Welcome everyone. Today is Monday, July 21st, 2025 and this is a regular meeting of the city of Asbury Park Planning Board. Chairwoman Kurszac, can you please call this meeting to order? Yes. This meeting is being held in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 231, Public Law 1975.
Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided to the Coaster Nasbury Park Press by publication of the annual meeting notice and posted on municipal buling board and municipal website. All notices are on file with the board secretary. Uh official action can be taken in the following manner before
this board. This meeting is being recorded by APV. Please uh join me in the salute to the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of United States of America and to the republic for it stands nation
and justice for all. I will now take roll call. James Banano here. Councilwoman Clayton here. Jim Henry here. Jeremy Hoffman is absent. Mayor Moore here.
Jen Solder is absent. Daniel Shaneo here. Bob Zuckermanman here. Kathy McLaclin here. Vice Chair Gunnan here. And Chairwoman Korzac here. Okay. The first item up is the
resolution for approval uh for 607611 Su Avenue. Um has the resolution been modified? Yes. Okay. The reference to the underground utilities that your email that's been taken out.
Okay. So that's been taken out. Um eligible members are Barbara Kurszac, John Moore, Michael Gonan, Yvon Clayton, Jennifer Sadder, Kathy Mclacklin, and Bob Zuckerman. I get a motion to approve. Second.
I'll second. Okay. Um Councilwoman Clayton. Yes. Mayor Moore. Yes. Kathy McLaclin. Yes. Bob Zuckermanman. Yes. Michael Gunnan. Yes. Chairwoman Carzac. Yes. All right. We have the application 1201
Memorial Drive. Yes. Madam Chairwoman, I've reviewed the notices for tonight's meeting to drop the form. Excellent. Proceed. Another matter of housekeeping is that there are, I believe, two members, Bob and Ben, who are not at the last meeting, but they
have uh watch the audio video, all that sort of thing. Please make please put that on the record that you have. Uh I have I did indeed watch the video from the first meeting. I did as well. Okay. And I will circulate a certification for you to sign uh after
tonight's meeting. Thank you, Jack. Excuse me. Uh the last meeting I missed, but when I looked at the uh uh APV broadcast of it, uh this application was uh carried at that meeting.
Yes. So So you didn't have to there's nothing to do with nothing to nothing to watch. But you were at the April meeting. Yes. Yes. So you're fine. Okay. Okay. Uh thank you Steve Goowen from Girardono Howerin and Cecila representing the applicant Jamal's
Braverman Building LLC. Um as Mr. Serpo noted, this is a continuation of a meeting that we had in April. Um I know at the meeting in April, we sort of introduced the project and went over some um design, architectural design. We're going to finish up architecture tonight um with Dan Zento, but first I'm
going to have Jim Kennedy uh show you the site plan and we'll walk through some of the engineering items. Um, we did get review letters, one from Clark Hint, dated July 14th, 2025, and one from uh, Mr. Ivakian's office dated July 9th, 2025. I think um, we can comply
with all of the recommendations in those letters. Uh, but we're going to address them as we go through Mr. Kennedy's testimony, Mr. Zenetto's testimony. If we could put up the rendered site plan, that would be good. I don't know if we marked any exhibits
at the April meeting. Who is bringing up the uh site plan if you if you're not there? No, Jim is Jim is going to talk. Oh, he's going to do it. Yes, correct. I don't see a laptop. I think um Do you need me to do it?
Yeah. Can you put it up? Uh I think there was A1 architecture and in the future the norm is the presenter we can do it runs the laptop that's that's the norm. Now if that's something that you're not prepared to do please tell me and then we could have someone else do it but in
the normal circumstances our secretary has other things to do during a meeting. Yeah. A1 was David's plans. the architectural plans. Yes. Okay. We're going to have Jim do it.
Okay. All right. So, when we get it up there, we'll mark as A2 the rendered site. So, we're first looking at engineering. Yes. Correct. While we're waiting, I'll swear in our staff. Please do.
Raise your right hand. Swear affirm the whole truth to nothing but the truth. I do. Please state your names and your affiliation with the board. Donna Miller, board planner. Thank you. But I suppose before um Jim gets going,
we should swear him in as well. Sure, sir. Please raise your right hand. So I swear to affirm that testimony about this recommendation. Yes, I do. James Kennedy, Kenny, 211 Maple Avenue in RepBank, New Jersey.
Uh Jim, before you get started, just give the board the benefit of your professional qualifications, please. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. I've previously been qualified before this board as well as many others in Malmouth County over the last 30 years. I'm also an expert
testified in superior court and as an expert in civil engineering and I've been qualified as as such throughout my Okay. Um I I don't see this in my pocket. So where would this come from? I don't see it in anything that we have here.
Right. All right. So, Jim, why don't you describe what we're looking at on the uh on the board? Sure. This is the site plan rendering that's uh dated tonight. It's basically a colorized version of what you have in your packet. What was submitted as the landscape plan was merely black and
white. This provides some color to make it a little bit easier for me to describe and superimposes some zoning as well. Okay. What page are we on the one that we have? Uh that would be the landscape plan. So, I believe that's sheet four. be four of nine.
That's five. Five of nine is the lighting. Four of nine. Mhm. Five of nine. Five. Five. Okay. That's the landscape plan. Although site plan might be more useful. Whatever's best has for this A2.
This is a color version. It's been slightly tweaked for this exhibit, but the base is your landscape. It's five of nine. Yes. Okay. All right. So, um, so looking at exhibit 82, and I'm going to hand everybody a copy of A22, so you
have a copy in front of you. Um, But why don't you describe what we have going on from a uh proposed conditions perspective? Okay. As you know, this site is subject to a redevelopment zone. Uh it's a one and a half a little over one and a half acre piece of property. To the right of
the exhibit is north and that would be uh fifth. Uh to the south and left of the exhibit is fourth. And across the bottom is Memorial Drive. Uh what you see in yellow is the building footprint that the architect previously testified
to but will testify again tonight. Uh the colorized uh the red circles that's proposed landscaping and um I'll kind of step through uh what's proposed using A2. Um
the and then to the west or the top of the exhibit are single family residential homes. Uh there are 126 residential units proposed and approximately um a little under 2,000 square feet of retail proposed.
Okay. So the orange square in the middle uh just with the mouse there that is the building that the architect will be discussing. Um I'll be talking about the the site improvements that are proposed. Now I guess the largest feature that you see in light gray up to the top or west
of the exhibit. This is a portion of the parking lot that is exterior uh to the building. So there's 22 parking stalls located at the top. It's a lighter beige color. Uh the remainder of the parking field is underneath the building uh
footprint. So 22 spaces are located to the exterior. About 109 spaces are proposed both covered and partially covered uh within and underneath the building. Um a single means of access off of 4th Avenue is proposed. Uh it
location is about halfway up the frontage of uh 4th. And uh just a couple notes on the parking area and you can see it on A2. Uh we propose barrierfree parking stalls. Uh there's a a grouping uh
closest to the barrierfree entrance and um elevator access to the residential floors and to the commercial. So they're located at the norththeast quadrant of the parking garage. Then you'll see, and I I know that it's not easy to see, but
where the hand is, which is right across the bottom or Memorial Drive side, we have not only the EV parking stalls, but also the make ready EV stalls. So, this is just demonstrating compliance with the ordinance, the redevelopment
ordinance that we um we're not taking extra credit for these EV stalls or the make ready stalls, but we are complying with the ordinance to provide uh both barrierfree parking stalls as well as these EV and make ready stalls. Um,
excuse me. So, so get to the exterior parking lot when they come in, they have to go all the way around. That's correct. they'd come forward and um go counterclockwise and then up to the uh to the west.
Most people, I would bet, will want to park under the building in the parking field. And I see this exterior parking lot as more of an overflow area. I didn't have a problem with the securities, you know, parking um because
that allows someone to to actually visualize the entire parking into the garage before moving outside. Um, it also helps with traffic circulation not to have that immediate left turn as you come into the garage only because of of sight visibility
across the trash room if we were to provide uh and break up that and we we do have extra stalls and we could, but I think this is a better design alternative because it it it just makes people go a little bit slower through the parking garage and not try and
conflict with an immediate left turn or with someone coming the other to make a right turn that's kind of blind because where the trash room is. So I I don't have, you know, an issue with that um that turning. Every aisle,
every stall, uh the aisles are 23 feet wide. They're all oneway aisles. All the parking stalls comply at 9 by8. I'm sorry, you said they're one way. No, no, two way. Two-way. Two-way 23 foot wide aisles. All 9 by8 parking stalls. We're not
trying to cram anything in here. Um 121 parking stalls are required and we're providing an excess of um well 131 stalls are proposed in the design. Um
okay. Uh so parking and then you know just simply utilities. J before you jump on parking I just wanted to point out I do agree with Jim about turning in. That's not But when you go to that back open air area and you pull in say isn't any parking back there, how do you just
serve and someone pulling back out? So we did provide for um a small turn bump out. Yes. So it is a 23 foot wide aisle. Um so a K turn. Okay. It might not be a three point turn, but um
a car can typically turn in a 23 foot aisle, especially providing that, you know, I just just to be clear, just so where the board knows where I'm coming from, I do agree it's possible to do it. Uh but I think 23 feet and like Jim just testified to, you're going to be more in
the three-point turn, pulling in and turning out. However, it would be up to the board if they prefer more parking or if you lost a space or two to reconfigure some of that to have a more efficient way of backing out if you get stuck back there. Are they going to be assigned spaces?
Not to my uh typically not. Um when we assign them, it uses it loses efficiency. Um I prefer them to be unassigned unless there's some security reason to assign them. I know of no security reason to assign them. So my uh
no I ask only because if you if you have your own space then they arrive to your space it should be free right I agree with you well if you don't assign them then how do you how do you manage them the number of residents who are using the spaces because typically you have one resident who gets space and one has to park somewhere else then otherwise you just
have first come first serve with how what's to stop me from having three of my own personal vehicles down there so I I mean there will be a management company that is required to to patrol the uh parking whether that be through I don't know a
decal or a hang tag. I mean we we certainly can't have um people just parking you know unfortunately this is you know it's it's reserved we meet the parking standard. Yeah. Um but it is reserved for for resident use. So is it going to be one permit per
unit? That I would think that that's exactly how it would work because that's the standard. Um, one parking space per unit is the standard. So, could can someone at some point after you're finished? After you're finished, we can't intermix.
When you're finished, then we can have someone else that will tell us what it is as opposed to what we think it is. Okay. So, I would rather have someone that will tell us what it is. Agreed. Yeah, we can have Mr. Mr. Wilstein is here so he can answer those questions after Jim's done. That's fine.
Okay. So with regard to utilities, uh this building does have access to public utilities. Of course, uh water is located at the northeast corner, uh along the corner of Memorial Fifth. Sewer is located at the southeast corner at the corner of fourth. Uh we have
electric at the southwest corner, which is in this area, the top left hand side of A2. The transformer is located in this green box uh right here. So in locating that uh we had to weigh a
couple things. First JCPNL requires vehicular access to the transformer. Vehicular access is actually provided from the parking area. Um secondly, we had to screen it from 4th Avenue. I don't I I don't want the the transformer
on Fourth Avenue. Um because a we don't have vehicular access that JCPNL needs. Uh there's required ballards and clear space around it. it would create an island in an area that we are basically trying to landscape um tightly landscape and we're putting
this behind a fence where the visual intrusion to the neighborhood is lessened. Now, if JCPNL tells us we have to move it out, then we're going to trade landscape. We're going to move landscaping into the island. We're going to keep the island landscaped and move
the transformer out. They do have um under their BPU agreement they are solely responsible for locating the equipment. The developer can appeal to them and pay a little extra for the extra length of primary cabling but
under the BPU tariff that New Jersey has negotiated with JCPNL they and they alone can decide whenever they want to decide uh where the transformer has to be placed. But I've been doing this a long time. we meet their criteria with
clearance, with vehicular access, and we're trying to meet the city's requirements for screening and landscaping. So, I think this fits the puzzle. I think this works. I think it's the really the best alternative given the given the constraints. Um, and I I
think it'll work. I think it'll work well. So, and then lastly, um, storm water management. So what we've provided is four uh drainage swells. Starting in the northwest corner, um you see this
kind of this decorative stone channel with a landscape swale. And then at the northwest, sorry, northeast corner, a smaller swell going over to the southwest corner, I'm sorry, southeast corner. Uh another
swell and then finally a larger or the largest swell at the southwest corner of the property. Uh the intent of the swells in accordance with the redevelopment ordinance is to disconnect imperous surfaces from the municipal drainage system. In years past, what
we've done is taken the roof leaders, taken the uh drainage inlets and just stuck them into a pipe. That's how most cities manage drainage. Um, in your redevelopment ordinance, you've suggested, and I agree, that you
disconnect imperous services from direct connection into the municipal system. So, what that means is that our water, all of it is going to come off of our parking lot, run through a specially designed um swell, landscaped swell, and
then get collected into an inlet. That inlet then connects into the municipal system. So you might say um and it matters. Okay, it matters. Anytime that we can impose vegetation within the flow of storm water, you're going to get
non-source point um uh well water quality benefits from non-source point pollution. So as uh let's say deicer is used on the exterior portion of the property, that deicer will get washed into the landscaping and instead of the
drainage system and ultimately u lake. So, anytime that we can interrupt that direct passage, um that's really the standard of practice and that's what we're doing in this instance. We are reducing runoff as um shown in our storm
water management report. This was previously developed as you know building. Uh we're reducing the imperous surfaces related to vehicular traffic by about vehicular parking spaces by about 4,900 square feet. Um in addition
uh we are um like I well I already testified to it but imposing the swailes for some water quality benefit because this is all going towards that north aspberry connection to deal lake. Uh that wershed
is about 250 260 uh acres that flows to one specific portion of deal lake. As you know, Deal Lake has a huge watershed 5,900 acres uh flows into Deal Lake, but the portion that this site is in is about 250 acres.
