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: How does 5 this affect our County roads? 6 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: T&M 7 Associates did a study. 8 MS. FLOR: When we hear the 9 traffic engineer it will be clear. The 10 Central Avenue interchange, that has some 11 additional trips. 12 Although the level of service 13 changed, there are trips that change the level 14 but the traffic engineer should testify on 15 that further. 16 MR. BENNETT: Mr. Cahill is 17 going nowhere, although he would like to. Why 18 don't I have Mr. Charles Olivo come up and be 19 sworn in. He is here to address the traffic 20 issue. 21 MR. OLIVO: Charles Olivo, 22 O-L-I-V-O, Atlantic Traffic & Design 23 Engineers, 35 Technology Drive, Warren, New 24 Jersey. 25 (Charles Olivo was duly sworn.) 163 1 MR. BENNETT: Mr. Olivo, you are 2 a licensed engineer in the State of New 3 Jersey? 4 MR. OLIVO: I am a licensed 5 professional engineer in the State of New 6 Jersey with a Bachelor of Science in the field 7 of civil engineering from the University of 8 Notre Dame. 9 I am a professional traffic 10 engineer as well as being involved in the 11 preparation of over a hundred traffic impact 12 studies throughout New York, New Jersey, and 13 Pennsylvania. 14 I have been qualified also as an 15 expert in four states and also served as a 16 consultant to the New Jersey Department of 17 Transportation. 18 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Go green. 19 MR. BENNETT: Mr. Chairman, I 20 would like to offer him as an expert. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Yes. 22 MR. BENNETT: Mr. Olivo, you had 23 the opportunity, did you not, to in 24 conjunction with Bohler Engineering, analyze 25 the site we are depicting here this evening 164 1 and are requesting approval on? 2 MR. OLIVO: Yes. Worked with 3 Bohler Engineering regarding not only the 4 on-site circulation and the access points, but 5 we also provided a traffic impact statement 6 for the development project with regard to the 7 impact on the adjacent off-site roadway 8 intersections. 9 MR. BENNETT: And as a result of 10 that traffic impact statement that was 11 submitted, your analysis, you also were privy 12 to correspondence from T&M Associates on 13 behalf of the County Board, were you not? 14 MR. OLIVO: Correct. 15 MR. BENNETT: Would you please 16 integrate the traffic impact study and what 17 you found with regards to the trips going in 18 and out and any impact that may occur on both 19 County and municipal roadways and also in 20 conjunction with the concerns and comments 21 that were raised initially by T&M Associates. 22 MR. OLIVO: For information 23 purposes direct access would be provided along 24 the town's jurisdiction. Just north of U.S. 1 25 & 9 Truck Route it does become a Hudson County 165 1 roadway. 2 So for that reason we undertook 3 an analysis which took inventory of the 4 roadways. 5 Many were in the peak hours from 6 seven to nine a.m. and from four and six p.m. 7 to understand the character of the traffic and 8 the roadway network as well as to 9 qualitatively discuss how many vehicles are 10 travelling through the intersection as well as 11 what level of congestion is expected 12 throughout, and what we found when we looked 13 at the trip generation of the proposed 14 warehousing which is just more than half a 15 million square feet is that it would not be 16 expected that this development would 17 significantly impact the off-site 18 intersections, particularly the Central Avenue 19 interchange with U.S. Route 1 Truck. 20 Mr. Cahill went into a little 21 bit of some of the operations and differences 22 with regard to the number of trucks on site. 23 After talking with the operator 24 and the owner of the site, it is expected 25 there would be a net reduction in the heavy 166 1 vehicle circulation to and from the site. 2 There would be an addition of 3 passenger cars, and for that reason we have 4 conducted this analysis using the conservative 5 trip generation manual's numbers for a 6 warehousing facility of this size. 7 What we did after working with 8 T&M is we looked from a level of service 9 perspective. Officially the traffic impact 10 study we provided simply talked about more in 11 general terms. We expected there to be a 12 significant impact on the roadway. 13 The traffic associated with this 14 development would account for less than five 15 percent of the total interchange volume. 16 We felt there would not be a 17 significant impact to these operations. Based 18 on consultations with T&M, we later took a 19 look at three analysis points in particular, 20 the first being -- just to try to orient -- 21 just to reorient the Board, north is up, west 22 is to the left of the page. 23 Look at the interchange. We 24 specifically investigated three analysis 25 points. Just again for reference purposes, 167 1 the direct access point under existing 2 conditions is located south of U.S. Route 1. 