So, we do have a slight increase in storm water volume and we're talking about 2,000 cubic feet. It's not a lot of water considering a 250 or so waterhed. So in my report we show reductions in peak flow but nominal or
dimminimous increases in volume given the constraints of the site and what I mean by that we have a high water tube. The only way to mitigate storm water volume would be to infiltrate it but because groundwater was found about 3 feet below grade our ability to mitigate
stormwater volume through infiltration is limited. We can't we really can't do it. That's not to say that the landscape swailes will not intercept water. They will infiltrate to the extent they can and of course there'll be um water used
by the plants and vegetation um to to reduce volume. But our calculations don't reflect that. Our calculations show kind of a worst case scenario of that 2,000 or so uh cubic foot increase in volume. But we do reduce peak flows
as a result of um of this nonstructural approach which is really reducing impervious surface on the site. Um and and so are those gray are those the gray areas within the So the gray areas. Yes. The gray areas are just the inverts of
those swailes. That's just the decorative riverstone that's hatched. There's so no no no. It's it's kind of a decorative stone with um with landscaping. And Jim, before you go on, I'm just going to jump in. I I really do think
Jim did a good job explaining that. One of the things that we asked for in my letter or our letter was if there was any other way to keep some of that quantity on the site. And why I say that and being 3 feet you're season high water. There's really not. But the reason I say that is because D and our
regulations our ordinance says to demonstrate through hydraulic analysis and what his team had done that their volume quantity is dimminimous. So peak runoff which is pretty much your intensity of how fast something is going into the lake. That's your peak runoff that was reduced but your quantity the
amount the volume the peak volume was increased by 2,000 cubic feet per second cubic feet overall. Excuse me. Cubic feet overall. So, um, the language in the ordinance doesn't state a fixed volume. So, could it be dimminimous? It's it's testimony that it
is. I can't really speak on that. But what I can speak on, we all know Deal Lake. When that gate valve is closed, it's not tidal. When the gate valve is open, it allows water to go out. This is a good amount of water going into Deal Lake. It is a 100red-year storm. However, I I don't know if there's
anything else that could be done to the site with this application for storm water. So, is this the only place? Is this our only way that we're dealing with storm water? Yeah. So, the only way that they're dealing with storm water is those swailes. There's no quantity and they
don't have to per or per ordinance, excuse me. Um, however, I did just want to voice the concern or my feeling that, you know, we all see what happens with Deal Lake. This is a big development. It is per ordinance. He did testify that it is dimminimous and that's what the
ordinance asks for and that's a personal opinion. That's dimminimus is personal. Well, yeah, exactly. It's there's no fixed volume uh per D or the ordinance. So the ordinance doesn't state that you have to be it does. Yeah. A certain amount at or equal. It does not.
And just in my rationale in determining dimminimus, I have to look at the overall watershed. So, when I say 59 5,900 acres that flow to Deal Lake, that's an incredible volume of water. We're talking about 2,000 cubic feet. If
you think about um you know, it's it's just such a nominal amount considering the overall water. I think it's I don't I don't mean to interrupt you, but I think that uh it's close and near and dear to everyone in here's heart being that you see more frequent
really high intensity storms and Deal Lake is uh a known culprit to get inundated with rain. So, I I do agree with what you're saying. It's just it's hard to say what to do because if we can't put in my I don't have a design for the applicant, but like you know, at first I was thinking what if we did
something underneath the parking lot, but we clearly can't if it's three feet. I I don't know if there's another way. Um, but we looked at I I looked at under drain. I looked at providing perforated piping under the invert of these swailes, but it wouldn't meet any design
standard because we have to have a twoft separation. So, it would just be money spent. We could say we're going to do it, but it doesn't work. So, why why do that? Why spend that uh money? We looked at um like you said, porous pavement and storage underneath the exterior of
building. Um, for a number of reasons that didn't work as well, mostly because it's a twoft separation requirement from the storage bed. So I I looked at alternatives. The best alternative here was reducing imperous surface and that's
what we did. We reduced impervious surface from what was there. That's the nonstructural approach that your ordinance u you know emphasizes. Secondly, we provided landscape swells and disconnected the impervious surface of the development from the storm water
management system. So I I do think that this is the best result. We h have the the power to design through. I I don't know of any other alternatives that would work for uh the volume that we're talking about.
How deep are these size building? I mean, right, if a smaller building was built, would have more perus here. Correct. Yeah. Or less parking area. You build a small building.
Everybody talks about parking or whatever. I'm sorry. I want to understand. So, do the swailes slow down any of the discharge or I'm sorry, run off more than discharge? Um,
do they detain at all or or is it really just sort of incidental? So, they're not designed uh to detain, but they will slow runoff by the very nature of the roughness of the stone path and landscape, right?
And like I said, they will I mean, they're not very it's it's pretty flat. It's not like that and it's an inlet at the end. It just goes out. Correct. Once it reaches that Okay. So, so, so it works kind of like a rain garden works. Yes.
Okay. And how deep is this swept? How deep are they? Meaning before you get to the rock and and level surface, how deep are they? So, they vary depending on which So, I think the deepest one is at the north.
I'm just flipping over the grading plan, which is on sheet three of nine. Mhm. Um the north west is about a foot deep. The northeast
is about oh let's see about a foot deep. Moving to the souththeast that's a little deeper um about 18 inches and then the southwest 10.75 to 119. So a little over a foot
actually a little more than a foot there as well. Is that the depth of the block? No, that's the depth of storage to the block. So from the the point where this would overflow to the inver. And these aren't designed to be very deep as a rain garden because it would it inundates the
vegetation and the plants and the landscaping that we we landscape there. So they're not designed to be detention bases or they're designed to have an impact on, you know, like I said, disconnecting impervious surface from the site to the municipal system. The
other alternative would be to just connect everything in, put an inland in, put an inland in the street, draw a pipe, and which is what you're allowed to do, which is what we're allowed to do. But this the redevelopment zone um you know your your planner your engineer our
office we thought this was a better alternative. It's something that can be done. I think it's a it's it's an attractive feature and it has an environmental benefit as well. So when we were talking about the transform and the possibility of JCPNL not approving this will that remove part
of this swell? No it will not. Uh so it's not that the swell ends before that that whole area where the transformer may have some modifications. Yes, that's correct. Okay. So the swells will remain the same. Yes, that's correct.
And honestly, while we're at this point, I understand from the last meeting that there was some discussion about having a direct access to the bike storage room. And if we were to do that, it would interrupt that's the swale. It would cut the swale off. So, uh, we worked with
the architect and he'll discuss that further, but that is really one of the reasons why there wasn't a direct access to the bike room because it goes right through our our landscapes. I was under the impression that that swell was like a a walking path. Oh, I see.
So, you can disregard that. Okay. Thank you. Um, so with regard to uh well, let's just talk about landscaping while we're there. Um so landscaping we're proposing 83 trees. Uh we meet the requirements for size,
height, spacing, placement. Uh 323 shrubs are proposed not only within the rain gardens but along the perimeter of the site as well as some of the internal islands. and then 988 ornamental grasses and perennials throughout the site to to
provide uh seasonal interest to provide uh some color and pollinator as well. Um in uh the planner's letter uh there was a question with regard to um let me just
get it exactly right. it was 10% of the exterior uh parking area had to have um landscaping and that had to be outside of other areas that were used to meet other requirements. So, I'll I'll just
work through this. Uh the parking lot is 7,982 square feet. That's outside of where the building is. So, that's this lighter yellow shade. That's 7,982 square feet. So 10% of that is 798
square feet. So we have to provide at least 798 square ft of landscaping. Um we provide a total of uh 3,817 but we have to back out a portion of
that because of the required buff. So we total that to 2,35. So the real numbers are 3,817 minus the 10 foot buffer of 1512 comes out to 2305 square ft where 798.2
are required. I'm sorry. Are you counting landscaping on the site? Yes. At 3,000. Okay. Yes. the tool and then the landscaping has to be in the parking area to count
that's around the perimeter. Don't you have an exhibit for this? I do. Yeah. Okay. It's much clearer in the exhibit. Do you have um Jim's going to pull it up electronically, but we'll mark this A3. Why don't you tell everybody what A3 is?
So A3 is just that parking calcul the landscape calculation of the area of uh perimeter landscaping and versus the outside parking area. So this red area is the total landscaping that's
provided and that totals uh that that totals the 3,817 square ft. A portion of that is within a required buffer which is really you know that that perimeter area. Yeah,
that required buffer is 1512. So the uh the remainder which is this area which is um the fourth street side uh running along the left hand side of A3 that island that is interior as well
as this island which is interior as well to that parking area that totals um 235 square feet. I'm sorry. What's in the transformer area?
So there's uh that's grasped all the way through. It's grass. But even if it even if we discounted that block. No, no. I just wanted to make sure because I think uh when my tech was measuring it didn't wasn't counting that
because it was not. So the white block is not counted. That's concrete. That's what the transformer sits. So, I didn't think we need unless you calculate a different way. Um, I don't think we need that waiver for interior landscaping the park.
It's not interior. It's just landscaping for the park. What's the boundary for the left area on here? Is it the fence? Uh, that's that's right. There's a fenced area. Um, and then after that becomes the the rain garden or the swell.
The sidewalks are pavers. Um, well, I can go back to the site plan. Uh, there's no sidewalk shown. There's no papers there. I can't get to my plan. So, there's like I said papers.
So, uh, is this the sidewalks or is this looks like if you go back to the Yeah. So, at the bottom right behind the red trees, is that part of the sidewalk or is that This is part of the the ride ofway and it is pavers. It is paid, right?
Yes. So, are they what are they just free free in there and Well, no. Our our detail um so our detail has them on concrete or mason. Is that the question? They're in concrete.
Because of the differential settlement, we have issues with pavers. So, we do put them on a concrete base. Is that was that does that answer the question? Yeah. I I just thought there was something to the city concrete.
Um James, right? Well, I mean, we wouldn't do slate, but we would do No, slate sidewalks that are old and broken. Slate sidewalks that are old and broken. But we don't like you're not forced to take them in. We just part of city projects. We
replace them with concrete. No, I thought they would take out, you know, some people had pavers. Well, if they put their own You can't put your own pavers on it for a sidewalk or an apron. That's so They had to come out. Yes, you're right. That did happen though. Okay.
Um Okay. So, and then lighting. Um we have a composite lighting. And I know that this was confusing. It's the lighter. Yes, those are. So, we prepared the
lighting design for the exterior and then the architect prepared the lighting design for the garage spaces. That was kind of difficult to to for everyone, for us, for you. Um so we actually u had
a a third party lighting consultant um redo all the lighting in a composite manner so that we knew the contribution of the garage lights with the outdoor uh site lights and we'll provide this uh to your professionals. Um, but I just want
to go over uh the results of that are very similar, especially for the exterior when they and I I know your engineers saw this that their calculations were a little bit different than ours. That's because the points at where they were measured were different.
So instead of them replicating our grid in the calculations, it was off by three or four feet. And when you have a 14 foot mounted light, three or four foot difference in the grid calculation means something. I mean it it changes. So um
we we're now more uniform. We we've matched the grids. We've matched the calculation inputs. We've created a composite plan. And I can tell you what relief we need. Uh the relief really hasn't changed. Um but there is some relief
uh given the proximity of this parking lot to uh the westerly property boundary. Even though we're using shielded lights, 2700 Kelvin uh fixtures, uh 14 foot high mount heights, we have a six foot high
privacy fence behind it. We're proposing landscaping long and around and trees. The calculations do show some lighting on the property line between 0.2 2 foot candles and 0
7 foot candles where your ordinance requires a maximum of 0.1 for candles. So in order to get to that 0.1, we have to eliminate the fixtures
um or point the fixtures in a way that they're forward throw. And I I'm reluctant to do this. When I put a fixture up near a residential home, I want the back of the fixture facing the home so that there's a glare shield and
there's no glare on that residential home. If I were to reorient this and say uh place the light fixture in that island, I could forward throw and cover the light uh cover the parking spaces,
but there's a greater likelihood of glare in the first floor of that residential home. So, I think this is a better alternative. Um the 0.2 2 and 0.7 0.7 actually happens on the northerly
property line. Um this property line which is the westerly property line which is closest to our residential neighbor. Um that's where the the So what does that mean? That they actually see the light source. Exactly.
That's one of the problem. What about So there's two things which is illumination which is just how bright it is and then staring up the light. You don't want to stare at the light. That's like worst case scenario. So glare is an intrusive thing. It's a nuisance. Uh illumination is less of a nuisance uh
than glare in my opinion. I think everyone would agree that no one wants a flashlight in their face. So what about lowering the mounting height or changing those two fixtures? Is is that something that could be done or have you looked into that? Yes, we could lower the mount height. Uh but I don't know that we would get the
um the throw in the aisle. So So we might 0.5 right here which is um yeah we only need to do five right so that's at a minimum right here so if we lowered this mount height of the
light in red here this 0.5 will go down so it's a waiver either way I mean no oh because minimum minimum is can't just put another well then you'll be signing into the might not have right or you might not
Yeah. So the two lights the 14 foot you're talking about are these two red dots yes at the top of what's shown up there along the property line here. So um and actually you can see these are
the calculated values.3 4 I know there's a point 2 in here and the impact is on the house to the um west correct right here
and northeast well right but and then well it's not northeast that's up here I mean you're right that also has but but the lighting there So it it's right here. Um, right. So there's I mean there's vegetation and landscaping
between that house and uh these but how do we get from I'm sorry. How do we get from that 0.5 that's in the parking lot? We're sitting there at 0.5. Suddenly when we go over the fence we're at 7 and there's no light. So how does that happen?
It's the the additive nature of illumination. So as soon as you start having You're right. I don't know why because that doesn't make any sense to me because this is the building that I like the most. It's further. You're going further away. So I have to be possibly be
that I'd like to say that it's wrong. It would be great if you could say that it's wrong and it's really wrong. So this is the composite design and and you're right. So look at that.
So along that property line uh starting at the top where I have 0.3 which is that quarter the recalculated values are 0.2 0.2 2 0.3 five and then as we get closer to this
one this one corner here is now 0.9 point what 0.9 which corner I'm sorry the one can you see the hand moves up the but how do you go from 0.5 to 0.9 and you're further away so that's picking up the garage lighting
yeah but the garage lighting the other the other inside the garage oh the interior garage from whatever is underneath the garage area. Okay. As long as we we understand. So, I can certainly work with your and I know that this plan is like this
afternoon basically that we we worked with the lighting designer. We can work with your professionals um to to to smooth some of these out as best we can. If you're comfortable doing that, um I I don't think that we're going to get to 0.1 along the property
line. I think we're going to need a waiver for that. I also don't think that we're going to need the average given the um the height of the fixtures and that we're trying to reduce the number of fixtures. And then because we're not meeting the
average, there's also a ratio. That's the average to average to min. So those three things are what we would require a waiver from there's no way. You know, we can't come up with a better
way to do it. Uh, and I and I'm not convinced we can because we've gone through numerous iterations. It really has to do with the lighting fixtures being located 5T from Yeah. So, we we have done that before, but so
we can't obstruct the the drive aisle. If we put a fixture here at the tip of the smaller island, what I'm concerned about is the the glare towards that hole. I'd much rather have the shielded back plate where they cannot see the the the
fixture, the actual light, the LED panel. They can't see the light. They can see the the illuminance from the light, but they can't see the glare of the fixture. If I move it over here and try and light the eastern the westerly parking area from it, I have a
concern that they would actually see the source of the light. I'm trying to I think that at this point um we don't want to to keep move going on with with this in my opinion. Uh but having anything that is a 6 or 7 or anything
like that to me is too much for the residents. It's too much. So, it's like figure it out, gather together, figure out what the best approach is because a waiver like that, I would be against a waiver like that. Okay,
that that's that egregious. Like, you know, if it's a 0.1 if it's a 0 2 versus a 0.1, okay, I mean, I' I'd be much more immuneable to that, but a 0.1 to a 7 I'm I'm struggling with that now. I don't know if anybody else has a These lights are going to be on all
night long, right? Right. These lights are on all night long. So, you had said you would either need an exception for the amount of light spillage over the property line or an exception for the the drive aisle of this outdoor parking area being too dim. Is that that's the That would be that would be one
alternative is to dim the outside parking area below five because I I I'm not going to give my personal opinion, not everybody else's. If if you did an exception one way or the other, I would be much more prone to give an exception for a dim parking area than for light spillage into residential
homes. Okay, I agree with that. So, I'm sure that that's a good point that there are cars that are going that are circulating around that park. It's a double-edged sword, but I think there's a way of getting uh a nice
uniformity without having excess light. So I think um I was talking with Sam about some ideas. Okay. So we can move on and we understand the goal is less impact on the neighbors and again we don't want them impacting the
residents in the new building either. Yeah. Um I have one more question about lighting. Sorry before we move on. So you said in that bottom left corner um it's a 0.9 now. Yeah. Right there. So, you don't have any numbers going north from there, but if we're worried
about light spillage coming from the garage, is there light spillage along that property line? So, along that property line, um right at the property line where the calculation is, he said he's asking going north from point
to the right going to the right. There is there is um there there certainly is light along here. Right. So we'd like you go behind the property line. I'm seeing all zeros zero behind the fence. Yes. Okay. But right in front of the fence we're at
1.3 1.2 1.1 and that's spillage from the fixtures beneath the building. Okay. And so then just along this vein. So where you we do see right here are these 7s and everything. Is that inside the fence or outside the fence? Is that what the neighbors are seeing or what
we're seeing right inside the fence? It's actually inside the fence. It's actually along the fence, inside the fence because of the mountain height is 14 ft and then the the angle that the light comes down, it it's going to be cut off by the fence. The fence is going to cast a shadow. And by the time that
shadow hits the residential area, of course, it's going to be far dimmer. But the lighting programs even today are are not that uh detailed to shadow to create the shadow the French shadows.
Okay. And then again that is the uh objective standard that we can use right to evaluate lighting for the people who are living in that property when they're looking at this
new development and has light in its, you know, sphere that we can't objectively describe. and standardized. So yes, it's at that very low level at the ground,
but between the ground and the source is what they're seeing, right? And we know it's in that range. Yep. So that's why we're shooting for this very low standard at the ground. Yep. Okay. So So just to get us on to the next point relative to to this issue with the lighting at the property boundary, I
think what the applicant would agree for the purposes of tonight, purposes of this application is no waiver at the property boundary. So, we'll comply with the ordinance um and we'll work with the board's professionals to come up with a parking plan or lighting plan for inside the parking lot that um
might that we might need a design waiver for the standard inside of the parking lot below 0.5, but we would not request a waiver for the property. So, that would be the ask. Understanding the board's concern, I think that's a more reasonable way to approach it. If for whatever reason we
absolutely couldn't figure out a solution to that, which I think we can, um, then we would have to come back and ask for further relief, understanding that it probably wouldn't be granted. So, we should work really hard to work with the professionals to come up with a plan that works. And, um, so you're saying you're going to get it to 0.1?
Yes, correct. We're going to get it to 0.1. So, that's right. But we But if they can't, they have to come back. The only thing is that we might need a waiver for the lighting inside of the parking lot below 0.5 in certain places. But Jim's going to figure out a way to make that not happen. Mhm. Yeah. I mean, obviously the way to get that done is to use lower mount heights.
As we as soon as we use a ballard, it's it's there's no because the fence is there. Yeah. So, if we use a 30 or 42 inch ballard behind a 72 inch fence, there's zero. There's there's not going to be any light behind the fence. So, if we can make that work in a manner that that is
acceptable, then that's the way to do it. I don't mean to just beat the dead horse, but you said you were at like 1.2 next to that 0.9 from the garage interior lights. How you going to do that? We're going to shield all I I don't think the lighting consultant
used shields on the inside and I think she's going to have to move them and obviously Yeah. Whether they're whether they're being mounted on the flat or I'm not sure what's going on in that ceiling, but yeah, find a way. Yeah. I mean, they're already tucked, right? They're already tucked in the structure, but the structure
Let's hope so because I'm seeing some out in the field that are coming at us like Surf House. Oh, yeah. That are not. So, make sure figure out the ceiling design and see where those fixtures are really being mounted and relationship to the opening and if you need to put a skirt
or cornice or some kind of belt course or something to give you that extra bit of shielding. Yeah. So, that was it for my direct testimony. While we're on lighting, sorry, sorry to be dead. So, there's obviously the
lighting that you guys are putting on the site. There's also going to be lights from headlights. Um, so can you tell us about cars, trucks driving around this thing? How is that light being uh shielded from these adjacent homes?
Um, so so a couple different ways. First, through landscaping, uh, because that's inside the fence, and then secondly, through the privacy fence itself, which is a solid a solid fence. So a 30-inch, uh, headlight height uh,
Actually, the the newer ones are even better because they're cut off. But even if you have like an older vehicle, uh that 30-inch cut off, the proximity isn't there, you're not going to be able to get past that fence in the throw that we have. So, as soon as you turn into the stall, your headlamps, as you know, as
you pull into a garage or wherever you pull in and there's a wall, you'll see where your lights cut off. And that's the same thing here, except instead of a wall, we have a solid privacy fence. So, what is that fence made of? What What is it? Okay. Uh we have a detail in the plan on
uh sheet 8. So it is a 6oot black vinyl privacy fence uh with an overall height of uh 6 feet. Yep. Set concrete. Uh it's at the top right hand corner of sheet 89.
No gaps between Noaps. Good. Thank you. And um before we we before we go to um other questions, um is there a reason why these swells are only one foot deep as opposed to one and a half or two foot deep? Because I
know you'd mentioned that 3 feet is is you hit water. So why aren't we getting a little closer to that 3 ft so we can gather more water? The root balls basically the root balls of the plants and the shrubs that we're planting throughout.
If we put the root balls in water, you know, the root system of the Yeah. You need to have separation between where that that seasonal high is, right? Where that groundwater is, right? And where everything else is happening, right? So the trees um and the shrubs, right,
they're when they're planted in the ground, they're 2 feet below grade. Mhm. three feet almost below grade depending on what what it is, right? Um but we need that separation um between the seasonal high and the and the bottom of those things. Usually there's at
least one foot, right? So so I'm just my my biggest concern is the ones that are on the on the north side where they're both one feet. We said that the depth is one foot. The other ones are 1.5 and 1.75. I was just wondering why is that
one? Can we can we inch out anymore on there so that any any you know that here any bit of water that we can capture we want to capture. Well, again, they're not really detaining.
Well, it's it's slowing things down. And in some cases, it retains. If you see some of our rain gardens, that water sits there. It doesn't always fall through, which is not really a bad thing. I I know, but I I don't really know how those are designed. He's testified that
these are not designed to retain. I don't know the outlets on those rain gardens. They may be elevated so that they're purposely holding. Even if it's only 6 in, right? These are not designed that way. I mean, I don't know. I don't know that if he can.
And it's not possible to use plants that can detain. There are. It would be, but there's I don't know if there are other problems with holding the water on the site. You could, it's just not designed to that. You could design a rain garden
that has a proper vegetation outlet structure that's only 8 in to a foot. Let's say that that might be dimminimous, but it it's possible. Yes. I just want to do everything we possibly can to not have that water end up in De
Lake on these storms and slow it down. We also don't want it accidentally ponding. No, you're you're absolutely right. You're right. We want it. We want the right mix. You're absolutely right. Yes, we want to do it right. But that's why that's why I'm asking.
And we are right. We are right there. We actually had geotech out there and they let you know they they left the holes open for 24 hours for the ground water to settle. We were literally right there. So we had a landscape architect designed the plants to make sure that the balls had
enough I mean if we don't want if we want to go with just perennials and not woody vegetation I I don't think that would be attractive year round but I mean there are alternatives but we have to trade off here. you know what kind of landscaping we can do versus getting
maybe three or four more inches of of storage. I don't think I mean if you ask me I want the woody woody vegetation that sucks up the water and that develops you know it's transpiration so as the
water from the root system comes up it's transpiring through the leaves and that's one way of mitigating runoff as well it's not we never calculate that but that's hydraulic cycle works. It's, you know, the word says we want three or four more inches. We'll find it
and we'll change. We'll go to more of a a grass and print. I want as much as I can get personally. Like I said, I'm one vote, but knowing what this town goes through in the rain, I want every inch I can get. So it's
also you kind of lose some of the water quality benefit as you move away from woody vegetation. So that's the trade. Well, I would leave that with you and Sam to kind of figure out what's the best thing that we can do to capture the most water the right way,
not cause ponding for long periods of time and do the best we can for the city. And to be very honest, yes, I think this is the best. Do you think that's that's what I need I need to know. to hear. That's what I want to hear. I say this
is the best we can do. This is the best solution. I want to hear that this is the best. We've gone through I just I don't know how many iterations of this with your professionals before. I I do agree with I don't mean to cut off. I do agree with Jim. You know, if you trade off the the hardy vegetation
that does absorb more than just a grass and aesthetically there's a a benefit to not having just grass. But aesthetics aside, I do agree that for the amount that we might be the amount that the applicant might be gaining, having that vegetation that's there year round,
being able to absorb all that probably outweighs any benefit. You're the prof you're the professionals. I'll try to I need your I need your honest opinions to do this the right way. Yep. Okay. All right. So, you said you'd finish
with your direct. We want to go through um professional letters before we get to questions. So I did try and touch on a number of the issues in both the planners and engineers letter. Um and a lot of the planners letter is architectural. Correct.