3 As you travel north along this 4 roadway you come to an unsignalized 5 intersection which is the intersection of 6 Central Avenue northbound and southbound and 7 the U.S. Route 1 westbound on ramp. 8 This is an unsignalized 9 intersection. Each point is an unsignalized 10 access point. That was the first analysis 11 point we took a look at. 12 The second was the merge within 13 the ramps. Both of these ramps are coming 14 from Central Avenue and, again, going to 15 westbound U.S. Route 1. That was the second 16 analysis point. 17 The third point is the merge 18 movement from Central Avenue to U.S. Route 1 19 westbound. 20 What we found in all cases and 21 all analysis points using both an existing 22 condition as well as as-built condition which 23 included the trip generation superimposed on 24 to the existing conditions that all level of 25 service in the existing condition would be 168 1 maintained and we felt that reinforced our 2 point of an insignificant traffic impact 3 within the off-site area. 4 MR. BENNETT: And based upon 5 that full analysis initially and the follow-up 6 after T&M, is it still your opinion that this 7 development of these three warehouses can be 8 implemented without any negative impact on the 9 traffic pattern in that area? 10 MR. OLIVO: Yes, it is. 11 MR. BENNETT: And without any 12 negative impact on any County roads? 13 MR. OLIVO: Yes. 14 MR. BENNETT: I have no more 15 questions for Mr. Olivo. 16 MS. FLOR: We agree with that 17 regarding the interchange. The other item we 18 wanted to hear some testimony on is that the 19 DOT does have a project in the area and we 20 wanted to hear some testimony from the 21 applicant which is the Portway project and how 22 this will fit into that or change the plans 23 that DOT has in that area. 24 MR. OLIVO: That would be a 25 comment that came up. I would more than happy 169 1 to offer any knowledge I have on the Portway. 2 T&M was nice enough to provide 3 some information with regard to the DOT web 4 sites and other informational sites where some 5 different aspects of the project could be 6 recognized and understood. 7 My understanding at this point 8 is that the improvements that are potentially 9 proposed for the subject interchange, Central 10 Avenue and U.S. Route 1 Truck, are in the 11 feasibility assessment stage meaning they have 12 not gone to preliminary design as of yet and 13 the department has varying levels of stages, I 14 guess, of assessment. 15 First one -- the first is the 16 conceived development. The next would be 17 feasibility assessment. And moving along to 18 preliminary and final design and construction 19 would be the end phase. 20 This is the first scoping phase, 21 so I believe there is limited information. We 22 reached out to Ms. Becker at DOT who is the 23 project manager. 24 She was not able to get back to 25 us before the time of the meeting, but my 170 1 understanding just generally of the Portway 2 project is that this project is meant to 3 increase the capacity within the roadway 4 network through this area. 5 I think if anything the 6 applicant would benefit from that project. I 7 don't think this particular project -- just 8 based on planning principals -- this 9 particular project would change anything to 10 have anything to do with the Portway project. 11 It is off in the distance as far as timing and 12 time line. 13 We did not consider it as part 14 of the project and we feel again since this 15 would not have a significant impact on the 16 roadway, any improvements would benefit the 17 capacity of the roadway and help it to 18 accommodate this particular development. 19 So that was the research we 20 conducted. I am not sure if the County 21 consultants have any more information on it. 22 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: That 23 project is pretty far down the line. 24 MS. FLOR: Yes, still in the 25 feasibility stage. 171 1 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 2 Feasibility and the way the State is going, 3 the way the economy is going, you need money 4 for that so it is way way down the line. 5 MR. BENNETT: It is to connect 6 Newark and this peninsula and Kearny, and Mr. 7 Lambiase has specific information. I don't 8 know that we need to take it, but the intent 9 was to move product out of the port much 10 quicker. This fits into that because as it 11 comes out of the port there are warehousing 12 facilities that can accommodate it. 13 Not only does it help with 14 regard to the proposed project, but it helps 15 to have the facilities along that way. They 16 wanted to move them quicker out of the port 17 and get them moving quicker so they could keep 18 the ports -- that would be Mr. Lambiase's 19 testimony in a much more eloquent and detailed 20 testimony, but I will offer that as a 21 supplemental to the traffic engineer's 22 comments. 