So I I I know the chair I know you like to go point by point on this but I don't know if you want me to just say architect architect architect. For me I don't mean to interrupt again but for me he's hit everything except for lighting but lighting is going to be adjusted. So, all right. So, your your report you're Okay. Okay.
And Donnie, do you want to defer your report to um we have Dan here? I'm just checking. I would like to mention the pedestrian warning system because that's probably a little bit more than than me and the architect. Oh, okay.
So, in your 4.4, which is on page 9 of 18, this is your letter updated July 14, 2025. We do look for and we do propose um pedestrian warning systems whenever we can't get a car width or car length out
of the garage. So in this case, we actually have the car length out of the garage before the sidewalk. It has to do with visibility. So as you're pulling out of a garage, the driver's side window clears at about halfway at right where your window is.
In this case, we have 21 20 over 21 ft between the face of the building and the property line, which is right here. Okay? So, we have 21.7 from the face of the garage to the property line.
Then there's another four or five feet between the property line and the sidewalk. So, driver visibility starts back here when the car is about halfway out of the garage. Um I there was no engineering reason for
a pedestrian warning system given that length between the face of the garage and the start of the walkway because there's plenty of visibility and that's the most important thing is visibility visibility and illumination and there's there's I'm assuming there's
a garage door. So, the noise of the door, I'm assuming, and tell me if I'm right, the noise of the door would also be an alert that a car is coming. I won't tell. I don't know what Dan has planned. I hope he's using a quiet
short, but he definitely will see there. There will be motion and that car will be visible to the pedestrian and more importantly the pedestrian visible to the car um well prior to to there being a conflict. Well, how how tall are the shrubs that
are lining? Because I don't Yeah, they see them when they're right in front, but they don't see them. They don't even see them in a crosswalk. So, so this is and I also again we asked for an auditory as well as visual warning
because not everyone has good vision or is cited. Um, so that's that's our standard now. auditory and visual warning systems for these crossings that are not happening at a typical
street intersection. I think it's fair. These are barriers. This is barrier. Yes. I mean, we can put in an auditory. I just if I were the neighbor, I But if that is, you know,
I'm sorry. One, two, three, four. 100 ft away from the neighbor. Can you tell me how many how many feet the driveway is from the westerly neighbor? 11.
So, a little more maybe closer to 15. Okay. I don't think the auditory warning is going to be a problem for them. I prefer an auditory warning and a light light warning as well. Uh I know you can come out of the garage and you can see and I actually like like that about it. I know the shrubs are only about 20 12 to 24 in, but anything that's going to
help uh you know a driver may come out and not look might not stop. I rather air on the side of caution than have a pedestrian be on the sidewalk. Okay. I mean the balance is yours, right? So on balance, you know, that's what this board's job. That's your job
to balance the testimony. So if you want an auditory warning, we do it. We do both. Yeah. We we'll we'll do both. What do you mean both? We'll do both. Auditory and visual. Okay.
Is there something in the report about street lights? Maybe. Yeah, I think we had um Sorry. Um, so I think uh from from Donna's letter that was
we basically agree, you know, where I testified differently or or provided some testimony with regard landscaping or that one driveway issue was something that I wanted to testify to, but otherwise I believe the architect is going to go through uh pretty thoroughly on your comments here.
Okay. Yeah, I believe that note was added, so Oh, okay. Great. Yeah, great. I'm sorry. Did I miss a question? No, we're good. Don't worry. I missed something. Good. So, I think um we can go to questions from the board if there's any
further. It depends on if our planner is satisfied with Yes. with everything that that was brought up. Okay. Does uh does anybody on the board have any further questions of this witness? professional our professionals. Do they
have any questions for this witness? No. All right. If not, uh I'm open up to the public to for any questions to this witness. Please give us your uh or Jack, you your name and address. Not you don't have to. Yeah. Hi, Eric Gallipo, 9085th Avenue.
Um I thank you for your testimony. I just have a few questions and I want to confirm that I'm able to ask landscape parking and civil engineering questions of you. Yes. Okay, great. So, um I just want to know if there has been any estimate of the
total parking demand for the 126 unit development. We've um met the ordinance requirement. Different question. Okay. So, we have not studied that. We we actually That's okay. The answer is no. It's
okay. The answer is no. Um, uh, you know, on that point, and I forgot to, um, we we actually are closing up a number of the driveway curb cuts. So, sorry, before we I know where you're going with that. I just want to sort of
ask a follow-on question. So there there hasn't been an estimate of the total parking need. Therefore, do you expect that the parking need generated by this
126 development will exceed the 131 spaces that are being provided? In other words, will there be cars from residents at this building and their visitors and the commercial properties who will be relying on street
parking? So really really it is the same answer. The we are required to meet an ordinance standard and that's what we've done. The parking is going to be controlled by the management company. That's going to
limit the number of residential cars that park there. And when you have that limitation, it changes. There's really no way to study it because that number becomes fixed. It becomes fixed with the number of parking passes or permits that are handed out. So, uh, to answer your
question, we haven't studied it. We complied with the ordinance and the management company will control the demand and the utilization on the I appreciate your answer.
I think you're still answering a slightly different question. That's his answer. You don't have to accept it. But if that's his answer, I don't think he's answered my question. He He thinks he did. That's his answer. If you don't want to accept it, you don't have to. Understood.
But he doesn't have to change his answer. Then I will ask a different question. Then you then go ahead. Will street parking be required to meet some or some demand created by this
building? Yeah. So for the commercial elements um the ordinance does not require parking. So on street parking will be utilized for the commercial and the commercial is modest. It's less than 2,000 square
feet. But on street parking likely for the commercial Okay. Um so with the movement of parking being controlled by the management company the assignment of spaces
uh and you have testified correct that spaces may not be assigned to particular residents. We have not we may I just say something that we have said that the next person that testifies will speak to that. Okay.
We have not that was not validated here by this. How will you manage parking churn essentially people entering the site driving all the way through not able to find a spot driving all the way out and
then having to rely on street parking? That's the question. So, the Parton garage and the outside area is designed with two-way traffic. So, that traffic circulation is designed in accordance not only the ordinance but
standard engineering and accepted practices. I I don't see an issue with traffic circulating if there are no parking stalls circulating, turning around and coming back out to the site. I the the parking lot seems adequately
designed to allow movement. How will you prevent churn? Essentially people entering the parking lot unable to find a spot then needing to leave. Therefore creating one inrip and one outrip just to look for a parking spot.
It seems that parking assignment would also almost be required. So I thought I answered the question. Mr. the the operator um is here and maybe his testimony will further clarify
how the management in the parking spaces will work. Right. Okay. Um so your plan isn't up anymore, but um there are some notations on it that refer to a sixoot vinyl fence. Are you planning on demolishing my fence?
Could you tell me which Sorry. Could you tell me which property? The north and um the north end west side fifth. I'm I'm the cutout. So both the re our rear fence
This is you right here. That's correct. Our rear fence to your left right here. Yeah. And the fence line all the way along the building already exists. It's a six-foot wooden stockade fence. There's also existing trees along the
property line that are not notated. I want to make sure that you are not proposing removal of our existing trees or removal of our existing fence. Further, does that six foot our six-foot
wooden privacy fence ends at approximately where the souththeast corner of our house is. So, we're right where that right Yeah, right about there. And there is an existing chain link fence that has been there
since I was a child. Um, and so if you do intend to replace the fence, do you intend to replace it with a different material? And if you intend to replace the fence
is does the requirement not require does it not is it not required to be two foot inside your property line. Okay. So the first thing is uh that it appears that your fence was surveyed and it appears to be well on on your
property. We did not and we cannot propose demolition of your fence. Um and no the fence is permitted to be installed on the property line which is what we propose.
Was there another part to it? And we we don't propose any work to, you know, cut trees down on someone else's property. That's kind of on the property line, but um my my our fence is on the property line. It was built prior to the current
ordinance. It is on the property line. Okay. So, the surveyor that conducted this gave you more property than than perhaps what your surveyor I don't know. I would have to. Right. So, unless that fence
would you be willing to match the material of your fence to our existing fence along your western property line, which is a wood stocking? Yes, sure. Yeah, no problem. Great. And I'm sorry, that survey gray line
right there that I'm tracing with the hand. Yeah. That appears to be maybe the limit of a a driveway patio. Your fence is actually shown. Well, it ends somewhere. Yeah, it ends to the left. There is an existing uh uh chain link
fence that's been there since I can remember. Okay. It looks like the fence encroaches. That's also I'm sure that's something that could be worked out at the time. Great. We would prefer We would appreciate being contacted when that is being discussed and decided. Thank you. We can do that.
Okay. Um, so in addition in your plan and the exhibit that you passed out, um, you show a 10- foot buffered area along the, um, westerly and northernly rear
property lines in the parking lot. Correct. Um, can you go to your um, uh, calculation page? This was very helpful. So, is it not required that that full 10
foot be landscaped or is that just a building buffer? Um, we're not seeking relief for the encroachments within that that buffer. Um, we're meeting the buffer requirements through the solid fence as
well as the landscaping. Do you mind explaining that? Right. It's part of the redevelopment plan versus the landscape ordinance in the regular ordinance. Um, but so how how is it that the
redevelopment plan requires a 10-ft planted buffer at property lines, but this shows less than that in two locations? Okay. So, it's E7. It requires a planted buffer of no less
than five feet in width as well as a solid fence where the property abuts a residential line. The design of the buffer including plantings, fence location, and design provided said fence does not exceed six feet in height shall be at the discretion of the planning. So
the development ordinance requires a five foot buffer where the underlying zone requires a 10-ft buffer, but it's preempted by the redevelopment redevelopment plan.
So why do you Well, I don't know why we did a 10 foot buffer because that means our our landscape calculations are even more. We're providing even more. I mean, could you put landscape up to the zone? Is that a problem?
Well, those are parking spaces. Well, this landscape plan. So, the intent is have a little backup space. Correct. I mean, if we grasped it. Yeah. But that's not going to This is all behind a sixoot fence. This is not, you
know, not seen from I I think it's a better alternative to have the backup and not crush the plants. And what is that interior uh barrier the black line not on the exterior of the landscaping but the interior those are just
inside you know like this is I'm sorry right here that's the building this is the the building above right but but over by the trees by the 10 foot buffer area.
Yes. See? Right. So that's the fence on that side of the on the exterior side of the landscaping. What's on the interior side? That's that's the landscaping. This is a curve. It's just a simple just occur. Yes. It's not an actual barrier. Just
occur. Okay. So from your testimony, am I to um this is related to the lighting levels of 7 and 0.9 at the fence line. Am I to understand that you believe the six-foot fence will reduce that to some
dimminimous number on the other side of the fence? Well, even further, uh, we've agreed to meet the ordinance requirements of 0.1. Okay. So, that will be effective. Great. Um and then in terms of uh
grading and um water flow, is it designed to flow away from adjacent properties? Yes, it is. Um well, yes, it is. Yes, it is. Because as you know, we had a storm
event this past weekend where I was in kneedeep water at the bottom of my driveway. So your grade is actually higher than the site and we've provided swailes that um that the water well we talked about the swailes but we've lowered the grade
so that water from your property actually will flow onto ours and not vice versa. Fantastic. Um okay. Oh yeah. So this relates to the design of sidewalks on fourth fifth and memorial.
Can you go back to your rendered site plan and show us? Um, uh, if you would zoom in on your, uh, north and west corner adjacent to our property. Um, I believe it seems that
your sidewalk jogs. Yes, it does. What is the reason for that considering this will be the only place on the entirety of Fifth Avenue where that happens? So, this tree uh that we're we're trying to get around
the root system and bring it and match your sidewalk along your front. I believe this is very atypical arrangement for our city and that tree is new or existing. I mean there is one
there but it is in terrible shape. That is the existing tree that we're showing. Well, that tree is badly diseased and falling apart. um as all of them are. Uh so the idea would you consider aligning the sidewalk
which is quite standard and all the way in a straight line as a method of being able to expand the swailes on your side of the sidewalk. I know that that is city property and not your property.
The idea here was to to provide a median for the trees and to provide spacing for the existing trees. Could we? Yes. But that's the design intent is to set the sidewalk back so that we're not continually disturbing
the root system of of the trees. Again, that that's that's a balance. Can we? Yes. If the board says make it line up, of course we can. But statute of the existing trees. I believe those are new trees and you
are you are not you will not be able to save those existing trees. I I those are new trees. Yes, those are the proposed. Yeah. So my suggestion and and new trees we know can survive within the existing verge that is left between the current
sidewalk line and the what seems to be happening with it which is this curve in the sidewalk which happens nowhere else. I can think of in Aspberry Park. Maybe I Yeah, it seems suspect.
Second question is the sidewalks and this happens on both Fourth and Fifth Avenue. The second qu and the reason I suggest this or ask this question is if you aggregate more green space to the owner's property direction you would
have more opportunity to expand those swailes for storm water retention on their side of the property. Well, that is true. Um that if we move the sidewalk towards fifth, we would in effect
but but remember we are proposing the swells in the property line. Correct. Not within the rightway. Understood. So we wouldn't propose this swell system in the city's rightway. It's really a private, you know, it's privately maintained. Um, you
know, on balance, there's a reason why the trees are diseased and not doing well, and they just don't have they don't have the room that we're proposing. No. Now, no. Why are they diseased? Because the utility company has butchered them.
Well, technically, there are there are no utility there are no utility lines on that side on that side of Fifth Avenue. The utility lines run in the rear yard. So we have on just on Fifth Avenue on that one block we do not have utility lines. They're in the rear yard. Those haven't been
never touched. It's just disease. Terrible. It's just disease. Um they're terrible. Are there any other questions? I do have further questions. Sorry. So the size of the sidewalk on Memorial
Drive where and can you zoom in on Memorial Drive for us for a second? So, as people park on Memorial Drive, I realize you've added small access points.
Um I'm Are you aware of the arrangement that we make in downtown where it's essential? Would you consider flipping this so that the planted side was against the the building allowing people to essentially
exit their cars and get right onto the sidewalk. Otherwise, they're going to be walking right through your planting beds, which look really nice, but flipping the arrangement will help them be more wellmaintained. No, no, no. Moving the plantings to the
bu against the building between your retail spaces so that when you get out of a car, walk through the bike lane, the first thing you step on is solid pavement. I mean obviously the intent was for for
people to park use the gore striping and center theirel on an access because there is you know between the gore striping and the and the lane that again can it be done yes I think this is the preferred street
crosssection that we see throughout the city I think we'd have a problem with the shade trees too I think if you move them back too close to the building right you would leave tree beds where the trees you want to keep the trees and move the move the beds to the building. First of all, it will soften the
lack of activity on that level of the building a little bit. No, no, the trees stay there. Trees are in tree pits and then the benches and the plantings go against the building. All right, I think that the question has
been asked. Yes. And now we need an answer. Um and I have the answer would be could we? Yes. Do I think this is a better design as proposed? Yes. Okay. Any other questions? I do. Okay. So, um and and then can you show us the
design of the driveway around fourth the fourth Avenue entrance? Um, you mentioned that there's going Is it a roll top or is it a lever arm? One makes far less noise than the other. I know there needs to be an That hasn't been discussed yet.
Okay. That was not testified to yet. And then can you zoom in even further in so we see this the design where it meets the bike lane on 4th Avenue? So you have a play here.
uh how many cars would be able to queue in that area if you have two cars entering or two cars leaving at the same time? So in the apron area. Sure. So the apron um is actually you know
it's over 20 ft long. So one car could queue either way. I mean that's not the intent. And is there any sort of like rumble stripping or something? I don't that's not the right term, but something to indicate where the sidewalk traverses
the entire driveway. So like something that tells them they're on that surface. We're required to provide um delineation pads at either side of it. Are you saying like a going across? Yes. I mean we could change the texture of the block or the design of the papers
to indicate that that's you know a crossing. We could do that. Sure. Yes, but it's the uh the ADA delineation paths that usually do. Yep. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. Your next uh um there was uh there
I know that while there was discussion, you mentioned something about about the parking, the exterior parking. Is someone else going to talk about that? I'm assuming someone else will talk about that. Well, I I just want to point out that we're closing a number of the curb cuts and that we're actually adding
additional parking spaces on site on street, I'm sorry, on street. So, just to put a number to that, um on 4th Avenue, 260 ft of driveway will be removed and that will increase the number of parking stalls on Fourth
Avenue by 12. By 12. By 12. Wow. And then on uh Fifth Avenue, we will be increasing about two parallel parking spaces will be increased there because of the
closure of a driveway apron there. Um it's it's a small area, but um and it depends on how the city strikes it, but we believe that they can get two additional on. Are you planning to put some kind of loading zone area in front of your front
door there? I see you have that large uh kind of pad reaching the sidewalk. Typically when I see that in development, they you're requesting an area for like loading. Can you tell me are you seeing this on the Fifth Avenue side of the building? Oh, Fifth Avenue.
Okay. That's fourth side. All right. Building entrance. This large uh sidewalk pad that reaches out to the street. I don't think that that was um Okay. that that was really just a
generous like kind of like a gateway. Okay. Into the building, but Okay. May sorry. Hold on. We'll get to you're going to change. Yep. You will. Let's do we have any other is that all
any questions? So, so we're talking about a total of we're adding 14 parking spaces. Well, we're not adding in theory because that whole area on 4th Avenue is permitted. Like you're allowed to park there. You're not ticketed for blocking a driveway there. Okay.
They're all like depressed because it's just how old it is. But um in how it's actively set up and used, you would be losing the space that's currently being that's going to be edited for this driveway, which is probably two cars. Mhm. So, so does that mean that's that that
it's not striped today and it will be striped tomorrow or you know what I mean? Like when this is put together, does that mean that the striping will change the amount of parking spaces in this area? Are we I mean there's no stripes there's no striping right now on this. There's no stripe right now. Okay. There's no stripe stalls proposed by
this. Yes. Um if the parking becomes an issue in the area, we will have to stripe it, but I I can't say what that would be. Madam Chair, yes. Public has a right to question this. Yes. Yes. I was just trying to absorb
that. Okay. I'm sorry. I think I was trying to understand where where where we got 14. Um Okay. Um any other questions from the board members, professionals? I still don't see 14 because if you're 25 feet off the I'm sorry to keep that
gun. You're 25t off of the crosswalk. Maybe you get one car on the eastern side of your apron. You're not fitting 11 on the other side. Maybe two. And they already exist. So it represents a loss. Not your turn yet. Not your turn.
Okay. So there's no striping and we're closing 260 ft of existing driveway. So I know that the driveways don't lead to anywhere now that the building has been demolished, but historically they the properties have been there and we're
closing them and proposing full curve. So pretty much we're saying that people have been parking there anyway functionally functionally. So whether you're gaining them or not gaining them, which is why it wasn't I guess part of my primary. No, I understand. I understand. As long
as we understand what you what you mean by it, it's uh we understand. Um anything else? All right, public. So what's your question? My question is, if the parking exists and is legal,
how can you count this as an addition when your driveway will lead to the reduction of the available parking linear parking footage? So, you're making the assumption that it is legal. It is. And if in New Jersey,
uh, parking in front of a driveway is not legal, regardless of if that driveway leads to a building or not. So, it might be um I don't ignored or allowed, but I don't know that I would term it as
legal. You're blocking the driveway that legally exists. I know it's fenced. It doesn't lead anywhere. So, this is semantics, but we meet the parking requirements as is. Okay. I was just bringing up the point of what we're doing. That's fair. Any other question?
in stripes. Uh I would say that, you know, typically you're going to have a driveway whenever you have a garage. So you're putting 131 spaces in this building and you're losing two on the sidewalk for that. So while yes, you're losing on street space, um with one driveway, it's kind of a
gain in a way that you're putting everything inside rather than on the street. Any other um your next witness Um, why don't we uh why don't I bring up um Paul Milstein from Douglas and we'll hit those couple of questions we got on the
parking garage so we can get those out. Okay, I I might have to call Paul back after Dan testifies in case there's more operational questions, but we'll see how we do. You've got till about 9:30. So, all right, use your time. Let's go. Paul, raise your right hand, please. Do you
sound so swear or affirm testimony truth or truth? I do. Please state your name again for the record. Paul Milstein, Douglas Development Corporation. Thank you. Sure. All right. So, Paul, um, quickly, I know you're familiar with this board, but, uh, explain to the board again what you
do for Douglas and your role with the project. So, I am, uh, my current role for Douglas development as director of development, vice president of the company, been with the company for 38 years, uh, worked my way through. So, I'm responsible for all the developments in all the jurisdictions. They develop in multiple states. So, I travel as the
company travels. So, I've I've been associated with this project from the beginning, bringing through the redevelopment plan, and happy to say, I think we're getting super close, which is exciting. So, anyway, that's me. I'm good. So, there was there was a question that came up uh during Jim's testimony about how we're going to handle the parking with respect to the
residents. Are we going to use tags? We're going to use some kind of identification. Can you explain how you envision that work? So, and the way we approach parking management is a fluid situation. We'll start at at a reasonable level of enforcement and detail and then if it works, we'll continue and and we'll ramp
up as necessary. So, we'll start out by uh renting parking spaces. They'll be paid for and we'll determine something so it's not a free-for-all and there'll be hang tags by the unit by the unit number and we'll make one to one available. So, you'll be able to unit 2011 will be able to rent a parking
space and that hang tag will say 2011. Um they can park in any space. We won't assign spaces initially. uh we will have a towing contract and we will have parking management and if there's any abuse the someone will be if if we will pro go through that garage on a regular
basis and tow anyone without a hand tag. That's that's the way we start. Um if if it gets progressively worse, we will put a key fob entrance on the door. The door is intended to be a rolling coil jet door. So it is a very fast, very quiet door. It does make some noise so it will
alert the pedestrians in some fashion. The preference would be to leave the door up during the day and hope that the t the key tag system is sufficient as far as as enforcement issues, but if it's a problem, we'll drop the door and you will get a key fob for every resident that's entering the building. We'll have to swipe in, swipe out, and
the door will close behind them. And then we can go from there. There's many levels we can go. We try to again start the least obtrusive and see if it's effective. But that our initial intent is hang tags, one per unit, numbered, and we go from there. And now is the is the garage door. Or is
it two garage doors or one? It'll be two garage doors. Will be two. So, one in, one out. And they're the quick the quick. Yeah, they're called jet doors, whisper doors. They're right. They're very quick. Right. Okay. All right. Uh, can you just clarify what you said? Um,
do tenants rent a space? Yes. Separately from their unit? Yes, that's the intention. every do they have to rent a parking space? They do not. Some tenants don't have cars.
That's fine. But others will prefer to park on the street for free. Pardon me. Others would prefer to park on the street for free. Exas aspirating issues for res. I think the intent of the redevelopment plan is that tenants with
cars will be afforded a place to park because you're providing the parking that was required per unit. And um yeah, you know, the the idea that a tenant may
decide not to pay for parking and try and park I'm sorry, James, is there permit parking in this neighborhood? There's not. There's not. So, so there's no deterrent from them to just park on the street. We, you know, we have the potential here for Yeah. from a legal perspective.
Sure. There you go. There would be no reason to have mandatory parking requirement if it wasn't going to be used by the tenants. Transient. It's not allowed to be transient. No. No. The the parking requirement is
specific to the quantity of units and so on, right? It relates directly to the usage of the property. So if you're saying that it's they may not be parking there and they're parking out on the street, you're actually defeating the purpose of required parking. So those those spaces should be used by
those tenants. That's the intention of the spaces of course. Yes. So but if somebody says we had we experienced this once before downtown where a developer did that was charging what people were claiming to be an exorbitant rate. All of a sudden, our on street parking turned into a mess
because nobody was renting the spaces and they were sitting there vacant. And that's that's directly, of course, defeating the purpose, right? So, you're going to have to come up with Well, that we can do it another way. We just found that it was a way to discourage abuse as well.
We we need it to be a different way because the point of this is not to haveund 30 some odd people on the street. No, that was you can't do that. I wouldn't build the garage. Charging them for this is not I'm sorry. It's not the right answer. Okay. So then we won't charge them for
it. Could they just add it to the price? I could do it a hundred different ways. It's no problem. Different way. But you're going to have understood. The tenants are going to have to use those spaces. No. The tenants will have use of those spaces. Okay. And the intention is that every tenant
will at least um have the ability to take one. Correct. That's correct. So, as far as that goes, then you just you you assume you price it into the monthly rent and each tenant gets a parking pass, right? That would be the way to do it. Yeah, it's fine. Yeah. Okay. So, that's So, we'll do it that way. I mean, it's
your testimony is so amended. Yeah, I would say it is. Thank you. That's why we talk. Okay. Appreciate the uh advice. Any uh any other questions from board? Questions from the public about that? May I ask one? Oh, so of course
you said that um it's sort of it sounds like sort of an honor system to go into the garage. You're going to leave the door open. Will somebody be you know monitoring or Yeah. And it's actually not intended to be an honor system. Yeah. Stretch.
We will actually it's intended to be regulated. So we'll issue a tag per unit. Um monitor. So we have a parking management company that won't be full-time. they'll come through it, but we'll also have towing contracts that we'll also circle through on a regular basis. Um because we found
if you don't do that, it gets abused. So key No, no. A hang tag. Well, there's a garage door. Yes. Yes. So have somebody open the door. Well, they we'll have both, but they're going to have hang tags, right? So I mean somebody only that has access, correct? To open the door, right?