23 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I think 24 we understand it. 25 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Mr. 172 1 Chairman, I want to say the Portway project is 2 real, it is in various stages, about a dozen 3 projects. The St. Paul's Avenue Bridge 4 replacement is the next one starting 5 construction next month. 6 Central Avenue is probably last 7 on the list because that is a minor component 8 of it, but I would say he made an attempt to 9 contact DOT, he should try to do that by the 10 time the resolution is memorialized as a 11 condition, and just to get some feedback from 12 the State. 13 I don't expect anything 14 outlandish because this is the type of project 15 the Portway is intended for, so I would ask 16 you to contact whoever the project manager is 17 there. 18 MR. OLIVO: We will continue to 19 consult with him. 20 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: My 21 question is, where is there a County road? 22 MS. FLOR: Central Avenue is the 23 County road north of the project. He can show 24 the boundary. 25 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: That has 173 1 been a commercial route ever since it existed, 2 right? 3 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Very 4 industrial. All industrial. 5 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: 6 Pre-existing. 7 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Let me ask 8 you a question with regards to when we get 9 jurisdiction. 10 Let's say if you build something 11 on Bergenline Avenue it will affect Kennedy 12 Boulevard eventually, but we don't take 13 jurisdiction over that, only jurisdiction the 14 property along County roads. 15 MS. FLOR: This was a 16 subdivision that was affecting a County road. 17 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 18 the County Planning Act gives the County 19 Planning Board jurisdiction over subdivisions 20 which are County roads. 21 This, although it doesn't create 22 a negative impact on Central Avenue, does 23 cause trip generation to truck trips, 24 essentially trucks that enter on the County 25 portion of the road. 174 1 It is basically a matter of 2 equity to look at all applications which 3 affect county roads. 4 There was a similar application 5 a couple of months ago that is before the 6 County Planning Board where it was a 7 subdivision in Secaucus that wasn't directly 8 along the County road. There was a single 9 means of ingress and egress from that 10 application, the Hartz Mountain, 14th Street 11 Movie Theater. 12 Even though it wasn't physically 13 located along the County road, it did generate 14 traffic which came onto the County road and 15 the Planning Board did have jurisdiction. 16 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: The only 17 way to access these is through the County 18 roads? 19 MR. OLIVO: The access is 20 through the State system. It is under the 21 jurisdiction of the State, and at certain 22 points would fall under the jurisdiction of 23 the County. 24 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: If we go to 25 that mentality then the whole County would be 175 1 in that position. 2 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: First of 3 all, this is an industrial area. The use -- I 4 see through Central, it has been industrial 5 for how long, close to maybe a hundred years, 6 right? 7 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Goes 8 back to somewhere there. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Early 10 1900s. 11 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: I would 12 say early 20th Century. 13 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: So the 14 use is not being changed. 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: I am not 16 referring to that, I agree with the 17 application. I am not bringing an objection 18 to its application. It is more of a mentality 19 on how we take jurisdiction over an 20 application. 21 MR. BENNETT: The position had 22 been, although it did not directly affect it, 23 it would have an impact on a County road and 24 therefore that is why we are here, to -- just 25 assure you, number one, it is not going to 176 1 have any impact and we believe it is a great 2 project. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: He wants 4 to make a recommendation. What was the 5 recommendation? 