Right. But the tow truck guy wouldn't know who has he's got to see the the hanging on the I understand. But you said initially there's no key fob. It's just going to be open. No, we can still issue key fobs for after hours, but we like we prefer to keep it open during the day if possible. Just so it's not up and down, up and
down, up and down. But if it becomes a problem, correct? That's the preference. But it's adjustable. It's funible as things depending on how the operations go. I don't know residents only.
You mean as opposed to public parking? No, but somebody visiting somebody, you know, they don't maybe don't know if you even open and there's no sign. I mean, I know we get crazy about someone. Well, they're going to have to not put a sign that advises, you know,
advanced notice the towing. Yeah, you can't just Yeah, for sure. So, I would play D. I mean, it seems like a gate is really the solution to that problem, but we're saying each unit gets one spot. You pay your rent, you
get a spot. If someone doesn't own a car now, there's just going to be empty spots in this parking lot. There may be empty spots. No. So, what what we do and we're doing with the project now, some people will prefer two spots. Um, and we won't commit to that in a lease. But what happens is if there's available spaces,
we'll say we'll give you the one and we'll do the second one on a month-to-month basis as availability is because it also takes a year to lease the building up. So we don't want spaces to be wasted. So well again that it'll be a fluid situation, but we the intention is not to have empty spaces and some people inevitably won't too.
That's just it happens. But that makes me feel better. So everyone gets a space, people get a unit, but there's a potential option to rent to second space. But we Yeah, but we wouldn't guarantee that in their lease. It would be on a month-to-month basis for the second space. Absolutely. As as available as available. Absolutely.
Okay. Any other questions? Any other questions from the public of this witness? Question. Okay. Thanks. Next. Okay. Dan knows you're coming. Sir, please raise your right hand. So, I'm swear from testimony about giving
this matter to the truth. The whole truth. State your name again for the record. Daniel Zanetto. And spell your last name. Z like zebra. A N E T O. Okay. You were qualified the last time you were here as a licensed architect in
the state of New Jersey. Correct. Correct. Are you still so licensed? Yes. license some good chest. I think you're good to go. All right. So, um why don't we Sam, why don't you pull up your exhibit first? So, I know that uh at the April meeting
the board reviewed the architecture. So, I'm going to have Dan just give um a little bit of the overview and then um an overview of what changed um from uh the last meeting to today. Uh, okay. So, I'll kind of start by
going through the plans and highlighting some of the changes that were made since the last meeting. We went through each level last time. Um, we talked about uh the retail spaces on Memorial Drive and
there was a suggestion to add additional doors for those spaces into the garage so that trash could be taken directly through the garage into the trash room rather than taking it out to the sidewalk and walking around. So, we've
added that for each space. So, each space now has direct access into the garage. Um, also on this floor, um, we're now indicating a trash compactor. So, trash will, uh, come down, uh, there's two shoots here for
trash recycling. Uh, trash compactor will handle that. And we'll have some storage bins here. And if there's any questions on operations, and we can ask Mr. Milstein here to uh, testify to that again. But the uh the intent is for the
the compactor to service the building and pickups would be by a private hauler and you know as the building operates the uh the schedule of those pickups will be figured out and they will come as needed. I believe there was a a request we uh
spoke about it earlier with uh the civil engineers testimony. the bike room. Uh there was discussion of adding a door with direct access out to Fifth Avenue. We investigated that and really just weighing the importance
of the uh pvious area versus that kind of added convenience. Um we're leaning towards keeping the swailes as they were designed. So we're not adding a second door into the bike room. So that access will come through the garage. Are they
uh supposed to walk through the garage door or through the lobby? They they could go either way. So, you could go out on the fourth through the the the drive or you could take it through the lobby out on the fifth. Okay. Those lobby doors have like the
handicap button. They open automatically. Uh I I don't think we have that. I was just wondering through if you don't manage Um, so that is the extent of the changes
on the the parking level. Wasn't there a question about the whether there was enough if they were big enough, if the trash rooms were big enough and the recycling was large enough to be able to handle however many days we need to handle. So, did we determine that that that's
okay or did we not? So, our our proposed solution is to add the the compactor so we'll have more Okay. trash storage. Um there's room for bins here and then pickups will be scheduled as needed based on the size and what we can hold here.
That's private private private hauler. But how are you handling recycling? Uh same thing bins here private. They're trash recycling both private hauler. But so the tri the compactor will only
deal with trash as opposed to recycle. Um there's no other questions about parking then the first floor uh first residential floor. The only change on this floor is the layout of the courtyard. We're now indicating um some
turf area in the center here. Uh we have an additional rendering of this space that we'll go through and you can see what's uh what is planned for that courtyard space. Mr. Do you want us to look back at our letter?
So, back to our original testimony from last month though, are are you indicating that you do have sufficient space 12 square feet per floor area and could hold four weeks of trash per organs in that room?
I think we're um we're we're saying that we will have a level of service that will account for that level of use appropriate. That's because that like you can't hold the four weeks. That
would be a waiver. Is that what you're asking? You're just saying you can't do it. You have a small trash. I'm just trying to make sure wants to hold four weeks of trash. Yeah. So they're they're going to do private hauling so they don't have to do four
weeks. So, you know, it's kind of a way out of that threshold, that standard. It would make me feel better as opposed to as needed, right? Is it every week? Well, you know, as opposed to who's
going to know it's as needed, Paul Milstein, Douglas, I'm good. You're good. So, it is unequivocally not big enough for four months worth of trash. Four weeks. Four weeks, which is a month, but anyway, that's not happening. Um, so as we rent up, we'll rent 10 units. We'll
have one pull a week most likely. Uh, when we get to 30 units, we'll probably increase to two pulls per week. As we get there, we'll go to three pools. We'll moni We'll monitor it. Again, we have other properties in the shore area that would it's a fluid situation, but if we have to get the daily pickups, we
will. If we have to do 7-day pickups, we can. We have some properties that have that that have a lot of restaurants. This won't be the case. But again, we will ramp up the amount of pools as necessary based on volume. No, it's a minimum. So if they're doing more than the minimum.
Okay. Uh so talking about the courtyard here. So, the only change on this level is just the addition of the uh the artificial turf area in the courtyard. And then moving through the upper
floors, these are all unchanged since they were last presented. Before we go too high, can we talk about the windowless bedrooms? Uh, so on in the corner on on each level, we have a onebedroom unit. that
has a living space and has a bedroom. Adjacent to that, there will be transom windows high on the wall here to allow daylight into the the bedroom. And then this will have uh its own ventilation system, HVAC
um unit controlled by the occupant so they can control that room individually. And how many of those do we have? Do we still have six or has that changed? in that in the whole development we have four
four last time last time it was six I just want to make sure that are we still sitting at six right now six one bedrooms two on each of Okay. Right. Yes.
And I know that there was there's this this unit here at the uh northwest corner of the courtyard and then the northeast corner. So that's on four floors. So and that's on three floors. Three floors. So six total. Correct.
Okay. And just to touch on something that was in our planners report also is that those are not necessarily designated for um affordable housing. They're not targeted for that.
No, actually none of them are. Why don't we That's why I want to make sure that none of them are affordable. Correct. Okay. And Dan, why don't I pass this out while we're on the topic? Sure. So, um, one of the comments in, uh, Donna's review letter was that basically we do a better job of distributing the affordable units around
the building. So, that's what Dan's going to talk to you now. This we would have to mark as, um, A4. And we'll we'll just call this Dan the affordable um, affordable unit. Um, they call it affordable
unit mix exhibit. So, um, what we've done is without changing the unit count or the the makeup of the building as far as one bedroom, two bedroom, threebedroom, um, we've kind of shuffled around which units will be designated as affordable
units to provide more of a mix throughout. Previously, they were more or less kind of aligned along the west side of the uh the building and we're making efforts to sprinkle in some units
on each level. So, so is it the blue or the white? The the blue, the purplish blue is uh the affordable units. So, on the first floor, we now have a one-bedroom and a twobedroom along the
Memorial Drive elevation. On the second floor, again, we're we're moving a two-bedroom and a onebedroom along the uh Memorial Drive elevation. On the third floor, we're moving a two-bedroom to the corner unit.
And on the fourth floor, where we previously had no affordable units, we have three one-bedroom affordable units. And again, Dan, the intent of doing it this way was effectively to get
approximately 20% of the units on each floor as affordable units. Correct. Correct. So obviously there's fewer units on the fourth floor, so we have fewer affordables there. But um the fourth floor is more
the fourth floor. Uh these are regular onelevel units. They do have a private roof terrace or private terrace, a walk out terrace onto the roof level, but uh they're not penthouse units in that way. as well.
They do. Yeah. They're they're no different than the market rate. The affordable also are entitled to parking. Yes. Oh, yes. What whatever whatever parking requirements apply to the market rate
units. Same for affordable So the the floor plans again are unchanged except for that shuffling of the location of the affordable units. Um the roof plan we did add some detail just showing uh mechanical unit locations. It's really conceptual at
this time. These are there's a mechanical zone that we're illustrating with this gray hatched area. the diagonal hatch here and um showing approximately how many units would be needed on that upper roof area. So this is the roof above the uh the fourth
floor units. Daniel, I think the comment in CCH's report also dealt with the screening of that. Uh yes, so I can speak to that. We have a line of sight study that we put together.
So these are are building sections through the building illustrating you know uh the view from the opposite side of the rightway looking up at the building. Uh the the dash line indicates anything below the dash line uh until it
hits the building would be visible or I'm sorry anything below the dash line after the cornice line here is not visible. So as you look across the street up at the building, you wouldn't
see this this back level at all or any of the units above it. So we did that for each right of way on uh Memorial Drive, Fourth Avenue and Fit.
So this just illustrates that the units wouldn't be visible from the street. The uh next area that uh was updated on the plans were some of the elevations. Um specifically on the fourth avenue, we
had some comments about adding some interest to that elevation. Um we also included the calculation for the the solid versus void calculation. Um I believe the requirement is 60. So there still would be a waiver that would be needed
along um Fourth Avenue. So on this large stair tower, we're proposing an additional mural to be installed. And instead of the uh louvers that we had previously, we're uh proposing that uh the screening system with the uh the
graphic print on it as well on this elevation. We've included the courtyard elevations. These weren't in the last set of plans that we presented. So these are the proposed elevations inside the courtyard. Um so similar materials that
are on the building. We have a uh thin brick base and fiber cement siding above that. Same type of windows. Right. Then I'll skip down to some of the
updated images here. You changed the materials on the west side of the building. We did. Um that was another comment that we had. Thank you for bringing that up. So the the west side of the building, we had a lot of feedback that it looked kind of disconnected from what was
happening on the other three sides. So we made sure we went and looked at those materials carefully and made them match more closely with what's being presented uh overall. So we feel that was an improvement. Uh these are some additional images. So
this is what's proposed for the courtyard. There was comments about um you know what is planned for this area and the intent is to have a paver uh a pedestal paver system here. uh made up of concrete pavers and then an area of
turf. So we think uh it would be a nice area to kind of gather and have activities. This is all kind of proposed as freestanding furniture that can be moved and you know reconfigured as needed. Uh a mix of planters,
seating, tables. Is the idea that this will be programmed space or is it just I think res lounge res use it as will at will
both how does one access the courtyard uh it's accessed from the first residential floor there's two entrances on either end uh Interior. Interior. Yes.
So, it happens from the the you know, this is kind of the elevator lobby is right off of that. You have access in and then there's a second means of access on the opposite side direct to the corridor. Laundry facilities.
Uh there's laundry in each unit. Yes. This is an updated rendering of the fourth A elevation. So, we've added a large mural here that will be worked out with the city, the design of that. And
we've also added the flex flex facade screening uh in uh these openings here. So, these are openings for natural ventilation for the garage. Um, but this gives us an opportunity to have a large printed graphic design on those openings
with a flexible screen and that shows uh a building identification sign over the garage. Is that is that the intent is to have additional signage over the garage entrance? That was one of the other questions I
have. Okay. the signage signs. We show the signage here just conceptually, but we have areas. So, you're allowed one residential sign. So, we have on Fifth and you have that. Then you
have this Fourth Avenue garage sign, right? You Yeah, I think uh we would like to have the signage over the the drive. that that would have to be a waiver that we would have to agree to. One on fifth and one on fourth.
And then the other signage that's shown is uh the signage for the retail tenants. So there's one on Fifth Avenue proposed and a second for that tenant on Memorial Drive. So they would have two signs. And then same thing on Fourth.
And then the the center tenant would have one sign. And then on fourth again, one on Memorial and one on fourth. Can you go back to those screens on the garage? So what do you mean a flexible screen? They're breathable. Those are open.
It's a It's like a mesh uh fabric that's stretched really soft. So So it's breathable. So Yeah. So it allows for ventilation of the garage. Natural ventilation of the garage. So what So now I assume the garage is going to be lit at night, right?
The garage is is lit at night. It's on a occupancy uh motion sensor. So, it's by level. There'll be a low setting and then when someone drives in, it'll go higher so that you have a minimum uh light level.
So, the screens will light up at night. Uh well, there'll be some illumination from inside the garage. A little bit maybe. Not that much. Didn't we discuss that last time? I mean, on many applications. I'm not
sure if we did this one yet. We did. And uh just there's one additional view showing kind of the revised elevation on the west side of the building and the uh revised Fourth Avenue. It shows some of
the planting, the fence material. Um I know there was comments about this section of the building, right? um not being the parking not being screened but um even the fence and the planting material
we feel is sufficient. The window's actually that's stairs. Correct. Don, anything in your review letter that we did not Yeah. Did Did was there just a mention of the Yeah, the stairwells. We talked about that last time.
Uh And lastly, there was a a comment about sustainable measures and energy star. So, this will be Energy Star for multif family. All appliances and the units uh will be Energy Star certified. Uh there'll be some increased insulation
and air leakage requirements that come along with Energy Star certifying a building like this. Um, it'll have efficient windows and glazing, high efficiency HVAC and water heating. And, uh, there will be occupancy controls on
lighting areas, the common areas. So, um, corridors, stairwells, things like that will also have that dimming feature where no one is in the corridor, the light level will drop and then if someone um, detects and it comes up to a standard level.
That will be in the stairwells. stairwells and corridors, correct? In common areas, um, you know, these will be all LED fixtures and, uh, water sense labeled water efficient fixtures. That's
fourth. Fourth, fourth. This is uh, looking toward the memorial a corner. Donna, anything in your review letter that we didn't get to? I think we tried
to hit either either hit them with plan revisions or hit them in testimony. Yeah, I think that's everything. Okay, Sam, we're good with yours also. Yes, sir. Last time there was a question about meters. Were the meters interior, exterior, and are they
right? There was a question about gas meters specifically and there was a little confusion whether this was a gas project. There's no gas on the project, no gas meters. Um the intent for the electrical meters will be uh there is a
the transformer is located at the southwest corner of the property. We have a smaller electrical room here where we'll have our our main panel and meter and then we'll have utility grade submeters within the building and we'll
handle the submetering that way. But this will all be sorted out with the utility provider. So, you're subs if if we can't fit the all the meters that we need in the electrical room down here or in an area where uh the utility
provider won't access it or read accesses, then we'll make arrangements to to submeter it. So, you just have a meter charge, right? So, there are no meters on the exterior.
None on the exterior. No. Any other questions from our our I'm sorry. Is the testimony finished? We're we're finished. Okay. Is there any questions from the board members? Yeah, I've got a couple of questions. Go ahead. Uh you just talked about the uh
electrical panel. And on the excuse me, on the garage floor, a garage level, uh on the south side, you have a meter electrical room. Correct. Mhm. And
are 126 meters going to fit in that room? No. So if if they if we're not able to get it to work on the on this side or and we also have a room over on the other side on uh fifth a but you know obviously we don't want to run all of
our primaries to the other side of the building. So we're going to come up with a solution with the utility provider um where we can provide those submeter meters within the building or submeter it if we have to
submeter to each unit to or include power in the rooms. Well, I'm looking at the the rooms that you have indicated here as electric and you have one on the north side and
one on the south side. Um, I still ask the question even with those two electrical rooms, can you get 126 panels and meters in there?
Right. So if if we can't fit it on the first floor, then we're going to submeter and we have room on uh the upper floors. These storage rooms, electrical rooms will find they're going to they're going to put in put them on a different level, but they'll still stay inside the
building. Okay. Another question I have is concerning the uh the master plan and how does this development uh fit in with the neighboring
community? He can't answer that. Skill and character. He can't answer that. I'm sorry. He can't answer that. He's an architect. You can't answer a planning question.
He's not qualified. Any other questions from any planning board members? Go ahead. Um, on the retail spaces, I just wanted to confirm that there um there's no hooding, right? So, there won't be any like full service restaurants. They're
just either retail goods or Yeah, they're they're not sized for a a restaurant, you know, maybe a small cafe, but nothing that would need a that would need a hood. So, uh we wouldn't we wouldn't bring in a grease. There could be like a heat
hood, which is just for heat. It's also if you had like there's electric convection ovens now where they could do something quickly and they may just have to release the heat out, but the intention is not to have any grease cooking. No, no black iron hoods going through the building and no answer systems. Correct. Great. Thanks.
Sure. Any other questions? Okay. The professionals. Um I I'm interested to know if there are any board members that agree with that recommendation to shift the
planting zone on Memorial. I kind of I kind of like it. I kind of like it, too. I do, too. I wouldn't I wouldn't I wouldn't move. Not like that. Do you like moving it or you like not So, the idea Let me just lay it out. So,
the idea would be to leave the street trees at the curb line along with the bike racks. Bike racks and trash containers or leave the movement containers. No, all the trash is internal to the building. No, no, no. The public ones.
Oh, they're part of the Okay. I didn't see them on the streets. All right. And then the benches and the plantings, shrub plantings and perennials or whatever would be moved uh to uh within like three or five feet of the front building wall. Yeah.
Is that what we're saying? No. I'm sorry. All right. We've got we've got a we've got a no. We've got a I said yes. I I think it breaks at the front of the building a little better. And uh you won't have people who are coming out of the cars then walking
across uh planters or down the bike lane to find the next opening. Anybody else have any thoughts about that? A good idea to get a consensus. I'm for that. I'm for that. So two, three, four. What? On I'm memorial.
I'm memorial and leave. Uh, but let's be clear as to what we're saying on Memorial. Let's be clear. Okay. All right. Go ahead. Let me just try. Okay. Go ahead. So, the street trees would stay along
the curb line. Oops. Sorry. Um, and the Yeah, thank you. Oh, can you just shift it? There we go. And then the planting bed and the benches.
would be shifted against the building. So, not in front of the retail spaces, right? Not in front of the retail spaces. So, concentrated in those blank spots where the parking is, where the parking structure is. You still have enough clear zone on the
sidewalk. And then you'd also have enough room again to if you're parked on Memorial after you've navigated the bike lane, you can get onto the sidewalk and out to the sidewalk.
The trees be their own cutouts and still the the street trees have have the um the grates so they're fully so we would have the grassy right move that grass back, right? Well, I I think that for the person
first personally for the reasons of when you're parking there and you're walking across, I think people are are correct in saying that, you know, they're just going to walk over it as opposed to finding walk in the bike lane, right? Through the bike lane and then as
opposed to finding where the where these openings are because there are only two. Yeah, go ahead. Right. And so so again these these are right of way. This is the public this is the public space. So you know we get that kind of who's
maintaining the plantings problem. So from people walking on them. Um can you pan a little further north? We can try. So you know again part of what sorry sorry
very zoomed in. Sorry. Um, you know, again, maybe we apply the the daylighting design that we've been using to at the corners or we concentrate that little bit of planting more toward the corner uh with a little
strip and then flip it against the building on the flat. But is it who who maintains that? Because that turns into what? So, it's again, it becomes easier for the property owner to maintain when
it's not going to be crushed and run over by people on the street and it's right against his building. And it gives some ownership also maybe to the retail tenants because it's right outside their their commercial spaces, right?
You'll get a chance. So, again, just talking getting it out there. I'm I'm open either way. So, I'm happy to continue that discussion. I mean, what do you what do what what do other board members feel? I'm for it.
I like it the way it is. Okay. I I was ambivalent, but you guys just made really good points. So, I actually kind of want to hear what you guys have to say. We have a a couple things come to mind, then I'll ask Jim to speak as well. So, I do know that inevitably they will retain water
um even though they're not retention bonds. um because as the chairwoman said that you know they as heavy rains and they eventually if it's heavy enough rains they and then they'll spill over um which is what they're intended to do. They're better positioned at the street line then I got up against the building
and then spilling into the sidewalks. I also I do want to keep our our retail visibility. Um, so I want to if we do do this and push him to the building, I want to make sure we keep a nice path so that the retailers have visibility and a clear clear pedestrian path to the to
the retail as well. It's just things to think about. Um, and and and I don't know that people are going to walk across. I mean, they are a foot to a foot and a half deep. So, you're you're walking down to walk back up. It's it's not the best walking. You mean really I'm not I typically don't walk through
them um unless they're level. Um, I'm sorry. What the heck? What's what's what's a foot? Are these the bio retentions between? No, no, no. Bet retentions. Okay. Memorial. Sorry. Sorry. Memorial. All right. Okay. Okay. Okay. Just a
I thought those were retention. No, no. Those are just regular planters. Yeah. Just flat plants. They're not They're really not going to hold water. They're going to work just like No, I'm sorry. I thought Okay. What's that? Yeah. I don't care. It's fine. just additional spots.
I'll add through whatever the board's preference is. I mean, you have to decide where you have that open concrete area by that corner cafe. Mhm. You know, you have that open to the sidewalk. So, I guess the decision has
to make, do you put a plan in there, too, to make it more uh do you want it open to the sidewalk or do you want it? I I guess is that an entrance? Is that the I guess it's an entrance both ways into that region.
Well, I guess it's the same. Or and again, because those are the striped no parking areas, those two on the ends, maybe they stay. Yeah, you can business move back from bike lane, bike rack to bike rack, you can move that back other than in front of
the retail stores because and then that way your two your two end units, you know, they have their containment and you don't have to worry about so like for example the outdoor dining rags, right? They're allowed to go into the right ofway a couple of feet
with portable things. Um, and then that way it doesn't interfere with that, but you know, it gives it that framing. I think it I think it could work out really nice. All right. So, we have a couple of
people that are in, a couple of people that like it. Don't like it. What do you Can I just mention a couple things because pedestrian safety is sort of like important. Yes. We just do planting pits. So, we have a brick edge and a planting pit. That's
Yeah, we're not talking about a race planter. That's not allowed in the right way. Okay. So my concern is that that people are going to be now they have a tree grade on one side and a planting pit on the other and you're going to be confining the pedestrians in an area
that's unnatural. So they're either going to guide along the face of the building. So well you have the trees right will be in planting things right now if we bump out and lose the pavers along the front of this area. Leave the
retail open. Bump out. lose the papers here and then go back in, leave the retail open. You're creating areas that will have plants and kind of like a a mulch area or a drop off that you don't have a straight line to follow. You're
going to be in and out. My just concern is someone's foot going off the edge of the neighbor. So, if that's not I'm not concerned with that. It's a 10 foot sidewalk. you still maintain a 10-ft sidewalk that's lined up with the neighboring
roadways and then you have a flat grass area. I mean, if it was a retention thing, I'd be concerned about that. But for a flat grass area, if they step off of it, they're not going anywhere really. So, just a three-foot area basically starting at the retail to this. Well, whatever the width is you have, I I would literally take whatever you have
at the front there. This right there, the whole Yeah. It says what? Five feet three inches. Is that what it says on the bottom? Yeah, it looks like 5 foot three. Oh, here. Yeah, I would just other than the tree pits themselves, uh, and maybe the corners, I would just scoot it back and
obviously work around the retail spaces. So, ju just so we're clear, we're going to keep this retail space. So, do the plantings along here, then stop at this retail. Sure. I know. Um, and then
obviously keep this open. Keep our corners open here, right? Yeah. Get the corners the way they're they're designed right now. Okay. Keep that corner well just like it is cuz it's the Yeah. And move that one up between those two. And I would say it's up to you guys if you want like low plantings like a foot
tall in front of the glass of the retail space. It might look nice. You might not want it. I think it could be fine either way. True. I don't think either makes or breaks it for me, but I I think I like it back against the building more in my opinion. All right. So, what do we what do we
think? Yeah, this way would give the applicant something. Just to give Yeah. All right. Just to give some idea if we if we were going to go this way forward. Yeah. So, what do what do you guys think down? Okay. Raise hands. That they're in. You like it? I mean, I'm okay either way.
I I prefer it that way, but it's not not a make or concern. Okay. I can go either way on that. So, four on four. We got five. Okay. Yep. Okay, you got it.
All right. Okay. Anything else? All right. Now, we have created a mess. Yep. We've created a mess. Can I just say that because now we have three witnesses that we have
to be able to question. I can handle it. I think that I think that Jack can handle it. But here you go. Okay. All right. Does anyone have anything else to say? Planning board members or professionals? Okay, let's open it to the public. Eric. Okay.
You have any more questions on based on the testimony that the three gentlemen just gave of all three people? Okay. No. Okay. Or agenda next. Do you have any Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. So, uh,
okay. Let's open Let's Can I get a motion for uh public open to public comment? For three minute comment. move. Second. Okay. Three minute comment. Okay. Eric, please raise your right hand. You swear affirm that testimony
about truth truth and nothing of the truth. Absolutely. Please state your name for the record and your address. Uh Eric Gallipo, 908 Fth Avenue. Thank you. So, thank you planning board members for your time and attention to this matter.