6 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: That 7 you reach out to the DOT regarding the Portway 8 project. 9 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: If you 10 reach out to them, can you reach out to them 11 and get in touch with them, let us know what 12 is going on. 13 MR. OLIVO: If we were to find 14 out any information, that would be forwarded 15 on to the County. 16 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: You need 17 to do that anyway. 18 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, I 19 would like to commend Mr. Lambiase and River 20 Terminal for proposing a green project and I 21 would like to remind them or let them know 22 that according to the County Planning Board's 23 application for lead certified projects you 24 get a refunded application fee back for 25 platinum certified projects. 177 1 You get -- applicants get one 2 hundred percent of the application fee back. 3 Gold certified projects get 4 seventy-five percent of the application fee 5 back. 6 Silver gets fifty percent of the 7 application fee back, so at end of the project 8 it may help pay for Mr. Bennett's hours 9 tonight. 10 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: I would 11 like to make a motion to approve this 12 application. 13 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: I second 14 it. 15 DIRECTOR MARKS: Mr. Chairman, 16 on a motion to approve application 17 2008-089-SP/SD made by Commissioner Choffo and 18 seconded by Commissioner Mehta, Commissioner 19 Arencibia? 20 COMMISSIONER ARENCIBIA: Aye. 21 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 22 Avagliano? 23 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Aye. 24 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 25 Choffo? 178 1 COMMISSIONER CHOFFO: Aye. 2 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 3 DiDomenico? 4 COMMISSIONER DiDOMENICO: Aye. 5 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 6 Mehta? 7 COMMISSIONER MEHTA: Aye. 8 DIRECTOR MARKS: Commissioner 9 Munoz? 10 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Before I 11 vote, I commend on the use of the solar 12 energy. We are spending money and it is great 13 that you guys are going the extra mile to do 14 that and I vote yes. 15 DIRECTOR MARKS: Chairman 16 Fitzgibbons? 17 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On the 18 motion make sure you have communications with 19 the State and let us know what they say. 20 MR. BENNETT: Yes. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: I like 22 what you have. This is what the County wants, 23 we want to go green and this is the first 24 commercial property I know of that is going 25 green. 179 1 Congratulations and I vote aye. 2 MR. BENNETT: Thank you. 3 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: Any other 4 business? 5 DIRECTOR MARKS: Under new 6 business, the New Jersey Planning Officials 7 Organization of which the County Planning 8 Board is a member, is sponsoring training 9 workshops. A number of the Commissioners had 10 gone to this a couple of years ago. 11 The State legislature a couple 12 years ago passed a law requiring mandatory 13 training for municipal Planning Board 14 Commissioners. It didn't apply to the County 15 Planning Board Commissioners, but to your 16 credit even though you weren't required to go, 17 a number of the Commissioners went. They 18 actually took the test and actually passed the 19 test, so kudos to those folks. 20 Freeholder Munoz was interested 21 in the training, but if there is anybody else 22 who is interested, I did bring along copies of 23 the notice and you are all welcome. 24 There are three dates which are 25 available. Also the New Jersey chapter of the 180 1 American Planning Association has a year-end 2 conference in New Brunswick on November 6 and 3 7. 4 If anybody is interested in 5 attending that please let me know and I will 6 put forth the paperwork. 7 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: What days? 8 DIRECTOR MARKS: November 6 and 9 7. It is basically a two-day conference. If 10 you are interested I will get you the 11 paperwork. 12 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Can you 13 e-mail? 14 DIRECTOR MARKS: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Do I have 16 to RSVP? 17 COMMISSIONER AVAGLIANO: Can you 18 send it in the mail? 19 DIRECTOR MARKS: Sure. That is 20 it, Mr. Chairman. 21 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: On a 22 motion to adjourn? 23 COMMISSIONER MUNOZ: Motion. 24 CHAIRMAN FITZGIBBONS: All in 25 favor? 181 1 (Rounds of Ayes.) 2 DIRECTOR MARKS: Opposed? 3 (No response.) 4 (Time noted: 10:00 p.m.) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25