As you know, this has taken nearly 5 years to get to this point. And I do urge you to vote in favor of this application if for no other reason for us to just get on with our lives. This process is deeply unfortunate. How
we have arrived here is not great. the constant use of redevelopment powers in advance of the planning board having any real input into the creation of the plan to the exclusion of the public is deeply concerning. What you should be
asking for in the future is true zoning reform that provides a clear framework for Memorial Drive where developers, well-intentioned as they are, as easy to work with as they are as Mr. Milstein and his company have been.
We need a plan for Memorial Drive that creates a predictable framework for development. In this process, we have been subjected to by one council member being told it's my job to take one for the team, by
another to be called an a-hole. by another to be called that the Fourth and Fifth Avenue people are members of a cult simply for the fact that we wanted information. We wanted to be included in the process and we were not.
We had to beg, borrow and steal to get the outcome that we have, which was asking for basic things like having the building align to the prevailing setbacks, which is a feature of the city plan of this town. The fact that we had
to ask for things to be basic urban design criteria to be established and met is really not fair. This is a problem of the process. The first time anybody was formally required
to be notified for a hearing in this five years happened less than two months ago when this board provided us notice. We received it in the mail. One day before the hearing on a holiday when
city hall was closed, meaning there was functionally no opportunity for anybody to review those plans. Thankfully, they're available online and I follow agendas and so, yeah, it was easy to find for me, but the involvement of the community is paramount. We can do better
and allowing the city to continually use the redevelopment powers in advance of this board having the real say is the travesty. Thank you for your attention. I urge you to approve this application in its current form.
Motion to uh to close public comment. So move second. Second. All in favor? Right. There are a few things that um I have on on my list and I'm not sure if uh I I believe that we agreed to this, but
let's talk about it. Um we had talked about auditory and visual driveway signals. Got it. We got that. There was also a request from the public about um the texture across the driveway. There was a there
was a an area that we wanted to so that a person that was coming out knew. So I'm going to request that that be included there as well. Um I believe that all the shielding that we were talking about and the stairwells and whatnot are already in the report. So that has doesn't have to be something
separate. Uh, and now the movement of the planters on memorial I think has to be put in because that was not something that we had agreed upon. Um, I'm not sure how do we deal with the fact that um, all right, you you guys are going to work on the lighting. So, the only
statement we really have to make is that there is no waiver requested and maybe that's what we have to put in there, Jack, is that there is no waiver requested for lighting. Well, other than because we said we said there's gonna be no light spillage at the parking lot, but we'll allow for lower light
intensity on average on the parking lot subject to I think you got a basic question before we even get to all of this. Go ahead. It's up to the board. I know what the applicant wants. They want you to give an approval subject to, but are these
the lighting plan revision and the landscape plan revision, are these things that you're willing to accept as conditions of approval or do you want to see them first? It's your call. It's not my call. It's your call.
I would say as long as Sam and Donna are are involved in that. The things we want are very specific, right? Okay. Yeah, I agree. So, we just have to make sure that the conditions are Yes. outlined correctly when it comes to both. That's fair. Okay. The other ones I know.
That's fair. Are there others that you have or does anybody else have? Yeah. What was about issuing uh the issues of aligning the sidewalks on Fourth and Fifth Avenue? No. Nobody took but is it a concern for you?
Yeah. Well, it addressed what the community said about it. It seemed seemed like that would be seemed reasonable reasonable to have line especially if we're talking about keeping you know I don't know it was
done the explanation was that it was joged that way to uh to keep an existing tree which I hear is just disease but then I heard that on the plan those are new trees. And I didn't we didn't go in further
whether there's an impractability you know why that job is there we can craft a condition so we don't have to open public comment again. Well let me see if I can answer it. So, uh, with respect to that, we have to do the jog at some point in that sidewalk
because if we align the sidewalks directly, there's not going to be enough room for the street trees along that street. So, we we have to at at some point we have to jog the sidewalks. We have enough room for the trees. Then you have to do it on both avenues.
Yeah, it's on both avenues. Jo on both avenues. Yeah, it is. Yeah, it happens on See, see what I mean? If you if you bring that sidewalk straight down, there's not going to be sufficient room for those street trees. I mean, well, I can't see the jar, so I can't
see the sidewalk. Is that you say that's where the sidewalk is now today? Like if the trees are existing, you can see it here. Why is it set back so far? No. No. Why is the sidewalk set back so far from the curb line?
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, how wide is that? So, what is the distance you have to that green space? No, but at the other end, like why is the sidewalk back? So, I guess this is the existing sidewalk here.
So, are we asking for the job not to exist and what the impact of that is? Is that the question? I think I think we already know that. Well, if you I guess the question is if you kept the the alignment of the sidewalk, how wide would the planting
area for the tree be and is it sufficient? So, can somebody say what the from from our perspective it doesn't matter. We we'll do it either way. We we don't care. The only reason for doing that was to have enough room to have street trees planted there without them
dying. You're saying there's not enough room. So, I'm asking what is the space that you're allotting now? And if you didn't allow that, you lined the sidewalk, what would the space be? And well, I'm going to have to I'm going to have to recall Mr. Kennedy and have him
answer that question. So, let's do it. Jim, thank you. So, so the existing um median between the curb and the sidewalk is sufficient for certain street trees. We know that the sidewalk gets lifted by the tree roots depending on what gets planted. We'll have to re-evaluate. If
you tell us to keep the sidewalk the way it is and line it up straight down, then we're going to have to reassess what trees we plant there. We might not be able to plant the trees that are proposed. We might just have to be using a smaller, you know, a different root system, a different tap. We might have to do a root barrier. Might just have to
do something different. If it's not important, we'll make it work. I'm only one voice. Anybody else? Anybody else concerned about that? I don't have a preference for a straight versus a jog sidewalk. As long as it's ADA compliant and it could be navigated,
yeah, I want the trees to be healthy. Yeah, we want healthy trees no matter how you look at it. Yeah, but our planting standards take that into account. Then the that's why we have if it's in a paved area, you use a certain type of,
you know, root zone and planting mix. And so it sounds like that's a no-brainer then. Yeah. Yeah. To to just say, you know, if you want the street if you want the sidewalks to be straight, there shouldn't be a reason that's stopping that. Not for new trees.
Not for because these are all new trees, right? Right. If they're all new trees, then what are we stopping? You know, why why is this an issue? Right. And so again, my so I'm my concern because I'm I don't know why it's
hitting me now, but I don't know why the sidewalk is so far away from the curb. Well, that's what we're looking to to move it to make it straight right between the driveway and where it's
jogging on Fourth Avenue. Right. on fourth a. It's the same thing on both. No, we're on four, but we're looking at fourth Avenue right now. Right. So, we're there's the driveway. So, between the driveway and the westerly property line, the sidewalk is
very close to the property line, not the curb line, and then it's jogging back toward the curb line to meet the existing sidewalk. Yes. say why isn't it at why is it so close to the building so to speak
well that's that's why we're okay with we can be okay there is no reason on fourth reason for the sidewalk to be over well neither is it's not on on the fifth either there's no reason now on Fifth Avenue I I understood the testimony to be we were trying to save
or be careful of existing trees and the testimony was no there's they're in crappy shape and no wait no those are actually new trees Um, as long as those are new trees, I'm not seeing that there's a reason why we have to jog anything. And again, so where is that you're
jogging from the inside to the outside? Yeah. Yeah. So again, I don't understand why is the sidewalk so far away from the curb line? I mean, that's the same thing on Fifth Avenue because if you drew a straight line from the sidewalk further west, it
goes right into the crosswalk. Yeah. at the point. And like you said, it should do that too far to the straight line. Yeah. All right. So, if we're doing all new trees anyway, there we go. Why can't we have a straight
Why aren't we doing all new trees? Cuz that's where the sidewalk should be. The more you complicate this, the more I'm going to tell you, you should not be giving approvals because that's how we wound up with Johnny Max across the street with all the fest.
Okay? You got to be careful because how much are you going to leave to the discretion of Donna and Sam and the applicant? And you're not going to see it. You're not going to approve it. So, if they approve something, you have to be ready to accept it.
It's fine with me. That aside, I'm gonna if that's what you want, I'll line it up that way. I I'm going to take a I'm pretty ambivalent on this. I quite honestly vote for it either way. Right now, the sidewalk does jog. The misalignment irks me a little bit, but it does make this
really nice thing where you're walking between two rows of trees, right? Directly in the middle of two rows of trees on the fourth side. Yeah. Fourth. And and well, you would still
you would still be it's just that well be planting different trees. That's no and again our planting standards and those are small trees. They're not large shade trees like they are on Fifth Avenue. So the planting standard is you
would still be able to have the proper root zone for having a sidewalk within however many feet of the trunk. you would have a sidewalk and and that planting zone um and the same alignment the full length
of Fourth Avenue instead of having it that weird jog at the end and having it line up with the crosswalk at the corner. I know that that the mayor had a question about about why are we doing new trees? No, I said
Oh, do they have to be? No, I thought before the testimony was they're not new trees. They're trees are already there. So on Fifth Avenue, correct? No, they're all they're all new. All new trees.
So again, respect to the sidewalk. So the ones on fifth, they're there. You're chopping down. New trees. Okay. Yeah. They're all new trees. I mean, we need to construct the project. So by the time we're done, they're all new trees. So again, all new trees. If you want the
sidewalks to be a straight line, easy enough. We'll do it. Do we want to see it or That's up to you. I'm not saying we should or shouldn't do this. I'm just saying it's up to you to decide how you want it. Do we feel comfortable with allowing
this to happen outside of our approval? If it's all it's pretty if it's all straight. If we're all agreeing to it, I don't have to see it again. Okay. I'm in agreement with that.
Okay. Again, I think the things we're asking for are very specific. I can I can We're good. We're good with that. Now, does anybody have any other comments that they would like to make? Do you want any more questions to testify?
Okay. Good. Any other comments that any planning board members would like to make before we move forward here? Anything from our our um Are we still talking about condition we wanted to add? Yes. Okay. So, what I had from last time was
we need DCA uh approval for affordable housing. Someone said that last time. I don't looks confused. Something about DCA. Need approval from DCA regarding affordable housing is something I written down. You're looking at me like I'm crazy. So, that's I'll delete it. So, we'll delete that.
The other one I had was about parking and if a park one parking style has to be available for each rented unit. We took care of that. They already testified to that. I've got a list. Go ahead. All right. Obviously, I'll get to the big two or three at the end. Okay. Um,
parking system, audio, and visual. We discuss that condition. Uh, the drainage uh maintenance manual to be submitted and recorded. Okay. that's in uh Sam's report. We have standard clauses that we
put in any redevelopment plan resolution which will be in there. Uh if there are any outstanding issues contained in either the CCH or VOC reports that we complied with um the proposed fence
uh will match uh the Galipo fence. We'll call it the Galipo fence. Okay. That was that was agreed to by the engineer on the record. Trash and recycling will be by private haulers. Representations are already made on the record as to how long at the compacting and how the
system will work so that there isn't an accumulation of trash that's there. Uh the courtyard was addressed. Um uh murals, you have to standard clause for meeting with the city mural committee. Whatever that language is,
yeah, whatever it is, we'll do it. signage. I'm going to talk to Donna about how to craft that condition on signage. She's going to help me with that. Uh parking uh is to be included with each unit. Parentheses not rented separately so that it complies with the
ordinance. Uh plan revision one of the side the sidewalk across the driveway will be uh delineated. So we know that. Now the big the big ones are the lighting plan submission. I'll get that language from Donna as to what the
applicant is going to comply with that they represented on the record. It's going to be either a 0.1 at the property line or something or other. It's a rather complicated one, but I'll talk to her about that. And the memorial uh memorial streetscape will be revised
basically to move the plantings back to the building open spaces by the commercial by the commercial units and the trees stay where they are. The trees will stay where they are. Uh, I'll of course it'll be much more lengthy than that after I talk to Donna.
And we're going to also have the plans revised to show the Fourth and Fifth Avenue sidewalks to be aligned in a straight line. Okay. And whatever the appropriate plantings are for that area pursuant to the ordinance, they'll be followed and submitted to Donna andor
Sam for approval and that'll be done. So, do we need to include in the lighting one? There's currently not asking for an exception for the total lighting level of that parking lot. Right. There are amendments creating a new exception. Yeah, we're gonna have to get on. I'm
gonna have to go and we have to say that we're okay with that. As long as you guys just like you're granting relief for the additional signage. Yes. Yes. Yeah. I have that that signage issue.
And that's basically what we have. and all of the any amendments or revised plans, the lighting plans, memorial streetscape, uh sidewalk alignment, meters inside the building. Yeah, I'm sorry. Electric meters inside the building. Okay, I got Okay, let's put that in.
Got it. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Anybody else? All right. Can I get a motion to approve this application with the exceptions that were that were just discussed? Move it.
Second second. Okay. Okay. Um, James Banano, yes. Councilwoman Clayton, yes. Jim Henry, no. Uh, Mayor Moore, yes.
Daniel Shaneo, yes. Bob Zuckermanman, yes. Kathy McLaclin, yes. Vice Chair Gunnan, yes. Chairwoman Kerzac, yes. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Motion to journ.
All in favor, none opposed. Okay. Thanks everybody.